You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

burnerdrone04 ago

There is a term I really like: "plausibility structure" It's kind of like world-view. It is a framework of understanding that allows you to believe that something is true. If I had been exposed to the statement "Hillary is part of a satanic global cabal that murders children" 4 months ago, that would have been the end of my interest and investigation into pizzagate. I had to build (or have built by others in this amazing/terrifying community) the plausibility structure over time. I suggest the following resources in this order for "red-pilling" the logical skeptic:

TED talk -Sharyl Attkisson- how to spot media manipulation

Norway Pedo Bust

Corporate Media Story spike of the Norway Pedo Bust
NYT Then
NYT Now

Washinton Post

Stephen Colbert on Pizzagate (Note the words used mirror those warned by Sharyl Attkinsson)

Ben Swann on Pizzagate

So that covers the climate within which #Pizzagate exists. It's really a good primer because this thing is so vast, there's no point in summing it up unless the "plausibility structure" has been established for going further. It should be enough to cause someone to at least consider that pizzagate is real and hopefully dig further for themselves. You own the knowledge more if you do some of the homework.

More stories/info on censorship or character assassination may also be helpful when viewed through the lens of the Sharyl Attkinsson TED talk, such as David Seamans battles with his own wikipedia page. David Seaman in his own words on character assassination.

Also understanding that the kind of deep evil involving child torture/murder has a place in our human history... This is not new. I know it's Wikipedia but a lot of people default to trusting it and historical articles are not as likely to change a whole lot. There are other sources for these widely publicized events.

Marc_Dutroux

Jimmy Savile

Edward Heath

Maybe even Gilles de Rais

Find out what it's really all about: pizzagate.com and of course right here on voat/v/pizzagate

wecanhelp ago

Thank you, I have many thoughts about this comment. First and foremost:

"plausibility structure"

Thanks for this, this is exactly what I've been thinking about for some time now, didn't know it had a name. The rabbit hole is getting deeper, and with that less and less plausible for a newcomer.

Unfortunately, I don't think it's a viable solution to include a list of links, the whole point of an introductory material is that it already has done the work of aggregating information from different sources, and building them up in an easy-to-follow, educative structure. If you're new to all this, and you arrive with the predisposition that this is likely just another conspiracy theory, you will have no incentive to invest considerably into potentially being convinced of the opposite. Present an understandably skeptical newbie with a long list of resources, and you've set yourself up for failure. I stick by the single-link idea.

You own the knowledge more if you do some of the homework.

For sure, and I'm not looking to take that away. That is why the introductory material is not meant to be the be-all and end-all of Pizzagate information. It should be (and excuse the word choice, but it hopefully gets my message through) an appetizer that has the best chance to guarantee you will then be intrinsically motivated to do the rest of your own homework.

To give you a good example that is unfortunately not accessible anymore on the original channel: #PizzaGate: What We Know So Far by Reality Calls was an excellent Pizzagate 101 of its time, even despite some inaccuracies that the community has discovered since. It redpilled me, and many others as well, precisely because it was brief, to-the-point, sourced, and intelligent. It was unlike typical conspiracy theory videos, and you could tell there had been a lot of thought put into not just what to tell, but how to tell it. I'm looking for an up-to-date version of this essentially.

Finally:

pizzagate.com

Unfortunately that site is compromised, and its maintainers have dubious motives, so we won't endorse it. Too bad, because otherwise the core information and presentation there used to be of pretty good quality.

Progressivelymean ago

Maybe instead of the whole article just a excerpt of an article that give enough to gain interest, or enough that they understand the point with a link to the remainder of the article. Newslogue does this all the time when you share an article.

burnerdrone04 ago

Well, if any from my list are contenders, I'd still stick with Ben Swann's Reality check video for a couple of reasons. It's easy to follow, it prompts further digging, and it comes from someone on a credible major news network (if you are not willing to distrust the TV yet).

wecanhelp ago

This is a very good point actually. I'm adding it to my mental shortlist. Thank you.