No, it would be stupid as fuck to take a mostly complacent population who had no idea how bad things were, and tell them a bunch of shit on how bad things were just to hopefully make them more complacent when you tell them there's a plan.

And if that's the case, Trump is in on their plan, which itself is a silly idea. They don't attack any of their controlled opposition as hard as they attack Trump and his followers. Trump also gave space to true conservatives and America first people. Why do this when they already had their perfect little two party system with the Dems and the RINOs?

So I think we can reasonably establish that it's not controlled by the bad guys. At that point, we only have to establish whether or not it's true. I think this is also well established, and as such the fact nobody knows the exact timeframe is mostly irrelevant.

It is meant to keep a civil war from happening, though. The good guys in control who are trying to fix shit peacefully first seem to be opposed to bloodshed, you know, as a result of them being the good guys.

I love this thread. Because I love this debate. The "Two Paths" phenomenon.

"One of our analogies is correct. Hopefully we find out soon which one."

This.

And Infidel makes a valid point as well.

But time is somewhat* irrelevant here. Society IS holding together, somehow. Until society actually begins to crumble then I have 100% faith in the Plan.

If shit goes sideways and there's no sign of intervention from ANY aspect of our government? (As is currently happening in slow motion) Then I will start to worry a bit.

The notion that The Plan = Complacency is grounded in circular logic. The individual making this claim is also guilty of complacency. The act of calling out complacency while remaining complacent is like criticizing OJ Simpson's verdict while stabbing someone.

If complacency is the biggest hurdle, last I checked, P.Win is much larger than GA.Win... so how is this a Q/Plan issue?