3 ms·

It is a process and you can't get people to trust you unless you're willing to make some fundamental changes. Private prisons, marijuana criminalization, spying

It is a process and you can't get people to trust you unless you're willing to make some fundamental changes. Private prisons, marijuana criminalization, spying, qualified immunity, etc. are just a few of the reasons people don't trust their government.

somenameforme 5y ago
The things you are mentioning are bad decisions that favor the government and there are likely be ulterior motives, but there is no overt deception. What's driving distrust IMO is overt deception which is becoming increasingly normalized and regular. One of the most extreme examples was the death of Officer Brian Sicknick [1] during the January 6th riots. The media ran a nonstop narrative (for months) that he had been brutally killed after being attacked by a rioter with a fire extinguisher: a visceral and discomforting image that helped to frame the riots. Politicians, up to and including the president, exploited this by having an honorary ceremony at the Capitol Rotunda historically used to honor the likes of Abraham Lincoln, Rosa Parks, and RBG. The problem is that not only was he not killed by a fire extinguisher, he wasn't killed at all. He died of a completely unrelated and preexisting medical condition (blood clot in the brain leading to stroke) well after the riots had ended. He texted his brother long after the riots stating he was feeling fine and had no problems except getting pepper sprayed twice. The media tried to pivot to claiming that he died of an allergic reaction to the pepper spray, but there was no basis in reality for that whatsoever and it was also completely dismissed by the medical examiner whose report was publicly released only months after its completion. Events like this emphasize that the argument of scale against conspiracy theories simply doesn't hold. His family knew what happened, the examiner's office knew what happened, many politicians exploiting his death knew what happened, and I expect there's no doubt much of the media also knew. Yet they all ran with the same story because it helped advance the desired narrative. Efforts at countering it were effectively squished by a mixture of censorship and labels (such as conspiracy theory). And of course this event also emphasizes that the political establishment are more than happy to carry out amoral conspiracies even over such absurdly petty things, and that our media is now more of a tool for political manipulation of society than a balance against it. So after events like this, what reason do I ever have to now believe the media or politicians on pretty much anything? Even science is now starting to go down the exact same myopic path with things like the famous open letter published by the Lancet [2] declaring any consideration that COVID may have come from a lab leak as being an unjustifiable conspiracy theory. Most of the scientists who signed that letter had direct ties to the Wuhan Lab. They declared no competing interests in the letter, and the Lancet editor who chose to publish it clearly didn't see it as a conflict of interest either. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Brian_Sicknick https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Brian_Sicknick [2] - https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30418-9/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
- peoplefromibiza 5y ago
  > such as conspiracy theory but most of the rioters were there that day because they believed in some conspiracy theory Or at least that was their esxcuse to wreak havoc and show their disrespect for any kind of common rule that should not be broken. If you go there saying you're protecting your president from Hillary Clinton's gang who rallied in a pizza restaurant owned by HC herself but it was actually a cover up for a pedo-ring of satanists who also drank blood, well, even if you don't believe it when you say it, don't be surprised if they'll frame you as cop killers. Psyops go both ways: sometimes you punch, sometimes you get punched in the face. So no, that's not reason for distrust of the government, that's reason for not taking reports too seriously and read between the lines looking for the actual information, buried in the noise. The reason for government distrust in USA is fabricated by those powerful people that do not want to make it obvious that they are abusing the rules and use the common people as human shields to protect their shady interests
  - encryptluks2 5y ago
    > The reason for government distrust in USA is fabricated by those powerful people that do not want to make it obvious that they are abusing the rules and use the common people as human shields to protect their shady interests Many of those powerful people work in the government, so yes the government is the reason of people distrusting the government.
    - peoplefromibiza 5y ago
      > Many of those powerful people work in the government don't know about the US, but AFAIU many of the people who want free hands try to put some of their people in the government being directly the ones who work for the government means having your public and private life constantly under scrutiny and that's a no go for such people One should ask (IMO) why people vote for them or believe that people like Sanders are commies who want to destroy US lifestyle ...

somenameforme 5y ago

The things you are mentioning are bad decisions that favor the government and there are likely be ulterior motives, but there is no overt deception. What's driving distrust IMO is overt deception which is becoming increasingly normalized and regular. One of the most extreme examples was the death of Officer Brian Sicknick [1] during the January 6th riots. The media ran a nonstop narrative (for months) that he had been brutally killed after being attacked by a rioter with a fire extinguisher: a visceral and discomforting image that helped to frame the riots. Politicians, up to and including the president, exploited this by having an honorary ceremony at the Capitol Rotunda historically used to honor the likes of Abraham Lincoln, Rosa Parks, and RBG. The problem is that not only was he not killed by a fire extinguisher, he wasn't killed at all. He died of a completely unrelated and preexisting medical condition (blood clot in the brain leading to stroke) well after the riots had ended. He texted his brother long after the riots stating he was feeling fine and had no problems except getting pepper sprayed twice. The media tried to pivot to claiming that he died of an allergic reaction to the pepper spray, but there was no basis in reality for that whatsoever and it was also completely dismissed by the medical examiner whose report was publicly released only months after its completion. Events like this emphasize that the argument of scale against conspiracy theories simply doesn't hold. His family knew what happened, the examiner's office knew what happened, many politicians exploiting his death knew what happened, and I expect there's no doubt much of the media also knew. Yet they all ran with the same story because it helped advance the desired narrative. Efforts at countering it were effectively squished by a mixture of censorship and labels (such as conspiracy theory). And of course this event also emphasizes that the political establishment are more than happy to carry out amoral conspiracies even over such absurdly petty things, and that our media is now more of a tool for political manipulation of society than a balance against it. So after events like this, what reason do I ever have to now believe the media or politicians on pretty much anything? Even science is now starting to go down the exact same myopic path with things like the famous open letter published by the Lancet [2] declaring any consideration that COVID may have come from a lab leak as being an unjustifiable conspiracy theory. Most of the scientists who signed that letter had direct ties to the Wuhan Lab. They declared no competing interests in the letter, and the Lancet editor who chose to publish it clearly didn't see it as a conflict of interest either. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Brian_Sicknick https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Brian_Sicknick [2] - https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30418-9/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

peoplefromibiza 5y ago
> such as conspiracy theory but most of the rioters were there that day because they believed in some conspiracy theory Or at least that was their esxcuse to wreak havoc and show their disrespect for any kind of common rule that should not be broken. If you go there saying you're protecting your president from Hillary Clinton's gang who rallied in a pizza restaurant owned by HC herself but it was actually a cover up for a pedo-ring of satanists who also drank blood, well, even if you don't believe it when you say it, don't be surprised if they'll frame you as cop killers. Psyops go both ways: sometimes you punch, sometimes you get punched in the face. So no, that's not reason for distrust of the government, that's reason for not taking reports too seriously and read between the lines looking for the actual information, buried in the noise. The reason for government distrust in USA is fabricated by those powerful people that do not want to make it obvious that they are abusing the rules and use the common people as human shields to protect their shady interests
- encryptluks2 5y ago
  > The reason for government distrust in USA is fabricated by those powerful people that do not want to make it obvious that they are abusing the rules and use the common people as human shields to protect their shady interests Many of those powerful people work in the government, so yes the government is the reason of people distrusting the government.
  - peoplefromibiza 5y ago
    > Many of those powerful people work in the government don't know about the US, but AFAIU many of the people who want free hands try to put some of their people in the government being directly the ones who work for the government means having your public and private life constantly under scrutiny and that's a no go for such people One should ask (IMO) why people vote for them or believe that people like Sanders are commies who want to destroy US lifestyle ...