Note: DYOR. I present this here for this purpose.
So the latest flowing through the youtube streams is that QAnon has been debunked as a falsehood. I’m starting to listen to some commentary, and in the spirit of DYOR (!) I’ll post what I’ve come across so far and let you come to your own conclusions.
When I was digesting all this information, several things ran through my mind:
1) The energy of the presenter (don’t let the presenter’s energy sway your opinion this is where critical thinking needs to be applied hard.) Some people are very confident in their conclusions, and they give off that vibe. When we truly open ourselves up to hear another person’s viewpoint, we are also reading their energy on some level. Be aware of that.
2) The tactic of divide and rule/conquer. The use of in-fighting among an opponent is an effective and well utilized tactic. If you are a the powers that be and and a group arises to oppose you, it’s harder to win against a unified front, but if you can divide that unified mass, you diffuse their energy and can pick them apart one at a time. Two ways to do this is to infiltrate movements, (the Patriot movement after the 2008 US elections, and the Occupy Wall Street movements in 2010, as examples,) and introduce false narratives among discussions in the public space (the UFO/Disclosure movements.) What usually happens is that an idea will be presented and either given validity by active supporting agents or people will unknowingly support it because it fits their own motivations or beliefs. The false narrative will grow because the people who voice their support have the credentials and a following of people that will add momentum and will embrace their consensus leader accordingly. If an idea gets introduced and embraced by an honest person, the odds of it getting a foothold increase that much more. [I’ll add here that I once read that a really good disinformation agent should be right/accurate 80% of the time with what they share and say, with the other 20% being where the disinformation/misinformation can be inserted, and people be fooled.]
To this end, perhaps the QAnon narrative was created to grab people’s attention by providing an outlet of (false) hope, and as people embraced and trusted the narrative, attention was subtly steered towards an outlet to get people to waste their time and attention instead to channeling it elsewhere.
3) The egos, the accusations, and the drama that ensues between personalities. Who is right? Who is wrong? What are the agendas or angles that people take when they act? Is someone just a disinformation agent trying to dilute the narrative? All of this needs to be filtered on top of the information that is being presented. What could be serious debate becomes a battle that pits one viewpoint (and the people who embrace it. This again is an illustration of divide and rule/conquer.
I’ve yet to come across the mentioned individual that is said to have proven the Q narrative as false, so I’ve still got some homework to do. Out of all this, I can say that I’ve benefited from travelling down this particular rabbit hole. This had happened to me once before a few years back, with a “debunking” of one of the researchers that I digested a lot of (Michael Tsarion?) The benefit of that experience (and this one,) is that it forced me to take a step back, and divorce myself from a viewpoint, which in turn gave me a more critical eye because I was no longer taking “sides.” I would hope that you could as well, because if you don’t, it’s too easy to get sucked into a us/them we’re right/you’re wrong debate that goes nowhere. (DYOR!)
So until events prove otherwise, I’m still following the Q posts, and if it does pan out as BS, well then, we’ll all move on a little wiser. If it doesn’t, it could evolve into a very interesting narrative.
Be well, Everyone.