(First published August 23rd 2022. Republished today to coincide with my articles on Andrew Bridgen.)

On one of my recent articles, scrutinising the cynical establishment scam, "Don't Pay UK" (more on them later) - and the inordinate amount of negative attention I have received for so-scrutinising - someone left a very astute comment. They said:

"I have noticed that a huge proportion of people talking against the government have simply replaced their "daddy government" with their "daddy truth movement" but the mentality has remained exactly the same - an infantile one. And when they see someone who is actually thinking for themselves, they go just as bananas as the government adoptees: "How dare you talk bad against my daddy, here's some sand into your eyes, shut up".

This is a profoundly important - and oh-so accurate - observation. On so many occasions now, I have raised the wrath of persons behaving very much like tantrum-throwing toddlers, because I have investigated, questioned or (ye Gods!) criticised their "daddy" - 'daddy' taken in this context to mean an all-knowing, all-powerful, wise and benevolent authority. Someone or something that has all the answers, is one's own personal saviour, and is, therefore, totally beyond reproach.

Most human beings seem wired to need this kind of omniscient absolutism in their lives, and it is exactly that wiring that accounts for why statism and technocracy have been so successful in the first place - why people will uncritically trust "the experts", and lash out overly-emotionally against any of us who question or criticise them.

We understand that mentality, yet assume, once people have woken up to the scam of the state / technocracy / $cience / "experts", they have learned how to be independent and critical thinkers, and will therefore uniformly apply the same critical eye to all ideologies and movements.

However, this assumption is wrong. Oh-so very wrong. What seems to often happen is people "wake up" to the government, only to seamlessly replace the investment they had in that "authority", with the same totally trusting and uncritical investment in something else. I have seen this happen with so many sub-sections of the 'truth movement', including, but not limited to: protests, Magna Carta, common law, 'manifesting', veganism, David Icke, "love and light" (bleurgh) - and now, of course, "Don't Pay UK".

Don't Pay UK is about as shady as it is possible to be (completely anonymous, came out of nowhere and got instant massive following, MSM coverage, obviously well-funded), yet even my doing my basic due diligence and pointing these things out (and then discovering some even more indicting information), enraged - and continues to enrage - infantile thinkers to the point of apoplexy because I'm being mean to their daddy!

One of my most recent antagonists took such exception to my questioning DPUK that she blocked my page (having previously been trolling it at length), which I observed was a curious move, as aforementioned extensive trolling suggested she was quite interested in me.

"I'm not interested in YOU," she fomented furiously in return, as the spittle from an ejected dummy was almost audible. "I'm not interested in your articles. I can't block you ENOUGH!"

Now, excuse me if I'm wrong, as it's been a while since I did any babysitting (I have 15 younger cousins so it was rather a stalwart of my childhood), but isn't that an almost verbatim example of the common toddler refrain to something they find objectionable? Being told to finish their vegetables, for example, or denied more sweets before bedtime?

"I don't like you. You're not my friend. GO AWAY!"

And I get this response from significant numbers of supposed adults, again and again, whenever I simply put the same critical thinking hat on that enabled me to "wake up" in the first place, in order to investigate other issues of significance - which is what all autonomous adults should do, including and especially ones who have ever described themselves as "awake" critical thinkers.

It seems I am in good company in experiencing these kinds of frustrations, as David Clews from the Unity News Network had to put out a video yesterday to explain why it is important to reveal that GB News is funded by a hedge fund linked to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the WEF.

David had obviously deeply wounded a lot of irate toddlers with this diligent piece of investigative journalism, and I can just hear the "you don't criticise MY DADDY GB NEWS! I don't like you any more! GO AWAY!" howls of recrimination - as David had to patiently explain to cantankerous critics why knowing who funds the media is important. That doesn't necessarily mean the funders are dictating the editorial policy of the vehicles they fund, but it's certainly very possible and probable that large funders have influence, so it's important to know who they are. You understand why it's important to know the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funds The Guardian: well, it's just as important to know they're involved in the funding of GB News.

Yet it seems that this kind of thinking is anathema to those people incapable of real adult thought, who just want very binary, very black and white answers to everything - "Guardian, BAD! GB News, GOOD!" - whereas, of course, the reality is that the world, people, movements, motivations and so on, are far more complex and nuanced than that, and require a far more mature and sophisticated level of thinking to understand.

(And while we're on the subject of critical thought and the mainstream media, I am thoroughly sick to death of mental midgets who respond to any and all pieces of information sourced from the Daily Mail with, "OMG. That's the Daily Mail. Everything they say is a lie to advance their fascist agenda!" - and someone did just say exactly that in response to a screenshot I shared from the Daily Mail confirming that energy companies can switch Smart meter users to prepayment meters without their consent. This is an easily verifiable fact reported on by many resources, but rather than use the slightest bit of mental effort to do that verification themselves, this individual wanted to demonstrate their own toweringly superior intellect by stating the "fact" that everything the Daily Mail prints is a lie. I can't believe I'm actually having to qualify this, but, no dear, not everything they print is a lie - just like not everything GB News says is a lie, even though they're funded by shady sources - and stating "but it's the Daily Mail tho (fascists!!!)", is not an argument. Ye Gods, if these are the "awake", then heaven help us...)

So let us be abundantly clear on what I'm getting at here: not only are we in the truth movement "allowed" to scrutinise, question, and, yes, even criticise, any sub-section of the truth movement we like, but any real "truth seeker" should be actively encouraging this - the truth does not fear investigation and all that - because without constant questioning and dialogue, you don't have "truth", you have dogma and cultism. Nothing is beyond questioning. Nothing is beyond being investigated and (where necessary) exposed. And (now I'm really going to fall out with all the angry toddlers), there is no big daddy coming to save you.

Some of the things I mentioned in the opening paragraphs - protests and so on - are worth engaging in some of the time. My point (which adult thinkers will already have understood) is not that all of the things I listed are worthless - merely that they are not "the answer" because - brace yourself now, babies - there IS NO ANSWER. There is no one, big, magical solution to the very complex and challenging situation we currently find ourselves in (e.g., life), there are just lots of different things we can try, some of which work some of the time, some of which don't, some of which used to but don't any more, and so on and so forth.

The real challenge of being an adult is understanding implicitly that nobody - no government, no group, no movement, no ideology - is coming to save you, and whilst you can certainly draw useful information and support from others, you are 100% responsible for saving yourself - and 100% responsible for training yourself to be vigilant and constructively critical, always asking questions and looking for evidence, before investing in something. And even once you've invested, never remain uncritically invested or unwilling to pose challenges (and all shady movements are extremely challenge-averse - those who confront Don't Pay UK on their Twitter typically receive an instant block).

Yet because so many people seem absolutely incapable of real independent thought, they instantly leap to labelling those of us who exercise it as "controlled opposition", "shills", etc., because their thinking is so shallow, all they see is "big daddy movement [Don't Pay UK etc.] coming to save me... mean person criticising my saviour daddy... SHILL!! PIED PIPER!!"

Why they do this is is not necessarily because they are unintelligent (although some of them...), but rather, it is that they are so emotionally flabby and underdeveloped. A key part of maturing from a child, into an adolescent, and then an adult, is learning self-mastery of our emotions and that a strong feeling doesn't necessarily equate to a rational thought. A baby might hear a strange noise and scream in terror, thinking a monster is coming to kill them. That's understandable, because they are a baby, and have not had the opportunity to mature their emotions and separate "strong feeling" from "rational thought".

Adults have had this opportunity, but many of them have not gone through that maturing process (usually due to various kinds of trauma, including "school", which intentionally keeps people emotionally dependent toddlers), and so they become confused, threatened, and enraged by those of us that have. These people are temperamentally incapable of saying, "oh, that's some interesting research you've done there and I can see why you've come to the conclusions you have. However, I've done my own research and I've concluded something different, because..."

Because they haven't done any of that. They haven't engaged in rational, critical thought or done their due diligence. They've simply taken something at face value that has strongly triggered their "help me save me" emotions ("daddy's coming home at last!") and any challenge to that is therefore taken as an existential insult to their most primitive and primal needs for safety. Expecting them to respond rationally to critique is like expecting to have a reasonable conversation with a distraught toddler who's mum has just dropped off for their first day at nursery ("mummy's abandoned me! She's never coming back! HOW WILL I SURVIVE THIS HORROR!?" - which is a reasonable response for a confused toddler, but once you've graduated infant school, it's really not any more).

I feel sympathy for these people, as it must be decidedly unpleasant to have that constant maelstrom of ungovernable emotions in your head, and make all aspects of adult life extremely difficult to navigate - but "sympathy" does not compel me to want to have anything to do with them. I am able to control my own emotions, I'm not hot-headed and I don't lose my temper (or only very, very rarely). I think things through, I collate evidence, ask questions, and think - and reserve my right to change my mind at any time. Therefore, for anyone I have a direct relationship with, I expect them to be able to do these things, too. Happily, many people (and all regular readers of this column!) can. An irritatingly over-vocal minority cannot.

In answer to the eponymous query, "who's your daddy?", to qualify as an adult, certainly an "awake" one, the answer is - not any movement, ideology, figurehead, or book - the answer is, "I don't have one because I don't need one. Parents are for children and I'm an adult" (yes, yes, for any over-literalists, I realise the people who brought you up may well still exist, and indeed I hope they do, but I think you get the point... And isn't it interesting how a notable milestone in the passage towards adulthood for many is that they stop calling their father-figure "daddy"?)

It's always been important to be a critical thinker, but it's particularly crucial at this juncture in history, as the social engineers are in the process of dismantling the current culture - that's what the upcoming 'dark winter' is all about, finishing off this iteration of history completely - and they are going to attempt to manufacture your consent for the next stage by sending in powerful movements and compelling figureheads to "save you".

If you are still stuck in childish thinking where you believe you need saving, you are going to fall hook, line, and sinker for these false prophets, and all that that entails. This isn't to say they won't offer some valuable solutions - of course they will, in order to win trust and be credible. That is just how rat poison works - 99% sweet-meal, 1% poison. Certainly be smart, and if you can separate the sweets from the poison, do so (I've always said of so-called "controlled opposition", as long as you're not naïve and overly-trusting, they're exceptionally useful, as they give a lot of good information). But be aware that the poison is there nevertheless.(as they say, the lie tastes sweet in the beginning and bitter in the end, whereas the truth is the opposite), and of the steps you need to take to immunise yourself from it.

Those steps being - in a word - "thinking". To quote a rather catchy slogan I've just been listening to as part of an old song - "think! Think! It's not illegal yet..."

And note, every movement or individual of any note has always advised on the importance of - not merely 'feeling' and responding on that basis - but thinking, too. The problem we are facing with the tantrummy toddlers as described in this article, was perfectly summed up by the great Thomas Sowell, explaining why modern politics and debate is often so vicious and so futile. Referring to a famous 1960s book on the problem of illiteracy in America ("Why Johnny Can't Read"), Sowell said:

"The problem isn't that Johnny can't read. The problem isn't even that Johnny can't think. The problem is that Johnny doesn't know what thinking is. He confuses it with feeling."

Thanks for reading! This site is 100% reader-funded, with no paywalls, adverts, or wealthy corporate backers, meaning your support is what powers this site to keep going. If you would like to make a contribution of any size, please do so through...

1. BuyMeACoffee for one-off or monthly donations
2. Patreon, for monthly pledges
3. Direct bank transfer, for either monthly or one-off donations, to Nat West, a/c 30835984, s/c 54-10-27, account name FINCH MA

Your support is what enables this site to continue to exist, and is enormously appreciated. Thank you.

(If you'd like to comment on this article, please visit Facebook or Instagram.)