5 ms·

Yeah well just refute the arguments for the people who think democrats, hollywood, and the (((globalists))) and kidnapping and killing children to drink their b

Yeah well just refute the arguments for the people who think democrats, hollywood, and the (((globalists))) and kidnapping and killing children to drink their blood, thatll convince them

AnthonyMouse 6y ago
Here's a pretty good start: https://www.thestreet.com/phildavis/news/a-game-designers-analysis-of-qanon https://www.thestreet.com/phildavis/news/a-game-designers-an... Show them the method of operation of the theory building so they can recognize it and stop participating in it.
- AshWolfy 6y ago
  People dont like to think they are being tricked, and will actively reject truth if it contradicts what they already believe. Doing something like this can be great, but it takes time and effort, meanwhile acts of terrorism are being committed now. Most qanoners dont really believe it, and if separated from their echo chambers, will deradicalize themselves
  - danans 6y ago
    > Most qanoners dont really believe it Not only that, for many of them it's just fun - in exactly the same way that some people find supermarket tabloids entertaining. The audience for these conspiracies is quite similar (probably overlaps) with the audience of the National Enquirer.
    - AshWolfy 6y ago
      You should reach eichmann in jerusulem, most people who follow movements like these are just conformists like eichmann, they usually cant be convinced otherwise because they dont really believe anything at all I know a qanoner in real life, and when i talked to him about it he denied easily provable facts, shifted goalposts, assumed i made arguments i didnt make, and now has taken to literally yelling over me so he cant hear the words im saying
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    > People dont like to think they are being tricked, and will actively reject truth if it contradicts what they already believe. I never liked that study because people always read it like that. When people receive new information, they try to make it consistent with what they already believe by making the smallest possible change to the existing belief system to make them consistent. That could be as simple as just not believing you. This can strengthen their belief in the existing thing because they just evaluated it against some potentially conflicting new information without rejecting it. Just not believing you doesn't work for an article like that because it's reasoning rather than facts. They have to find a hole in the logic if they want to keep their existing beliefs. So they'll come up with something like, maybe that's how it works for other conspiracy theories, but this one is real so it doesn't apply. But now the logic is in their head, so the next time the conspiracy theory has to be reframed to match a changing reality, they notice that what's happening is consistent with the logic. It makes them doubt. And the more information and reasoning they're exposed to which is inconsistent with the conspiracy theory, the more they doubt. It just like how the Big Lie works, but in reverse. You expose them to truth and logic over and over until they can no longer make the conspiracy theory consistent with it. > Doing something like this can be great, but it takes time and effort, meanwhile acts of terrorism are being committed now. "Acts of terrorism" aren't speech so as soon as they go there they go to jail. I mean they were planning it openly on Facebook, it was kind of a discredit to law enforcement that they weren't arrested for the conspiracy to begin with. > Most qanoners dont really believe it, and if separated from their echo chambers, will deradicalize themselves But that's why we need free speech, right? To avoid echo chambers. Even if private censorship is allowed, that doesn't make it a good idea if it causes people to leave for some Voat-like cesspool where they won't encounter ordinary people anymore.
    - danans 6y ago
      > Even if private censorship is allowed, that doesn't make it a good idea if it causes people to leave for some Voat-like cesspool where they won't encounter ordinary people anymore. Absent access to "ordinary people" to recruit to violent causes, the inhabitants of such a "cesspool" will likely bore of their own conversation. If, as you state, any of them are engaged in illegal provocation to violence, they will be easier to find there, since they lack the shield generated by the noise of "ordinary" conversation. Besides, nobody is going to "helped" away from violent provocation by casually interacting with them social media. The only thing that can help such people is real in-person and trusted interaction, like at church, with a community help group, or with a therapist. At best social media can be used to identify candidates to be offered an off-ramp from the road they are on, but that needs to be done by people who do de-radicalization as a full time job or mission, not casual social media acquaintances. Very few people are dedicated to that kind of work today.

Yeah well just refute the arguments for the people who think democrats, hollywood, and the (((globalists))) and kidnapping and killing children to drink their blood, thatll convince them

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

Here's a pretty good start: https://www.thestreet.com/phildavis/news/a-game-designers-analysis-of-qanon https://www.thestreet.com/phildavis/news/a-game-designers-an... Show them the method of operation of the theory building so they can recognize it and stop participating in it.

AshWolfy 6y ago
People dont like to think they are being tricked, and will actively reject truth if it contradicts what they already believe. Doing something like this can be great, but it takes time and effort, meanwhile acts of terrorism are being committed now. Most qanoners dont really believe it, and if separated from their echo chambers, will deradicalize themselves
- danans 6y ago
  > Most qanoners dont really believe it Not only that, for many of them it's just fun - in exactly the same way that some people find supermarket tabloids entertaining. The audience for these conspiracies is quite similar (probably overlaps) with the audience of the National Enquirer.
  - AshWolfy 6y ago
    You should reach eichmann in jerusulem, most people who follow movements like these are just conformists like eichmann, they usually cant be convinced otherwise because they dont really believe anything at all I know a qanoner in real life, and when i talked to him about it he denied easily provable facts, shifted goalposts, assumed i made arguments i didnt make, and now has taken to literally yelling over me so he cant hear the words im saying
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  > People dont like to think they are being tricked, and will actively reject truth if it contradicts what they already believe. I never liked that study because people always read it like that. When people receive new information, they try to make it consistent with what they already believe by making the smallest possible change to the existing belief system to make them consistent. That could be as simple as just not believing you. This can strengthen their belief in the existing thing because they just evaluated it against some potentially conflicting new information without rejecting it. Just not believing you doesn't work for an article like that because it's reasoning rather than facts. They have to find a hole in the logic if they want to keep their existing beliefs. So they'll come up with something like, maybe that's how it works for other conspiracy theories, but this one is real so it doesn't apply. But now the logic is in their head, so the next time the conspiracy theory has to be reframed to match a changing reality, they notice that what's happening is consistent with the logic. It makes them doubt. And the more information and reasoning they're exposed to which is inconsistent with the conspiracy theory, the more they doubt. It just like how the Big Lie works, but in reverse. You expose them to truth and logic over and over until they can no longer make the conspiracy theory consistent with it. > Doing something like this can be great, but it takes time and effort, meanwhile acts of terrorism are being committed now. "Acts of terrorism" aren't speech so as soon as they go there they go to jail. I mean they were planning it openly on Facebook, it was kind of a discredit to law enforcement that they weren't arrested for the conspiracy to begin with. > Most qanoners dont really believe it, and if separated from their echo chambers, will deradicalize themselves But that's why we need free speech, right? To avoid echo chambers. Even if private censorship is allowed, that doesn't make it a good idea if it causes people to leave for some Voat-like cesspool where they won't encounter ordinary people anymore.
  - danans 6y ago
    > Even if private censorship is allowed, that doesn't make it a good idea if it causes people to leave for some Voat-like cesspool where they won't encounter ordinary people anymore. Absent access to "ordinary people" to recruit to violent causes, the inhabitants of such a "cesspool" will likely bore of their own conversation. If, as you state, any of them are engaged in illegal provocation to violence, they will be easier to find there, since they lack the shield generated by the noise of "ordinary" conversation. Besides, nobody is going to "helped" away from violent provocation by casually interacting with them social media. The only thing that can help such people is real in-person and trusted interaction, like at church, with a community help group, or with a therapist. At best social media can be used to identify candidates to be offered an off-ramp from the road they are on, but that needs to be done by people who do de-radicalization as a full time job or mission, not casual social media acquaintances. Very few people are dedicated to that kind of work today.