How to 'discuss' w. people who live in alternate though overlapping universes? I tend not to, though occasionally exasperation trumps (damn, a perfectly good word irreversibly contaminated) good sense.
I've been *refraining* in person and on Facebook w. a friend. She gets her news from one of those alternate but overlapping news sites and thinks the Main Stream Media is one big lyin' conspiracy. So if I offer up my facts, she can counter with her facts.
In my head I sometimes argue about sources. The MSM indeed often runs as a pack, are influenced by the financial interests that own them, get all in a groupthink flap about one personality or other (twas Clinton, now Trump), has faults galore. (Eek, “galore” makes me think of Pussy Galore and Pussy makes me think of, oh god, another word to eliminate from my vocabulary, which is shrinking anyway as my brain shrivels.) However, the MSM also is composed of rivals, not only sharing each other's news but eager to undercut if one of them goofs. There is accountability, not perfect but existent – they usually have to provide sources, libel lawyers are standing by, and there's all kinds of pushback.
Reality also sometimes interjects.
The obscure little nutbar websites, on the other hand, have no pushback, no accountability. They may be speaking *truth* to a benighted world...or they may be babbling nonsense...or malicious intentional propaganda.
My finale would be: “I have a website. I can publish anything I like on it. As it is, it's some opinions about Paganism that some people would disagree with...if they ever saw it. But I'm also free to write about Queen Elizabeth being a space lizard.” (Oops, trumped again. It's been done. But you get the idea.)
Recent things she's posted – government (or somebody) is planning to add somethingorother to vaccines for the purpose of somethingorother; T will be vindicated after alternate news comes out about that botched Yemen raid; the former head of the CIA (or somebody) has admitted that contrails are, well, whatever, augmenting the evial work of the additives in vaccines.
I have got into back-and-forth with some people sometimes, and it leads to, um, outer space, where there is no up and down or day and night. Re the usual anti-vaccine thing, I used to yell (i.e., hit the shift) “POLIO!” But, like, that was then and now vaccines are full of poison. Or they're okay in principle, but terribly overdone. Or whatever. What is my comeback? “Are NOT!” For whatever that's worth. (And, gee, maybe.......)
Yet another friend today reposted some item about how an extract of fruit juice cures cancer. Said she, “At last!” My silent (unwritten) response: “I've been hearing shit like that for the last 80 years.” “Cancer is not one across-the-board disease.” “No, I don't want to hear about the evils of big pharma – if there were a real all-purpose cancer cure, they'd be on it like a wolf on a rabbit. To SELL, not hide.”
But I know there's no point. For everything they say, or I say, there is a counter-thing to say... until there isn't. All that's left is a bad smell.
And when you get down to it, neither they nor I actually *know* anything anyway. And if we did, there's no way to convey it.
(I don't even know if downtown Hope exists – I haven't seen it for several snowed-in days now. I don't know if y'all exist – perhaps OS, even the entire internet, is just the hobby of a multi-tasking space lizard. What do I know and when did I know it?)
(I guess it all boils down to the philosophically right-on words of a former not-nearly-as-terrible president: “It depends on what the meaning of 'is' is.”)