Don’t know who this guy is, but he’s using a classic technique to bypass people’s internal filters, not to mention one to get through Twitter’s filters. By acting skeptical while delivering the message, he can attract people who normally would not be open to the message. Does it red pill anyone? Or at least make the curious enough about “cue” to do some research?
It works. I do this a lot irl. For example, I act neutral and slip in ‘idk how true it is, it might be or not idk, but some people believe yxz…’ or ‘there’s a rumour that he is actually XYZ…’. etc etc. People love the idea of getting some hushed up gossip. The truth is, we don’t know how true this stuff is. By putting it this way, it gets them thinking.
Plus, when you are attributing the "gossip" to someone else, it allows the person you are talking to freedom from having to think about your feelings. It's you and him on the same side, discussing a third party. When you start off acknowledging your own idea then the interaction is different.
Don’t know who this guy is, but he’s using a classic technique to bypass people’s internal filters, not to mention one to get through Twitter’s filters. By acting skeptical while delivering the message, he can attract people who normally would not be open to the message. Does it red pill anyone? Or at least make the curious enough about “cue” to do some research?
It works. I do this a lot irl. For example, I act neutral and slip in ‘idk how true it is, it might be or not idk, but some people believe yxz…’ or ‘there’s a rumour that he is actually XYZ…’. etc etc. People love the idea of getting some hushed up gossip. The truth is, we don’t know how true this stuff is. By putting it this way, it gets them thinking.
Plus, when you are attributing the "gossip" to someone else, it allows the person you are talking to freedom from having to think about your feelings. It's you and him on the same side, discussing a third party. When you start off acknowledging your own idea then the interaction is different.