No! You DON'T Need a 'Black Belt in Radical Sophistication' to Know the Good Guys from the Bad Guys
You only need an egalitarian yardstick by which to measure people
Below is a Facebook post that really annoys me.
Why does it annoy me, you might wonder? After all, it’s all about how the ruling class is lying to us and manipulating us, and I agree that the ruling class does all of that. So, what’s not to like about this Facebook post? Take a look at it:
Here’s why I don’t like this Facebook post. It makes it seem—wrongly!—as if one cannot tell the good guys (females are guys too, in my usage of that word here, OK?) from the bad guys unless one is extremely knowledgeable about the deep state that “goes far deeper than most can imagine.” It makes it seem as if only a few people, “those of us who know,” can ever really avoid falling for the “PsyOps” and thus tell the good guys from the bad guys. According to this way of thinking, if you’re not one of the few “who know,” then you need to rely on one of those few people who know the real truth to tell you if, say, Tucker Carlson is a good guy or a bad guy.
NO!
The way to tell who is a good guy and who is a bad guy is really quite simple and it’s something all of us can do without any special esoteric knowledge about the inner workings of the deep state or PsyOps or CIA propaganda and so forth.
The way to tell who is a good guy and who is a bad guy depends first on what kind of person we’re talking about.
If we’re talking about a politician such as Trump or Biden or Putin or Bernie Sanders or RFK, Jr. or Jill Stein or Cornel West, or about a public personality such as Tucker Carlson or Robert Reich or Jordan Peterson or Joe Rogan, then all one has to do is see if they do or do not explicitly support the egalitarian aims and values shared by the vast majority of people: to remove the rich from power to have real, not fake, democracy with no rich and no poor. If they do, then they’re a good guy, and otherwise they’re not (maybe they will become a good guy in the future but they aren’t yet one.) Currently, there are no good guys in this category of people that I am aware of. Maybe they’re afraid to be a good guy; maybe they’ve been bribed not to be a good guy; maybe they’re just assholes. Who knows?
If we’re talking about regular people not in the above category, then if they are people you can converse with, all you need to do is ask them if they think it is a good idea or a bad idea to remove the rich from power to have real, not fake, democracy with no rich and no poor. Most will say it’s a good idea—or a great idea (although most will also say they think it is impossible because they wrongly believe nobody ELSE thinks it’s a good idea.) These people are good guys. The ones who say it’s a bad idea are bad guys.
If you can’t just ask a regular person what they think, then one can determine if they’re a good guy or a bad guy by observing how they relate to other people. Do they relate to other people as equals in dignity and rights; do they have some genuine concern for others? Or do they relate to some people as inferiors whom they try to dominate and use for selfish aims? If the former, they’re a good guy, otherwise a bad guy.
It’s NOT complicated! One does not need to have a “black belt in radical sophistication” to do this.
Why Is This Way of Evaluating People Not Commonly Done?
The simple and obvious way of evaluating people requires that one “measure” people with an egalitarian “yard stick” so to speak, in other words according to whether or not they support egalitarian values and aims or behave in a manner suggesting they do so. The problem is that the ruling class has worked very hard to censor from public discourse the very idea of egalitarian aims and values and the fact that they conflict with the aims and values of the current ruling classes of the world. The ruling class has censored the idea of egalitarian revolution—the simple idea that the good guys should have the real power in society, not the bad guys. As a result, people are unaccustomed to applying the egalitarian “yardstick” for evaluating people. One of the tasks of an egalitarian revolutionary movement is to promote the use of exactly that yardstick.
Your dedication to the essential goodness of man as evidenced by your egalitarianism is truly admirable. If the rich men in power were subjected to strict accountability with severe punishments for misfeasance then this would alleviate some of the evils of which you speak. The judges of misfeasance would be those selected from the poor.