Do you think you are too clever to be fooled? Are you a gullicist?
The spread of anti-vax conspiracy theories is just another example of the gullicism that defines our age. The cynicism is highly selective: Gullicists see everyone’s hidden motives—except when they don’t. They are able to reject any claim rooted in actual evidence—whether in science, politics, or history—while embracing the most breathtakingly absurd assertions on the same topics. Indeed, documentation is often taken as further evidence of conspiracy, while assertion (that this or that will “detoxify” your blood or that COVID deaths were exaggerated) is taken as gospel. This rejection of empiricism makes selling falsehoods easier and contradicting them harder, which creates a fertile environment for anyone with something to sell, whether shady businesses or authoritarian governments.
Trump popularized the use of the term "... a lot of people are saying it..." as a rhetorical tool for pre-empting saying something false, and I hear it all over now. Whatever happened to trust but verify? We have folks posting here that Democrats are touting the benefits of shoplifting (when the comment was obviously sarcastic), and others posting about massive voter fraud as if its a huge problem (it doesn't exist). Americans eating pets!
Gullicism is great for MAGA, it allows you to live in a pretend world.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/03/cynical-gullible-american-man/686079/
@wildgrass
Gullicism is great for MAGA, it allows you to live in a pretend world.
This is what I was responding to that you wrote, pretend land is the only place libs live.
1 edit
@mike69 saidI know where this is going.
@wildgrass
Gullicism is great for MAGA, it allows you to live in a pretend world.
This is what I was responding to that you wrote, pretend land is the only place libs live.
Wait for it, just a few more posts.
@wildgrass saidIt was your dumb post not mine?
I know where this is going.
Wait for it, just a few more posts.
@wildgrass
Ask people in California, esp San Francisco if shoplifting is even still a thing. It was around 1500. dollars in stolen goods was a misdemeanor now it’s 950.00 and nothing happens to you anyway, Dems love them some criminals.
Vax, think what you want I don’t care.
Why are you so gullible and believe every conspiracy theory was my first post.
@mike69 saidWhat conspiracy theory?
@wildgrass
Ask people in California, esp San Francisco if shoplifting is even still a thing. It was around 1500. dollars in stolen goods was a misdemeanor now it’s 950.00 and nothing happens to you anyway, Dems love them some criminals.
Vax, think what you want I don’t care.
Why are you so gullible and believe every conspiracy theory was my first post.
@wildgrass saidPick one, you’re full of them. How about how long you went on about Trump and his ear not getting hit and the dead people were also part of the conspiracy.
What conspiracy theory?
1 edit
@mike69 saidOk, I'll admit I went on about Trump and his ear not getting hit. But that's because his ear wasn't hit. There's no scar, no sign of injury, no medical report. The doctor who saw him said there was a 2 centimeter wide wound that went into the cartilage which I think we can both agree is a lie. Why did his doctor say that?
Pick one, you’re full of them. How about how long you went on about Trump and his ear not getting hit and the dead people were also part of the conspiracy.
All other evidence suggests he faked it, unless you take his word for it which I never do. You mentioned the bodies, I don't know how to explain that.
I don't consider that a conspiracy. You'd have to be very gullible to believe Trump's own doctors account of the incident. Any others? I'm usually pretty fair with regard to evidence for and against.
@wildgrass saidI rest my case👏👏👏.
Ok, I'll admit I went on about Trump and his ear not getting hit. But that's because his ear wasn't hit. There's no scar, no sign of injury, no medical report. The doctor who saw him said there was a 2 centimeter wide wound that went into the cartilage which I think we can both agree is a lie. Why did his doctor say that?
All other evidence suggests he faked it, unless y ...[text shortened]... ccount of the incident. Any others? I'm usually pretty fair with regard to evidence for and against.
@wildgrass
I believe 100% it was an actual assignation attempt and his ear was slightly nicked. Tell me the reasons you think and feel so strongly that the republican party felt they had to go to this high of an extreme and risk to Trumps life at that time.
@mike69 saidOk but you're disagreeing with Trumps own doctor.
@wildgrass
I believe 100% it was an actual assignation attempt and his ear was slightly nicked. Tell me the reasons you think and feel so strongly that the republican party felt they had to go to this high of an extreme and risk to Trumps life at that time.
Other descriptions of the "injury" from close-up inspections shortly after the incident describe “An ear had never appeared to have gone through less,”
You appear to fall somewhere in between these two eye witness accounts describing 2 centimeter wound and no injury at all.
I tend to think the ear wasn't injured by a bullet. It's not a conspiracy theory though. I agree with eye witness testimony and other evidence from his doctor is not credible.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/donald-trump-ear-campaign-assassination-attempt.html