Post Trust – The Instinct to Reject Mainstream Lies

confused-people-dreamstime_xs_75691764

Characteristically of “God’s Chosen”, the Jewish heist, the operation Steal Reality, is delivered with huge chutzpah. You know that concept that when someone says to you “everything I tell you is a lie” it goes around in circles, since it means the statement was itself a lie? Well it is that kind of dizzying surrealism that these masters of lies specialise in.

Today I noticed this piece in The Guardian “Don’t Call it Post Truth, There is a Simpler Word: Lies”.

“Post truth” is a generally pejorative term and has been designated as the “word of the year” by Oxford Dictionaries. They define it thus: an adjective defined as ‘relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief’. LINK

The Guardian writer, Freedland, who wants to simply call this phenomenon the simpler word “lies” is upset along with the rest of the mainstream media and establishment, that people can sense the unpleasant manipulations from them, and while not really knowing what to think, many ordinary folk have an instinct that the mainstream cannot be trusted. They have a feeling that those countering the mainstream are preferable sources of information and the internet has produced attractive rivals to the state propaganda.

The cheek of Freedland in his article is breathtaking. While he is part of the programme to ensure everything we believe is a lie and that truth itself is regarded as a personal preference and a culturally sensitive matter – in his article he pretends he and his ilk stand up for truth and evidence. And in that typically Jewish “accuse the accuser” style he has the nerve to give the example of David Irving’s trial – a trial which, as it was about “The Holocaust” meant that “the truth is no defence” as all dissent is regarded as hate speech.

Freedland says: Hence the queasy sensation the ground was falling away. As I wrote at the time: “If we start to doubt corroborated facts, how can we prevent ourselves being swallowed up in doubt, unable to trust anything we see? It might all be a conspiracy, a legend, a hoax. This is the bizarre, never-never world inhabited by David Irving. Now the court has to decide: is this our world too?”

This piece by Freedland has really got it all – he goes on to say that only post-truth/lies  contradict the propaganda on what is happening in Syria, targeting the Morning Star (which is on the very opposite of the political spectrum to David Irving or to Donald Trump) for it’s agreement on the Russian perspective that a “liberation” rather than Assad’s unconscionable murderous brutality is happening in Aleppo.

Freedland throws a blanket label of “post truth politics” on absolutely anything Donald Trump says, blames post truth for the Brexit and also for making people doubt that Russia hacked the US election.

Freedland talks of “corroborated facts” when none have in reality been provided as proof of his assertions. He relies entirely on an appeal to authority in which the mainstream is to be believed just because they are who they are. Those who show how corrupt and untrustworthy that mainstream is do not make any appeal to be believed just because of who they are. Instead they provide arguments that people find more or less convincing; arguments that at worst appeal to their gut instinct, which is no longer captivated by authority.

This should not be called “post truth” but rather “post trust”, since it is about the loss of trust in the mainstream narrative, which leads people to venture out into the unknown in search of something that is not trying to play them for a fool for sinister reasons.

Freedland’s article attempts to mock those who do not swallow the establishment’s propaganda, but it only serves to show how concerned that establishment is because it is regarded as seriously untrustworthy.

Creators use our religious compass to decide what we give our trust to – and it is a flawless assessment of who benefits and whether it is good for the White race.

~Rev. Jane