This Blog Has Moved!

My blog has moved. Check out my new blog at

Your Ad Here

Sunday, October 4, 2009

Why Are People So Hostile to the Truth?

Most people react with extreme hostility when confronted with the truth. Try mentioning any of these ideas to someone, and notice the reaction:

  • Taxation is theft!
  • The USA has a corrupt monetary system!
  • Government is just a humongous extortion racket!
  • Government is terrorism!
  • Government licensing requirements for doctors are harmful, because they restrict supply and raise prices!
  • Who needs a government anyway? A true free market would be superior, where nobody has a monopoly of violence.
Most people don't just say "Your argument is stupid." and move on. They get outright hostile, especially if you're explaining the truth well and if you're persistent.

When you try discussing the above subjects, then the functioning of the Matrix is totally obvious.

Most people don't notice the Matrix, because they don't question the lies that people have been brainwashed to believe. If you go around speaking the truth, then the people around you react with hostility. This causes the superficial conclusion "There's something wrong with the person speaking the truth!" instead of "Nearly everyone is a brainwashed idiot!"

You only see the Matrix when you start questioning things. Most people don't question the Matrix all at once, like I can now. They question bits and pieces at a time. Then, they are forcibly brought back in line by the pro-State trolls around them.

As a child, you're sharply corrected by the adults around you whenever you question official State propaganda. Over time, you internalize this, and learn to not question the State. It doesn't happen all at once, but the cumulative effect over many years is very damaging. State brainwashing centers (schools) encourage this process.

In almost every group of humans, at least one has the parasitic personality type. Parasites are those who most aggressively defend the State. The State directly and indirectly backs the looting of the parasites. Parasites won't question the source of their power and influence.

When you try to explain the truth to a parasite, they'll say "I logically refuted your argument.", even though they're spouting incoherent gibberish. They actually believe their own lies. If you evaluate their body language, their body language will say "I logically refuted your argument." If you don't have self-confidence, you'll let their persistence weaken your own resolve. Then, an observer will say "The parasite won the debate!"

This is an important evil tactic. Parasites model the behavior of a true leader, even though they don't have the content to back it up. The problem is that most people don't have their emotions synchronized with their logical thinking. They'll evaluate the body language while completely ignoring the details of the argument. If an intelligent person debates a parasite, the parasite isn't studying the logic of your argument. The parasite is studying your body language, and learning to emulate that.

For this reason, I aggressively keep try to keep pro-State trolls off my blog. I'm not going to convince them. It's better for them to get disgusted and leave. I'll just waste a lot of time and energy for nothing.

At one of my jobs, I tried to explain "Taxation is theft! The USA has a corrupt monetary system!" to someone with the parasitic personality type. He responded with the usual pro-State trolling. He thought he had logically refuted my points, but it was incoherent gibberish. I then said "If the movie 'The Matrix' were nonfiction, which pill would you take, the red one or the blue one?" He said "I'd take the red pill, duh!" I tried explaining it to him, but couldn't make him understand. It was funny and sad at the same time.

In most groups of humans, the parasitic person is the emotional leader. If the parasite gets hostile, then the "abused productive" people follow suit.

Even when no parasites are around, someone with the "abused productive" personality type will get hostile when confronted with the truth. Their conditioning is so deeply ingrained that they follow their role. An "abused productive" person will get scared and confused, but not necessarily outright hostile, when confronted with the truth.

It's very traumatic to realize the massive scam that has occurred. People get hostile towards the truth, because they don't want to realize that they've been completely and totally conned.

The more "educated" someone is, the more hostile they become to the truth. The more power and influence you have, the more important it is for you to be a brainwashed pro-State troll.

Cynically, you could argue that the education system selects as leaders those who are best at being pro-State brainwashed, rather than the best thinkers. The schooling system isn't sorting you based on your actual ability; you're being sorted based on your ability to be pro-State brainwashed. People who have the highest resistance to pro-State brainwashing are labeled as defective. Made-up diseases like "attention deficit disorder" wind up hurting those who are the most independent thinkers.

There was one flaw. In order to pro-State brainwash someone to be good at Math, you have to teach Math honestly. Similarly, Computer Science must be honestly taught, because you have to be able to actually program a computer. If Math or Computers were taught dishonestly, then the intelligent people would not be fooled. Instead, an intelligent student might think "My Math teacher is teaching Math honestly. Therefore, my history teacher must be teaching history honestly." By teaching Math honestly, this lends credibility to the history or economics teacher, who is teaching pro-State brainwashing.

The people who react with the most hostility to the truth are insiders. Everyone else then follows the example set by the leaders. I doubt that any politician or lawyer or CEO has ever heard or understood the "Taxation is theft!" argument in his life. They're surrounded by people who are totally brainwashed pro-State trolls.

Most politicians and insiders probably aren't consciously aware that they're participating in a massive crime. They probably don't think "HAHAHA!! I'm using State violence to steal from everyone for my personal benefit!" They probably think "I'm a brilliant businessman and leader! People should be grateful that someone as wise as me is making decisions for them!"

I'm not an insider, so I don't know how insiders think. They might be evil and brilliant actors. They might be just plain stupid. There's probably a range. Some insiders, like Madoff, are complete frauds and know it. Some insiders, like Obama, are doing the best they can to work within a corrupt system, without being aware that it's a massive scam. Obama has the "abused productive" personality type. He's pretty intelligent. Unfortunately, he's spent his career learning lies instead of learning the truth. Plus, all his advisers and handlers are pro-State brainwashed; many probably have the parasitic personality type. The advisers and handlers don't appear on TV, so it's hard to tell.

The State survives because the responsibility for evil is distributed. Even if a CEO lobbies the government for favors, he's not the one who has to use violence to enforce the law/pork he received. Nobody is solely responsible for evil. This allows most/all of the participants to be blissfully unaware that they're participating in a massive crime.

Government is actually a symptom of a larger problem. It is the evil mental State that allows government to exist in the first place. Most people are unable to think logically. This is not natural human behavior. This is a symptom of massive pro-State brainwashing. If people were able to think logically, they would all say "WTF is this?"

It's silly to say "Humans in their natural state can't think logically." You don't know how humans would behave if they weren't pro-State brainwashed.

Humans who start to crack their pro-State brainwashing are labeled with a "mental illness". Then, they are forcibly drugged and silenced. The psychiatry industry scam plays an important role in preserving the Matrix.

Insiders and parasites are hostile to the truth, because they don't want their gravy train threatened. They have a financial interest in ignoring the truth.

Productive workers are hostile to the truth, because they don't want to realize that they've been conned.

Most people are hostile to the truth, because it's very horrible to realize what has actually happened. As information spreads gradually over the Internet, people will be more receptive to the truth. It's unrealistic to expect to convert someone all at once. If someone hears "Taxation is theft!" multiple times from different sources, then eventually they might start to understand.

The smartest people and most independent thinkers will discover the truth first. That's one advantage of the Internet compared to the mainstream media. If the NY Times and other State propagandists started telling the truth, then there would be a massive panic. It's better for them to continue spreading their lies, while people slowly discover the truth on their own, one at a time.


Anonymous said...

Without a government, how do you handle market failures, they happen all the time in the real world, people love to create huge negative externalities for everyone else if they only bear a tiny fraction of the cost and reap a large amount of benefit, you can see it every day, even with a government, it will just get a whole lot worse. Think food safety in China.

Nick said...

One thing that must be understood about people's unwavering support of govt is that many people have no idea that society can do something without govt doing it. Without govt programs, people wouldn't be able to get health care, without govt regulations, businesses would run the world and enslave us, without any govt at all, the would fall into complete chaos. I'm a f*cking minarchist, but I don't believe that society would fall into complete chaos if we didn't have a few rulers (this assuming there was an organized effort on part of the citizenry to decrease govt's influence and eventually make govt obsolete).

But people who believe there would be a void of chaos and suffering therefore believe govt must exist to legitimately take from some to provide for others and restrict some freedoms to protect freedom.

"Without Medicare, elderly people couldn't afford health care, therefore we must have taxes to pay to help poor people" for one example. The idea of making individuals responsible to helping and working with each other voluntarily to get what one needs is scary and seen as a lack of order. I've seen people literally get angry at the idea of someone who's poor having to ask someone who has more for help...but instead support the govt simply forcibly taking for those with more.

In short...Statists don't see society having order without layers upon layers of laws dictating such order.

theftthroughinflation said...

Anonymous said...
"Without a government, how do you handle market failures, they happen all the time in the real world, people love to create huge negative externalities for everyone else if they only bear a tiny fraction of the cost and reap a large amount of benefit, you can see it every day, even with a government, it will just get a whole lot worse. Think food safety in China."

Thats pro-state trolling as FSK would say. Without a government there is less incentive to be deceptive. If a particular company was deceptive and engaged in unsustainable business practices then the penalty would be failure.
In our statist system now there is more incentive to screw people over because if your business fails because of an unsound business model then the government is likely to bail you and your victims out! The credit bubble would never have been created without help from the Fed because investors using real savings instead of printed fiat money would never dream of risking their capital on thinks like sub-prime mortgages!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Without a government, how do you handle market failures, they happen all the time in the real world, people love to create huge negative externalities for everyone else if they only bear a tiny fraction of the cost and reap a large amount of benefit, you can see it every day, even with a government, it will just get a whole lot worse. Think food safety in China.

And how did the government *PREVENT* food safety in China? You contradict your own argument and are entirely pro-State trolling. Go away.

Robin Smith said...

Agreed! The truths I get attacked on when in dialogue are:

1) Defining WEALTH. That is something that can only be created by doing work on natural resources. (land etc)

2) Who owns that WEALTH: Its rightful owner is the one who has done the work. It is the only property you can justly own.

The objections come because they want to break these natural laws due to the free lunches monoploy right that will deliver

They objectve with hostility because they either want to preserve these monoploy rights or aspire to acquire them

memenode said...

Good article. I have to say I've become so tired of debating these kinds of people that I've actually come to the point of ignoring them whereas I would respond before (such as recently on youtube).

It's always same old crap. When they ask you a question it's always loaded, always asked in a manner which already presumes knowledge of an answer and just waits for you to answer so they can engage you in an utterly endless and ultimately unproductive debate.

It has made me want to just bow out and not engage as much, but the problem is that as long as you write articles promoting voluntaryism, such same old questions will keep coming. How do you answer properly without engaging in a yet another fruitless debate that wont go anywhere?

It makes me want to sometimes just start doing something else.. maybe start writing science fiction modeling a future world where voluntaryism is accepted. This way at least I get to have a creative license nobody can question while still demonstrating my points in a way they could be heard.. I don't know..

Anonymous said...

two words. power vaccum. i understand the state is a charade, but its a charade i prefer over other charades. corruption exists everwhere, why would it not exist in government.

watch robocop. i am serious, watch robocop and think about it.

This Blog Has Moved!

My blog has moved. Check out my new blog at