EP 026 The Extremism of Questioning Authority: The Conspiracy of When Skepticism Becomes a Threat


When Thinking for Yourself Becomes Dangerous | Cultural Commentary | Skeptical Thinking
Episode Summary
In this episode, Tracy Brinkmann explores the cultural disruption caused by the transformation of questioning authority from a civic duty to a form of extremism. By examining historical patterns such as Soviet psychiatric hospitals, McCarthyism, and medieval heresy, Brinkmann reveals how institutions systematically redefine skepticism as a threat to democracy to silence dissent. This episode delves into how modern systems coordinate to label critical thinking and inquiry as dangerous, replacing legal punishment with social and economic pressure, thus fostering self-censorship.
Listeners will discover how language has evolved to frame disruptive thought as extremist behavior and how the weaponization of expertise is used to shut down legitimate questions. Despite these challenges, resistance networks of journalists, researchers, advocates, and citizens persist in their pursuit of intellectual freedom and democratic dissent.
Join us as we ask: When did thinking for yourself become more dangerous than the policies being questioned? How do we differentiate legitimate authority from authoritarian control? And why are the foundational questions that built democracy now treated as threats to it? Welcome to a critical exploration of intellectual freedom, cultural disruption, and the ongoing fight against thought policing.
Check Out The Dark Horse Entrepreneur AI Escape Plan Podcast (Our Sponsor) – https://DarkHorseEntrepreneur.com
Key Points
- Language Evolution: Extremism redefined from violent action to disruptive thought, questioning motives to questioning reality
- Institutional Coordination: Simultaneous shift across governments, media, platforms treating skepticism as extremism
- Historical Patterns: Soviet psychiatric hospitals, Nazi degeneracy labels, McCarthyism, medieval heresy - all criminalized questioning power
- Self-Censorship Mechanism: Social and economic pressure replacing legal punishment, people stop asking questions due to consequences
- Expertise Weaponization: "Trust the experts" used to shut down inquiry rather than encourage it
- Resistance Networks: Journalists, researchers, advocates, politicians, and citizens continuing to ask uncomfortable questions despite being labeled extremist
Critical Questions
- When did thinking for yourself become more dangerous than the policies you're thinking about?
- How do we distinguish between legitimate authority and authoritarian control?
- Why are the same questions that built democracy now treated as threats to it?
Notable Quote
"When asking who benefits becomes more dangerous than the policies that benefit them, when questioning motives gets you labeled as a threat to society, when thinking for yourself requires more courage than following orders, you're not living in a free society. You are living in a managed one."
https://SomeUnapprovedThinking.com
questioning authority extremism, criminalized skepticism, thought policing, institutional control, democratic dissent, narrative management, intellectual freedom, civic responsibility, pattern recognition, critical thinking suppression
00:00:00,210 --> 00:00:01,590
Beneath the headlines.
2
00:00:01,980 --> 00:00:06,090
Behind the timelines, there is a
story no one wants you to find.
3
00:00:06,540 --> 00:00:12,960
Welcome to some unapproved thinking, where
forgotten truths, buried patterns, and
4
00:00:12,960 --> 00:00:15,750
invisible systems rise to the surface.
5
00:00:16,110 --> 00:00:18,840
You weren't crazy, you were just early.
6
00:00:19,350 --> 00:00:20,100
Let's begin.
7
00:00:20,430 --> 00:00:23,910
There was a time when questioning
power was called patriotism,
8
00:00:24,600 --> 00:00:27,060
when skepticism was civic duty.
9
00:00:27,450 --> 00:00:29,310
When asking who benefits.
10
00:00:29,670 --> 00:00:31,020
Was how democracy worked.
11
00:00:31,260 --> 00:00:34,080
I remember the exact moment I
realized something had flipped.
12
00:00:34,500 --> 00:00:38,010
I was sitting in a coffee shop overhearing
a conversation at the next table.
13
00:00:38,580 --> 00:00:41,070
A woman was telling her friend,
she'd stopped asking certain
14
00:00:41,070 --> 00:00:44,520
questions at work, not because
she'd found answers, but because
15
00:00:44,550 --> 00:00:46,380
asking them had become problematic.
16
00:00:46,590 --> 00:00:49,140
The questions themselves
had become the problem.
17
00:00:49,410 --> 00:00:50,310
That's when it hit me.
18
00:00:50,850 --> 00:00:54,690
Somewhere along the way, the same
questions that built this country
19
00:00:54,690 --> 00:00:56,460
got reclassified as threats to it.
20
00:00:56,730 --> 00:01:01,380
The same skepticism that once protected
democracy became evidence of extremism.
21
00:01:01,860 --> 00:01:04,379
When did thinking for yourself
become more dangerous than the
22
00:01:04,379 --> 00:01:05,220
policies you're thinking about?
23
00:01:06,285 --> 00:01:09,075
When did asking basic questions
about power become a form of
24
00:01:09,075 --> 00:01:10,274
violence against the state?
25
00:01:10,545 --> 00:01:14,085
When did the burden of proof
shift from those making claims
26
00:01:14,235 --> 00:01:15,375
to those questioning them?
27
00:01:15,615 --> 00:01:19,245
Tonight we ask what happens when
the people in power decide that
28
00:01:19,245 --> 00:01:21,045
questioning them is extremism.
29
00:01:21,335 --> 00:01:23,735
This is some unapproved thinking.
30
00:01:24,155 --> 00:01:28,265
Thank you to our sponsor, the
Dark Horse Entrepreneur Podcast.
31
00:01:28,655 --> 00:01:33,395
Unlock your potential with the Dark
Horse entrepreneur AI escape Plan, the
32
00:01:33,395 --> 00:01:37,895
podcast empowering hardworking parents
to break free from the nine to five
33
00:01:37,895 --> 00:01:40,235
grind through AI powered side hustles.
34
00:01:40,625 --> 00:01:43,325
Check them out@darkhorseentrepreneur.com.
35
00:01:43,895 --> 00:01:44,825
Now back to the show.
36
00:01:45,275 --> 00:01:49,085
We live in an age where information
moves faster than verification.
37
00:01:49,545 --> 00:01:53,685
Where narratives solidify before
facts can catch up, where questioning
38
00:01:53,685 --> 00:01:57,225
official explanations can get you
labeled as dangerous, potentially
39
00:01:57,225 --> 00:02:01,005
as dangerous as the very threats
those explanations claim to address.
40
00:02:01,335 --> 00:02:05,445
I've watched this transformation from the
inside, from corporate boardrooms, where
41
00:02:05,445 --> 00:02:09,525
we'd craft narratives for big brands,
watching how easily language could be
42
00:02:09,525 --> 00:02:15,255
shaped, twisted, made to serve interests
that had nothing to do with truth.
43
00:02:15,810 --> 00:02:17,940
Back then I thought I
was just doing marketing.
44
00:02:18,090 --> 00:02:21,329
I didn't realize I was watching the
blueprint for something much bigger.
45
00:02:21,630 --> 00:02:24,630
The post pandemic world
accelerated a troubling trend.
46
00:02:25,170 --> 00:02:29,280
The redefinition of extremism
from violent action to disruptive
47
00:02:29,280 --> 00:02:33,690
thought, questioning motives became
questioning legitimacy, questioning
48
00:02:33,690 --> 00:02:35,910
outcomes became questioning reality.
49
00:02:36,299 --> 00:02:39,839
Asking who benefits became
a sign of radicalization
50
00:02:39,959 --> 00:02:41,130
rather than rational inquiry.
51
00:02:41,940 --> 00:02:45,990
The speed and uniformity of this
shift across governments, media,
52
00:02:45,990 --> 00:02:51,570
platforms, and institutions suggests
coordination rather than coincidence.
53
00:02:51,900 --> 00:02:54,720
The same people who once celebrated
skeptical thinking as essential to
54
00:02:54,720 --> 00:02:58,590
democracy now treat it as a threat
to stability when the questions
55
00:02:58,590 --> 00:03:00,120
themselves become the problem.
56
00:03:00,720 --> 00:03:05,040
When curiosity gets classified as
conspiracy, when thinking for yourself
57
00:03:05,040 --> 00:03:09,510
gets labeled as extremism, you're not
witnessing the protection of democracy.
58
00:03:09,825 --> 00:03:10,725
You're witnessing.
59
00:03:10,905 --> 00:03:14,025
Its systematic dismantling.
60
00:03:14,415 --> 00:03:17,055
Let me walk you through how
questioning authority became more
61
00:03:17,055 --> 00:03:18,735
dangerous than the authority itself.
62
00:03:18,945 --> 00:03:20,355
Because this didn't happen overnight.
63
00:03:20,745 --> 00:03:21,855
It happened gradually.
64
00:03:22,275 --> 00:03:23,565
Crisis by crisis.
65
00:03:23,925 --> 00:03:28,305
Each emergency, creating new
opportunities to redefine what
66
00:03:28,305 --> 00:03:30,315
counts as acceptable thought.
67
00:03:30,735 --> 00:03:32,985
I've watched this
transformation from the inside.
68
00:03:33,165 --> 00:03:36,705
The language shift was subtle,
but systematic extremism stopped
69
00:03:36,705 --> 00:03:39,525
meaning violent action and started
meaning disruptive thought.
70
00:03:39,765 --> 00:03:42,735
Questioning motives became
questioning legitimacy.
71
00:03:43,005 --> 00:03:45,525
Questioning outcomes
became questioning reality.
72
00:03:45,855 --> 00:03:49,515
The definition expanded until almost
any critique of official narratives
73
00:03:49,515 --> 00:03:51,405
could land you on a spectrum of threat.
74
00:03:51,735 --> 00:03:56,385
What makes this suspicious isn't just
the shift itself, it's the speed and
75
00:03:56,385 --> 00:03:58,845
uniformity across different institutions.
76
00:03:59,190 --> 00:04:04,320
Governments, media platforms, academic
institutions, corporate policies, they
77
00:04:04,320 --> 00:04:10,049
all moved simultaneously toward treating
skepticism as a form of extremism.
78
00:04:10,260 --> 00:04:12,450
That level of coordination
doesn't happen organically.
79
00:04:12,779 --> 00:04:16,260
Here's how the framework operates
in practice, you question the
80
00:04:16,260 --> 00:04:17,700
effectiveness of a policy.
81
00:04:18,599 --> 00:04:18,750
They tell.
82
00:04:18,750 --> 00:04:22,620
You're questioning the science
you question the science they tell
83
00:04:22,620 --> 00:04:24,090
you you're questioning expertise.
84
00:04:24,419 --> 00:04:27,750
You question expertise, they tell you
you're questioning reality itself.
85
00:04:28,109 --> 00:04:32,219
Each step moves you further along the
extremism spectrum without you ever
86
00:04:32,219 --> 00:04:34,320
advocating for violence or illegal action.
87
00:04:34,530 --> 00:04:39,179
The beauty of this system is that it
exploits people's deepest fear not being
88
00:04:39,179 --> 00:04:42,120
wrong, but being labeled the label.
89
00:04:42,120 --> 00:04:43,950
Extremist carries social stigma.
90
00:04:43,950 --> 00:04:47,280
That implies danger,
irrationality, moral failure.
91
00:04:47,580 --> 00:04:50,164
So people self-censor
soften their questions.
92
00:04:51,015 --> 00:04:52,635
Stop asking them publicly.
93
00:04:52,965 --> 00:04:56,205
The system becomes
self-enforcing through fear.
94
00:04:56,505 --> 00:04:59,115
The accusation itself
becomes the punishment.
95
00:04:59,594 --> 00:05:02,175
You don't need to prove
someone is actually extreme.
96
00:05:02,505 --> 00:05:04,780
You just need to successfully
label them as such.
97
00:05:05,475 --> 00:05:08,655
The label does the work of
discrediting without requiring
98
00:05:08,655 --> 00:05:10,725
evidence of actual extremist behavior.
99
00:05:11,025 --> 00:05:13,065
But here's what's most telling
about this whole operation.
100
00:05:13,305 --> 00:05:17,085
The same institutions redefining extremism
to include questioning are the ones
101
00:05:17,085 --> 00:05:20,475
whose credibility has been systematically
destroyed by their own failures.
102
00:05:20,745 --> 00:05:25,125
Trust in media, government expert
institutions has collapsed, but instead
103
00:05:25,125 --> 00:05:27,945
of rebuilding credibility through
transparency and accountability,
104
00:05:28,215 --> 00:05:31,185
they chose to criminalize the
skepticism their failures created.
105
00:05:31,575 --> 00:05:36,435
When institutions lose legitimacy through
their own actions, they have two choices.
106
00:05:36,615 --> 00:05:40,035
Reform themselves or redefine
criticism as extremism.
107
00:05:40,605 --> 00:05:41,895
Guess which one they chose?
108
00:05:42,315 --> 00:05:45,225
The pattern reveals itself when
you look at who gets labeled
109
00:05:45,225 --> 00:05:46,545
extreme and who doesn't?
110
00:05:47,205 --> 00:05:50,175
Questioning certain narratives
makes you a dangerous extremist.
111
00:05:50,685 --> 00:05:53,745
Questioning other narratives
makes you a brave truth teller.
112
00:05:54,075 --> 00:05:55,905
The difference isn't
the act of questioning.
113
00:05:56,265 --> 00:06:01,125
It's whose interests your questions serve
or threaten when asking Who benefits.
114
00:06:01,875 --> 00:06:05,685
Becomes more dangerous than
the policies that benefit them.
115
00:06:06,045 --> 00:06:07,545
You're not living in a democracy.
116
00:06:07,815 --> 00:06:10,755
You're living in a system where power
protects itself by criminalizing
117
00:06:10,755 --> 00:06:12,195
the questions that could expose it.
118
00:06:12,570 --> 00:06:17,190
This pattern of criminalizing dissent
by redefining it as extremism isn't new.
119
00:06:17,460 --> 00:06:21,210
Many have spent years tracing how failing
institutions use the same strategy to
120
00:06:21,210 --> 00:06:24,750
protect themselves from accountability,
and the playbook is remarkably consistent.
121
00:06:24,900 --> 00:06:26,880
The Soviet Union perfected this technique.
122
00:06:27,210 --> 00:06:30,900
Citizens who questioned party policies
weren't treated as political opponents.
123
00:06:31,140 --> 00:06:33,240
They were diagnosed with mental illness.
124
00:06:33,599 --> 00:06:37,620
Sluggish schizophrenia became
the official explanation for why
125
00:06:37,620 --> 00:06:40,865
someone would oppose the obviously
correct policies of the state.
126
00:06:41,820 --> 00:06:44,910
The dissent itself was evidence
of the mental disorder.
127
00:06:45,300 --> 00:06:45,990
Brilliant.
128
00:06:46,140 --> 00:06:49,890
If you think about it, I mean,
after all, you can't argue with
129
00:06:49,890 --> 00:06:51,930
a medical diagnosis, can you?
130
00:06:52,290 --> 00:06:55,470
Nazi Germany used similar methods
before resorting to violence.
131
00:06:55,860 --> 00:06:57,810
Critics of the regime weren't just wrong.
132
00:06:58,050 --> 00:07:01,290
They were diseased, degenerate
threats to social health.
133
00:07:01,710 --> 00:07:05,310
The questioning itself became evidence
of moral and mental deficiency that
134
00:07:05,310 --> 00:07:07,620
justified exclusion from normal society.
135
00:07:07,980 --> 00:07:12,180
McCarthyism in America followed the same
pattern, questioning certain foreign
136
00:07:12,180 --> 00:07:14,070
policies or economic arrangements.
137
00:07:14,070 --> 00:07:15,570
Wasn't political disagreement.
138
00:07:15,570 --> 00:07:19,560
It was evidence of un-American thinking
that threatened national security.
139
00:07:19,920 --> 00:07:23,370
The questions themselves
became proof of disloyalty.
140
00:07:23,760 --> 00:07:26,790
The church's response to scientific
inquiry during the medieval period
141
00:07:26,850 --> 00:07:28,980
provides another parallel questioning.
142
00:07:28,980 --> 00:07:32,010
Religious explanations for
natural phenomena wasn't
143
00:07:32,040 --> 00:07:33,330
intellectual disagreement.
144
00:07:33,600 --> 00:07:36,150
It was heresy that
threatened the social order.
145
00:07:36,540 --> 00:07:39,660
The act of questioning
established truth was treated
146
00:07:39,660 --> 00:07:41,550
as a form of spiritual violence.
147
00:07:42,000 --> 00:07:43,845
I've seen this pattern in my own lifetime.
148
00:07:44,310 --> 00:07:48,780
The response to anti-war movements during
Vietnam followed this script questioning.
149
00:07:48,780 --> 00:07:50,550
The war wasn't patriotic descent.
150
00:07:50,970 --> 00:07:53,160
It was giving aid and
comfort to the enemy.
151
00:07:53,505 --> 00:07:56,474
The questions themselves were
treated as if they were acts
152
00:07:56,474 --> 00:07:57,880
of treason More recently.
153
00:07:58,650 --> 00:08:02,370
After nine 11, questioning certain
aspects of the official narrative or the
154
00:08:02,370 --> 00:08:06,660
policies that followed wasn't legitimate
inquiry, it was conspiracy theorizing that
155
00:08:06,660 --> 00:08:08,280
threatened the overall national unity.
156
00:08:08,580 --> 00:08:12,150
This pattern keeps
repeating because it works.
157
00:08:12,660 --> 00:08:14,820
The strategy serves multiple purposes.
158
00:08:15,330 --> 00:08:18,720
It discredits the critics without
addressing their criticisms.
159
00:08:18,870 --> 00:08:23,775
It creates social pressure for others to
avoid similar questions, and it allows.
160
00:08:24,445 --> 00:08:28,945
Institutions to maintain their authority
without having to justify their actions.
161
00:08:29,275 --> 00:08:32,155
Understanding this history
helps explain why questioning
162
00:08:32,155 --> 00:08:35,664
authority has been redefined as
extremism in our current moment.
163
00:08:35,965 --> 00:08:39,655
It's not because the questions are
actually extreme, it's because the
164
00:08:39,655 --> 00:08:44,875
institutions being questioned cannot or
will not provide satisfactory answers.
165
00:08:45,255 --> 00:08:49,365
Now let me show you the mechanics
of how questioning gets criminalized
166
00:08:49,755 --> 00:08:53,324
because once you see this pattern,
you'll recognize it everywhere.
167
00:08:53,714 --> 00:08:55,635
The pattern always begins with crisis.
168
00:08:55,635 --> 00:09:00,854
Creating opportunities for redefinition
real or manufactured emergencies provide
169
00:09:00,854 --> 00:09:05,870
justification for expanding the definition
of threats to include nonviolent dissent.
170
00:09:06,439 --> 00:09:10,280
Each crisis leaves behind new authorities
and new restrictions that become
171
00:09:10,280 --> 00:09:11,990
the baseline for the next expansion.
172
00:09:12,260 --> 00:09:17,360
Then there is the language evolution
that follows very predictable stages.
173
00:09:17,930 --> 00:09:20,719
At first, extremism means violent action.
174
00:09:21,140 --> 00:09:22,430
That seems fair, right?
175
00:09:22,729 --> 00:09:27,260
Then it gets modified to
include incitement to violence.
176
00:09:27,620 --> 00:09:31,849
Then it gets modified again
to include spreading ideas
177
00:09:31,849 --> 00:09:33,110
that might lead to violence.
178
00:09:33,380 --> 00:09:35,959
Finally, there will be
yet another modification.
179
00:09:36,315 --> 00:09:40,545
So that it includes questioning
narratives that authorities claim are
180
00:09:40,545 --> 00:09:42,615
essential for preventing violence.
181
00:09:42,975 --> 00:09:46,425
The expansion gets justified by connecting
dots that may not actually connect.
182
00:09:46,665 --> 00:09:50,775
If questioning a policy could
theoretically lead to distrust, and
183
00:09:50,775 --> 00:09:55,515
distrust could theoretically lead to
unrest, and unrest could theoretically
184
00:09:55,875 --> 00:10:00,555
lead to violence, then questioning the
policy becomes a form of violence itself.
185
00:10:01,155 --> 00:10:04,275
It's guilt by theoretical
association, you know.
186
00:10:04,680 --> 00:10:08,490
The beauty of this whole damn silly
ass system is its flexibility.
187
00:10:09,240 --> 00:10:13,890
The definition of extremism can
be expanded or contracted based
188
00:10:13,890 --> 00:10:15,600
solely upon political needs.
189
00:10:15,930 --> 00:10:21,900
Questions that were acceptable to ask
just yesterday can become extreme today
190
00:10:22,290 --> 00:10:24,000
if they threaten the wrong interests.
191
00:10:24,300 --> 00:10:28,710
The same act of questioning can be
patriotic or extremist depending on who's
192
00:10:28,710 --> 00:10:32,850
doing the asking and who's doing labeling
and the the enforcement mechanism.
193
00:10:33,585 --> 00:10:37,425
It relies on social and economic pressure
rather than actual legal punishment.
194
00:10:37,935 --> 00:10:40,425
You don't get arrested for
asking questions, nope.
195
00:10:40,845 --> 00:10:45,975
Instead, you get de platformed
demonetized, professionally
196
00:10:45,975 --> 00:10:48,910
marginalized or socially ostracized.
197
00:10:49,635 --> 00:10:52,485
The punishment is real, but
it's distributed across multiple
198
00:10:52,485 --> 00:10:56,445
institutions in ways that make it
seem organic rather than coordinated.
199
00:10:56,835 --> 00:11:00,795
And one of the most insidious aspects
is how the system makes people
200
00:11:00,795 --> 00:11:02,835
complicit in their own censorship.
201
00:11:03,285 --> 00:11:07,425
When the social costs of questioning
become high enough, people will stop
202
00:11:07,425 --> 00:11:10,905
asking questions, not because they're
legally prohibited, but because they
203
00:11:10,905 --> 00:11:13,275
just can't afford the consequences.
204
00:11:13,605 --> 00:11:16,365
But here's where it gets
really sophisticated.
205
00:11:16,860 --> 00:11:23,850
Expertise gets weaponized against inquiry
question, a policy they tell you to trust.
206
00:11:23,850 --> 00:11:26,040
The experts question the experts.
207
00:11:27,030 --> 00:11:29,339
They tell you you're not
qualified to have an opinion.
208
00:11:29,670 --> 00:11:32,939
Point out that experts have
been wrong before they tell you.
209
00:11:32,939 --> 00:11:35,670
You're undermining the
entire concept of expertise.
210
00:11:35,670 --> 00:11:40,620
This creates a closed loop where
questioning becomes impossible without
211
00:11:40,620 --> 00:11:44,579
being labeled as anti-intellectual,
anti-science, or anti expert.
212
00:11:44,985 --> 00:11:45,825
Sound familiar.
213
00:11:46,125 --> 00:11:50,895
The credentials he says with air quotes
become more important than the arguments,
214
00:11:51,105 --> 00:11:54,285
and the arguments become irrelevant if
you don't have the right credentials.
215
00:11:54,780 --> 00:11:58,230
There really appears to be
coordination across institutions
216
00:11:58,230 --> 00:12:01,740
giving us a peak at the, the
systematic nature of the operation.
217
00:12:02,040 --> 00:12:06,810
When governments, media platforms,
academic institutions, and corporate
218
00:12:06,810 --> 00:12:12,060
policies all shift simultaneously
toward treating skepticism as extremism,
219
00:12:12,300 --> 00:12:16,230
you are witnessing a coordinated
implementation of a strategy that
220
00:12:16,230 --> 00:12:18,569
someone somewhere mapped out.
221
00:12:18,895 --> 00:12:24,535
Giving us a pattern that suggests that
criminalizing questions isn't a response
222
00:12:24,535 --> 00:12:31,165
to actual extremism, but rather it is a
preemptive strike against accountability.
223
00:12:31,645 --> 00:12:35,485
When institutions know they can't justify
their actions under scrutiny, they
224
00:12:35,485 --> 00:12:37,675
make the very scrutiny itself a crime.
225
00:12:38,035 --> 00:12:41,365
Now, as always, not everyone
has accepted this redefinition
226
00:12:41,365 --> 00:12:43,075
of questioning into extremism.
227
00:12:43,470 --> 00:12:46,290
Around the world, individuals and
institutions continue to choose
228
00:12:46,290 --> 00:12:49,650
intellectual courage over social
safety, and their resistance reveals
229
00:12:49,650 --> 00:12:52,710
both the scope of the pressure
and the possibility of resistance.
230
00:12:53,100 --> 00:12:55,800
Some journalists continued
investigating despite being labeled
231
00:12:55,800 --> 00:12:58,860
as spreaders of misinformation or even
being called conspiracy theorists.
232
00:12:59,069 --> 00:13:02,400
They understood that their job
was to ask these potentially
233
00:13:02,400 --> 00:13:06,660
uncomfortable questions, not to coddle
or protect institutional comfort.
234
00:13:06,990 --> 00:13:09,720
Their work faced systematic
marginalization, but they persisted
235
00:13:09,720 --> 00:13:13,050
anyway because they believe
democracy requires and will continue
236
00:13:13,050 --> 00:13:14,550
to require skeptical inquiry.
237
00:13:14,850 --> 00:13:18,630
There are academic researchers out
there who maintain a healthy scientific
238
00:13:18,630 --> 00:13:22,830
skepticism despite pressure to
conform to institutional narratives.
239
00:13:23,250 --> 00:13:27,390
They ask questions about data
methodologies and conclusions, even
240
00:13:27,390 --> 00:13:30,600
when those questions were labeled
as dangerous or even irresponsible
241
00:13:30,840 --> 00:13:36,150
for some their careers suffered,
but at least their integrity.
242
00:13:36,525 --> 00:13:37,545
Remains intact.
243
00:13:37,935 --> 00:13:41,385
Legal advocates defended the right
to question authority even when
244
00:13:41,385 --> 00:13:44,385
that questioning was unpopular
or politically inconvenient.
245
00:13:44,805 --> 00:13:47,475
They understand that the right
to civil dissent is fundamental
246
00:13:47,475 --> 00:13:50,535
to a democratic society, and they
fought to protect that, right?
247
00:13:50,535 --> 00:13:53,535
Even when it was exercised in ways
they personally disagreed with.
248
00:13:53,865 --> 00:13:57,135
Even some politicians continued
asking uncomfortable questions despite
249
00:13:57,135 --> 00:14:00,405
being labeled as extremists by their
colleagues as well as the media.
250
00:14:00,705 --> 00:14:04,005
They recognized that their job was
to represent their constituents
251
00:14:04,005 --> 00:14:07,755
concerns not to protect institutional
narratives from scrutiny.
252
00:14:08,115 --> 00:14:12,075
Citizens have formed independent research
networks and alternative information
253
00:14:12,075 --> 00:14:15,915
sources when mainstream channels
became unreliable or compromised.
254
00:14:16,215 --> 00:14:19,215
They are creating spaces where
questions could be asked and
255
00:14:19,215 --> 00:14:23,415
evidence could be examined without
fear of being labeled as extremist.
256
00:14:23,820 --> 00:14:26,850
International observers from
countries with experience of
257
00:14:26,850 --> 00:14:30,960
authoritarian control recognize the
patterns and have warned about the
258
00:14:30,960 --> 00:14:33,210
dangers of criminalizing dissent.
259
00:14:33,570 --> 00:14:37,140
They understand al to well that
the redefinition of extremism is
260
00:14:37,140 --> 00:14:40,770
often the first step toward more
comprehensive suppression of opposition.
261
00:14:41,160 --> 00:14:44,070
Whistleblowers continued
exposing institutional failures
262
00:14:44,070 --> 00:14:47,205
despite facing severe personal
and professional consequences.
263
00:14:47,905 --> 00:14:48,125
Why?
264
00:14:49,125 --> 00:14:52,334
Like you, they understand that
accountability requires people willing
265
00:14:52,334 --> 00:14:57,584
to ask questions and reveal uncomfortable
truths regardless of the personal cost.
266
00:14:57,885 --> 00:15:02,655
But as always, the most important
resistance continues to come from
267
00:15:02,655 --> 00:15:07,995
ordinary people like you and I who
refuse to stop asking questions despite
268
00:15:07,995 --> 00:15:10,035
social pressure and professional risks.
269
00:15:10,365 --> 00:15:13,485
We understand that democracy dies
when the citizens stop holding their
270
00:15:13,485 --> 00:15:17,655
institutions accountable, and they
chose civic duty over social acceptance.
271
00:15:18,060 --> 00:15:21,810
All these outliers show us that
the criminalization of questioning
272
00:15:21,840 --> 00:15:23,610
isn't inevitable or necessary.
273
00:15:23,910 --> 00:15:27,360
Every person who continues asking
uncomfortable questions, every
274
00:15:27,360 --> 00:15:31,320
institution that protects intellectual
freedom, every community that values
275
00:15:31,320 --> 00:15:34,680
skeptical inquiry helps maintain
space for democratic accountability.
276
00:15:35,760 --> 00:15:40,650
Look, I believe that understanding
how questioning gets criminalized
277
00:15:40,920 --> 00:15:45,180
changes everything about how you
evaluate institutional responses
278
00:15:45,180 --> 00:15:49,319
to criticism and how you protect
your own intellectual freedom.
279
00:15:49,829 --> 00:15:54,510
So remember when institutions respond
to criticism by attacking the character
280
00:15:54,510 --> 00:15:58,620
of critics rather than addressing
their arguments, you are witnessing
281
00:15:58,620 --> 00:16:00,689
the criminalization strategy in action.
282
00:16:00,900 --> 00:16:04,500
Real confidence in institutional
legitimacy welcomes scrutiny.
283
00:16:05,520 --> 00:16:08,550
Defensive responses that focus
on labeling rather than answering
284
00:16:08,550 --> 00:16:10,140
reveal institutional weakness.
285
00:16:10,560 --> 00:16:14,910
The phrase trust the experts should
be a glaring red flag, especially
286
00:16:15,330 --> 00:16:18,660
when it's used to shut down
inquiry rather than encourage it.
287
00:16:19,140 --> 00:16:22,710
Real expertise welcomes questions
and can explain its reasoning.
288
00:16:23,070 --> 00:16:25,770
Fake expertise hides behind
credentials and demands.
289
00:16:25,800 --> 00:16:29,775
Unquestioning acceptance, social
pressure, brought to bear.
290
00:16:30,570 --> 00:16:33,630
The goal of avoiding certain
questions becomes recognizable
291
00:16:33,750 --> 00:16:35,880
as a form of soft censorship.
292
00:16:36,210 --> 00:16:39,150
When asking legitimate questions
about institutional performance
293
00:16:39,150 --> 00:16:42,990
becomes socially costly, you're
experiencing the enforcement
294
00:16:42,990 --> 00:16:45,120
mechanism of intellectual control.
295
00:16:45,450 --> 00:16:50,310
Again, as I have mentioned many times
on this podcast, pattern recognition
296
00:16:50,310 --> 00:16:54,690
becomes more important than individual
issue analysis when the same techniques
297
00:16:54,690 --> 00:16:58,140
for criminalizing dissent appear
across different decades, different
298
00:16:58,140 --> 00:16:59,370
institutions, and different issues.
299
00:17:00,060 --> 00:17:03,210
Recognizing the pattern helps you
understand what's happening, even
300
00:17:03,210 --> 00:17:05,040
when the specific details vary.
301
00:17:05,400 --> 00:17:09,060
The value of independent information
sources becomes even more important
302
00:17:09,390 --> 00:17:14,250
when the mainstream channels clearly
participate in criminalizing questions.
303
00:17:14,670 --> 00:17:18,030
Maintaining access to alternative
perspectives becomes essential for
304
00:17:18,030 --> 00:17:21,925
your intellectual freedom when dominant
institutions work to suppress descent.
305
00:17:22,605 --> 00:17:26,055
Most importantly, you realize that
your right to question authority
306
00:17:26,055 --> 00:17:27,705
is not just a personal freedom.
307
00:17:27,915 --> 00:17:30,045
It is your civic responsibility.
308
00:17:30,405 --> 00:17:34,965
Democracy depends on citizens who are
willing to look around openly, curiously,
309
00:17:34,965 --> 00:17:39,315
investigate, ask uncomfortable questions,
and demand accountability from the very
310
00:17:39,315 --> 00:17:40,905
institutions that claim to serve them.
311
00:17:41,235 --> 00:17:44,715
The goal isn't to become a reflexive
contrarian who questions every
312
00:17:44,715 --> 00:17:45,885
single thing that's out there.
313
00:17:46,155 --> 00:17:50,445
The goal is to maintain the intellectual
freedom to question anything, especially
314
00:17:50,445 --> 00:17:53,415
when that questioning is actively
being discouraged or criminalized.
315
00:17:53,834 --> 00:17:56,235
They turned the very questions
that were once used to build
316
00:17:56,235 --> 00:17:58,665
democracy into threats against it.
317
00:17:59,235 --> 00:18:03,524
Skepticism became sedition
inquiry, became extremism.
318
00:18:04,215 --> 00:18:07,425
Thinking for yourself became a
form of violence against the state.
319
00:18:07,800 --> 00:18:10,140
I've watched this transformation
from corporate conference
320
00:18:10,140 --> 00:18:11,220
room to political gathering.
321
00:18:11,220 --> 00:18:15,390
Halls seen how the same techniques
we used to sell products got scaled
322
00:18:15,390 --> 00:18:17,550
up to sell entire worldviews.
323
00:18:17,850 --> 00:18:21,660
The playbook is ancient, but
the application is modern.
324
00:18:21,990 --> 00:18:24,390
The same techniques
used by failing empires.
325
00:18:24,510 --> 00:18:28,290
Corrupt churches and totalitarian
states are now being deployed by
326
00:18:28,290 --> 00:18:31,975
institutions that claim to protect
democracy while effectively chiseling
327
00:18:31,975 --> 00:18:33,215
away at its very foundations.
328
00:18:33,855 --> 00:18:37,545
When institutions lose legitimacy
through their own failures, they
329
00:18:37,545 --> 00:18:41,595
have two choices reform themselves
or criminalize the criticism.
330
00:18:42,075 --> 00:18:44,625
Seems many have chosen criminalization.
331
00:18:44,835 --> 00:18:48,165
They chose to make the questions
more dangerous than the problems.
332
00:18:48,165 --> 00:18:49,785
The questions try to expose.
333
00:18:50,175 --> 00:18:54,675
When asking who benefits becomes more
dangerous than the policies that benefit
334
00:18:54,675 --> 00:18:58,215
them when questioning motives gets
you labeled as a threat to society.
335
00:18:58,485 --> 00:19:01,605
When thinking for yourself requires
more courage than following orders,
336
00:19:01,845 --> 00:19:03,645
you're not living in a free society.
337
00:19:03,975 --> 00:19:05,715
You are living in a managed one.
338
00:19:06,045 --> 00:19:09,405
The real extremism is not in
the questions being asked.
339
00:19:10,500 --> 00:19:16,725
It is in the system that criminalizes
the act of questioning violence is not in
340
00:19:16,725 --> 00:19:19,275
the skepticism, it's in the suppression.
341
00:19:19,635 --> 00:19:23,355
Of that skepticism, the threat
to democracy is not coming from
342
00:19:23,355 --> 00:19:28,125
citizens who ask those uncomfortable
questions to me, it is coming from
343
00:19:28,125 --> 00:19:32,085
institutions that cannot or will not
damn well answer those questions.
344
00:19:32,445 --> 00:19:35,925
They're trying to get you to believe that
questioning authority is now extremism.
345
00:19:36,555 --> 00:19:40,965
But the truth, my dear friends, is
that not questioning authority is the
346
00:19:40,965 --> 00:19:43,365
real extremism you see in a democracy.
347
00:19:43,365 --> 00:19:45,015
Skepticism isn't sedition.
348
00:19:45,435 --> 00:19:46,425
It's citizenship.
349
00:19:46,695 --> 00:19:50,865
As you know, the official story is
rarely the whole story and the story
350
00:19:50,865 --> 00:19:55,695
of how questioning became extremism is
still being written and rewritten again
351
00:19:55,695 --> 00:19:59,745
and again by the very people who hope
you will stop asking questions long
352
00:19:59,745 --> 00:20:01,245
enough for them to finish writing it.
353
00:20:01,545 --> 00:20:06,525
Keep asking, keep questioning,
and of course, keep thinking for
354
00:20:06,525 --> 00:20:12,525
yourself because the moment you
stop democracy stops with you.
355
00:20:12,825 --> 00:20:13,365
Tracy.
356
00:20:14,355 --> 00:20:17,235
If this story didn't sit
right with you, good.
357
00:20:17,715 --> 00:20:19,185
You are not here to be comforted.
358
00:20:19,574 --> 00:20:22,095
You are here to see what others overlook.
359
00:20:22,514 --> 00:20:25,064
Thanks for exploring
some unapproved thinking.
360
00:20:25,544 --> 00:20:28,965
Learn more@someunapprovedthinking.com.
361
00:20:29,504 --> 00:20:31,274
New episodes, drop weekly.
362
00:20:31,695 --> 00:20:37,455
Subscribe, share, and keep questioning
because the pattern's still playing out.
363
00:20:37,875 --> 00:20:39,669
And next time we're going deeper.