There's a certain group of people that says, "okay - 75% of this conspiracy is stupid but here's the 25% that's actually pretty weird" - when meanwhile there's a lot of valid info in the 75% that they're tossing out with the bathwater.
Granted, the community is teeming with disinformation and often has an echo chamber mentality to it, but these people seem to forget that professional disinformation typically has elements of truth. "Parapolitical hipsters", operating under the assumption that if an issue has become a meme (e.g. Freemasonry) it must be wholly distraction, and should be ignored. I don't know if this is about building credibility with the uninitiated, setting a unique brand, or - at best - just trying to draw attention to less talked about aspects, which is honourable but can be done without automatically discounting the work that's been done to this point. Either way it skews one's perspective, in the same way as if you base your outlook purely on the established memes.>>33062297
Awesome, thank you.
One thing I'll say for Levenda is his takes tend to be original so whether I agree or not I'll always listen. Nick Bryant is the man.