This video is controversial. You have been warned. Click at your own risk.

2024 has begun.This is the 10th year of this platform's existance, and 900 videos released, a introspective examination and self assessment of content typology and reception outcome of my own work, is I believe paramount. Most importantly, what is the message that I am sharing with the world?

For this year's content, the usual baseline of historical videos, like these, is still going to be the core of my production. I will also continue ongoing series such as these. But what about these types of videos? Am I going to drop the controversial stuff once and for all? The offensive content? The content that gets me waves of hate in that ungodly wasteland called Reddit?

This question is a great opportunity for an empirical discussion on modern logic in argumentation discourse, to understand why controversy arises, and how to still encourage an open exchange of opposing thoughts.

What is Controversy?

You see to answer this with a yes or a no, is inappropriate, because it would be a way to dignify a question that is based on a false assumption. The assumption being that these videos are in fact controversial in the first place. I argue they shouldn't be.

I'll ask a question of my own, instead.

Why are these videos deemed controversial? In fact, what is controversy?
Not only as a general principle of psychology of the masses, but also specifically within the educational and entertainment cyber sphere, in connection with information and comunication technlogies.

Due to the spread of Social Media, and with the safety of internet anonymity, a certain frowning upon topics considered controversial has been bolstered. We got so used to the idea that certain specific key words make content "controversial", that we have been effectively gaslit into accepting it as a base of discourse, even though we should be questioning the foundations of such mental positioning.

What is the cognitive significance of controversies which ignites negative sentiment within any given discourse?

Admittedly, a comprehensive analysis of data alone won't cut it. Yet,
I suppose, humans do operate on foreseeable patters, which is why history is so important to study. Accurate historical education gives us access to a species level collective knowledge, yet there are clear forces at play that seek to manipulate historical truth for the benefit of the few, at the expenses of the many, and then label all who disagree with them as controversial, or worse.

So today I ask:

Why is it controversial, to talk about topics that may enrich the knowledge of our past?
Why is it controversial to question, when questioning is the very basis of learning?
Why is it controversial to openly refute the systematic erasure and rewriting of established historical fact?
Why is it controversial for me to question, when they do the very same thing in reverse, clearly showing a double standard in place

And finally why is it controversial to have a different opinion even when it's based on facts?

The moment children, students, citizens, humans, feel afraid or ashamed of asking questions, preassured to hide their interests, even when said question was asked in good faith with the right spirit of knowledge seeking, the moment the court of public opinion deems appropriate to judge people based on what may be, we'll be replacing "innocent until proven guilty", with Innocent until I'm offended.

#metatron #controversial #history