u/Hatrct

It is just a business. All they care about is views/profit. Not journalism.

The mainstream media is owned by the same few oligarchs. They don't want you to know the truth, they just want to push a narrative on you so you act/belief in a manner that benefits the oligarchy.

CNN worships Democrats, Fox worships Republicans. They each claim to be 100% correct and that the other side is 100% wrong. 0% grey area. 0% journalism. 100% outrage and clickbait.

Then you have those independent youtubers who present alternative news.

The vast majority are Democrats.

But they do the same as CNN. The only difference is that they are more pro Gaza than CNN. Other than that they are the exact same.

It is 0% journalism. 100% tribal mentality.

100% of their videos are vilifying Trump: 100% of his policies are 100% bad according to them. And outside Gaza, they support the Democrats 100%, because they are so caught up in Trump hate. They claim to be progressive Democrats but in practice they just serve the mainstream oligarchical Democrats. And this is why they are allowed to continue posting on big tech like youtube: because if they were truly progressive, big tech would censor them: people do not seem to understand this basic logic. There is no freedom of speech in reality. If you "actually" go against the oligarchical system, since they own all communication channels, they will censor you. If someone is allowed to speak/have a meaningful/sizeable audience, that means they are ultimately working in favor of the oligarchy, otherwise, the oligarchy would censor them, because the oligarchy owns all communication channels. This is very simple logic to grasp, yet people tend to not realize it. That is why even on reddit if you post against the oligarchy, you will be censored/banned from all high-traffic subs: they will allow you to post on the smaller/low traffic ones like this one to give the illusion of democracy freedom, but you will not be permitted to have a large audience/make meaningful change. So anybody who has a sizeable audience is not progressive/anti-oligarchy, they are pro-oligarchy, no matter what they claim to be.

This is not journalism. This is garbage.

Every single day they put out multiple videos: this is just for money. There is no need for multiple videos per day. This is a business. Their goal is to gain more views/clicks. So they talk about what Trump did and make 12 videos a day based on it, and in that they mock him like school children, imitate his voice, etc... while claiming that he is bad because he does these things. They are all hypocrites.

You don't need to make 48 videos a day about the same thing. It is wasting people's time. It is not value. It is not being objective. It is not objective analysis. It is analysis for the sake of profit-driven analysis. And when you FORCE content, you introduce more and more subconscious bias. It is a heap of repetitive, thoughtless, useless garbage.

When you START with a stance, and then you FUNNEL EVERTHING WITHIN that PREDETERMINED stance, that is worthless. It is creating nothing new. It is just regurgitation. It does not allow for meaningful discussion or learning anything new. "Trump bad we perfect" and just rinse repeat. It is very lame and a waste of time. I have no idea how people have not picked up on this and continue to religiously watch and worship these charlatans. They offer nothing to the world.

And this is coming from someone who on balance thinks the vast majority of Trump's policies are garbage. But that doesn't mean I will automatically say 100% of what he ever said or done is wrong solely because he is Trump. For example, I support his recent vaccine stance, because it is indeed conducive with the real science and common sense. But these brainwashed "progressive Democrats" who know nothing about science automatically assume it is bad and automatically assume that the big pharma-worshipping Democrats actually care about science/health. Trump also cares about corporations over people, but on the vaccine issue in particular, perhaps he did not get benefits from big pharma, so he is not shilling for them, or he figures he can get more political brownie points by catering to his base on this issue. Whatever the reason, his stance on that makes sense. But these progressive democrat channels simply knock it down because it is Trump. That is why nothing they say can be meaningful: it is just silly tribalism with no logic or substance.

Nancy McWilliams appears to be saying neurotic/borderline/psychotic can be personality styles/level of personality organization, and not psychiatric disorders, e.g., someone with depression/anxiety can have psychotic level personality, which means that they use extreme 1st order defense mechanisms like denial or splitting. And that this does not necessarily mean they have schizophrenia or a psychotic disorder. However, several times McWilliams mentions how antipsychotic medication were a godsend for these patients. So if someone requires antipsychotics, how is that just personality? Doesn't that mean they indeed do have a psychotic disorder or schizophrenia (disorder as opposed to just personality)?

The thing is I actually agree that depressed/anxious people can be at borderline or psychotic personality levels (i.e., they can use a lot of 1st order defense mechanisms, likely due to trauma rather than having a neurobiological disorder like schizophrenia), but I don't understand how/why antipsychotic medication would work for them, because these medications work for schizophrenia, which is a neurobiological disorder (which can be triggered by trauma too but the genetic predisposition still has to be there- there is no way all the people who use 1st order defense mechanisms/are at psychotic level of personality organization have this genetic predisposition). You would expect that SSRIs would be used for someone with dep/anx + borderline/psychotic level of personality organization to take the edge off and increase serotonin to further relax mood, not antipsychotics, which are specifically working on parts of the brain/neurotransmitters implicated in schizophrenia, which is a neurobiological disorder.

Where do we draw the line on which is causing what? I will use a case example:

I am a human too. So this means sometimes I procrastinate. But if I procrastinate, I realize I am doing so. For example, if I am procrastinating on going to the gym, I might watch an entertaining tv show instead. But I know that I am procrastinating, and I do not believe the tv show is going to magically make me lose weight.

But the vast majority do not seem to be like this, which is what I don't understand. Instead of going to the gym, they repeatedly and religiously watch videos by blatant charlatan content creators on youtube who keep spamming/recycling the same content in different repeat videos, promising magic supplements and magic superfood and magic diets to magically lose weight. It is the same thing with those who watch those get rich quick videos.

Now, I know that repeatedly watching videos about weight loss is much easier than actually doing what is needed for weight loss: going to the gym and fixing diet. And I know this is why people watch the videos instead. So it is a form of procrastination.

But what I am baffled is that they cognitively believe the content of the videos. Again, refer back to me TV show example. If I skip the gym and watch a TV show instead, I cognitively know I am procrastinating/I know the TV show will not help me lose weight. The TV show, while it will not help me lose weight, still has some purpose, it is entertaining. But watching a charlatan make a video about weight loss has 0 value, 0 entertainment. It is 100% a waste of time. It is logically analogous to going up to your wall and repeating "there once was or wasn't a hippo, also, astronauts. In other news, 1+1=3" then repeating this line over and over again. There is absolutely 0 utility or validity. But the vast majority, who repeatedly and religiously watch nonsensical charlatan youtube videos promising magic weight loss, do not cognitively realize what they are doing: they literally believe that watching those videos are more efficient and productive in terms of losing weight as opposed to going to the gym and fixing diet.

So that is where I am confused. Is this a cognitive deficit they are displaying (they literally believe the charlatans/they literally believe watching those videos instead of going to the gym and fixing their diet will make them lose weight), or is it that their level of procrastination is so high/their thinking is clouded by immensely high levels of cognitive dissonance and the emotional pain (guilt?) that is caused by realizing that they are doing something mutually exclusive to their weight loss goals (wasting time watching nonsensical videos that are mutually exclusive to reaching their weight loss goals) instead of doing what they actually need to do to reach their goals?

So that was a case example. I think it largely boils down to cognitive dissonance. I will use the classic smoking example. It is said that if you tell a smoker smoking is bad, they will downplay the negative health effects in order to justify continuing to smoke. This is an example of cognitive dissonance. But is it cognitive, or emotional? How can it be that a grown adult can possibly convince them of something so bizarre? It is like believing 1+1=3, or not understanding that 2+2=4. So how can it be cognitive? So this leads me to believe it is actually emotion, the smoker feels guilt at not being able to quit smoking, so then that leads to the faulty cognition. But even then, it is still a chicken vs egg, because even if the emotion exists, how can it be that extreme that you literally are able to convince yourself that 1+1=3? So isn't cognition still involved? This is something I simply can't wrap my head around. I am not a smoker, but if I was, and someone said it is bad, I would say "yes, I know it is bad, but I simply can't stop." I can't fathom being able to cognitively convince myself that it is not bad, it would be like believing 1+1=3 or that a cat is a dog. So I don't understand how emotions, even if extreme, can distort cognition to such a degree. I do understand how emotions can distort cognition in cases where things are not always clear, but I don't see how in literal 1+1=3 examples this can be the case.

So do those who believe the equivalent of 1+1=3 indeed have cognitive deficits? But all of them passed grade 1 math, and there is no indication that they have significant IQ deficits/they seem to be operating fine in other domains, so how can this be? Does the amygdala literally take the PFC offline in that moment? But even if this is the case, doesn't the brain have memory, even after that moment people do not realize this. So is it that every time a memory associated with this situation pops up, the amygdala immediately completely takes the PFC offline? Maybe that makes the hippocampus not be able to write it into memory in the first place? But again, very simple examples/situations from relevant previously stored information is needed to make such easy inferences, for example, if you know 1+1=2 you should infer automatically that if there is 1 apple and you add another apple then you have 2 apples, you do not need to be literally shown the 2 apples being put together to make this inference.

I am a human too. So this means sometimes I procrastinate. But if I procrastinate, I realize I am doing so. For example, if I am procrastinating on going to the gym, I might watch an entertaining tv show instead. But I know that I am procrastinating, and I do not believe the tv show is going to magically make me lose weight.

But the vast majority do not seem to be like this, which is what I don't understand. Instead of going to the gym, they repeatedly and religiously watch videos by blatant charlatan content creators on youtube who keep spamming/recycling the same content in different repeat videos, promising magic supplements and magic superfood and magic diets to magically lose weight. It is the same thing with those who watch those get rich quick videos.

Now, I know that repeatedly watching videos about weight loss is much easier than actually doing what is needed for weight loss: going to the gym and fixing diet. And I know this is why people watch the videos instead. So it is a form of procrastination.

But what I am baffled is that they cognitively believe the content of the videos. Again, refer back to me TV show example. If I skip the gym and watch a TV show instead, I cognitively know I am procrastinating/I know the TV show will not help me lose weight. The TV show, while it will not help me lose weight, still has some purpose, it is entertaining. But watching a charlatan make a video about weight loss has 0 value, 0 entertainment. It is 100% a waste of time. It is logically analogous to going up to your wall and repeating "there once was or wasn't a hippo, also, astronauts. In other news, 1+1=3" then repeating this line over and over again. There is absolutely 0 utility or validity. But the vast majority, who repeatedly and religiously watch nonsensical charlatan youtube videos promising magic weight loss, do not cognitively realize what they are doing: they literally believe that watching those videos are more efficient and productive in terms of losing weight as opposed to going to the gym and fixing diet.

So that is where I am confused. Is this a cognitive deficit they are displaying (they literally believe the charlatans/they literally believe watching those videos instead of going to the gym and fixing their diet will make them lose weight), or is it that their level of procrastination is so high/their thinking is clouded by immensely high levels of cognitive dissonance and the emotional pain (guilt?) that is caused by realizing that they are doing something mutually exclusive to their weight loss goals (wasting time watching nonsensical videos that are mutually exclusive to reaching their weight loss goals) instead of doing what they actually need to do to reach their goals?

A Series of Unfortunate Events.

While it is for children, it is quite popular and many adults have read it as well.

Yet the vast majority of adults did not pick up on the central/root themes.

This book has arguably among the most important and practical themes out of all books.

Yet bizarrely, there is very little discussion about its important themes.

And the few sources who do discuss its themes ironically prove the author's themes correct, as most of the discussed themes are only the superficial ones, such as good vs evil, and adults failing children.

I have barely been able to find any sources that discuss the actual, important themes.

For this book series, the root/most important theme is the lack of critical thinking in human society. It is a critique of human society. Some sub themes that constitute this overall theme is the focus on superficiality (especially dishonest superficiality) over reality/truth/nuance, mob mentality/group think, and how personal vulnerabilities such as anxiety and insecurity can further blind people in terms of critical thinking/finding out the truth. These are very, very deep and important themes. They explain practically all/most human-made problems on earth. They directly explain why we have the social/political/economic issues we have today, why we have the leaders we have, why we have wars, why we have polarization, etc... Yet adults will read this book, will miss these themes, or even in rare cases they pick up on them, will not realize how they themselves act like this on a daily basis, and irrationally/emotionally act as if only others are like this. The is the unfortunate irony of this book series.

EDIT: the gang downvotes/censors I am getting with zero rebuttals as to how the themes of this book are wrong prove the themes of this book and further illustrate the irony. You can't make this stuff up! Those downvoting and saying this books themes are incorrect, can you offer any rebuttals?

I noticed a trend: IQair tends to show higher poor air quality compared to government website.

IQair uses AQI, which is:

0-50: good

51-100: moderate

101-150: unhealthy for sensitive groups

151-200: unhealthy

200+ more severe unhealthy categories.

Now, keep in mind, even IQair is too conservative with these labels, in reality, anything in mid range of moderate and higher/worse, you will want to avoid being outside as much as possible. And 100+ is not "unhealthy for sensitive groups", it is actually unhealthy for everyone. I will cover this more below when I talk about PM2.5 counts. When they say labels like "unhealthy for sensitive groups" it appears they are focusing on ability of the poor air to cause IMMEDIATE symptoms like coughing, but this doesn't mean for healthy people they won't also have their risk of cancer and heart issues and such increased by having the tiny PM2.5 particles go permanently inside their blood stream (some of the PM2.5 including some produced by wildfire do this and stay there permanently, so then imagine the accumulation effect of this day after day, summer after summer, decade after decade).

The govt website uses:

1-3: low risk

4-6: moderate risk

7-10+: high risk

For example, today for Toronto IQair showed 98, which is pretty much the level between moderate and unhealthy for sensitive groups. IQair also shows (if you click a city and scroll down) how many times the PM2.5 count is higher than the WHO guidelines. Since in most North American regions the main culprit is usually PM2.5, it is probably better to just look at this indicator rather than the general AQI 0-50, etc.. number. So today for Toronto it said PM2.5 level is 7 times higher than WHO level. Now, the WHO level is the annual average recommended level (over a year), which is 5 ug/m^3. WHO does say that for short term (like single day) upper limit is 15 ug/m^3. So for the Toronto example, the 7 times is 35 ug/m^3, so even using the limit of 15, 35 is still over twice as high the upper limit for single day.

Yet government website had a rating of 4, the lowest rating in the medium risk category, for Toronto, but IQair had it at 98, which is the top most part of the moderate category.

The fact is, 35ug/m^3 is too high: if you could, you should be closing all windows, staying indoors, and turning on a HEPA air purifier. And it is definitely too high to exercise in outdoors. Yet you look at the government indicator and see 4/10, lowest risk of moderate, and most people would think this means "a tad bit worse than ideal/perfect weather" and it will make them not even consider reducing outdoor time.

Why is it so hard to find one without carbon filter? Unless your are in epicentre of wildfires VOCs are not an issue. HEPA filter itself will do the job. Having a carbon filter gives me unnecessary anxiety because it is difficult to know when to replace and if you don't replace on time it can do more harm than good.

First oligarchical capitalism causes the wildfires, then even when you want to spend your hard earned middle class money to partially protect yourself, you are hit with 1000s of different models and 99% of them are garbage or focus on marketing instead of functionality.

Does anyone know any good ones that are not too loud and either don't have carbon filter or have a separate carbon filter that can be safely removed? I don't have 25 guinea pigs and 8 hamsters, there is no issues with smell, people have been living without carbon filters and their house smelled fined for 1000s of years.

I also don't care to have wifi connected to it. I also don't need it to tell me my heart rate. I also don't need it to be hooked up to smart phone. I want it to filter the air.

This was written by me (zero AI was used). I thought people who enjoyed ASOUE might enjoy this.

--

Little Johnny was considered to be a bad boy. A bad boy is bad. Bad boys do bad things. Bad things are done by bad boys.

One day, Johnny was sick and tired of having to rote memorize facts and formulas in school. One day, Johnny decided to speak up. This all happened one day, of course, but against the backdrop of many days, rather, years, of daily drudgery. His class offered "free talk time" once a month, on the last Friday of the month. During free talk time, any student in the class could talk, provided they raised their hands, talked in an orderly fashion, did not use bad language, used an acceptable decibel level, did not offend anybody, did not say anything immoral, did not say anything evil, did not say anything mean, did not spread misinformation, presented established empirical evidence to support each of their statements, did not say anything that could harm children, and did not say anything bad. Now, Johnny was not the worst student, but he was not the best student. He coasted through school, more so due to boredom than laziness. He would pass all the subjects, but unlike Theodore and other students, he would make more silly mistakes and would sometime score lower on multiple choice tests. However, outside of school, once he finished his homework as quickly as he possibly could, he would start to read books about all the different things he was interested about. He would reflect on his day and his conversations. About what his parents and what other adults and children told him. Then he would try to make sense of it all. Theodore on the other hand, loved school. His home life was not great. He lived with his mother, who, faced with the stress of being a single mother and working a dead-end job, would often criticize Theodore, a lone child, and his father seemed more interested in sending him gifts and money than spending time with him.

Johnny raised his hand, which hurt from having to write repeated formulas and definitions all day, and Ms. Mormonton, noticing that his hand was the only one in the air, reluctantly permitted him to speak. Ms. Mormonton was a noble and neat woman. She was an intelligent woman, as evidenced by her score of 126 on standardized intelligence testing when she herself was assessed as a youngster after the Ministry of Education mandated a jurisdiction-wide intelligence testing program nicknamed Educational learnings of empiricism in benefit of the glorious jurisdiction of Lawrenceworth. Her father was a lawyer who attended a prestigious university and worked for the government prior to pursuing litigation in private practice within the realm of contract disputes, and her mother a nurse who diligently administered medication to thousands of institutionalized mental health patients throughout her career at the hospital. Ms. Mormonton had 2 children of her own, a boy and a girl. She was hopeful for the boy turning into a doctor, to administer even more medication than her mother did as a nurse at the hospital, and her daughter to be a judge, to maintain the moral, civilized, and correct standards of society that were set thousands and hundreds of years ago. Ms. Mormonton would dress professionally and sharply, with her hair neatly ironed and straightened on a daily basis, and would wear a pin with the school's motto, "You can be anything you want to be." on it, much to the satisfaction of the principal, Mr. Taylorsworth. Johnny however, was considered a slob. He would often wear the same clothes, even though he did not have them washed infrequently. His hair was somewhat wavy, and he did not use hair gel like the other young boys in his grade, though he did not infrequently shower.

Johnny asked Ms. Mormonton: Ms. Mormonton, my hands and head hurt from rote memorizing facts and formulas all day, when will we ever use these damn things in the future anyways, why can't we learn about solving problems that actually exist on a daily basis"? Ms. Mormonton looked at Johnny as if she saw a ghost. Sure, Johnny was a pale boy, presumably due to being confined within the school walls all day rote memorizing, and often in detention after school for defending himself against Theodore and his clique, who happen to be Ms. Mormonton's favorite students, but he was no ghost. He was living flesh and bones, who, unlike a ghost, was able to feel pain and emotions, which led to his questioning in the classroom in the first place. "Johnny", Ms. Mormonton replied, "how dare you use that wretched word, the d word? When you talk like this, how do you ever expect anybody to believe anything you say? Moreover, how dare you disrespect this sacred institution? I have worked here for 27 years and this is how you repay me? You will serve 3 detentions, starting today. One, for uttering improper and insensitive language; Two, for disrespecting a supreme and sacred institution; and Three, for violating proper and sufficient physical presentation standards, that is, I see that you have not done up your top button on your shirt again, and you could certainly use a comb more regularly". The children laughed, with Theodore, in his perfect pinstripe shirt, which resembled a casino worker more than a young student, laughing while raising his hand.

After the laughter ceased and a few seconds went by, Ms. Mormonton noticed Theodore's non-wailing but stern hand in the air, calling upon him to speak. Theodore stated, "yes, Ms. Mormonton is correct: how come you don't dress like me, Johnny?" Much of the class mumbled something in agreement, though they did not laugh this time, because the time it took for Ms. Mormonton to select Theodore's hand in permitting him to speak killed the momentum. Nevertheless, Ms. Mormonton said semi-loudly, "structure.", which was her word to calm down the class. The children ceased mumbling at once. "Now now, children, you know better than to talk out of turn, without raising your hand". "Yes Ms. Mormonton", the children replied in unison. Ms. Mormonton continued, “Johnny, do you have any empirical evidence against the three factors that constitute your detention?” However, before Johnny could raise his hand, Theodore raised his, albeit by a fraction of a second. Ms. Mormonton again called on Theodore, who uttered, “I think the case has already been made Ms. Mormonton: look at him: his button is clearly undone, his hair wavy, he made you feel bad based on your reaction, which we all observed, and last but not least, we all heard him say the, oh I don’t want to say it, you know, the word.” “Astute observations Theodore, class, all who are in favor of Theodore’s arguments raise your hands”, Ms. Mormonton responded. Surprisingly, all of the children raised their hands, and Johnny did not bother raising his hand to speak.

Ms. Mormonton concluded by saying “Johnny, I hope you picked up something worthwhile from this free talk session, in which all children are free to talk about everything that is on their mind, because here at Pencilworth Prepatory, we believe in freedom of speech. Think now, children, if you were in another corner of the world, the forces of evil and totalitarianism would have suppressed your ability to exercise free speech. You would have been told what to eat, what to speak, what to feel. How horrible would that be, children? Can you imagine? Fortunately, here at Pencilworth Prepatory, within the glorious jurisdiction of Lawrenceworth, we do not have this problem. Now, everybody get ready to exit to the cafeteria as it is noon and you must be hungry, though in single file, as we are not savages. Theodore, please do the daily head count and report to the lunch lady so she can administer the correct number of trays. I heard in the teacher's lounge that today's lunch will be hamburgers with fries, concentrated apple juice with 15% real juice, and a bag of chips. My father actually represented Purehealth Meats, which is the meat source for our yummy burgers, and as the name shows, you know you are in for a healthy meaty meal of goodness. Furthermore, I personally attended a function with the CEO Mr. Naismith, where he was presenting a speech about his ambitious plans to donate money to upgrade our computer systems in our library and in his honor the library will be renamed to the Naismith Library in Benefit of Empiricism and Advancement. What a wonderful man and philanthropist, with a wonderful suit selection and smile to match." The children cheered and went into the cafeteria single file, akin to the cows who were confined on the conveyor belts in the farms of Purehealth Meats. However, the cows, I am sad to say, were not headed to a cafeteria. But they were behind closed doors and so this did not cross the minds of the children, who were instead focused on their carbohydrate rich meals in front of their faces, which would temporarily spike them with energy so that they could memorize more facts and formulas upon being shepherded back into the classroom after lunch period.

Many of the children were already obese, but this did not matter, because scientific experts and doctors such as Ms. Mormonton's family members past and present would be sure to treat them using the latest medical technology and empirical sciences. In fact, Ms. Mormonton's brother, who started out as a medical doctor and for reasons unknown transitioned early on in his career into serving as the chief medical officer of Lawrenceworth, a regulatory position personally selected by the esteemed top political leader of Lawrenceworth himself, just recently provided a visually appealing powerpoint presentation with many charts, graphs, and cited sources called "Evidence-based empirical and scientific methods in benefit of tackling the obesity epidemic" in which he was promoting a new anti-fat medication created by Perfectbody Pharmaceuticals, whose CEO happened to be the cousin of CEO and philanthropist Mr. Naismith of Purehealth Meats, which would, in his medical opinion, "make us victorious in the battle against obesity".

We live in a society which is filled with analogies and metaphors. For example, books and movies are filled with them. There are usually themes: these themes are uncovered through analogies, for example, a character stands for x, an interaction between characters stands for y.

The reader/watcher has to independently pick up on them and make sense of them. But I think this is the problem. People are biased. They will not use analogies and themes to correct their pre-exising incorrect worldviews, rather, they will interpret themes in a manner to make them consistent with and justify their pre-existing views.

I think there are 2 main types of themes. 1) obvious and uncontroversial themes/themes that parrot existing societal ideals. For example, the little match girl. Theme: poverty bad. I don't think anybody contests this. So what is the point of this theme? If everybody can pick up on it and agrees on it, what is the point? This means there was no need for the theme. In fact I argue that such themes are counterproductive, because they emotionalize the issue rather than focus on the root causes that create/maintain poverty for example. This leads to a society in which most people neglect the root causes, but use emotions to immediately at a very insufficient level "fix" poverty: for example, the average person when walking by a homeless person will feel guilty in the moment and might drop a bit of change. They are not going to go home and analyze the structural causes of poverty and how to fix this so that homeless person does not have to be homeless in the first place.

2. more deep themes. For these, the issue is that very few people will pick them up. And the rest will either miss them, or will interpret them incorrectly/in a way to twist them into a way that becomes consistent with/justifies their pre-existing views. So it fails because it does not change the incorrect pre-exising views of the masses. This is why so many great works only begin to be understood/accepted long after the author died/society changed.

This is why the paradox exists: most famous pieces of work are those that conform to existing societal ideals. They don't change society for the better: they parrot existing beliefs and make people emotionally feel good about themselves in the moment. And those that challenge societal ideals fall under the radar and are rejected because they make people think, which can cause temporary emotion pain, which people want to avoid, and these works are not valued until decades/centuries later after society already changes to be consistent with the themes of that book/movie but not because of it.

This is also why there is so much polarization today.

In order to change people's thinking, you need to take a page out of therapy. First you build a connection and validate them. Then you ask them questions that make them realize their problematic thinking patterns, and wait for them to catch it themselves. If you do it for them, they will resist and double down. So the problem with themes/analogies is that it does not get people to question their beliefs, as it is not direct enough. They will either miss it/ignore it/or it will cause cognitive dissonance and they will double down on their pre-existing beliefs.

>The Trump administration hosted representatives from more than 60 countries in Washington...
At Thursday's session in Washington DC, Rubio called for a global effort to share intelligence to counter the "transnational" issue of far-left extremism.

Also note that all G7 countries sent a representative to this conference. So it is not just the Trump administration. Both so called left wing and right wing governments from all capitalist countries believe in this and are united in this. It is just that the Trump administration is spearheading it. The pseudoleftist "Democrat" party in the USA heavily believes this as well, they just don't want to be the ones uttering it, so they let the Trump admin spearhead it and silently support it. So don't get fooled: this is how the neoliberal (dems+reps: all capitalist parties since 70s are neoliberal/anti middle class) keep their power: they pretend there is a difference between them, and then people worship democrats thinking they are different from republicans, this makes people continue see-saw voting for these 2 sides of the same coin neoliberal anti-middle class parties and prolonging neoliberalism/the oligarchical establishment. This is how they kept their power and progressively made life worse for the middle/class for the past half century, and this downward spiral is continuing today, and will as long as neoliberal parties are in power. Whichever of these 2 sides of the same coin party wins, the Bezos, Zuckerberg, Musks get more yachts, and the rest of the people get less: this has factually been progressively the case since the inception of neoliberalism half a century ago.

>where it argued left-wing political violence was the result of a "unique evil rooted in a deep resentment towards civilisation".

This is how they get you. They play with language. Smooth talking lawyers like Rubio, this is their job, propaganda. Do not fall for it. This line should actually be that it is neoliberalism that is a unique evil rooted in a deep ignorance of human values and the earth's nature. The only ones who show resentment towards "civilization" are neoliberal capitalist, who are an extension of classical liberal capitalism. Their past included colonialism, and their present includes neo-colonialism and lowering of basic life standards for their own populations (the middle/working class that is). So this line by Rubio is basically saying in reality "we want to straw man label any legitimate criticism toward the neoliberal oligarchy as "left wing terrorism" because we realize people are slowly waking from their slumber and realizing that neoliberalism does not serve them and the only think trickling down onto them is yellow liquid from the nether regions of birth advantaged barons." Timing matters. Anti billionaire sentiment is at an all time high. This is why they are moving to outlaw freedom of speech, under the guise of "protecting against left wing violent terrorism", which is not even a practical problem in reality. Again, this is just the Trump admin spear heading: pseudoleftist parties across G7 countries have had their own version of this, for example the pseudoleftist Mark Carney in Canada and Justin Trudeau before him having pushing legislations that undermine freedom of speech with the excuse of "think of the children!". The pseudoleftist neoliberals just do it more subtly. Make no mistake, they are onboard with this.

>At the session, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller characterised leftists as "fundamentally motivated by envy, by hatred, by jealousy".

Again, using words/playing with language to build a fake narrative. In reality, they want to suppress legitimate criticism of the neoliberal oligarchy by those who are motivated by things like "egalitarianism, freedom of speech, human dignity." And in reality, it is the neoliberal oligarchs who are fundamentally motivated by "greed, lust, neglect of the environment, and disrespect for humanity and the wisdom of ancient cultures". The neoliberal oligarchs have a mental illness, this ideology is a mental illness: they are literally and figuratively burning the earth and everything in it, just to accumulate more yachts or hypothetical digits associated with their net work on a screen. They are oblivious to the fact that this does not even serve their own interests at the end of the day: people like Trump and Bezos and Musk are not happy: they are insatiable, the more they get, the more they want. Ancient cultures had the wisdom to focus on necessity and harmony and mental peace rather than unlimited lust/greed-based endless accumulation. But these arrogant neoliberal oligarchs, who have absolutely zero intellectual or spiritual knowledge, think they are the most advanced humans in history, and they are blindly damaging the world and themselves, and are now increasingly trying to censor anybody who uses logic and common sense to stop them. This robot Rubio has not spent 2 minutes in his life using critical thinking about any subject. Trump does not know anything outside business. They have zero intellectual curiosity. They are one dimensional robots whose sole goal in life is endless profit maximization. What a sad existence. And the worst part is that they are completely oblivious to this and think that they are right. And they trick people because they attend prestigious formal educational institutions, but these institutions, especially in programs like business and economics and law, do not focus on teaching critical thinking or generalized knowledge. They take this destructive world view "as is" and work WITHIN it, to create robots like Rubio. Their job is not to create critical thinkers, it is to create conformists.

They have engaged in colonialism and continue with their neo-colonial wars. They have destroyed the environment (look at the wildfire situation, ticks and lyme disease, food borne illness like cyclospora), induced an obesity epidemic for the profit of a small group of junk/fast food CEOS, which they then double down and enrich big pharma with after the unnecessarily diabetes an such occurs. People can't even breath air, breathing air has becoming a luxury (wildfire smoke and pollution), people can't even go on grass (tick bites and lyme disease), people can't even eat basic foods in peace (food borne illnesses), there are more pandemics, etc... They call this "civilization" and "progress" but the only ones progressing are the pockets of the 1%, in every other way, for every other person, this destructive anti-human system of neoliberalism has been destroying the earth and everything in it since its inception in the in the 1970s/80s. They CREATE the problem, then use "advancement" to PARTIALLY fix it, and in the process profiting a very select few, while leaving everyone else worse off. This is not progress, it is counterproductive.

And now they are trying to reduce freedom of speech to straw man label all legitimate opposition of this anti-human system as "violent terrorists". The same people who have colonized millions and are bombing babies to bits are worried about violence. The same people who create for profit jails. The same people who create crime through exacerbation of poverty. They are worried about "left wing violence", which is practically not even a thing. Don't let smooth talking lawyers like Rubio trick you with their word play. There is no substance to their superficial words, and they are projecting a bunch.

This is not a new trick, these people have been using the same tricks for decades. In the early days of oligarchical neoliberalism, while they were gutting public services and damaging civilians, they straw man labeled all criticism as "communist traitors". And today they are resorting to the same tactic. Even George Bush used this tactic, do you not remember "you are either with us or with the terrorists"?

I think core beliefs are actually serving as a sort of defense mechanism.

The conventional thinking is that core beliefs are a "thought", then belief in this "thought" causes negative emotions.

But I think the opposite is happening.

I think core beliefs are thoughts that arise from, or at least are reinforced by, avoidance of emotion.

For example, the core belief "I am unlovable". Yes, someone might develop that due to being in an unloving relationship as a child.

But why would they hang on to it? Why are they not able to see its obviously irrational/untrue nature, when others can so easily? I think because it is a defense mechanism for them. It justifies their actions/lack of actions.

If you think you are unlovable, you will not try to get into relationships for example. It is scary to enter relationships, and the thought of entering a relationship will terrify someone with this core belief. So the core belief is used to fuel emotional avoidance.

Similarly, if you tell someone who smokes that smoking is bad, if they were to acknowledge and accept this truth, it will make them feel anxious (e.g., oh my god I will get cancer) or guilty (why can't I stop myself from smoking) for example, so instead they double down on their core belief that smoking is not that bad for you.

I think this explains why to onlookers, other people's core beliefs seem so obviously irrational, yet the person with the core belief is not able to see this.

Similarly, if you tell someone that the world is more complex than "my political party is perfect, the other side is the cause of all ills in the world" and show them examples of how their preferred party has also done bad things, this will give them anxiety, because it shatters this fake but neat categorical and controllable narrative (which also serves to make the person feel morally superior for example, for being associated with the supposed moral or good party) that "all I have to do is vote for the right party and everything will be ok". So, to protect against the existential anxiety that comes from acknowledging the reality and uncertainty of the world, they will double down on their core belief that their party is perfect.

So what is going on is avoidance. This is no different to the person with OCD using compulsions as an avoidant coping mechanism to deal with the negative feelings from their obsessions. So believing or doubling down on core beliefs (because challenging them/accepting reality would cause too much negative emotions like anxiety or guilt) would be analogous to doing a compulsion.

I have noticed when I post something, it usually gets something like 3-4 upvotes quickly. And then after a bit, it suddenly gets just enough downvotes to go under 1 (so 0), which then buries the post and prevents people from reading it or upvoting it. This consistent pattern is a bit suspicious.

Concerted bot campaign?

Little Johnny was considered to be a bad boy. A bad boy is bad. Bad boys do bad things. Bad things are done by bad boys.

One day, Johnny was sick and tired of having to rote memorize facts and formulas in school. One day, Johnny decided to speak up. This all happened one day, of course, but against the backdrop of many days, rather, years, of daily drudgery. His class offered "free talk time" once a month, on the last Friday of the month. During free talk time, any student in the class could talk, provided they raised their hands, talked in an orderly fashion, did not use bad language, used an acceptable decibel level, did not offend anybody, did not say anything immoral, did not say anything evil, did not say anything mean, did not spread misinformation, presented established empirical evidence to support each of their statements, did not say anything that could harm children, and did not say anything bad. Now, Johnny was not the worst student, but he was not the best student. He coasted through school, more so due to boredom than laziness. He would pass all the subjects, but unlike Theodore and other students, he would make more silly mistakes and would sometime score lower on multiple choice tests. However, outside of school, once he finished his homework as quickly as he possibly could, he would start to read books about all the different things he was interested about. He would reflect on his day and his conversations. About what his parents and what other adults and children told him. Then he would try to make sense of it all.

Johnny raised his hand, which hurt from having to write repeated formulas and definitions all day, and Ms. Mormonton, noticing that his hand was the only one in the air, reluctantly permitted him to speak. Ms. Mormonton was a noble and neat woman. She was an intelligent woman, as evidenced by her score of 126 on standardized intelligence testing when she herself was assessed as a youngster after the Ministry of Education mandated a jurisdiction-wide intelligence testing program nicknamed Educational learnings of empiricism in benefit of the glorious jurisdiction of Lawrenceworth. Her father was a lawyer who attended a prestigious university and worked for the government prior to pursuing litigation in private practice within the realm of contract disputes, and her mother a nurse who diligently administered medication to thousands of institutionalized mental health patients throughout her career at the hospital. Ms. Mormonton had 2 children of her own, a boy and a girl. She was hopeful for the boy turning into a doctor, to administer even more medication than her mother did as a nurse at the hospital, and her daughter to be a judge, to maintain the moral, civilized, and correct standards of society that were set thousands and hundreds of years ago. Ms. Mormonton would dress professionally and sharply, with her hair neatly ironed and straightened on a daily basis, and would wear a pin with the school's motto, "You can be anything you want to be." on it, much to the satisfaction of the principal, Mr. Taylorsworth. Johnny however, was considered a slob. He would often wear the same clothes, even though he did not have them washed infrequently. His hair was somewhat wavy, and he did not use hair gel like the other young boys in his grade, though he did not infrequently shower.

Johnny asked Ms. Mormonton: Ms. Mormonton, my hands and head hurt from rote memorizing facts and formulas all day, when will we ever use these damn things in the future anyways, why can't we learn about solving problems that actually exist on a daily basis"? Ms. Mormonton looked at Johnny as if she saw a ghost. Sure, Johnny was a pale boy, presumably due to being confined within the school walls all day rote memorizing, and often in detention after school for defending himself against Theodore and his clique, who happen to be Ms. Mormonton's favorite students, but he was no ghost. He was living flesh and bones, who, unlike a ghost, was able to feel pain and emotions, which led to his questioning in the classroom in the first place. "Johnny", Ms. Mormonton replied, "how dare you use that wretched word, the d word? When you talk like this, how do you ever expect anybody to believe anything you say? Moreover, how dare you disrespect this sacred institution? I have worked here for 27 years and this is how you repay me? You will serve 3 detentions, starting today. Also, I see that you have not done up your top button on your shirt again, and you could certainly use a comb more regularly". The children laughed, with Theodore, in his perfect pinstripe shirt, which resembled a casino worker more than a young student, laughing while raising his hand. After the laughter ceased and a few seconds went by, Ms. Mormonton noticed Theodore's non-wailing but stern hand in the air, calling upon him to speak. Theodore stated, "yes, Ms. Mormonton is correct: how come you don't dress like me, Johnny?" Much of the class mumbled something in agreement, though they did not laugh this time, because the time it took for Ms. Mormonton to select Theodore's hand in permitting him to speak killed the momentum. Nevertheless, Ms. Mormonton said semi-loudly, "structure.", which was her word to calm down the class. The children ceased mumbling at once. "Now now, children, you know better than to talk out of turn, without raising your hand". "Yes Ms. Mormonton", the children replied in unison.

"Now, where were we?", continued Ms. Mormonton. "Ah, yes, Theodore was instructing Johnny on appropriate and suitable physical presentation and etiquette within the classroom, Johnny, I hope you picked up something worthwhile from this free talk session, in which all children are free to talk about everything that is on their mind, because here at Pencilworth Prepatory, we believe in freedom of speech. Think now, children, if you were in another corner of the world, the forces of evil and totalitarianism would have suppressed your ability to exercise free speech. You would have been told what to eat, what to speak, what to feel. How horrible would that be, children? Can you imagine? Fortunately, here at Pencilworth Prepatory, within the glorious jurisdiction of Lawrenceworth, we do not have this problem. Now, everybody get ready to exit to the cafeteria as it is noon and you must be hungry, though in single file, as we are not savages. Theodore, please do the daily head count and report to the lunch lady so she can administer the correct number of trays. I heard in the teacher's lounge that today's lunch will be hamburgers with fries, concentrated apple juice with 15% real juice, and a bag of chips. My father actually represented Purehealth Meats, which is the meat source for our yummy burgers, and as the name shows, you know you are in for a healthy meaty meal of goodness. Furthermore, I personally attended a function with the CEO Mr. Naismith, where he was presenting a speech about his ambitious plans to donate money to upgrade our computer systems in our library and in his honor the library will be renamed to the Naismith Library in Benefit of Empiricism and Advancement. What a wonderful man and philanthropist, with a wonderful suit selection and smile to match." The children cheered and went into the cafeteria single file, akin to the cows who were confined on the conveyor belts in the farms of Purehealth Meats. However, the cows, I am sad to say, were not headed to a cafeteria. But they were behind closed doors and so this did not cross the minds of the children, who were instead focused on their carbohydrate rich meals in front of their faces, which would temporarily spike them with energy so that they could memorize more facts and formulas upon being shepherded back into the classroom after lunch period.

Many of the children were already obese, but this did not matter, because scientific experts and doctors such as Ms. Mormonton's family members past and present would be sure to treat them using the latest medical technology and empirical sciences. In fact, Ms. Mormonton's brother, who started out as a medical doctor and for reasons unknown transitioned early on in his career into serving as the chief medical officer of Lawrenceworth, a regulatory position personally selected by the esteemed top political leader of Lawrenceworth himself, just recently provided a visually appealing powerpoint presentation with many charts, graphs, and cited sources called "Evidence-based empirical and scientific methods in benefit of tackling the obesity epidemic" in which he was promoting a new anti-fat medication created by Perfectbody Pharmaceuticals, whose CEO happened to be the cousin of CEO and philanthropist Mr. Naismith of Purehealth Meats, which would, in his medical opinion, "make us victorious in the battle against obesity".

Little Johnny was considered to be a bad boy. A bad boy is bad. Bad boys do bad things. Bad things are done by bad boys.

One day, Johnny was sick and tired of having to rote memorize facts and formulas in school. One day, Johnny decided to speak up. This all happened one day, of course, but against the backdrop of many days, rather, years, of daily drudgery. His class offered "free talk time" once a month, on the last Friday of the month. During free talk time, any student in the class could talk, provided they raised their hands, talked in an orderly fashion, did not use bad language, used an acceptable decibel level, did not offend anybody, did not say anything immoral, did not say anything evil, did not say anything mean, did not spread misinformation, presented established empirical evidence to support each of their statements, did not say anything that could harm children, and did not say anything bad. Now, Johnny was not the worst student, but he was not the best student. He coasted through school, more so due to boredom than laziness. He would pass all the subjects, but unlike Theodore and other students, he would make more silly mistakes and would sometime score lower on multiple choice tests. However, outside of school, once he finished his homework as quickly as he possibly could, he would start to read books about all the different things he was interested about. He would reflect on his day and his conversations. About what his parents and what other adults and children told him. Then he would try to make sense of it all.

Johnny raised his hand, which hurt from having to write repeated formulas and definitions all day, and Ms. Mormonton, noticing that his hand was the only one in the air, reluctantly permitted him to speak. Ms. Mormonton was a noble and neat woman. She was an intelligent woman, as evidenced by her score of 126 on standardized intelligence testing when she herself was assessed as a youngster after the Ministry of Education mandated a jurisdiction-wide intelligence testing program nicknamed Educational learnings of empiricism in benefit of the glorious jurisdiction of Lawrenceworth. Her father was a lawyer who attended a prestigious university and worked for the government prior to pursuing litigation in private practice within the realm of contract disputes, and her mother a nurse who diligently administered medication to thousands of institutionalized mental health patients throughout her career at the hospital. Ms. Mormonton had 2 children of her own, a boy and a girl. She was hopeful for the boy turning into a doctor, to administer even more medication than her mother did as a nurse at the hospital, and her daughter to be a judge, to maintain the moral, civilized, and correct standards of society that were set thousands and hundreds of years ago. Ms. Mormonton would dress professionally and sharply, with her hair neatly ironed and straightened on a daily basis, and would wear a pin with the school's motto, "You can be anything you want to be." on it, much to the satisfaction of the principal, Mr. Taylorsworth. Johnny however, was considered a slob. He would often wear the same clothes, even though he did not have them washed infrequently. His hair was somewhat wavy, and he did not use hair gel like the other young boys in his grade, though he did not infrequently shower.

Johnny asked Ms. Mormonton: Ms. Mormonton, my hands and head hurt from rote memorizing facts and formulas all day, when will we ever use these damn things in the future anyways, why can't we learn about solving problems that actually exist on a daily basis"? Ms. Mormonton looked at Johnny as if she saw a ghost. Sure, Johnny was a pale boy, presumably due to being confined within the school walls all day rote memorizing, and often in detention after school for defending himself against Theodore and his clique, who happen to be Ms. Mormonton's favorite students, but he was no ghost. He was living flesh and bones, who, unlike a ghost, was able to feel pain and emotions, which led to his questioning in the classroom in the first place. "Johnny", Ms. Mormonton replied, "how dare you use that wretched word, the d word? When you talk like this, how do you ever expect anybody to believe anything you say? Moreover, how dare you disrespect this sacred institution? I have worked here for 27 years and this is how you repay me? You will serve 3 detentions, starting today. Also, I see that you have not done up your top button on your shirt again, and you could certainly use a comb more regularly". The children laughed, with Theodore, in his perfect pinstripe shirt, which resembled a casino worker more than a young student, laughing while raising his hand. After the laughter ceased and a few seconds went by, Ms. Mormonton noticed Theodore's non-wailing but stern hand in the air, calling upon him to speak. Theodore stated, "yes, Ms. Mormonton is correct: how come you don't dress like me, Johnny?" Much of the class mumbled something in agreement, though they did not laugh this time, because the time it took for Ms. Mormonton to select Theodore's hand in permitting him to speak killed the momentum. Nevertheless, Ms. Mormonton said semi-loudly, "structure.", which was her word to calm down the class. The children ceased mumbling at once. "Now now, children, you know better than to talk out of turn, without raising your hand". "Yes Ms. Mormonton", the children replied in unison.

"Now, where were we?", continued Ms. Mormonton. "Ah, yes, Theodore was instructing Johnny on appropriate and suitable physical presentation and etiquette within the classroom, Johnny, I hope you picked up something worthwhile from this free talk session, in which all children are free to talk about everything that is on their mind, because here at Pencilworth Prepatory, we believe in freedom of speech. Think now, children, if you were in another corner of the world, the forces of evil and totalitarianism would have suppressed your ability to exercise free speech. You would have been told what to eat, what to speak, what to feel. How horrible would that be, children? Can you imagine? Fortunately, here at Pencilworth Prepatory, within the glorious jurisdiction of Lawrenceworth, we do not have this problem. Now, everybody get ready to exit to the cafeteria as it is noon and you must be hungry, though in single file, as we are not savages. Theodore, please do the daily head count and report to the lunch lady so she can administer the correct number of trays. I heard in the teacher's lounge that today's lunch will be hamburgers with fries, concentrated apple juice with 15% real juice, and a bag of chips. My father actually represented Purehealth Meats, which is the meat source for our yummy burgers, and as the name shows, you know you are in for a healthy meaty meal of goodness. Furthermore, I personally attended a function with the CEO Mr. Naismith, where he was presenting a speech about his ambitious plans to donate money to upgrade our computer systems in our library and in his honor the library will be renamed to the Naismith Library in Benefit of Empiricism and Advancement. What a wonderful man and philanthropist, with a wonderful suit selection and smile to match." The children cheered and went into the cafeteria single file, akin to the cows who were confined on the conveyor belts in the farms of Purehealth Meats. However, the cows, I am sad to say, were not headed to a cafeteria. But they were behind closed doors and so this did not cross the minds of the children, who were instead focused on their carbohydrate rich meals in front of their faces, which would temporarily spike them with energy so that they could memorize more facts and formulas upon being shepherded back into the classroom after lunch period.

Many of the children were already obese, but this did not matter, because scientific experts and doctors such as Ms. Mormonton's family members past and present would be sure to treat them using the latest medical technology and empirical sciences. In fact, Ms. Mormonton's brother, who started out as a medical doctor and for reasons unknown transitioned early on in his career into serving as the chief medical officer of Lawrenceworth, a regulatory position personally selected by the esteemed top political leader of Lawrenceworth himself, just recently provided a visually appealing powerpoint presentation with many charts, graphs, and cited sources called "Evidence-based empirical and scientific methods in benefit of tackling the obesity epidemic" in which he was promoting a new anti-fat medication created by Perfectbody Pharmaceuticals, whose CEO happened to be the cousin of CEO and philanthropist Mr. Naismith of Purehealth Meats, which would, in his medical opinion, "make us victorious in the battle against obesity".

Little Johnny was considered to be a bad boy. A bad boy is bad. Bad boys do bad things. Bad things are done by bad boys.

One day, Johnny was sick and tired of having to rote memorize facts and formulas in school. One day, Johnny decided to speak up. This all happened one day, of course, but against the backdrop of many days, rather, years, of daily drudgery. His class offered "free talk time" once a month, on the last Friday of the month. During free talk time, any student in the class could talk, provided they raised their hands, talked in an orderly fashion, did not use bad language, used an acceptable decibel level, did not offend anybody, did not say anything immoral, did not say anything evil, did not say anything mean, did not spread misinformation, presented established empirical evidence to support each of their statements, did not say anything that could harm children, and did not say anything bad. Now, Johnny was not the worst student, but he was not the best student. He coasted through school, more so due to boredom than laziness. He would pass all the subjects, but unlike Theodore and other students, he would make more silly mistakes and would sometime score lower on multiple choice tests. However, outside of school, once he finished his homework as quickly as he possibly could, he would start to read books about all the different things he was interested about. He would reflect on his day and his conversations. About what his parents and what other adults and children told him. Then he would try to make sense of it all.

Johnny raised his hand, which hurt from having to write repeated formulas and definitions all day, and Ms. Mormonton, noticing that his hand was the only one in the air, reluctantly permitted him to speak. Ms. Mormonton was a noble and neat woman. She was an intelligent woman, as evidenced by her score of 126 on standardized intelligence testing when she herself was assessed as a youngster after the Ministry of Education mandated a jurisdiction-wide intelligence testing program nicknamed Educational learnings of empiricism in benefit of the glorious jurisdiction of Lawrenceworth. Her father was a lawyer who attended a prestigious university and worked for the government prior to pursuing litigation in private practice within the realm of contract disputes, and her mother a nurse who diligently administered medication to thousands of institutionalized mental health patients throughout her career at the hospital. Ms. Mormonton had 2 children of her own, a boy and a girl. She was hopeful for the boy turning into a doctor, to administer even more medication than her mother did as a nurse at the hospital, and her daughter to be a judge, to maintain the moral, civilized, and correct standards of society that were set thousands and hundreds of years ago. Ms. Mormonton would dress professionally and sharply, with her hair neatly ironed and straightened on a daily basis, and would wear a pin with the school's motto, "You can be anything you want to be." on it, much to the satisfaction of the principal, Mr. Taylorsworth. Johnny however, was considered a slob. He would often wear the same clothes, even though he did not have them washed infrequently. His hair was somewhat wavy, and he did not use hair gel like the other young boys in his grade, though he did not infrequently shower.

Johnny asked Ms. Mormonton: Ms. Mormonton, my hands and head hurt from rote memorizing facts and formulas all day, when will we ever use these damn things in the future anyways, why can't we learn about solving problems that actually exist on a daily basis"? Ms. Mormonton looked at Johnny as if she saw a ghost. Sure, Johnny was a pale boy, presumably due to being confined within the school walls all day rote memorizing, and often in detention after school for defending himself against Theodore and his clique, who happen to be Ms. Mormonton's favorite students, but he was no ghost. He was living flesh and bones, who, unlike a ghost, was able to feel pain and emotions, which led to his questioning in the classroom in the first place. "Johnny", Ms. Mormonton replied, "how dare you use that wretched word, the d word? When you talk like this, how do you ever expect anybody to believe anything you say? Moreover, how dare you disrespect this sacred institution? I have worked here for 27 years and this is how you repay me? You will serve 3 detentions, starting today. Also, I see that you have not done up your top button on your shirt again, and you could certainly use a comb more regularly". The children laughed, with Theodore, in his perfect pinstripe shirt, which resembled a casino worker more than a young student, laughing while raising his hand. After the laughter ceased and a few seconds went by, Ms. Mormonton noticed Theodore's non-wailing but stern hand in the air, calling upon him to speak. Theodore stated, "yes, Ms. Mormonton is correct: how come you don't dress like me, Johnny?" Much of the class mumbled something in agreement, though they did not laugh this time, because the time it took for Ms. Mormonton to select Theodore's hand in permitting him to speak killed the momentum. Nevertheless, Ms. Mormonton said semi-loudly, "structure.", which was her word to calm down the class. The children ceased mumbling at once. "Now now, children, you know better than to talk out of turn, without raising your hand". "Yes Ms. Mormonton", the children replied in unison.

"Now, where were we?", continued Ms. Mormonton. "Ah, yes, Theodore was instructing Johnny on appropriate and suitable physical presentation and etiquette within the classroom, Johnny, I hope you picked up something worthwhile from this free talk session, in which all children are free to talk about everything that is on their mind, because here at Pencilworth Prepatory, we believe in freedom of speech. Think now, children, if you were in another corner of the world, the forces of evil and totalitarianism would have suppressed your ability to exercise free speech. You would have been told what to eat, what to speak, what to feel. How horrible would that be, children? Can you imagine? Fortunately, here at Pencilworth Prepatory, within the glorious jurisdiction of Lawrenceworth, we do not have this problem. Now, everybody get ready to exit to the cafeteria as it is noon and you must be hungry, though in single file, as we are not savages. Theodore, please do the daily head count and report to the lunch lady so she can administer the correct number of trays. I heard in the teacher's lounge that today's lunch will be hamburgers with fries, concentrated apple juice with 15% real juice, and a bag of chips. My father actually represented Purehealth Meats, which is the meat source for our yummy burgers, and as the name shows, you know you are in for a healthy meaty meal of goodness. Furthermore, I personally attended a function with the CEO Mr. Naismith, where he was presenting a speech about his ambitious plans to donate money to upgrade our computer systems in our library and in his honor the library will be renamed to the Naismith Library in Benefit of Empiricism and Advancement. What a wonderful man and philanthropist, with a wonderful suit selection and smile to match." The children cheered and went into the cafeteria single file, akin to the cows who were confined on the conveyor belts in the farms of Purehealth Meats. However, the cows, I am sad to say, were not headed to a cafeteria. But they were behind closed doors and so this did not cross the minds of the children, who were instead focused on their carbohydrate rich meals in front of their faces, which would temporarily spike them with energy so that they could memorize more facts and formulas upon being shepherded back into the classroom after lunch period.

Many of the children were already obese, but this did not matter, because scientific experts and doctors such as Ms. Mormonton's family members past and present would be sure to treat them using the latest medical technology and empirical sciences. In fact, Ms. Mormonton's brother, who started out as a medical doctor and for reasons unknown transitioned early on in his career into serving as the chief medical officer of Lawrenceworth, a regulatory position personally selected by the esteemed top political leader of Lawrenceworth himself, just recently provided a visually appealing powerpoint presentation with many charts, graphs, and cited sources called "Evidence-based empirical and scientific methods in benefit of tackling the obesity epidemic" in which he was promoting a new anti-fat medication created by Perfectbody Pharmaceuticals, whose CEO happened to be the cousin of CEO and philanthropist Mr. Naismith of Purehealth Meats, which would, in his medical opinion, "make us victorious in the battle against obesity".