>>5119276

I just recently watched "Hot Fuzz," again.

It's a great movie in the context of Q. Almost something of a documentary.

"The greater good."

IE "Best Town of the Year." Can't have miscreants keeping our planet from winning, now can we?

I digress, the point I am making is that people are more capable than we often see them being. For right now, we have a lot of people who are still of the mindset that nothing is wrong or amiss. They will rapidly rise to the occasion when the time comes.

Many of us have been at the "she tripped and fell on her own shears" for quite some time. Others even know the meaning of Narp. But once the action unfolds, it will be conspiracy no longer.

We get to paint the town's cameras over. In a sense. "Want to do something useful?" The crayons and spraypaint are edible, so it's all good.

>>5119348

I think it is that they have been led to believe that there is something wrong with people who aren't in their positions or who can't achieve the same. Which, there are lazy and complacent people out there - but it is easy to have a pattern of life and then to toss rocks at people who do not have a pattern of life that can match it.

There are plenty of people employed by offices to pad a manager's department numbers. There are plenty of families who own large businesses who give their family members token jobs, and there are plenty of wealthy bankers who believe buying a business and managing them via spreadsheet constitutes some great feat of business genius.

It is very easy for them to say "I put in hard work today and I earned these things I have." Well, many of the department padding knows what they are and suffers a cognitive/ethical dissonance over it (again, part of why city people are insane) - but no one wants to lose their cookies.

The current system makes it very difficult for families to preserve wealth and places each individual on as remote of an island, financially, as possible and under as many recurring fees/debts as it can muster such that only those chosen to have financial liberty can genuinely act with freedom - those chosen because of their loyalty to the system more so than any talent or potential.

Again, Hot Fuzz as I mentioned in my prior comment brings this up. Performance is actually rarely rewarded in our society. At best, performance is relied upon in the tiers of business where things get done. IE - someone is too productive of a worker to elevate them out of that position. At worst, high performing people represent a threat to those who have 'waited their turn' to be in corporate positions.

Changing how this system works doesn't really mean anyone needs to lose the comforts they enjoy. That is part of the deception employed - that not everyone can have fancy things or that there will be a collapse of the social order if the plebs get to take two weeks off to go to Maui, too (granted, might be a little crowded).