Is Q a threat to Democracy?

Is it okay if I point out that I asked this question about Q being a threat to democracy months before Q supporters stormed the capital of the United States?

And there is an interview of a black police officer who was there at the capital who shared his experience, especially confronted by someone holding a Blue Lives Matter flag, including the fact that he played into their argument about the election being stolen and "no one voted for Biden" by saying that HE had voted for Biden and asked if his vote counted.

Their response? "Hey everyone, this N-GGER voted for Biden!" And he was called the N-word by many of the capital terrorists.

So if you combine this with the presence of the confederate flag... xenophobic messaging of the right, we get a clearer picture of what is at the core of this attack on democracy. And as I said before, the secret meaning behind "make America great again".

Yes... many people saw something in that simple message that they believed was good. And yes, many couldn't imagine what could be wrong with that message or why black people would take offense.

But as MAGA has matured and materialized into a force willing to oppose our Democracy how many people will realize that this is what it was all along?

Do you think these people just decided to do something so drastic overnight? Or was this simply already brewing in their brains even before Trump appeared and began talking to them?

And I'm asking this because just because Trump lost... that doesn't mean this threat to democracy has gone away. When Jesus didn't return quickly with their reward, they patiently waited and continued to imagine various signs as indications of his "soon" return. Q followers are basically treating Trump the same way; but not because they are following him, but rather because they perceive him to be following THEIR agenda. And their agenda has not been defeated.

Source: The interview I spoke of is on "Soul of a Nation" ep 1.

I don't feel like I'm a threat to humanity... tho I'm not the same Q you hear about today. Copycat or legitimate replacement I suppose. I have a itch that's saying there is probably bigger threats than Q.

This Q following is kind of amazing from a psychological perspective. What has emerged is a political cult. We're not used to that. It's not just political though. It's like a cancer that hooks into certain religious beliefs. Mainly evangelical Christianity.

The idea is simple. We often view the universe through the lens of a war between good and evil. And so we cast these parts, even down to matter vs antimatter. As long as we have this view we tend to create stories to match; stories where we are the hero of our own journey. But you can't be a hero without a villain. So as we believe our side represents the light there must be another side that represents the darkness. For some people this is as simple as comparing light or dark skin.

I've been thinking a lot about the Salem Witch Trials in recent years. I believe it highlights a certain neurological defect in humanity. The key is that people really didn't care whether each of the accused was a witch or what evidence they had that any one of them (if they weren't Christians themselves) even believed in the existence of Satan. The reality is that Satan only exists within Christianity. This being is supposedly far older than this religion and yet Judaism doesn't agree with the story and how he is cast. But Christianity doesn't care. You would think they would since it is such an important plot point. But it is fundamentally taken for granted.

And because Satan only exists within Christianity, only believers in Christianity could possibly worship him and therefore someone being "satanic" requires them to share the same beliefs the Christian does. But Christians, because of this worldview, may easily find themselves casting people of different beliefs/faiths/ideas into their same narrative AS IF these people believe in Satan. Or they'll come up with an excuse that Satan has tricked them into thinking he doesn't exist but whatever their belief is, it's simply a figure or representation of him. This means that Satan, the ego maniac who wanted to be higher than God, doesn't mind if none of his "followers" ever knows his name while God requires everyone to specifically believe in whatever name/id he has chosen and given to his "chosen" religion.

But this is a contradiction to the whole narrative of Satan. In fact, it flips the script entirely, casting God as the supreme ego and Satan as the humble agent granting people power or wishes (or whatever you think spirits do to "Serve" human desires and interests) without taking credit.

The larger point I'm making isn't about God or Satan. It's about us. It's about how we adopt a narrative and cast members on both sides of the conflict. We project ourselves onto one side (always the right side) and we project our enemies onto the "other" (as there is no other place for them to go). As long as there is an other/opposite side we feel morally right; almost like we cannot contemplate morality without moral superiority.

But this implies judgment of a very relative type because no human is perfect. The very idea of such a thing is relative to one's understanding. The moment you say "this person was perfect" you are also saying that person couldn't possibly grow or be any better than they were. Making the best possible choices is nice but realistically it is still relative to the possible choices you have available which is relative to the knowledge you have available. There is no such thing as perfect.

"Judge not, lest ye be judged"

Wise words, but are they universal? Is it ever good to be "above the law"? Above judgment? Isn't that simply hypocrisy? In order to make ourselves the hero we instantiate morality. In other words, we create a temporal instance of the construct of morality in which we judge ourselves according to a standard and then judge others by the same measure. But in 2,000 years that standard can change (IE slavery is wrong). Go forward further in time and more changes can be made as we realize our previous idea of being "perfect" or moral rightness still had a way to grow (IE accepting people of different sexual orientations).

It takes a long time to learn that we are the same as the people we're trying to cast onto the other side. And I think now we're in the process of doing the same thing with mental illnesses where as before they were simply thought to be under the possession of demons. Do you see? As long as we cast ourselves as the heroes it gives us the logical flexibility to demonize and assign "darkness" to the other side. But it is this process of judging, assigning, casting, putting people on the opposite side that is the source of evil. Think about it. Once you say "person X" is a goat and not a sheep, you've now given yourself permission to treat them differently than you'd treat "another" (because you're casting yourself as one) sheep. Once you say "person X" is lost... that judgement gives yourself permission to treat them as if they are in greater need than you are when in reality your needs are equal; simply different.

People aren't treating each other as they treat themselves; as they want to be treated. Because they're forcing others to be different, forcing them to be on a different side. This distribution of people to sides is what creates conflicts and war. Do you see? It's only because we see others as different that we're afraid of them; afraid of what they might do and can therefore imagine they would eat babies. This fear is, as Yoda said, a path to the dark side. It is in making someone else the enemy that we become an enemy ourselves. And when you think in absolutes and view someone as irredeemable? That's when we ourselves become irredeemable... unforgiveable.

We project our dark side onto Satan and everyone who acts out of that part of our character we cast as evil. We stop seeking to understand them because we remove our care and empathy. We see so much darkness that we retreat by removing care and empathy to the point where we become uncaring and almost sociopathic to all accept our "chosen" few. But when everyone does this the connections between humanity is severed and we only learn to tolerate sameness which is like spiritual inbreeding. You lose the benefits of diversity; diverse thinking, perspective, ideas. And eventually you want to destroy all other views so there's no one left to tell you when you're wrong, not perfect, room to grow. The future will judge you.

Q isn’t Russian. It’s the government…lol. And yea, probably a threat to democracy. Politicians don’t want us commoners to have a say. They just want more money and power and they don’t much care how they get it or who they step on to get it.

Q isn't Russian or the government. Q is simply a narrative created by a forum admin.

Remember in Batman Begins (I think) when he talked about being a symbol/idea?

In a sense, Batman used the fear of his own symbol in order to terrify bad guys.

Q just uses fear and distrust of the government to harness power from average voters so empower a single political agenda that had nothing to do with exposing the so-called "deep state" because such a thing doesn't exist. But it existed in the narrative for the purpose of harnessing the power of the people.

The "commoners" always have a say. People who don't want you to have a say are the ones who try and convince you that you don't have one and that your vote doesn't count or that the system is too rigged against you. We all have a say. But we also all have the ability to influence others and that's what Q lied in order to do.