[vearwhershuh]

You can't.

Despite the social shame associated with it, I no longer even believe main stream history around things like the kennedy assassination. I don't know what happened, but I'm skeptical that what they say happened actually happened.

We live in an epistemological radical age, with mass psychological operations being carried out by multiple state and non-state actors.

The good news is that the only sane response is to step back and focus on the ones we love around us, which is what we should be doing anyway.

[k_sze]

The problem is that, in order to protect the ones you love, especially their future, you need to make some important decisions like voting, joining protests when you need to, and maybe even trying to convince other people to vote for the same candidate or to join you in protest; all of these activities require being informed of the true agenda and abilities of candidates, of important socio-political issues, etc.

You can't just say "I'll focus on the ones I love around me" and ignore the rest.

[vearwhershuh]

I disagree. In as much as any of those distract you from raising good children, they hurt more than they help, and voting and political activity in general is pointless (at best) in most countries. The elites are going to get what they want until there is bloodshed, and probably even beyond that as well.

Irish Democracy[1] is more effective and more moral than any sort of political activism.

[1] "Quiet, anonymous, and often complicitous, lawbreaking and disobedience may well be the historically preferred mode of political action for peasant and subaltern classes, for whom open defiance is too dangerous….One need not have an actual conspiracy to achieve the practical effects of a conspiracy. More regimes have been brought, piecemeal, to their knees by what was once called “Irish Democracy”—the silent, dogged resistance, withdrawal, and truculence of millions of ordinary people—than by revolutionary vanguards or rioting mobs." James Scott - Two Cheers for Anarchism

[k_sze]

What you are talking about is the "action". I don't think that really invalidates my point: good old democracy via voting may not be your preferred mode of political action, but you still need to be informed about issues so that you take action for the right cause, whatever the form of political action you want to take.

Put another way, you need to be informed so that you can engage in lawbreaking and disobedience for the right cause.

Disclaimer: I'm not advocating for lawbreaking or disobedience. What I said above was just for the sake of argument in favour of staying informed.

[vearwhershuh]

Right, but with the main information channels (popular media, academic media, history) being at least in part a system of disinformation and control, and with the alternative channels easily overwhelmed by state and non-state actors as well as kooks, even paying attention is usually a net negative. It takes up valuable time and energy you could be using locally.

I suppose my point here is mainly one of degree: sure, be somewhat informed as to what the current disinformation campaigns are, but don't take it too seriously or think you are getting any "truth" out if it. And read old books, especially by people who were popular in their time but are now ignored, such as Henry George.

Voting, of course, is pointless.