“Covid” showed us how susceptible people can be to psy-ops, and how clever programming and hypnotic techniques can make people believe things that blatantly aren’t true, and do things blatantly not in their interests.
The ‘system’ may well be rigged in as much that the public are steered by the media into thinking there’s only two choices.
The campaign funding process also heavily favours the parties with the highest financial backing as it allows them to get their message out. Every time I mentioned to friends & family that I was voting for The Heritage Party no one had even heard of them, and that’s obviously due to lack of funding and lack of media coverage.
However, despite the flaws in the campaign process and bias in the media, it’s a fact that there are numerous options on a ballot paper, no one forces people to only choose between red or blue, and every one of those votes is counted.
I accept that it’s ultimately their choice but I’ve found it frustrating seeing so many truthers on Twitter ‘justifying’ why they didn’t vote.
There’s certainly irony in using ‘globalist’ platforms to keep trotting out the ‘don’t vote’ mantra. We all know Twitter heavily shadow bans accounts but does that stop the ‘don’t vote’ group from still using it?
YouTube bans video content makers (as you know personally) but does that stop the ‘don’t vote’ group from using it? What’s the difference, why is the ‘we won’t play their game’ argument not applied to globalist platforms that censor truth but must apply to elections?
Not complying with tyranny will always be the best way to fight back but that doesn’t mean we can’t also use ‘their’ voting system to change things. It certainly won’t be easy but I don’t see any downside in trying.
Thanks Mick, you are absolutely right. I have made these exact arguments to the "don't vote" crowd. When they say to me on Twitter, "voting is giving your power to the system", I say, "you're no more giving your power to the system by voting than you are giving it to Elon Musk by Tweeting".
It makes no logical sense that they are prepared to use the system's platforms daily (social media, iPhones, bank accounts etc) to fight tyranny, but not to use the ballot box to vote against tyranny, an opportunity that only comes around once every 4/5 years.
And indeed, it's NEVER a two-horse race, and if there isn't a candidate you want to vote for, there's very little stopping you standing yourself or convincing a trusted friend to. All you need to do is raise the deposit, which many freedom candidates do successfully with crowdfunding. You don't need any special qualifications, or to be in a political party, you just need to fill in a form.
As you say, people have the right not to vote and they absolutely should have that right. But their reasons for not doing so make no logical sense, which is why I am more and more convinced by the NLP hypnosis argument. Brainwashing centrally depends on getting people to repeat mantras and slogans, and that's all the "don't vote" side has - mantras and slogans, not fully fleshed out arguments, which is why none of them have accepted my public offer to have a live debate on the subject. Ideas that are wrong can gain a lot of traction and support through soundbites and slogans (as Covid taught as so well), but they fall apart in a debate situation when confronted with the truth (hence why establishment figures would never agree to debate "conspiracy theorists" about vaccines etc).
It's going to be very difficult to challenge this particular psy-op because it is so embedded and so beloved (as I know personally as I was once under this hypnosis myself), but I am absolutely determined to keep trying.
That’s so disappointing no one has agreed to your offer of a live debate on the subject. They are good, well meaning people that have stood up against everything in the last four years so surely only good things can come out of an open and respectful discussion.
About 16 years ago when I was a Personal Trainer I was on a training course. I got chatting to the tutor in a break and he mentioned he had just started his NLP training. I hadn’t heard of it so asked him what it was all about. He said ‘it’s using words to steer people’s thinking’. I remember thinking it sounded sinister but didn’t think any more about it, was probably too busy watching football in those days. If only I knew then what I know now 😄
It is disappointing. The only real reason I can see for declining such a debate is a concern one's opponent might be inappropriately combative or abusive, but anyone who has ever watched my interviews knows I am nothing like that, and also, I'd be very happy to have the debate refereed. In fact, that would be my preference (by someone known to be open to both sides and level-headed, such as Jeff Peel, who's had both me and David Kurten, and "Don't Vote" people on his pod). Well, maybe they will yet surprise me!
Yes. NLP is very sinister, and as hypnotherapist Debbie Williams confirmed in a recent article, far more widespread than we know.
Thanks Miri 👍🏻
The ‘system’ may well be rigged in as much that the public are steered by the media into thinking there’s only two choices.
The campaign funding process also heavily favours the parties with the highest financial backing as it allows them to get their message out. Every time I mentioned to friends & family that I was voting for The Heritage Party no one had even heard of them, and that’s obviously due to lack of funding and lack of media coverage.
However, despite the flaws in the campaign process and bias in the media, it’s a fact that there are numerous options on a ballot paper, no one forces people to only choose between red or blue, and every one of those votes is counted.
I accept that it’s ultimately their choice but I’ve found it frustrating seeing so many truthers on Twitter ‘justifying’ why they didn’t vote.
There’s certainly irony in using ‘globalist’ platforms to keep trotting out the ‘don’t vote’ mantra. We all know Twitter heavily shadow bans accounts but does that stop the ‘don’t vote’ group from still using it?
YouTube bans video content makers (as you know personally) but does that stop the ‘don’t vote’ group from using it? What’s the difference, why is the ‘we won’t play their game’ argument not applied to globalist platforms that censor truth but must apply to elections?
Not complying with tyranny will always be the best way to fight back but that doesn’t mean we can’t also use ‘their’ voting system to change things. It certainly won’t be easy but I don’t see any downside in trying.
Thanks Mick, you are absolutely right. I have made these exact arguments to the "don't vote" crowd. When they say to me on Twitter, "voting is giving your power to the system", I say, "you're no more giving your power to the system by voting than you are giving it to Elon Musk by Tweeting".
It makes no logical sense that they are prepared to use the system's platforms daily (social media, iPhones, bank accounts etc) to fight tyranny, but not to use the ballot box to vote against tyranny, an opportunity that only comes around once every 4/5 years.
And indeed, it's NEVER a two-horse race, and if there isn't a candidate you want to vote for, there's very little stopping you standing yourself or convincing a trusted friend to. All you need to do is raise the deposit, which many freedom candidates do successfully with crowdfunding. You don't need any special qualifications, or to be in a political party, you just need to fill in a form.
As you say, people have the right not to vote and they absolutely should have that right. But their reasons for not doing so make no logical sense, which is why I am more and more convinced by the NLP hypnosis argument. Brainwashing centrally depends on getting people to repeat mantras and slogans, and that's all the "don't vote" side has - mantras and slogans, not fully fleshed out arguments, which is why none of them have accepted my public offer to have a live debate on the subject. Ideas that are wrong can gain a lot of traction and support through soundbites and slogans (as Covid taught as so well), but they fall apart in a debate situation when confronted with the truth (hence why establishment figures would never agree to debate "conspiracy theorists" about vaccines etc).
It's going to be very difficult to challenge this particular psy-op because it is so embedded and so beloved (as I know personally as I was once under this hypnosis myself), but I am absolutely determined to keep trying.
That’s so disappointing no one has agreed to your offer of a live debate on the subject. They are good, well meaning people that have stood up against everything in the last four years so surely only good things can come out of an open and respectful discussion.
About 16 years ago when I was a Personal Trainer I was on a training course. I got chatting to the tutor in a break and he mentioned he had just started his NLP training. I hadn’t heard of it so asked him what it was all about. He said ‘it’s using words to steer people’s thinking’. I remember thinking it sounded sinister but didn’t think any more about it, was probably too busy watching football in those days. If only I knew then what I know now 😄
It is disappointing. The only real reason I can see for declining such a debate is a concern one's opponent might be inappropriately combative or abusive, but anyone who has ever watched my interviews knows I am nothing like that, and also, I'd be very happy to have the debate refereed. In fact, that would be my preference (by someone known to be open to both sides and level-headed, such as Jeff Peel, who's had both me and David Kurten, and "Don't Vote" people on his pod). Well, maybe they will yet surprise me!
Yes. NLP is very sinister, and as hypnotherapist Debbie Williams confirmed in a recent article, far more widespread than we know.