- ∙I.e.1 – Dissident Information (and Politics), what to do now: the need to redefine strategies
- ∙I.e.2 – An elementary (reassuring) approach of “dissident information” – The need to make a qualitative leap in making information “dissident”
- ∙I.e.4 – How to define a new approach to dissident information
The problem, as mentioned in the previous article, the dissident communication currently developed is not only unable to make most people understand what is really happening, but causes resentment on their part which justifies the repression implemented by the institutions.
So it is a question of developing new forms of communication that are able to make the most understand how much information that is not in line with the dominant thought on Covid can report objective facts.
To do this it is necessary to develop multi-level strategies – not just at the media level as illustrated in the previous article.
This is because the problem is in how our Society is currently structured: the real problem is not the measures imposed by the institutions (lockdown and the obligation to vaccinate).
We must in fact remember that to solve a problem it is always necessary to go and identify the causes of the problem, and then intervene on them.
The underlying problem in this case is that although the situation is very bad, if no substantial changes are made the situation is bound to get worse. And
the idea of being able to convince people
with the dissemination of data
in the way we are using now is an illusion:
in this way no real change is achieved.
In fact, we must consider the essence of the current situation: the problem is not in the dissemination of false information by the institutions (which could be solved with the dissemination of truthful information), but
the problem is in the manipulation of the minds to which Citizens of Western Democracies have been subjected.
A manipulation that allows the institutions to make the public believe what they want.
(As Macchiavelli said, if there are scammers, it is because there are people who aspire to be scammed.
This kind of manipulation represents a novelty: for the first time in history it is people who support precisely the measures that damage them. It is therefore a problem that must be faced in a new way: the strategies used up to now, over the centuries, no longer obtain any effect.
Today it is therefore necessary,
rather than demonstrating the objectivity of the information presented, use an approach capable of solving this problem of the condition of succubance of the mind.
This is because the essence of the problem is not the difficulty in understanding data, or in following a reasoning. The problem is the underlying factor behind these difficulties: a psychological condition of deep fear in which people are willing to believe what they are told by authoritative sources. <see my text “Handling the masses: the strategies of manipulation of consciences”>
(it must be considered that people are currently as if in a state of shock; and it is certainly not possible to reason with a person in such a condition). see in previous article “The armor of the minds (bigotry)“>
It is therefore necessary first of all to bring people into a condition of relative serenity: starting with an elementary (reassuring) approach, thanks to which people can begin to understand that the frightening problem they face could (Covid-19) be an invention of the institutions. <see in my previous article “Why it is possible to understand the whole truth only by starting with an elementary (reassuring) approach“>
If it is important to work immediately on the methods of providing information, it is equally important to operate at other levels (for the medium-long term).
Summarizing the levels on which it is necessary to operate are:
(the points are deepened in the very first chapters) ..
● information itself: the development of much more effective dissident information is possible if the qualities of new technologies are exploited to the full.
● Web tools and platforms: today the monopoly of a “crony Web”, in synergy with government institutions, makes it impossible to develop true dissident information.
● the methods of governance of the Society: the current submission of citizens to the dominant thought (to the “constituted power”) is maintained by the institutions thanks to the current organization of the Society’s Government.
It is therefore necessary to restore the current Social-democracy (pseudo-democracy) to the original conditions of real Democracy.
In other words, if one does not begin to operate at this level, any improvement in the current “cultural situation” in which citizens find themselves becomes useless (this aspect is only mentioned in a subsequent study, and is illustrated in detail in other documents).
The issue of information manipulation
In order to intervene on the causes of the problem, the multiple levels of the factors that contribute to its formation must be taken into consideration:
1° the problem that constitutes the pre-condition thanks to which mind manipulation strategies can be developed: a Western culture that has lost its links with reality, transforming itself from an effective knowledge to a “knowledge” based on the typical narrative of ideologies.
The basis of this problem lies in the education of individuals according to revolutionary formative criteria compared to the traditional ones – used in the tens of thousands of previous years (this aspect is detailed in other documents).
2° information profoundly manipulated to the point that for the Mainstream it becomes possible to spread information as profound truths that immediately turn out to be false to a person of solid culture.
This is possible, precisely, due to the monopoly of Culture by the State and the Market: the Market today is able to “buy” any form of communication to support its interests.
Obviously, the other significant aspect emerges from this analysis:
if you want to improve things,
you need to work at the Government level.
In matters of government. that in the age of ideologies – in which the motto is “everything is Government” – affect every aspect of the public and private life of the Citizen, it is necessary to return to the original condition: government “by the People” in which citizens are interested directly of the issues related to their life.
The next chapter illustrates some initiatives that allow the development of actions capable of supporting a substantial change in the current situation of dissemination of false information by the institutions.
(the following initiatives are illustrated in the next chapters)
► innovation of media information (to which the previous article is dedicated): today the “dissident” information channels naively confront the mainstream media on their own ground (they fight with their own “weapons”). Which makes them inherently losers (they will never be able to make most people understand the wrongness of the position in which the institutions and the mainstream media have placed themselves).
The development of a much more effective dissident information is possible if the qualities of new technologies are exploited to the fullest (something that mainstream, thanks to its dominant position, does not do).
These new technologies (Web, ICT, etc …) are extremely cheap (such as smartphone apps, the new generation “Social” online platforms) and can therefore lead to the creation of new highly innovative solutions <see my Article “Why disruptive innovation is not an option”>
There are other levels at which it is necessary to intervene in order to implement a real improvement of the situation of “cultural revolution” currently implemented in Western Democracy:
► “cultural” bottom-up research initiatives – In a historical phase in which Science has become an instrument for conveying the dominant Thought that no longer has an effective connection with reality, it is necessary to give back to Science its original role, of form of knowledge acquired independently from specific interests.
This is possible by starting to develop bottom-up “scientific research” – by the Crowd – as for the investigation of pollution in the area, or of the situations in hospitals.
And developing a Public debate in which experts from various sectors intervene, so that it is possible to clarify who is based on scientific foundations, and who develops mostly narratives (Scientific challenge).
► governance initiatives that bring the current Social-Democratic regime back to the condition of real Democracy.
► INNOVATION OF INFORMATION
If you want to get out of the cultural enclave in which dissident information is self-contained, today it is necessary to radically change the way information is done.
That is, it is necessary
stop dealing with mainstream media on its own level.
(stop fighting the opponent with his own weapons).
This topic is developed in the previous An elementary (reassuring) approach <see>.
One of the basic problems is that this type of dissident information is that it collides with the reality of a world of incumbent services (Media, Social Networks, etc …) that censor any type of “non-compliant” information.
For this reason
it is necessary to start studying the possibility of creating alternative platforms to the mainstream ones: Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, PayPal, etc …
today it is not only easy
to create alternatives to social incumbent platforms,
but today there is
ALSO THE OPPORTUNITY
TO DEVELOP THE ABOVE TYPES OF PRODUCTS
MUCH MORE POWERFUL THAN THEY.
An Achilles heel of the incumbents: they are afflicted by a serious underlying problem, since living in a monopoly position they are not at all stimulated to develop improvements to their products. And so they use technologies in an obsolete way. <see my articles “Why does innovation fail today? The inability to understand in new Customer Needs” – The Company Immune System: why the big Companies cannot develop real innovation>
In this way they leave a huge space for those who want to develop better products than Youtube, Faceboo, Twitter, etc … (keep in mind the situation of Google, the largest hi-tech comapny, which has seen almost 100% of products fail. launched in recent years <see my article “Be careful: most successful companies are not real innovators (disruptive innovators)“>)
As regards the innovation of Information itself, the structure of this project, which is outlined in more detail in the previous article, is based among other things on the following characteristics: adoption of Web-compliant modalities, starting with a “Visual design” in which textual, graphic and multimedia elements can be integrated into a single information. And of a hypertextual structure of information, today substantially ignored by the “dissident-stream” channels.
In summary, it is about integrating in an organic system that increases the value of a single information:
● information (eg news) developed in a new way that is more assimilable to most people.
● a knowledge-base that allows for in-depth analysis
Today science is a government tool.
In other words,
at an institutional level
there is no longer a “Scientific” science,
which is based on factual data, but there is a science-demagogy that develops texts linked to specific interests (Market, Politics).
it is necessary to give back to science
its original role,
as a form of knowledge
acquired autonomously from specific interests.
Today the development of a new “independent” science from market and political interests is possible thanks to:
● new hardware technologies (such as measurement tools) and new communication technologies (ICT).
● the practices of “crowd-sourcing” that Citizens (the “Crowd”) have developed in recent decades: that is the ability developed by Citizens to set up initiatives with which they can directly (mostly as voluntary service ) satisfy their needs.
Implementing this Crowd-sourcing modality is quite simple and cheap.
In other words, it is essentially a question of developing tools (online platforms) that allow the Crowd to self-organize research, investigation and documentation initiatives…
These Popular Initiatives can bring important results that shed new light on how the mainstream currently disseminates manipulated information,
which often, in order to follow the specific interests of the institutions and the market, hide many serious problems from citizens (for example problems of pollution in the territory, and problems of functioning of health protocols, such as vaccinations).
“Popular Initiatives” are aimed at creating Dossiers in which citizens can participate, but also technicians, laboratories, lawyers’ offices, etc… which operate free of charge or for a fee (with funding collected on the platform itself).
Bottom-up “scientific research” (by the Crowd) is the only action that can allow citizens to subvert the current condition of cultural subjection to institutions.
And it is precisely not only possible, but easy to organize.
(The problem, as we know, is that today we depend on “experts” who divulge false “scientific” information: it is that these falsehoods represent the basis for legitimizing the actions of institutional power).
With this research activity organized autonomously with respect to the Institutions, it is possible to develop real scientific researches with authoritative results (“certified”), and with the level of in-depth study currently non-existent (as for the survey of pollution on the territory, or situations in hospitals).
Research based on “Popular Initiatives” can (more on this later):
– produce new data – for example, in the case of pollution monitoring, it is possible to use professional tools that are now very cheap (or even just, at a simpler level, use a smartphone app)
– processing of existing data – for example to create statistics (also “certified”) capable of supporting “dissident” theses.
The information collected in this way becomes “undisputed” thanks to the authority (“certification”) that is attributed to it in the new ways of disseminating information:
The data is “certified”, among other things:
– for evidence in itself of the data collected – the data in some way “certified” thanks to the methods of acquisition themselves (see the examples of professional devices below for use) which indicate the methods and place of collection.
At this point, the institutional “Science” has nothing to do but produce data that disproves those collected – see the example of the diffusion levels of electromagnetic pollution in a city. Which it is unable to do.
– for the accession to the Dossier by people and institutions considered to be authoritative even by the same institutional science (this method is similar to the “signature” that prominent people today put on public documents of complaint).
To evaluate how the data collected can be considered “objective” it is necessary to evaluate that today consumer technologies (those from a few dollars) allow to create economic tools with very high performance (such as analysis devices that record levels of pollution, specifying many parameters such as the point where the survey takes place).
As illustrated in a subsequent chapter “widespread research on the territory” <see>,
working groups spread throughout the territory
made up of Citizens are able today
(thanks to the high level of consumer technologies)
to develop strictly scientific analyzes
such as those on environmental pollution.
It is also possible for the Crowd to directly collect statistical data such as those relating to the clogging of emergency rooms and intensive care, or situations within the shelters for the elderly. This collection can take place through citizens: patients or their relatives, operators in the structures, etc … And it can also be accompanied by images or videos.
In this way, statistical studies can be produced, which if presented in an appropriate manner, for example, showing the falsity of the information disclosed by the institutions; or the seriousness of the situation of facilities such as shelters for the elderly.
It is important to understand how an increase in the value of this data can be brought about by their integration by:
– from the detailed testimonies of those who lived or were present at the events.
– evaluations of authoritative persons.
● processing of existing data into new statistics
Today the data are heavily manipulated, so even if they are potentially able to indicate objective (irrefutable) truths, they are used by the Institutions and by the Maintream media to show an imaginary reality.
This is because
the data itself does not say anything to people who do not know how to draw real meanings from them
(the great majority of people).
It is therefore a question of presenting the data correctly.
But the data processing work is often not immediate (as in the case of graphs illustrating the correspondence of Coronavirus deaths between 2020 and previous years). So – as is the case with the presentation of evidence in a court of law – it is necessary to know how to organize and clearly present the data in order to understand the truth they show.
For these reasons, the editorial offices of the Media are composed of many people who work in the presentation of the Information.
Dissident information – not having the budget of the mainstream media available – can therefore make use of working groups formed by the Crowd that process data already produced by other institutional sources (such as Environmental Agencies, National Health Institutes).
These data may, for example, relate to the problem of Covid infectivity.
These types of investigations can be developed for many cases, such as on the validity (or harmfulness) of Medicines (such as chloroquine, Bella’s treatment, vaccines).
Let’s look specifically at two examples of this type of scientific research that can be developed by the Crowd (the cases are explored in the next chapters):
● Scientific challenge
● electromagnetic pollution reseach
a SCIENTIFIC CHALLENGE to bring out the actual truth
For people to be convinced of the falsity of the information offered by the Mainstream media regarding Covid-19, it is sufficient that authority is given to data that are already available (today most people, clinging to the institutional narrative, are not in able to recognize this authority).
To achieve this goal, it is possible to create on the Web a place where a debate develops in which there is a comparison between two opposite theses (for example the institutional theses and the “negationist” theses on Covid-19): in this way it is possible to demonstrate the falsity of institutional data, and to certify the truthfulness of the “dissident” information.
This debate must obviously strictly follow the rules of Science (see other article).
It should be noted that in this way the theses of the so-called “deniers” cannot but prevail, because the bearers of institutional thought do not have any rational, scientific support to support the danger of Covid (while it emerges that the theses of dissident thought are supported by irrefutable scientific evidence).
Necessary considerations on the field of comparison
The (positive) fact is that the institutions are losers from the start, in the sense that their position is absolutely not sustainable in the face of truly scientific data.
However, it must be understood that to achieve the objective of demonstrating this situation
it is necessary to change the comparison modes.
In essence, it is necessary to stop bringing “arguments” that the public is unable to understand. <<see previous article “An elementary (reassuring) approach of “dissident information” >
That is, it is necessary to move the comparison to a simpler dimension, and more focused on more assimilable topics (as mentioned in the previous article “An elementary (reassuring) approach”).
That is, for example, it is necessary to start by showing that the number of deaths in 2020 is the same as that of previous years. And that the swabs do not measure at all the danger of the situation, and are unable to distinguish Covid from a normal flu.
In this way it is possible to dissolve the solidity (fictitious, built on the narrative) of the institutional theses, and at the same time make the “dissident” information authoritative.
Scientific research spread across the territory
It is possible to create a site in which citizens organize themselves on their own territory to carry out real scientific analyzes of the various forms of pollution.
Today this is possible thanks to the availability of very cheap professional tools (or even just, at a simpler level, use smartphone apps).
Contributions can come from citizens, but also from technicians and laboratories (possibly paid with funding made on the site).
With this activity, it is possible, for example, to create pollution maps that unequivocally demonstrate the existence of the problem.
This site can also facilitate the organization of “class action” (appeals at national level or at international government institutions).
This type of initiative is illustrated in many of my works:
See my texts on the need to restore real democracy on other sites