Backroads

I think it depends on the context, but I do think that there is 100% secret combinations operating in governments and businesses all over the world, (and possibly even the church one day) which are leading to a degradation of quality of life, a symptom of which is increased violence. 

Is that why @LDSGator is so cranky about MLMers?

I think most of those are just me, hitting refresh endlessly to see what glorious new avatar you'll choose next.  
 
Honestly though, I believe the high count is an aspect of the billions of bots out there.  Nearly half of all internet traffic is generated by bots, with bad bots accounting for about one-third of that traffic. This trend has been increasing, with bad bot traffic rising significantly in recent years.  In 10 years if we don't find a way to halt the nefarious bots, probably most of the online folks out interacting with each other will be bots.
We absolutely see bot traffic here.   It started with accounts signing up, changing their avatar, then trying to start a post full of russian text, or links to free viagra, or what have you.  The mods catch all those.   But now I'm guessing half or more of our new people showing up and posting on existing threads, sometimes years old threads, with relevant things to say, are bots.  The technology is certainly there, and it's not like thirdhour has two factor cell phone authentication.  All you need is a fake Google/Facebook/X account or valid email address, and the ability to find the "I agree to the terms" button.
So yeah, don't buy viagra from anyone who contacts you via the thirdhour PM function.   

I think some will rethink their views. We live in a time where we don't get to see the bad sides of these diseases. It's easy to dismiss a theoretical, more difficult when it's your kid. In fact, I once read this account of a mom who was strongly anti-vax until practically the whole family came down what I think was whooping cough. That changed her tune. 
However, and maybe it's me whose a little too paranoid, I think there will be a lot of work done to discourage vaccinations even if measles come back in full force. 

There are always going to be a small percentage that will go against the grain.  But this whole thing about COVID was WOBAR.

I agree that a majority would, but the anti-vax movement is growing and they have a lot of business interests to protect. They depend on convincing more and more people not to vaccinate.

I agree that a majority would, but the anti-vax movement is growing and they have a lot of business interests to protect. They depend on convincing more and more people not to vaccinate.

I agree that a majority would, but the anti-vax movement is growing and they have a lot of business interests to protect. They depend on convincing more and more people not to vaccinate.

This is actually where I worry we have the opposite danger. I don't trust the people who discourage trusting science and doctors. And it starts with planting that seed of doubt in parents.
If all the "do your own research!" folk would just share their research, I might feel differently, but it's always a weird psychological game. "Oh, you trust the government? You don't think for yourself? You don't think you can find the info I have? You actually believe the research you found?"
Lots of smoke, no fire.
And the results are pretty bad and creating a lot of anxiety, which I think makes people more susceptible to manipulation.
Telling people to not trust good data and research without giving them a solid alternative is evil.
 

I saw a discussion where her entire defense was "ChatGPT said such".

Probably more likely to be chatGPT. 

This is actually where I worry we have the opposite danger. I don't trust the people who discourage trusting science and doctors. And it starts with planting that seed of doubt in parents.
If all the "do your own research!" folk would just share their research, I might feel differently, but it's always a weird psychological game. "Oh, you trust the government? You don't think for yourself? You don't think you can find the info I have? You actually believe the research you found?"
Lots of smoke, no fire.
And the results are pretty bad and creating a lot of anxiety, which I think makes people more susceptible to manipulation.
Telling people to not trust good data and research without giving them a solid alternative is evil.
 

No one actually does research. They watch YouTube videos or the like and consider themselves having researched. 

I highly doubt my parents were skeptical about vaccinations (nothing later in life suggests it).  I suspect it was just considered "normal" for children to catch certain diseases (like chicken pox) rather than to vaccinate them beforehand.  And now that I say that, I'm certain we had chicken pox, so maybe we were vaccinated against measles, cuz I don't remember us having two childhood diseases (and I know we didn't have mumps).  Next time I see them, I'll ask my aunts if they remember (both of my parents are dead, so I can't ask them).

As I've noted before, the controversy and fallout over the Covid vaccines was so extreme that even a lot of people who are otherwise in favor of vaccines wound up cynical and skeptical. 
When that much trust gets lost in something, it doesn't return overnight. 
I hate to say it, but we're likely going to be looking at a few more epidemics before society as a whole remembers why we began vaccinations in the first place. 

When I think Brady Bunch, I think their Hawaiian vacation with that tiki head thing, and whenever we saw the head the music went "boodaadiidaaLOOOO".
Oddly enough, people refusing to get their kids vaccinated against stuff like measles makes me hear the same music.
I grabbed this meme in 2017-ish, as it was all getting started.

Good ol' Marsha.
Ironically, that actress is the one who complains about that episode because apparently she had measles in a bad way 

"Marsha, Marsha, Marsha!"
(I have an annoying report for you: When I was a child (in Utah), it was common to just let kids get the measles and develop natural immunity. That's how me and my brothers got ours. <gdrvvf> )

In terms of "escape"........ it is an intentionally dramatic term and frankly I think gives the wrong impression. You are not trapped in any physical sense in the Church. If you want to leave on a simple practical level you can just stop going, send 1 letter to the Bishop asking them to not send anyone around (or remove your name if you genuinely want to) and perhaps a follow up and it is done.
On that practical level saying you escaped feels...... well we probably wanted you to stay and some people will have tried to persuade you but you were not truly trapped.
On a cultural level, it can be very hard for a person to completely overhaul or change their life. I have no plan to leave the Church (I am persuaded it is true for one thing) but even on a basic level I would feel..... kind of adrift on a Sunday without church to go to. I would lose some of my social interactions. I would lose a fairly hefty chunk of my identity. Leaving all of that behind may not be physically difficult but emotionally you bet it can be. And if you have close friends or family who are part of the Church then there can be a lot of pressure to stay and conform (whether intended or not) and telling them you no longer believe is going to be hard. I think escape is the wrong term, but it will be true that it can be a tough thing to do.
And on a personal note, I would say 2 things. First, if you have tried and genuinely do not believe it is true, or genuinely believe the Church is fundamentally wrong, then I think you probably should leave. Don't pretend as that will just do you harm. And if you want to explain to people why you disbelieve then of course that is your right. I only genuinely dislike the critics who are dishonest about the Church, such as clipping 2 seconds from a 20 minute talk to make a leader look bad (as one example, I saw a critic post a quote from Elder Scott that tried to imply he blamed people for being abused...... even the worst faith reading of the whole talk shows that is not true as the talk is replete with comments about how the abused has done nothing wrong and should not feel guilt etc). So long as you are honest we can have a productive conversation (I get as frustrated with Evangelical types who try to tell me what I believe, such as someone saying we earn our way into Heaven, as that is again often bad faith).
As a sub item to the above, don't accuse me of being brainwashed or some nonsense. I know why I believe what I do, you don't.
But for the second thing, I dislike the term "cult" or the modern variant "high-demand religion". Both are just code terms for saying "religion I do not like, but also it's bad". It is not a useful term at all. We are a religion like many others. People who use the term cult to describe us usually do so in bad faith. The term cult is just a pejorative without any meaningful content except as a cudgel to say "boooooo" at a religion. 

I never really understood this concept.  That is to say, I know what the technical definition of closure is:
But the idea that we can find certainty in life (much less the spiritual realm) is just not realistic especially in highly esoteric subjects.
We can find closure in what we know with the five senses.  But "belief"?  If anyone claims that there is no other worldly sense, then how can we know that it is or is not?  It's a circular self-defeating view.  All we can do is -- express doubt.  There is no certainty because you can't prove a negative.  At best, one can be agnostic.  Yet all too many atheists will mock those who believe.  For all they know, the theists could be correct.
Similarly, most other belief systems end up being circular.  The Bible tells us there is a God so, we know He exists.  We know the Bible is true because it says it is the word of God.
The one major difference in epistemology that the Restored Gospel offers is personal experience via the Holy Ghost.  My x-mo friend was completely honest about this.  He left because after being raised in the Church and giving it a good chance, he realized that he had never felt the Spirit.  That's why he left. 
Assuming that is true (I have no reason to doubt his own words about his own experience) I don't blame him.  Really living this religion requires a lot.  And if you have no certainty after many years of giving it a good try... How can you justify the effort to stay?
Atheists are perfectly welcome do disagree with others' belief systems.  But to claim that they have either moral or intellectual authority over theists seemingly displays a lack of self-awareness.

A sizeable percentage of those on the membership rolls of our church are not active. They didn't have to "escape" they simply stopped coming. I agree that leaving behind the cultural aspect of the Church requires significant adjustment but this video is not about closure. He is openly engaging our church but now as an antagonist. This is not escaping but attacking.
Obedience to God's laws is the only thing that brings lasting joy. So to the extent that anyone obeys God's laws they can receive that joy in proportion. Our Church's mission is to teach a fullness of God's laws so people can receive a fullness of joy, if they so choose it. It's up to them. But we seek for those who are not content being just fine. 

The cult accusations always get under my skin. Forgive me Americans, but I'm wondering if Church culture in the land of the free 🦅🇺🇸🦅 can at times be problematic. Because all of these "I escaped a CULT" videos tend to be from America, and the online discourse on whether or not the church is a cult, appears to be discussed between Americans. 
 
In my experience the Church is anything but a cult. My brother in law is homosexual, and inactive. He is loved and respected by his family and not excluded by any measure. On the odd occasion he comes to church to support family by listening to a talk or to witness a calling members of the ward greet him and ask how he is. He was the best man at my wedding. Some cult if you ask me. 
 
I think at worst, the church is a very conservative community with some very unorthodox beliefs when compared to the mainstream, but cult? Sounds like click bait. 

I'm not sure why they're making a big deal about the Church's "mysterious" real estate holdings.  We have hundreds of temples which are valued at multi-million dollars for just the buildings alone.  Then consider the land value as well (usually in nice neighborhoods).
Add to that all church buildings (especially stake centers).  Then have all the Deseret Industries buildings (welfare farms, welfare food stores, canneries, outreach, thrift stores, etc.) Duh-uh. 
Yes, we own a lot of real-estate.  And???
This is like the big deal about the Church having $100B endowment fund.  My response was: and???
If the Church liquidated all holdings and distributed it to all the members of the Church worldwide, we'd have enough for half the median annual salary for each active member of the Church.
Then we'd be broke and we'd have no church to meet in, no temples to attend, no charitable support to provide.  The Church would be dead.
Compare the $15B the Church owns compared to Walmart's $121B in real estate alone.  Then add to it all the other stuff they have in factories, warehouses, and stores.  Are they an evil corporation?
This is nothing more than propagating the notion that Rich = Evil.
EDIT: I don't think the Church would be dead.  But it would be similar to the condition of the Church prior to Lorenzo Snow.  But we would have to build up our churches and temples again.