Re: State of emergency?
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 10:39 am
And we should ask these questions about anything shown to be false or deliberately misleading:
Why would ________________ be spreading misinformation about ____________?
If this source or sources is lying about _______, then what other lies and misinformation are those same sources propagating?
Because once we buy in to believing a source is trustworthy, we can be misled into likewise trusting whatever its output or assertions might be - and this is true of virtually every human institution, club, political party, etc. So, EVERYTHING put forward should be considered ONLY on its own merits, facts, and what can be substantiated as true. And NO source is always perfect. And most sources have some sort of agenda. And so when something crops up that is true or right, yet is seen as an inconvenience or obstacle to whatever source's agenda, then the temptation is to either go around it, ignore it, disingenuously dismiss it, or make false assertions about it. And this is how good people and organizations become corrupted - as they often fail to deal with reality, or they fail to show equal and appropriate criticism of people and organizations they tend to favor or normally agree with. If our political parties would include more people who are willing to admit mistakes, criticize their own colleagues or favorites wherever warranted, we'd not see near the cronyism and corruption we have. And when our opponents are correct - even if we disagree with them on most other topics - we should acknowledge it when and where they are correct! But people like to, almost blindly, fall in lockstep, group-think agreement with their friends, favored peers, or favorite organizations - no matter what. And, sadly, that is human nature 101!
Why would ________________ be spreading misinformation about ____________?
If this source or sources is lying about _______, then what other lies and misinformation are those same sources propagating?
Because once we buy in to believing a source is trustworthy, we can be misled into likewise trusting whatever its output or assertions might be - and this is true of virtually every human institution, club, political party, etc. So, EVERYTHING put forward should be considered ONLY on its own merits, facts, and what can be substantiated as true. And NO source is always perfect. And most sources have some sort of agenda. And so when something crops up that is true or right, yet is seen as an inconvenience or obstacle to whatever source's agenda, then the temptation is to either go around it, ignore it, disingenuously dismiss it, or make false assertions about it. And this is how good people and organizations become corrupted - as they often fail to deal with reality, or they fail to show equal and appropriate criticism of people and organizations they tend to favor or normally agree with. If our political parties would include more people who are willing to admit mistakes, criticize their own colleagues or favorites wherever warranted, we'd not see near the cronyism and corruption we have. And when our opponents are correct - even if we disagree with them on most other topics - we should acknowledge it when and where they are correct! But people like to, almost blindly, fall in lockstep, group-think agreement with their friends, favored peers, or favorite organizations - no matter what. And, sadly, that is human nature 101!