Information Warfare Education, Propaganda, and How to Tell the Difference



I’m not sure how to address this from a systemic point of view, especially since people are very uncomfortable with corporations like Google “ranking” information and gatekeeping web traffic. But I continue to think that we need a neutral, peer-reviewed, third-party process in order to better curate the overall ecosystem.

I think we’re at a point where there’s a growing demand for breaking out of filter bubbles and unbundling “real” journalism from networks. does a decent job stepping out of partisan filter bubbles. is starting to gain traction with writers like Glen Greenwald and Bari Weiss calling it their home.


It might also be time to re-examine if this marriage of 50 Countries called the United States should continue. Czechoslovakia had a “Velvet Divorce” successfully. There’s no reason that a separation of States into 2 or more Nations needs to be violent.
Let one side go one way, and the other side go the other way and give people 10 years to decide where they want to live.


I’ve got to say it. Don’t you think you’re wrapping a bit of “Corey wants” with apocalypticalist doom and gloom? :slight_smile: Personally I think we will have some significant SHTF and get our Democracy back in order. The world has seen the Kid’s of Portland and Minneapolis in action. They can likely burn Blue cities at will, but not recommended that they head into the suburbs.

Very well thought out plan Corey. Are you working to implement in Colorado or Nationally? This is actionable.

  1. I can see the value for “equal representation” but also see that this would continue to create our Leftist bi-coastal “mob rule” with our largest states dominating and eliminating any input/influence from smaller states. Seems like the Democrats could whisk this one through before the 2022 elections and “gitter done” so to speak.
  2. Ranked choice - This makes some sense. I can’t see major downsides. If we had meaningful election integrity enforcement in place (1 citizen, 1 vote - no ballot harvesting) I might get behind this one. I assume you would want this for all national positions - senate, house, etc. Would you want to mandate the States adopt for their own internal elections as well, effectively Federalizing state elections?
  3. Kind of State run Rumbspringa to “Instill Greater Good” method. This could be an interesting fix. I also like your “Swiss” model of training all Americans in firearms proficiency. I would also send everyone home with an AR15 and have yearly proficiency certifications. Of course we would need uniform firearms violation enforcement. Any changes in Right to Bear would need a Constitutional Amendment. This very likely would support your healthy progressives goal. My opinion is that insinuating unhealthy nationalism is more Leftist narrative than a reality. Wrapping a “State run mission” into the mix meanwhile proactively attacking those you’re lifting the idea from is a bit rich :slight_smile: I would limit “free” education to somewhat “useful” studies. No support for Gender Studies, Interpretive Performance Art, Associate of Compost Piling majors should not be subsidized. Any “free” education would require either significant real world capability development (plumbing, carpentry, engineering, accounting,etc) and if studying a Liberal Arts or non-Scientific Science would require many hours of American Civics, Government and History.

Overall, I think a pretty good plan!


I still have yet to see a single city burn, despite the constant accusation from the right that we are apparently being invaded by the Mongol horde. I don’t know, that seems kinda “doom and gloom” to me :slight_smile:

That said, the most apocalyptic day of my life (other than my daughter’s medical diagnosis) was just about a year ago, when COVID was stating to seriously kick our asses and we had a bunch of out-of-control wildfires here in Colorado. I remember driving down the road, seeing people walk around with masks, ash falling from the sky, the sun blotted out by blood-red clouds with a small patch of blue sky way out on the horizon in front of me. “So this is what it looks like,” I remember saying to myself. Absolutely surreal.

But I am both an optimist and a realist, which means I tend to think that progress is K-shaped. Human beings generally do not change their collective behaviors until at least some piece of the sky falls on their heads first. We’re not very good at the proactive stuff, but once things get painful enough to awaken the sleeping giant, it tends to take some pretty huge steps forward.

So I guess I really do think the sky is falling… and landing on our heads like a big blue pancake :slight_smile:


I have lots of friends in Portland metro that are very disappointed they can’t go downtown with their families any more. Many have moved to red states. Friends in LA area were literally scared for their lives with businesses being destroyed night after night. One had “mostly peaceful” protestors in their alley destroying cars and fences three times and when they call 911 no one answered.

I’m not sure how Colorado forest fires and Covid are signaling a need to “save democracy”, but if its an emotive motivator for you then let’s get on with it.

But it’s all good. Great thing about the US is that BY DESIGN we have pushed as much local control to as close to the people as possible - city, county, state. Many don’t really appreciate how this empowers people to impact their lives locally.

Did you like my additions to your plan? Any way we can come together to perhaps create progress?


Yeah baby! Let’s get on with things.


Glad you like the plan! I was trying to come up with the simplest deep-structure fixes that would have the maximum effect on our surface-structure challenges. And ones that could make liberals want to lean in (Step 1), make conservatives lean in (Step 3), and make independents and the non-affiliated lean in (Step 2). I also wanted these to largely bypass the most amped-up culture war issues, because a) culture wars are almost entirely rooted in emotion, which tends to break good-faith discussions, and b) I believe these fixes would ultimately help improve the conditions that are producing those culture wars in the first place. (Other than gun control, of course, which is a culture war issue that particularly triggers the left [heh, pun] but I figured I would steer into the skid :slight_smile: )

As for your comments:

I am not concerned about that, because we already have checks and balance here – it’s called the Senate :slight_smile: The House of Representatives is supposed to be exactly that – fair and equal representation for all Americans. As it is, ever since 1929 the House has basically become an affirmative action program for the GOP. And I know how much those guys hate affirmative action!

Yes, and I think this is exactly what would allow a far more functional parliamentarian system to emerge.

I think it would be much better if that came up from the states themselves, but I absolutely do not think that will ever happen. No one ever willingly gives up their power :slight_smile: However, I’d prefer the states continue to manage their own elections, but likely within this sort of federally-enforced framework.

This one emerged organically in conversation with Ken, and we were both surprised by how much we like the idea, and how much of a "magic bullet’ this would likely be in terms of creating more unity and fewer broken polarities in our culture and society. Everyone gets their skin in the game. And in the meantime, we get to collectively metabolize our deeply-held shadows about guns, which causes people to become either addicted or allergic to them, either fetishizing guns or demonizing them altogether. Again, we are inherently a martial culture, but we need to find a healthier version for the current era.

I disagree with your opinion, I think there are metric tons of evidence to support the idea that we have a very unhealthy (toxic, you might say) version of nationalism that is incredibly ethnocentric and often deeply narcissistic. But I also think that this sort of broken nationalism is emerging in a vacuum where a healthy nationalism/patriotism should be, but has been largely dismantled and deconstructed by green. But we can disagree on the finer points here!

Oh well, it’s a national mandatory service for all young people, so it needs to be managed on both federal and state levels. Especially since it would act as a national civil service that, among other things, could help bring people from one state to another in times of need, such as natural disasters. Plus we get to keep all our guns (with regulations), so it’ll have to be a compromise :slight_smile:

I advocate for strong inter-locking governments at every holonic level – local/community, county, state, federal, and global. Sometimes we need to emphasize one more than the other, depending on the needs and life conditions we are trying to address, and where the pendulum currently finds itself at any given moment on any given issue.

I’d rather place emphasis and incentive on STEAM education for universities (absolutely need to add art and humanities to the STEM frame – STEM teaches us the “what” but the A teaches us the “why”), and I also think we need heavy emphasis on trade schools, as you mention. But ultimately, I say let people pursue whatever passion they want. My guess is that, after two years experience gained “in the trenches” of civil national service, rather than sitting on sites like Tumblr all day, many of the majors we might consider frivolous will no longer be selected for as frequently. But hey, follow your joy, let your freak flag fly, etc. — after all, we never know where innovation will come from next.


Your thoughts on the House do hold merit and would seem to be the “most fair” implementation as well as “meet intent” of of the House. I like it.
Your quip on GOP and Affirmative Action brings an “internal quadrant” question to mind. When you came up with this proposal, was it out of looking for ways to mitigate an outsized GOP influence or did you come up with this based on intent for fair and equal representation?

As someone not even close to being confused with the far left progressives :slight_smile: I simply don’t see what you see and think you’ve adopted a “position” that coincidentally aligns with your own beliefs. I would challenge that as long as you hold these beliefs of “toxic”, “narcissistic”, and “ethnocentric” you will be extremely limited in reaching “across the ideological isle” so to speak. I’ll not “extoll the virtues” that I think you conflate with negative assessments, yet again. :slight_smile:

Have you noticed that by and large your proposals tend to limit individual decision making, replacing with government mandated programs? Just an observation in an area that I’m keen to identify :slight_smile:
Also the “strong inter-locking governments” at all levels also shifts decision making, power, control to administrator/bureaucrats, which is something that the US was founded to limit/mitigate.

Careful here or regardless of what we call it, it will start looking, smelling and tasting like that “bad stuff”.

I think you underestimate a STEM education :slight_smile:. I’m not so sure Liberal Arts is taught much these days so not willing to fund. Any dream can be pursued, but not sure it’s quite fair to have the plumber and accountant pay for finger painting and gender studies tenured professor positions.

Also back to the original topic of Information Warfare…, I don’t see any representation of the “ills of government bureaucracy” but an faith that bureaucrats will consistently “do the right thing” and “make peoples’ lives better”.

One question might be if you think the “best and brightest” go into government service? Or perhaps what percentage are looking for a “job you will never be laid off from with great retirement benefits”?


One thought is why aren’t we proposing / promoting massive efficiency increases in our government bureaucracies - training, education, administrative management, surveillance, forensic analysis, supply chain,… As an example - free online education for every human in the world? (Right now I’m learning to weld and fabricate metal via youtube. LOL)

With the AMAZING technologies and software platforms that have been implemented it would seem we could offer the same level of government services at vastly reduced cost to the tax payers. This might be a position vast swaths of conservatives would have a hard time arguing against. Just a thought.


I could in turn retort by saying that you’ve adopted a position that coincidentally aligns with your own biases, but I don’t think that would be very constructive. It’s a great big reality out there, and each of us enacts it in a different way. Sometimes we see things the other doesn’t, sometimes those things are really there, sometime they aren’t.

But I will say, I think January 6th proves fairly definitively that there is a malignant strain of “MURICA” nationalism out there, and I continue to believe there is plenty of documented evidence of a growing group of people on the right who do not consider liberals to be bonafide Americans. Q Anon is itself fundamentally an expression of “toxic nationalism”, particularly its widespread beliefs that Democratic leaders (or any leaders) have been/should be extrajudicially executed, justified by their professed love for the country.

Interesting, I think my proposals do quite the opposite. Except for #3, of course, because it would in fact be “mandatory”.

But Ranked Choice voting? That increases individual decision making.

Restoring the House of Representatives so it actually, you know, represents people? That is far more supportive of individual choice, as our individual views are more fairly represented in government.

The latter, which then implicates the former. The intent is for fair and equal representation, and the observation is that this has been seriously skewed ever since the 1929 Reapportionment Act in favor of the GOP, which also creates an artificial skew in the Electoral College, which creates an artificial skew in the Supreme Court. So it’s actively skewing multiple branches of government. It should be one person one vote, which does not exist when one vote in Texas is weighed very differently than one vote in Wyoming.

This is not an anti-conservative sentiment, even while it is deeply critical of the GOP as a social holon. Because the result of what is effectively a national gerrymandering strategy is that conservatism no longer needs to compete fairly in the marketplace of ideas, and therefore rarely blossoms any more as a modern, rational, worldcentric political philosophy. It doesn’t need to evolve its messaging or widen its platform. It incentivizes regression. It can rely on a “always double down, no apologies” strategy. And it breaks our national sense of institutional legitimacy, because for example, we find ourselves in a position where Republican presidential candidates have only won the majority of the popular vote two times since 1988, and yet have nominated the vast majority of Supreme Court justices over the decades, resulting in a severely lopsided court that does not accurately represent the views and values of the majority of this country.

All of this is bad not because I think conservatism is bad, but because it prevents mature worldcentric conservatism from actually thriving. And it can only do so by competing on a level playing field within the marketplace of ideas (forgive my mixed metaphors).

There was actually a time not long ago when I was convinced that, after Bush and Cheney had completely cratered the GOP brand, the Republican Party would have little choice but to go Integral. Demographic and political selection pressures would force them to find a way to communicate their principles across multiple value stages. They would be forced to fully integrate and transcend orange and green, rather than remain an amber/orange reaction to green. The Democrats sure aren’t going to do it, Green is too new of an altitude, and the Democratic Party is too invested in it, as they probably should be.

At the time, I thought the only way through for Republicans was up. It may take a decade or so, but they will soon re-emerge as a more sophisticated and integral (on the inside) party, while being able to maintain their traditional amber/orange base. I thought they had nowhere else to go but up.

Then Trump came along. Holy fuck was I wrong.

Anyway, back to your question — as I said, when I was coming up with this list, I wanted to create some steps that could make everyone lean in, regardless of their political affiliation. #1 is definitely going to be more immediately appealing to the left than it is to the right. But whatever gains the left may make by executing #1, are then immediately tempered by #2, since Ranked Choice voting means people can no longer run purely on being “anti-right” or “anti-left”. You have to actually represent something, and actually compete in the marketplace of ideas.

So each of these are going to be more appealing to certain affiliations, but all of them have Trojan Horse benefits for all affiliations. Including #3 – as I mention, this one is about creating a healthy amber foundation of skin-in-the-game nationalism in this country, and to return us to a healthy martial culture. This is more immediately appealing to pro-2A folks on the right. But it’s also a Trojan Horse for development, because putting different kinds of people in service of something greater than themselves adds a lot of lubrication to the conveyor belt, simply by exposing people to new places, new people, and new perspectives.


@corey-devos It’s ok if we don’t agree or don’t disagree. This conversation has circled several times around Qnon, which I still can’t find anywhere except in Leftist circles. All I’m saying is of all the “conservatives” that I know, I don’t see any as having “unhealthy nationalism”. Do they exist? I’m sure they do. Just as I am quite confident there are Leftists/Democrats that intend to take over the US with their satanic cult, practice pedophilia, sacrifice children and by standards of civilized society should be summarily executed. I don’t blather on about “sanctity of life” or “600,000 systemic genocidal abortions per year creating a human tissue supply chain”. Is it constructive to continually weave quips like this into our discussions? Of course not.

Is perhaps the Integral Theory map out of alignment with humanity? Perhaps the definitions of Blue and Orange and Green and Teal need to be revisited?
Are there unfolding parallel development paths, alternate noospheres that might not look like a collectivist bureaucratic nirvana? And would the IT community be able to see something positive outside of the IT model/map?

If the Democrats / Far Left “accurately represent the views and values of the majority of this country”, why haven’t the Democrats packed SCOTUS, adopted the Wyoming Rule, abolished the Electroal College, defunded the police, locked up all Qnon members and installed their new Parliamentarian World Order?


We can absolutely disagree here, but I would invite you to consider the following polling, which suggests that:

  • One in five Americans, and 28% of Republicans, agree that there is a “storm coming soon,” which will “sweep away the elites in power and restore the rightful leaders,” according to the poll.

  • Shockingly, 28% of Republicans also say that “because things have gotten so far off track” in the U.S., “true American patriots may have to resort to violence” to save the country.

  • Some 23% of Republicans, and 15% of all Americans, say they agree with the baseless QAnon allegation that “the government, media and financial worlds in the U.S. are controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking operation.”

  • More than four in ten Americans who say they most trust far-right news outlets, such as OANN and Newsmax, subscribe to QAnon conspiracy theories.

All taken from that liberal rag, Forbes :slight_smile:

I think we underestimate Qanon at our own peril. We even have active Q-believers in congress right now.

Is perhaps the Integral Theory map out of alignment with humanity? Perhaps the definitions of Blue and Orange and Green and Teal need to be revisited?

I mean, I don’t think so? The altitudes are not necessarily correlated with different political leanings, even though social holons tend to aggregate at one stage or another. You can be a green conservative (rare, but much needed here in the era of climate change), a turquoise libertarian, an amber liberal, etc. Which is great, because all these ideologies are too narrow on their own to be applied comprehensively, but we have a system that ideally facilitates enfoldment between different perspectives and philosophies. The integral challenge, meanwhile, is how to put everything “in its right place”. If we have a red-altitude libertarian (very common) arguing with a modern orange conservative, it is worth tracking those Kosmic addresses for the sake of better sense-making.

If the Democrats / Far Left “accurately represent the views and values of the majority of this country”, why haven’t the Democrats packed SCOTUS, adopted the Wyoming Rule, abolished the Electroal College, defunded the police, locked up all Qnon members and installed their new Parliamentarian World Order?

First, I never said the far-left accurately represents the views and values of the majority of the country, that was an attempt to put straw in my mouth :slight_smile:

Neither the far left nor the far right represent the majority of this country.

However, demographically, democrats do outnumber republicans, yes. Which is why the GOP has only won the popular vote twice since 1988z

As for the rest of your questions, I think it’s because a) the Democrats are not nearly as totalitarian as you make them out to be, b) many Democrats are still playing “decorum games”, even though I think they are just playing with themselves, c) the Democrats have much less backbone and a much more diverse coalition, which means they often disagree with each other and have a very difficult time getting on the same page (Manchin, Sinema, etc.), d) today’s McConnell-led GOP has taken the political strategy of obstruction in order to prevent the left from achieving anything that could be perceived as “victory”, because it ruins their narrative that government can only be harmful that has been prevalent since Reagan.

Oh, and e) many Democrats have been captured by the same plutocratic interests that have infiltrated the GOP.


Would you consider Pro Life Conservatives as Qanon?
Do you support systematic genocide of human fetuses and industrialization of resulting human fetal materials?
You ok with violent demonstration like we’ve seen from Antifa, BLM in our Democrat managed for decades as necessary?
What’s the difference between an anti-theist promoting systematic eugenics and a satan worshipper?
Do you think citizens with a 7th grade reading proficiency can articulate the difference?
And most importantly how do you recommend the Integral Community “include and transform” this world?


These feel like non sequitors to me, but I’ll bite.

No, I consider people who self-identify as Qanon and/or share their conspiracy beliefs to be Qanon. Yes, there is likely a Venn diagram to be drawn between Qanon adherents and christian fundamentalists.

Talk about a loaded question. No, I disagree with the premise that first trimester abotions are “genocide”.

No, I always prefer nonviolent resistance and protest, which is why I am happy that the VAST majority of BLM protests across the country engaged in by millions and millions of people have been overwhelmingly non-violent, despite the appearance of violent opportunists and provacateurs that are attracted to every protest movement since Civil Rights. And the ones who were violent deserve full legal consequences for their actions.

I like how this decades-old cartoon kind of snaps things into focus :slight_smile:

And I also understand what John Kennedy was saying when he said “those who make nonviolent revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable.” This is not condoning violence, it is understanding that violence becomes imminent if harmful social structures and policies do not change with the will of the people.

One believes in supernatural characters, the other doesn’t? I’m not sure what the point you are trying to make is, other than rationalizing the prominence of Qanon beliefs among Republican voters.

Now that’s the money question. You “include and transform” not by making room for batshit conspiracy theories in our national discourse, but by addressing the conditions that are creating the guano in the first place. Namely – a) economic anxiety due to four decades of neoliberal trade policies, b) declining perceptions of media legitimacy due to the rise of the internet, the collapse of old media, and the corporate buyouts of those media organizations, c) the massive influx of propaganda and disinformation that has resulted from this deligitimization of media, d) the rise of the mind-and-behavior-changing social media paradigm that appeal exclusively to our confirmation biases, and e) declining perceptions of government legitimacy that can be directly traced from Vietnam to Nixon to Clinton’s BJ to Bush’s invasion of Iraq on false pretenses.

Each of these requires their own four-quadrant interventions, I imagine. But in every case, you transcend and include these people, by solving or improving the fundamental life conditions that give rise to these pathologies in the first place.

But if one person says 2+2=4, and another says 2+2=5, the ‘compromise’ is not to agree that 2+2=4.5. Bad views are not included, they are negated. But we always do our best to include the underlying values that tend to animate those views, either directly or in their absence.


Did you read the Survey as presented to those who responded? (Linked Here)

Any thoughts on Education vs Propaganda?


I did look at the raw data in order to see how neutrally the questions were presented, yes.

Yes – lack of education creates an open space for propaganda to thrive :slight_smile:

Question for you – would you agree that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence to save the country" represents “unhealthy nationalism”?

Do you believe that 15% of Americans (nearly 1/4 of Republicans) believing the world is run by “Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking operation” is troublesome, and indicative of a major current of popular right-wing thought among the electorate? Because 23% of a major political party is a lot of people.


Lol. The 2nd Amendment specifically calls out the right to bear arms and shall not be infringed, for exactly this reason. Isnt it healthy to have integrated across all 4 quadrants red, amber, blue, orange, green and teal altitudes?

There are many, including myself, that have grave concerns of the unaccompanied children flowing across our southern border and our current Adminstration seemingly promoting it. This is FAR outside western standards of caring and basic child welfare.


Oh sorry, the full quote was “because things have gotten so far off track, true American patriots may have to resort to violence to save the country”.

Meaning more than 1/4 of Republicans believe that, right now, they may need to take up arms against fellow Americans, because they themselves are “true American patriots”.

You seriously don’t see why this would be alarming?

It was verbatim the question in the poll, which you yourself linked above. Just search for the word “satan” :slight_smile:

Q9. Do you agree or disagree with each of the following?

Q9a. The government, media, and financial worlds in the U.S. are controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex trafficking operation

5 Completely agree
10 Mostly agree
19 Mostly disagree
63 Completely disagree
3 Skipped/Refused

100 Total

That’s 15% of Americans, and 24% of Republicans.

I thought this one was interesting too:

Q9d. The chaos in America today is evidence that we are living in what the Bible calls “the end times”

11 Completely agree
22 Mostly agree
23 Mostly disagree
42 Completely disagree
3 Skipped/Refused

100 Total

Holy crap, one third of Americans believe we live in the Biblical end times!

I think this is a dodge my friend :slight_smile: What you said is not the same as “satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global sex-trafficking operation”, which is a core Qanon belief – and which, again, is believed by 23% of Republican voters.


Not dodging my friend. You’re trying to stick to a strawman description that doesn’t hold up.
Does the current Administration choose to enforce policies in such a way that children without their partners are brought to the US by non relatives? Yes many believe this.
Again, I’ll ask you if you think fair to continually cast judgement on people that have perhaps a 7th grade reading level simply because they fail to utilize recently derived multisyllabic academic vernacular?
Call it “that’s fucked up” or “really f’ing creepy” or “that ain’t right” or given the only option of “satanic”, it’s against our norms to promote policy enforcement such that it separates children from their parents and puts them in the hands of coyotes to be delivered to their Salvadorian “uncle”.


Being alarmed is your choice while your neighbor probably sleeps better at night. We’ve got the 2nd Amendment for a reason. It’s always been an option.
Get after amending the Constitution, then you can round up the 434M firearms in the US, implement your Parliamentarian form of government, and sleep like a baby.

Regardless of the alarming fearmongering, I think if the 434M firearms in the US were a significant issue we wouldn’t be having this civil discourse. LOL

And for a bit of levity: