The Folk Prophet

I am convinced more and more as I age that the evil in the world is almost beyond comprehension to those who are not engaged in it. Most people do what they can get away with. Period. That's it. If they can, they do drugs and alcohol. If they can, they lie. If they can, they steal. If they can, the cheat. If they can, they murder. Powerful people can get away with a LOT. So they do. We're in a time where a lot of this evil is being exposed. I don't think a lot of it is new...but as things have become more socially acceptable, the evil peeks it's ugly head out from the crevices, believing it safe in the sunlight. In cases, they've shown more of their hand than they meant to. (For example, the leaked "gay agenda" videos by Disney execs.) But most of the true evil is still hidden. We're starting to see, for example...the "minor attracted" crowd beginning to show their cards. Ever so slightly. Testing the waters. Pushing the acceptance. Etc. Underneath what's seen, there's an entire unfathomably deep pit of filth. And some, as you point out, seem to disbelieve this to be true. I'm not sure why. Most of this corruption remains hidden. So we don't know the explicit details. But the fact that it exists seems so obvious.

Yeet!

I'm not sure what your point is or how this is a response (Counter? Agreement?) to what I said. Could you clarify?

I have a hard time commenting on this because the information in the media is all SO biased. I don't trust it. I know that what I typically see is that the media and everyone makes the terrible claims about him and they typically turn out to be inaccurate, twisted, or outright lies. So is there truth in some of the claims related to what happened with the Sandy Hook stuff....??? Could be. Probably is. But it's a cry wolf situation and so I don't trust much. And having not followed Alex Jones back then at all...well I just don't know. I'm not sure how to think on the idea of "followers" of any given person doing something that the person didn't tell them to and then blaming said person. We see the same thing with the Trump/Jan 6 narrative going on. As a general rule I don't buy that sort of thinking. Should Alex have said, "stop this" to them, in that case? Well, yeah. Of course. But I'm not sure we can really know the full story, what he was thinking, and why he might have said or not said what he did related to that. So I can get on board that there may have been mistakes made by him. From what I know of him though, he'd probably admit the same. In fact I've heard him say he made mistakes on certain things. Because he isn't some prophet leader of some cult. He's a radio show personality who talks about stuff. I mean we see the same thing with like Joe Rogan and the medicine he talked about taking on his show for Covid. Joe's not responsible if someone takes him as the authority on the matter. Anyone who takes Joe Rogan as an authority on anything besides, perhaps, MMA stuff is being dumb. Joe Rogan isn't an authority. If he said, "This is what you should do!" then, sure...he becomes somewhat culpable (though those believing him would still be dumb to do it on his word alone... Do your own research people!). But does every person with any sort of a following on any given platform need to automatically presume their listeners are nut-jobs who will do something stupid based on their opinions. Well...probably. Yeah. But... did Alex Jones presume that? Should he have? I dunno. Anyhow, I'm not really defending Alex Jones here. I just...I dunno... There's a problem in the world. (That's putting it lightly. I mean there are many problems. But....) Speech is under attack. Big time! It's a serious problem. Political correctness is out of control. People can't talk about so many things. Opinions can't be shared. Debates can hardly be had. It's bad. And it's getting worse. I'm not defending Jones...but his ability to share his opinions on things openly even if they're off based.... That I would defend. Of course that doesn't have anything to do with whether he's a good or bad person. Who knows. It doesn't strike me he's bad. Just flawed. But that's everyone. Right? Anyhow...just chatting. Don't take my thoughts too seriously on the matter. It's more a matter of curiosity than having any sort of real stance.

Are you saying it was your perception that he was ONLY in it for the money and fame? Because I would expect that anyone who's building that kind of thing is in it for money and fame...but if it's ONLY money and fame, then that implies dishonest intent. I've never felt Alex Jones had dishonest intent, overall. He has messed up. Yes. But he said what he thought and believed at any given time, I think. That's as compared to, say, Milo Yiannopoulos, who I believe is in it ONLY for the money and the fame and to be a provocateur because it makes him the popular "bad boy" of "conservativism" (quotes added here because...come on.) I think there are many out there who are provocateurs on the right because it's cool to do so and they were in it for only money and fame, particularly in the previous slate of right-wingers who have fallen a bit out of fashion now (many because they got banned from everywhere). But my sense of Jones was that he was/is sincere. He's a provocateur because he has a brazen personality, but I feel like he believes what he says. But the primary reason I wouldn't call him a "false" prophet (prophet's a weird word to use here, I think..but....)... is because of how often he's been right.

I'm just curious here. Does anyone actually watch Alex Jones' show? Or are the opinions here based on what the news media, etc., report of him? (Just to be clear, I don't watch his show...but I've watched him a few times in long-form conversations on Tim Pool's show.) Like I said, just curious. I'm not a fan of his. Have no interest in defending him or anything. But I certainly haven't concluded he's a "false prophet". Seems a bit extreme. My take on him is he's got some communication styles that put people off and can easily miscommunicates what he's trying to say to a lot of people. And he makes some presumptions that are off based sometimes, because he's, you know...a human. But a false prophet just trying to con people out of money seems a bit extreme to my thinking. As I said, I'm not a fan of his. And I can certainly understand many people disliking him as a personality. But he has also been, to my thinking, demonized WAY beyond reality.

I don't know if this comment will tie into this thread or not, but it's related to the title at least: I think it's terrible how all the commentary from conservatives is so fear-mongering right now to gain political points. I actually understand, in part, what the Biden administration is trying to do. Yes, some things in the economy are concrete -- but a lot of it is merely perception. When people get scared and tighten their belts, stop spending, stop hiring, etc., it makes things worse. If people trust things are going to be okay, they're more likely to keep spending, keep hiring, etc. Yes, there are concrete issues that affect such things as well. Though even some of those concrete things are based on up-the-chain perception. By letting people know that things aren't as bad as "A RECESSION", it seems the Biden administration is trying to keep things positive, in part, to maintain perception, so everything doesn't go into hunker-down mode, that will surely make things even worse. By arguing the point and demanding that the Biden admin is "redefining what recession means" the conservative commentary is playing a self-fulfilling prophecy style game. They're adding fear to the recession they claim we're now "by definition" in. And literally repeatedly stating how scary it is. Yes, I know there's more to it than simply what I've described above. I know the Biden admin is playing political games as well, trying to make it seem like they're doing a better job than they are. But I still think it's irresponsible of conservative voices to be dumping fuel on the fire.

It's amazing to me how much of a contest raising my kids feels like sometimes. Yes, I know...that's terrible. But I can't help it. Well, my kids may or may not be smarter than your grandkids...but they're cuter, dang it! So says I. And I'm not biased at all! It's objective!

Except, by literal word definition, it kind of does. (I will grant, there is an implication of the additional un-spoken "for" in the similarity of meaning. But unspoken implied added words are moderately common.) Which is why people misuse it that way so naturally. Some basic thesaurusing: Begs (for) the question, invokes the question, pleads (for) the question, advocates (for) the question, asks the question, sues (for) the question, adjures (for) the question... vs. Raises the question, incites the question, provokes the question, suggests the question, arouses the question, awakens the question.... I dunno...seems pretty much to mean the same thing, at a basic level...to me. Granted, without the implied "for" then it doesn't mean the same thing, because instead of asking "for" the question one is asking "of" the question itself...but still... clearly when anyone uses "begs the question" to mean "raises the question" they mean the implied "for" as part of it.

Prior to reading this post I was feeling so good about how well my 5 and a half year old was sounding out and reading words like "cat", "bob" and "ant". Now I feel like she's way behind the curve. Thanks for that.

I've never had a problem with the Book of Mormon's writing style until I started recently reading nightly scriptures to my 5-year-old. One might ask, why would you read something so difficult to understand to a 5-year-old? Well...for the same reason my mother read it to us. So when we're older the language doesn't seem or feel hard or strange. Every time I read "And it came to pass..." now my child pipes up, "that means, 'It happened!'". And she's just naturally starting to understand what "thou/thee" means, etc. And I have to explain what I'm reading as I go a lot, and find that in some verses...well, a lot of verses...I have to explain every other word. The language is not common or plain, despite Nephi's proclamation that he's speaking plainly. (Obviously what he means by speaking plainly is a subjective idea. And he is, indeed, speaking plainly....relatively.) Anyhow, my point is, I've never given much thought to the difficulty of understanding The Book of Mormon (other than the Isaiah parts, that I still struggle with), until I started reading it to a 5-year-old. 😆

I hope you weren't wondering if you were the one who was wrong on this one.

What are they saying?

That time is already here, imo. Though it will get much worse.

I think it's less about definitively claiming to know something in one's own thinking that can't be known until it's known (which some are prone to do, for sure) as it is about being wary. Seeing the dangers, etc. The prophecies are there for a reason, and I think we should be wary of them. The whole ESG rating thing, for example, seems like a good potential candidate. That being said...in the case of the Mark of the Beast since it's bound to happen no matter how wary we are of it or not...who knows if being wary of it even does any good, right? The Book of Mormon explicitly tells us to watch out for Secret Combinations though. And they're bound to happen anyway. And if we are watching out for them...what, exactly, are supposed to do about them anyhow? So I can't say I understand it all.

I believe that's pronounced "Shamon", per Michael Jackson.

I can't share my pronouns because A) I don't use that kind of language and B) that kind of language is against the site rules anyhow.

I'll be curious to see your reaction. I've heard it's good...and terrible. I won't see it either way because as long as their actively trying to corrupt my children they don't get my money. But....still curious.

The musical itself? Or the movie? So interestingly enough..... I rather enjoyed the movie. I know it's got issues. But....I dunno. I enjoyed it weirdly. The musical itself...it's not great as a music experience. But not terrible. But as a show including sets and dancing and everything I get why it's fun and did well.

I used to love looking over song titles of new musical recordings. I also love putting together song titles early as it helps me with outlining the show, etc., So anyhow, who knows, maybe one or two of you will enjoy looking over this planned song list for one of the musicals I'm currently writing.

I don't think anyone will actually have that advantage.

In the end, believing is a choice. Knowing is not. You know what you know. You believe what you choose to believe. You can believe what you know or you can not believe what you know. You can believe what you don't know, and you can not believe what you don't know.

I'm not sure my making up explanations to wave off this or that would hold any more validity than all the explanations given to wave off evidence of suspicious election related activities.

Why does everyone feel the need to be so patronizing? Good grief.

I think I ought to be able to comment on something (specifically a new documentary, that is timely), without having my person commented upon in return. I'm not lamenting here. I'm commenting. You're telling me what I'm feeling on the matter, as if my comment has anything to do with "teams". I don't care who's team won or lost. I care if the game was fairly played. Cheating and dishonesty is wrong from either side of the aisle. And I'm commenting because I saw something about an interesting documentary that implied things and it was...you know...interesting. But even if I believed whole heartedly that the election was absolutely stolen, it doesn't mean I'm moping about feeling like my team lost. You're putting that on me in your reply. Objective analysis does not equal "feelings". I know you like to point out how conservatives in the reverse are just as bad as the liberals. That is, certainly, true in many situations. But I am, politically, quite a bit more fair minded than that. (Get me talking religion and I'm less so, as you might be aware). I am not one of those people who blames Biden for inflation and gives Trump a pass, for example. Trump's spending was out of control! He dropped the ball on a lot of things. And anyhow, I'm on team Jesus. I'm not on team Trump. Sorry. And, I might add, if there really was cheating going on, we sure as shootin' better be aware of it, and better be talking about it as a nation, and better be doing something about it for future elections instead of burying our heads in the sand because the media (mainstream, social, and otherwise) are all crying "Nothing to see here. Move along people. Don't believe your lying eyes." I'm pretty sure we should, actually, discuss history so we don't repeat mistakes. I think I learned that somewhere once.