"The people know" is not a fact. It is an emotional framing designed to sound like consensus when none exists. The actual data shows: a deeply divided world, a Global South that refuses to take sides, and Western publics split along political lines.
According to this logic, all we need to do is evoke emotions, base our decisions on perceived, expected, and actual feelings, and let that be our compass for leading humanity forward.
I disagree.
I fully agree that those in power
try to evoke emotions. But I want to connect your chain of thinking to something more grounded: facts, information, data. Because emotions untethered from reality are not a moral compass, they're a weapon waiting to be aimed.
I sense deep emotional investment here — a bleak, heavy view of the world. I understand it. But I'd ask: what are those emotions actually
based on? Where do they come from?
Consider four sources:
- Your real-life close circles
- Your real-life outer circles
- Your digitized personal world (forums, social media friends, curated interests)
- Your digitized non-personal world (legacy media, Twitter, Instagram, etc.)
Here's the critical question: are your feelings of Israel and US as 100% wrong is driven more by sources 3–4 than by 1–2? Because sources 3–4 are
anything but neutral — they represent the interests of those in power, or those who oppose those in power, and everything in between. Feelings that originate there should be taken with significant self awareness.
My point is to try to distinguish between what I
feel and what I
know. That distinction matters. It's the only thing that separates moral clarity from mob sentiment.