Different opinions are very much needed. I see them as inevitable to expand my own thinking.

Examples? Let's look at our regular sources. In ca each 5th of Brian Cates' post (I have TG only), he opens aspects I'd never think of on my own. Even if his “prescription” does not materialize yet, those are prospects of thinking, worth following with other topics. He can be stubborn, he can be wrong, but he's always observant and clear and seasons everything with a hearty dose of humor.

Or take uncle Clif: that fucker knows incredible shit (his signature words, not mine 🤣), connects dots through history with the help of analysis of language, teaches what to notice etc. Yes, you need breaking in to listen to him, no matter how awakened you are; any normie will discard his average lecture as a total woo (pun intended) in a minute. (Fortunately, the very first video I saw was about street resistance tactics during a peaceful demonstration, so I listened again and looked for more.) Even here I see people who nag him about $600 silver etc.

On the other hand, some ops bring “different opinions” from Godlewski or Charlie Ward or RealRawNews. Yes, I, too, went through Ward period. All those grifters have their function: to teach everyone how to spot red flags or how to use source critics. Until you waste your time trying to sift out the grain of truth from them, you probably are not a critical thinker, yet. A pity we have them brought up because they are, like, say, potty training or bicycle lessons: required while growing up, total waste of time with normal adults. And I expect we are adults here.