>>11594

Thing is. How do you even redpill actual normies on this stuff? Its easy for us to say that an anonymous higher upper in the whitehouse is communicating information onto a 8ch board trying to spread some breadcrumbs on whats going on.

Try explaining it to a normie and their mind justs retracts into their ass.

Its "always" been this way. Regarding any sort of conspiracy/corruption scandal. The biggest problem right now is that we're not just fighting a narrative, we're fighting a media hellscape that is hellbent on telling us whats fake and not fake. regardless of the truth.

The Q redpill stuff needs to be normie-nised somehow. We need to dumb down the memes so even a toddler with a learning disability could understand it.

>>11617

Oh absolutely. I have a feeling the meme part is a key factor in making sure this stuff "leaks" to the public. Its just that getting people to want to change their view on something is what im going at.

The "mainstream thought", right now. Is that Trump is evil, anyone revolting against him is good.

Changing that narrative isn't easy. If anything it could be a good idea to reverse-psych it. Bend wording and switch out names. but link it to the real deal. Kinda like forcing people to read something they want to hear. (A is evil. B are the good ones), but in reality they're getting stealthpilled (B is evil. A is the good ones) in the actual sourcing of it.

Example: There are over 9 thousand sealed indictments from the Muller report.

While its true that there are a massive amount of sealed indictments. We have no idea where they come from. Things like that might work to make people try and want to find out more themselves.

Spamming Q keys or trying to explain his messaging is going to scare people away from it.

If Q gives us crumbs. We need to feed people molecules.

>>11626

And thats a problem as well. It is enormously disheartening to see your work fail. Especially on things like this, Stuff thats actually happening right now. Not some spelunking trip down a history book. Right. now.

The fact of the matter is that we need to distill the info into chunks that aren't that hard to digest (sorry about that). Writing out an essay about the connections between so-and-so with so-and-so isn't going to draw eyes.

What draws eyes are smaller crumbs that are interesting, Im just not sure how to distill the vast info we have right now.

We cannot just entertain the idea that people always read -everything-. They're used to bitesized info with maybe a 30sec video at most. Anything bigger than that is commitment which they never seem to have time for.

Bitesize stuff, reverse psychology, bait and switch. This is where i think the pilling can truely happen. 30+ minutes of youtube video, while informative, will only look "conspircy nutty" to the masses.