My theory of why people don’t respond is that they have adopted the role and the viewpoints that best help them function, cope, succeed in their immediate day to day environment of school, job, church, neighborhood, associations, organizations. A conspiracy model breaks those roles = because of the conspiracy is accpeted as true — if you take up the role of citizen fighting conspiracy you are required to do extraordinary things to address the problem — everyone knows you drop everything to face a deadly attack from a hostile enemy seeking to destroy us all by stealth. But that is one hell of a change of gears from the routine life. People feel that if others can afford to put off facing the truth I must do so to. But when it becomes obvious that the ordinary routine will not be possible tomorrow unless something is done immediately — then there will mass action like nothing ever seen. That is good news, but there is a serious drawback — by everyone playing the roles of normalcy (Harding’s word, not mine) they forgo the needed communication and sharing of information. How big a problem will this be? We don’t know. No one does polling on what the average person who is now sustaining normalcy knows about what the conspiracy investigators know and think. It’s one of those wait and see things. I spend quite a bit of time putting out postings with lots of information about international organized crime — in the hope that more rather than fewer people will be informed when the normalcy role is put aside and “Liberty Leading the People” role is taken up.
From what I get in my mailbox — which I pass on — I gather that there are a lot of people in the same “prepare the people” mode as I am in. I have many friends doing the same kind of thing — each in our own way. Isn’t that true of you?