Emotion has Sealed my Worldview

Here is a bit of self reflection.  I've noticed that I occasionally become overwhelmed with revulsion at certain behaviors and my mind is then made up.  I'm an open-minded person by nature, but there seems to a mechanism at work that keeps me from carrying this too far.  I previously took this approach more logically, writing a blog post entitled This I Believe.  I'm glad I did that as it has helped me to understand the world better.  Certain things are obvious to me and I will not let myself be gaslit.  

Logically, I say these are things that I'm > 95% sure of.  But that's intuition.  I don't have a spreadsheet for each thing I believe.  Rather, one of the functions of emotion is to fortify beliefs.  A good rule of thumb, perhaps, in expressing such strongly held beliefs is to use I-language.  For example, 

In hearing Democrats speak about Russia, I have been repeatedly overwhelmed with the feeling that they are catastrophically wrong.  This has made a profound impact on me and one that I can't / don't want to forget. 

This seems less threatening than:

Democrats continually lie about Russia and exaggerate the threat it poses to the West.  Western elites are evil in fomenting hatred against Russia based upon such lies and exaggerations. 

The Military-Financial-Information Complex

Like cancer, the U.S. military-financial-information complex (industry is less of a factor in comparison to Eisenhower's day) has strayed from its original mission and is attacking the host.

It's almost impossible to avoid being a part of this in one's daily life.

The social democratic model has proven the most effective form of political-economic governance. What prevents that from (re)emerging in US and from spreading across the globe? Why has that faltered in Britain?

Are Trump and Putin to blame? Or is there something more broadly cultural and systemic in the Anglosphere?

Did Merkel genuinely want peace in Ukraine, but was overridden by the Anglosphere? Is this a relevant context for Victoria Nuland's infamous "Fuck the EU" remark?

Primary Sources

One of the best developments of the 21st century, in my view, has been video reporting exposing the lies and errors of public officials. The Daily Show with Jon Stewart did a good job of exposing government and media misinformation with regard to the 2003 Iraq War, an event with massive consequences in terms of death, destruction, refugee crises, and trust in our institutions, both national and international. The videos juxtaposed statements by government officials and mainstream media organs with conflicting reporting of events (by equally "authoritative" institutions) as they actually turned out. We didn't have to trust Jon Stewart, we just had to trust our own eyes and ears and be alert to any signs that Stewart might be taking things out of context or doctoring videos.

In the current era of anti-Putin hysteria, there are equally good video reports available which make crystal clear the lies and errors of public officials with regard to a massively consequential event - the false demonization of Putin and the war in Ukraine. Here are some:

• Who Blew Up the Nord Stream Pipelines? "Russia, Russia, Russia!", by Matt Orfalea
• Russia Had Zero Influence On Election Admits Washington Post!,
  by Aaron Maté
• European Leaders ADMIT Ukraine Peace Deal Was A Sham,
  by Aaron Maté

I laugh and cry as I watch these.

Making Sense of the Cultural Landscape

I've found the following books helpful in making sense of the cultural landscape:

1. The Revolt of The Public and the Crisis of Authority in the New Millenium, by Martin Gurri

2. Conspiracy Theory in America (Discovering America) by Lance deHaven-Smith

The former describes the threat of nihilism in our new technological world where information (and mis-information) is made available freely, easily, and quickly across the globe. Institutional shortcomings and crimes can now be exposed more easily, and institutions and authority figures can be falsely and irresponsibly accused.

The second book describes the importance of looking objectively and comprehensively at potential state crimes (against democracy).  While the Internet facilitates the spread of false conspiracy theories, these can includes false narratives promoted by the state.  In looking for the truth in matters of societal life and death (war, assassination, censorship, and imprisonment), state crimes are not only possible but common.  The state propagandizes against such investigation, dismissing legitimate concerns and inquiries as conspiracy theories.  Citizens of democracies can be on the alert for these attempts to exclude potential state crimes from legitimate scrutiny, and to deflect attention onto scapegoats such as Putin.