There’s an interesting socio-psychological phenomenon I noticed in Western politics.

As time goes by, official narratives about things are first accepted unconditionally, and then as things move on, they are discredited and what used to be considered an extreme conspiracy theory turns out to be the truth.

However, nobody in the media or the political circus ever connects the dots, and concludes that if something is true for element x and for element x+1, it will most likely also be true for x+2, x+3 and so on.

No. Instead, every new “thing” is treated as if it exists in a vacuum, and the official narrative is to be unconditionally trusted. Also, reasonable people in the West who know that their media aren’t to be trusted with anything, unconditionally trust the official narrative about China, Russia and so on, and believe that every country the West wants to go to war with is a dictatorship ruled by a corrupt tyrant who oppresses his own people and something needs to be done about it. Also, induction is never applied and each new case is treated as if there were no precedent.

The problem, of course, is the emotional cost of the logically correct conclusion, because one would have to accept the fact that the media are controlled by an invisible ruling oligarchy, that the visible politicians are mere puppets, that we are not free, and there is no obvious way out. Also, the more one is invested in the system through “education” etc., the greater the emotional cost of realising it’s all based on deception and indoctrination and is not qualitatively different from the North Korean regime.