THE SCROLL: Why Do We Care What Other People Think?
And Other Insipid Human Habits....
The Starfire Codes produces an audience-supported publication with a stellar podcast, consciousness-expanding daily spiritual content, and well-researched articles on forbidden but crucial topics.
If you love our work, please join our constellation of curious minds and venture into forbidden realms of knowledge.
Hit that like button!
Share with fellow seekers!
If you haven’t yet, please become a Paid Subscriber to support the cosmic quest for truth!
This is what we do full time. Thank you for all of the ways you support The Starfire Codes! It means the universe to us. 🌟
I wrote the following passage in response to
’s article How Many of These Conspiracy Theories Do You Believe? at his publication . If you’re not following his stack yet, please do.Christopher wrote a portion of the latest in his Freedom Music Friday series in reaction to how apt people are to buy into literally any conspiracy theory imaginable. He provided a rundown of his thoughts pertaining to that, which you can read within the article above, and then he commented, “I myself have a heuristic I use: Just because the mainstream says something does not make it true.”
This led to an interesting conversation that I wanted to share with those of you who may have missed it.
Agreeing with Christopher’s sentiment, I restacked his quote in
Notes and responded with the following:I love this, Christopher.
And I use the reverse as well: Just because the alt media says something that is the opposite of what the mainstream media said doesn’t make it true either.
I catch the alternative media spewing just as much tripe, and honestly, if one wanted to corral people in a certain secondary direction finding that they have proven allergic to the primary predictable thought pattern trajectory, it would be very simple to use this dualistic either/or tendency to do exactly that.
And I have caught this ploy in action.
“Alternative” does not mean “unquestionably factual.” So I am wary. I take nothing for rote - and I will consider anything without necessarily believing in it, mainly because we have been lied to so often that I feel a duty to pull up the hood and check.
We have to employ the same rigor/skepticism to anything we are exposed to, no matter who/where it came from, and open ourselves up to the possibility that everyone is likely incorrect about most things some of the time - and give everyone leeway to keep thinking it through if they are doing it in an attempt to learn and not an attempt to attack.
No gurus. No darlings. No buying into 100% of what any one person has to say just because we like them and want to identify with them. That’s exactly how everyone got into this mess in the first place - the cult of personality was leveraged against everyone to create a misguided sense of loyalty.
That said, there are a lot of “flat earthers” who, while I may not agree with flat earth conceptually, have other fantastic information that I am not willing to disregard just because those particular people happen to think in their estimations that the earth is likelier to be flat.
I’m not going to throw the baby out with the bath water just because we disagree about something - although, to be fair, I have been attacked by particularly rabid flat earthers who have not given me that same courtesy while others have - just as often as I have been attacked by closed-minded mainstreamers telling me to “die in a fire” because my views differed from theirs.
Same goes for terrain vs. germ. There are plenty of people who disagree with my stance, and I might disagree with theirs too. Does that mean I have to pick fights with them because we disagree and everyone has been conditioned to pick fights about literally everything in recent years like it’s their damn job? Absolutely not.
I am perfectly comfortable agreeing to disagree - unless someone wants to try to force me to do things I am not comfortable doing or starts off “conversations” by picking fights, lobbing ad hominem attacks and not having the discussion from the vantage point of actually wanting to approach some kind of mutual understanding. I have no time for that energy, I can tell the difference immediately (many people have PTSD from being gaslit for years and are simply preemptively anticipating arguments by raising their hackles on hello - that’s a different feel, and I prefer to make those people feel comfortable conversing, if possible), and I will disengage with anyone who thinks it is ok to behave that way.
Our civil discourse skills in recent years, as a culture, really do leave something to be desired. Our opinions have been weaponized against each other. And we should become aware of that, err on the side of kindness and grace (unless the other person really is some kind of irredeemable wretched asshat), and really try to knock it off.
Christopher responded with the following to my comment:
All of this is well and rightly said, Demi. 100 percent.
With each passing day, I become more convinced that the way people obsess over what other people think is one of the worst pathologies in human life.
The one exception is when what they think is being translated, via physical force, into my problem. Then, I care, and rightly so.
But otherwise, have at it. Believe that Bigfoot was one of Jesus’s apostles and that Elvis is living in an underwater city with Nessie.
One of the greatest gifts one human can give to another is to not give a #$&% what they think.
To which I replied, “I agree completely, Christopher, and especially about the force piece. They have no right. NONE.”
To the part where Christopher said, “Believe that Bigfoot was one of Jesus’s apostles and that Elvis is living in an underwater city with Nessie,” I replied, “Ramen, brother…. ramen. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣”
I responded with the following:
Absolutely, Michael.
That 5% is often leveraged to corral people toward believing something of great detriment to themselves.
Insidious tactic.
I wish more people were aware of it, but the majority of people tend to approach the consumption of mainstream vs. alternative media in the same way they approach rooting for a football team.
And they get about as incensed when you attempt to pull back the curtain on the “wizard” no matter which “home team” they have chosen to identify with.
And then YOU become the object of their ire instead of the person/entity who lied to them.
Michael responded to the part where I had said: “ … the majority of people tend to approach the consumption of mainstream vs. alternative media in the same way they approach rooting for a football team.”
He asked, “Demi, how do you see through it? My love of art, has been a good guide and sometimes a good BS detector, not infallible. But good.”
I answered, “Michael, you know, I don’t honestly know how I survived the onslaught of brainwashing and which particular characteristics/experiences made me more resistant. Might be a blind spot for me? It’s a good question.”
This question is something I’ve pondered often, especially in reference to wanting to ascertain which conditions and qualities make some people less susceptible and others more gullible.
It would be valuable to know this information in an effort to check ourselves and grow, and I am wondering if there are any non-biased studies surrounding a sort of spectrum from skepticism to gullibility and how to determine where people might fall, also noting that self-professed “skeptics” may also have a tendency to be vulnerable to gullibility, a condition that might be informing any sort of loud self-qualifying identification as a “skeptic.”
It’s an interesting thought exercise, in any case.
commented, “Controlled opposition. I have to ask myself if I fall for this or don't question it enough then am I becoming controlled opposition? If so it's time to pump the brakes bc homie don't play that shit. 🤣❤️”This was my response to Jessica J:
at added, “Operational security argues for only letting the underlings know what they absolutely need to know, and withholding all other true information, typically by telling them plausible lies. That’s standard tradecraft for intelligence agencies…and secret societies (but I repeat myself.)”Sometimes they just honestly believe what they were told and are spewing bad information because they trusted some other guru or can’t manage to see past the bad information themselves, Jessica.
It’s gurus and influencers all the way down until you get to the one(s) who poisoned the well on purpose in the first place.
It’s usually for profit.
Unless there’s an established money trail, I wouldn’t feel comfortable calling anyone CO for simply believing and regurgitating lies.
That would make 99% of the world CO.
Everyone, at some point, believes and regurgitates lies. Most aren’t doing it on purpose. They were taught lies and they believe they are correct.
For most, the motive is to uphold the mainstream narrative in order to protect their own livelihood. If they happen to be aware of the truth, they think they will not survive if they tell the truth, so they co-sign any information they are told from on high without checking into it, knowing their lifestyle might suffer consequences if they do not. In that way, they become complicit and justify it by framing it as a survival move.
Implied threats also include the possibility of getting ridiculed or ostracized by their peer groups, in addition to the possibility they might lose their job or “credibility” within a group of people who are also co-signing toeing the party line.
This isn’t accounting for earning and blackmail webs at the highest levels. This is just accounting for how the zeitgeist keeps the majority in check, including lower level influencers who are not owned outright. Using the prison of their own minds to entrap them into toeing the line, sometimes without their even realizing it themselves, is effective enough.
I responded, “I agree. And compartmentalization offers chances for plausible deniability as well.”
of added, “God is with us to save us. Some souls are made of sterner stuff. It takes longer from soul conception to instantiation into a life here. Some souls are hundreds of thousands of years old before their first life in this realm. So “a very old soul” may be old indeed. This realm is challenging and not a vacation destination resort, as you know. This world is particularly difficult.”I joked, “I’ve been told on several occasions that I asked for expert mode because you wake up faster. What you’re saying tracks. I won’t be duped into agreeing to this again, but while I’m here this time around, why not? 🤣”
Jim replied, “What if I told you that you don't come here unless you volunteer? I agree, one visit is plenty. I have work to do here. Then I get to go home. I was shown the home I come from in a childhood dream a thousand times. It's a very beautiful place.”
I responded with the following:
Stick with what you find beautiful, and whatever it is, buy into the vision of it hard, Jim.
Most get duped into “volunteering” or they follow the spirit of some family member or loved one into a reincarnation tunnel and get stuck that way.
But that doesn’t need to be what you experience. It’s merely a construct. All of the potential experiences you could have are constructed from one’s own projections - just like expectation influences your experience of reality inside of this construct.
If you review accounts and testimony, the truth about the “afterlife” is that, when you arrive, you will tend to see exactly what you expect to see, whatever that is.
You are choosing it. You are generating it. No one is “right” because everyone is.
People who come back from near death experiences [NDEs], real or simulated, will tell you they saw exactly what they expected to see, good or bad. The experience was completely self-generated, fueled by the person’s individual belief system expectations.
Reality is an expectation engine. So whatever you believe, you best make it good - especially if you’re going to be stuck with your own projections for a long while and may never figure out that you’re the one in control.
I feel sorry for atheists in this regard. The expectation of nothingness and/or dirt and decay isn’t particularly fun. I’m glad I got over that experiential choice myself.
But I feel so much worse for people who expect to see and experience “hell.”
Man, that’s rough.
Some people even expect their lives to be hell. That’s even worse.
To this, I responded, “All matter and energy have consciousness and that consciousness is God. If you are an atheist, you will experience nothingness or dirt and decay because you choose it, not because source consciousness doesn’t exist. Ironically, it would be source consciousness providing the atheists with that experience because it’s the experience they wanted, and by wanting it, drew it to themselves by causing the universe to respond in kind.”
EDIT: Here is a note in response from
at :This is so on point, and further emphasises the importance of choosing to align with beings with whom we actually respect and who respect us. So much of this constant need to change people’s minds and stances to get them on board with our own viewpoint is control…that is often rooted in woundedness and fear.
I am always open to explore any viewpoint, but I’m never here to be evangelised to or manipulated into complying with someone else’s view on how I should be…especially when I haven’t sought out an opinion from them, and they freely believe it’s their job to alter me to fit their narrative and perspective.
I was taught that true intelligence is being able to entertain and respect any viewpoint, even if and when you don’t agree. The beings who have what we consider to be the most “far out” beliefs have come to these conclusions based upon their own unique experiences and learning. There is value to be found from every living experience…even if it’s a simple (and nonjudgmental) lesson that teaches us what not to do.
Thank you, Demi, for your candor and insight 💫💫
So you may have seen the Challenger blow up on television. I was in Houston at the time. Anyway one of the guys chosen for the Challenger commission was Richard Feynman. Smart man. He and all the commission members were given sample O rings during the Thiokol briefing and they each had a pitcher of ice water nearby. So Feynman pours himself some ice water and immediately sticks his sample O ring in the ice and behold it becomes stiff and useless.
He wrote a complete "minority report" on all the crap NASA did wrong and finding fault with the management who were tryna get the Challenger commission to help them whitewash the whole thing the way Danforth would later whitewash (and bleach!) the Waco massacre evidence.
Anyway, I started reading Feynman's books. Good stuff. Differentiating under the integral sign is brilliant stuff btw
One of his books is about his first wife. She was a beautiful lady and very smart. They met in the 1930s or so when they were both very young, like 18 or 19. And she had tuberculosis which at the time was also called consumption and was thought to be incurable. He had a great career ahead of him as a brilliant mathematician and scientist and she had a deadly illness and a short lifespan ahead.
So his parents tried to talk him out of marrying her. And her family tried to talk her out of marrying him. But they loved each other. Very deeply.
One day, he visits her in the hospital and she tries to talk him out of the marriage, giving all the tired arguments. And he asks her why she's doing this thing. And she says that everyone thinks she shouldn't let him marry her and that if she really loves him she'll talk him out of getting married. So he's been kind of fuming inside until she says this part and then he gets it. So he says, "So you love me so much you want me to have a great life?"
And she says yes. And he explains that he loves her so much that he can't have a great life unless they get married. And besides, he asks, "What do you care what other people think?"
Which became the title of a book he wrote. And he talks about how you have to expect people to reject new ideas, and old ideas like love, and say all kinds of things, and you have to stick with what you yourself know. You have to have the courage of your own convictions. It's a good book. You should read it.
Because the truth is, you are living in the most important time in two hundred thousand years. The great war is ending. We are going to defeat the demons. God is helping us with the heavy lifting, praise God, amen. And you need the courage of your convictions. You need to know what you know and be confident and determined no matter how many demon worshippers are paid to lie to you.
In the years since reading Feynman's book I sometimes modify his saying: How do you know other people are thinking? Maybe they are reacting. Maybe they are trained to lie. Maybe they don't want anyone to be brave and show them a world without limits?
I think the question of "why do we care what other people think" is actually pretty deep. We are social animals, and we are, I believe, hardwired to be in resonance with each other. People unconsciously imitate each other – and we need a sense of belonging, which means, sometimes at least, adapting to what our group is thinking and doing. Many of us over the past four years have learned how very painful it is to be rejected by our own families, and the communities to which we belonged. That is real.
But what is also real is that we have been intensely programmed for generations to defer to outside authority – not to trust our own body, our intuition, our sense of right and wrong even, If it conflicts with an outside authority that we believe knows more than we do. It should come as no surprise that multitudes of people are lost in this need to obey, the fear of what will happen if they don't, or falsely identifying with the outside authority instead of with themselves. Our social connections with each other and our natural energetic resonance have been turned against us, creating a false "community" of those who obey, who find their safety in that group.
I find it almost unbearably sad that so many have been so viciously manipulated this way, and they aren't even aware of it. And for myself, even though I have made the choice to follow my own lights – and I have found new community with others who have also made that choice – the pattern of doubting my inner knowing can be very strong, and I would say that continually coming back to awareness of this and returning to my own center is some of the hardest work I have ever done. And it is ongoing.