Flock to what is banned. Always.

But why? 

What is banned is dangerous, isn't it? 

Yeah, it is. If it weren't dangerous, people wouldn't go to the trouble of banning it. The question is, dangerous to what or to whom?

Flocking to what is banned is important for several reasons, none more than the preeminence of our self-determination. Where we fail to consider key sets of information, we self-suppress, and where we self-suppress, we self-brainwash. There is no need to wash our brains of “wrong think” if our minds have never consumed the information those in power wish to scrub away. 

If our times have shown us anything, it is the willingness of those in power to lie to our faces warmly. Hat tip Snowden. And we would be foolish to entertain even for a moment that we have caught them in every lie. Therefore it would be just as foolish not to consider the sets of ideas that they fear/ban the most. 

The accuracy of our conclusions comes from two things; the wisdom we have built over the years and the dataset considered. In our age of information, we are surrounded by an insurmountable amount of data; no one person can consider it all. With our minds in neutral, we will undoubtedly allow the mainstream to dictate a vast majority of our inputs and therefore the vast majority of our outputs.  A major part of the game is deciding what data sets to consider. It is my argument to you that banned information should be first off the draft board. 

Greatness stems from uniqueness.

There is no such thing as a great man or woman who did what is common. Uniqueness of action stems from uniqueness of thought, which alone stems from the uniqueness of the data set considered. The greatest among us will bring unique outputs because of the intentionality of their inputs.

Bad or incomplete inputs = bad or incomplete outputs. And if all of history has proven anything, it is that those in power use that power to benefit themselves. And when that power bans something, our gut reaction must be to take a look for ourselves. At what point in history has our society benefited from those in power banning words? Has history not shown us that those books most burned held the most important truth for that time? Has history not shown us that the ruling class bans things for their favor and not ours? 

Banning magnifies the foolish and shames the wise. The greater the suppression of a certain topic by the mainstream, the more those who would normally oppose that suppression cave to the pressure. The first and the fastest to cave are almost always those who are more “prominent, high class, educated, sophisticated.” This narrows the field of truth-tellers to those who are further and further “foolish.” 

We all feel the pull to avoid anything the mainstream has deemed dirty. I know you do; I do too. It is impossible not to feel the enormous pressure to stay away, or if you do dabble to do so with their immovable pre-drawn conclusions. 

We can be most assured that until we consider the ideas most banned, we are eliminating even the possibility of considering the key data points of our time, thus guaranteeing that at best, we arrive at incomplete conclusions and, at worst, we live a lie.

Make up your mind that you get to make up your mind.

Anything less is puppetry.

Hold Tension, Be Vast.

Remember, restoration alone brings victory.