Luke Ford

01:00 Pedos, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=162310
04:00 Seeing Through the Noise: Why Ordinary People Are Less Gullible Than Elites Think, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=162418
08:00 All men are incels: the bitter truth, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6xYHK3lrnk
18:00 Aaron Maté: New Docs Show FBI and NSA Never Believed Trump Worked with Russia, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=162412
20:00 AI’s global race in the dark, https://www.axios.com/2025/07/27/trump-ai-race-china
33:00 The News Is Bureaucratic Stenography, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=162374
53:40 Sex is about power: the fantasy of most men, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWW_2k3lrcc
1:00:00 Russiagate | The NatCon Squad, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=162420
1:07:00 How Is Majority Rule A Threat To Democracy?, https://yourmoralleader.blogspot.com/2025/07/how-is-majority-rule-threat-to-democracy.html
1:11:00 Why haven’t there been brought charges yet on Russiagate?, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bvQvwP-zcE
1:15:00 Predicting the DOJ Strikeforce on Russia Hoax | John Solomon, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=162410
1:25:30 Tulsi Gabbard vs. the Deep State: Why She’s Accusing Obama-Era Intel of Treason Over Trump-Russia, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=162398
1:28:00 I’m sure Mark Halperin is flattered to have a belief system that makes him the puppet master.
1:44:00 Niall Ferguson claims he’s primarily a historian, not a pundit, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41sJr2Zv7EQ
1:56:00 What’s driving the media’s mushroom mania? | Media Watch, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VArNK4pHuf8
1:57:00 Fairness and Freedom: A History of Two Open Societies: New Zealand and the United States, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=140864
2:06:30 The pro-Palestine on-air presenter punished for speaking out | Media Watch, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3ic8kvAXJs
2:19:30 Bogan Intelligentsia Podcast Ep. 2: Peter Lalor on Cricket, Identity, and Media Freedom, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbmTJpzEB7Y
2:23:30 How Credible Is Mike Benz?, https://yourmoralleader.blogspot.com/2025/07/how-credible-is-mike-benz.html
2:35:00 Jonah Goldberg Is Bill Buckley’s Successor, https://yourmoralleader.blogspot.com/2025/07/jonah-goldberg-is-bill-buckleys.html
2:42:00 The Structure of Expertise, https://yourmoralleader.blogspot.com/2025/07/the-structure-of-expertise.html
2:54:00 How Tulsi Gabbard’s Revelations About The Obama Administration’s Abuse Of Intelligence Decodes The Rule Of Experts, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=162387
3:00:20 WEHT to Michael Flynn?, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbcPDF_Had0
3:02:20 Bombshell Russiagate Docs Explained, and Truth About Putin and Hillary, w/ Matt Taibbi and Ruthless, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=162408
3:24:00 How Tulsi Gabbard’s Revelations About The Obama Administration’s Abuse Of Intelligence Decodes The Rule Of Experts, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=162387
3:36:45 Trump administration uses allegations of anti-semitism to stop American institutions from discriminating against whites, asians
3:47:00 ODNI Mania, The Other January 6 & How Assange Could Shatter The Rogue Intelligence State Today, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_eUGaUtTbw
3:56:00 RUSSIAGATE – A Major Dividing Line with Matt Taibbi | DEEP FOCUS with John Kiriakou, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfS3KjUGE4I
4:08:10 Heidi Priebe: How To Stop Taking Things Personally, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1ptE5Xb70k
4:12:00 Video: After the Fall: Planning for a Post-Communist China
4:21:00 The death of Ozzy Osbourne
4:24:00 The counter-culture within rock music
4:30:00 Was the Protestant Reformation a mistake?

Why did Luke Ford start his live stream an hour late?
Because he was still trying to convince Streamlabs OBS he’s not just a “pedo-spotting” comedian!

What’s Fordy’s favorite workout?
Jumping through the hoops of free internet platforms—takes a toll on the soul, mate!

Why does Luke Ford love Steven Turner’s books so much?
They’re the only ones long enough to keep up with his three-hour tangents on epistemic coercion!

How does Luke Ford prepare for a show?
He uploads his life regrets to AI and asks it to decode his humility—then blames the algorithm for his grandiosity!

Why did Fordy’s “How to Spot a Pedo” bit flop?
Because even his 15 live viewers knew “quoting the Constitution” isn’t a crime scene!

What’s Luke Ford’s secret to avoiding internet feuds?
He just talks about them for four hours until everyone forgets what the fight was about!

Why does Fordy call himself a humble guy?
Because he’s too busy exposing elite conspiracies to notice his own “classic Fordy comic crowd-pleaser” ego!

How does Luke Ford navigate the news?
He skips the New York Times and asks ChatGPT to summarize it with a side of MAGA flair!

Why did Luke Ford switch to expensive web hosting?
So he could finally afford tech support to handle his “epistemic closure” meltdowns!

What’s Fordy’s dream guest for his live stream?
A time machine to bring back Bill Buckley for a debate on who’s better at riffing on books they haven’t read!

1. “I miss the Bush administration. Not the policies, just the clarity.”
   At least back then, when they lied, they committed. Now it’s like everyone’s gaslighting everyone, but with trigger warnings and gender pronouns.
2. “They said my show had a low ratio of information to talk. That’s how I know I’m on the right path.”
   That’s how Torah works too. It’s 80% commentary, 10% divine ambiguity, and 10% guilt.
3. “Grok says I interrupt myself too much.”
   That’s anti-Semitic. Interrupting yourself is a Talmudic technique. It’s called havruta with yourself.
4. “The critique said I chase too many rabbit holes.”
   Look, if the Torah can go off on tangents about tzara’at in your house walls, I can spend 15 minutes on constitutional dictatorship and still get to Shoftim by the end of the show.
5. “Apparently I repeat the same talking points too often.”
   Yeah, it’s called having a worldview. It’s like Torah laining—you read the same thing every year and people still show up in shul. Kind of.
6. “The AI said my show lacks a through-line.”
   That’s because I’m the through-line. I’m the suffering servant wandering through American decadence with nothing but Becker, Schmitt, and some canceled rabbis to guide me.
7. “I treat Torah as sacred. The media treats Fauci as sacred.”
   But unlike Fauci, Torah doesn’t switch positions every few months and it never went on MSNBC.
8. “Hero systems in America today?”
   • Academia: worshipping DEI
   • Silicon Valley: worshipping IQ
   • Orthodox Jews: worshipping kiddush invites
   • Libertarians: worshipping their own Substack analytics
   • Me? I’m building a one-man hero system based on obscure German political theology and my dream of being the next Robert Moses—but frum.
9. “Apparently I talk over my guests.”
   Look, if I don’t assert dominance early in the conversation, they might think they’re the Decider. And there’s only room for one Carl Schmitt stan per stream.
10. “AI said I shouldn’t try to be both comic and prophetic.”
    But that’s the only combo that gets you laid in West LA shuls.

1. Ernest Becker says we’re all trying to deny death by latching onto hero systems.
I latched onto Torah, talk radio, and Twitter fights with Reform rabbis. That’s my immortality project. Some guys build pyramids. I built a blogspot with a hit counter.

2. America is now a battle royale of competing hero systems.
The military worships sacrifice, the universities worship diversity, the left worships victimhood, and I worship Friday night cholent invitations. Don’t tell me it’s not sacred — I’ve been ghosted over a dairy spoon in a fleishig pot.

3. Stephen Turner says democracy is ruled by credentialed experts.
And I’m credentialed in nothing — except maybe “saying the quiet part out loud” studies. My show is basically a public square for the dispossessed of LinkedIn.

4. I want to be part of a hero system too.
But all the cool ones require either a PhD or a six-pack. That’s why I’m starting my own: “The Church of Luke, Defender of Unverified Facts and Anti-Woke Constitutional Dictatorships.” Weekly services live-streamed, obviously.

5. Becker says we project our fear of death onto cultural dramas.
Which explains why I screamed at a guy for saying “Judaism is a culture not a religion.” No, Brad. It’s a death-denying hero system and it comes with its own dietary laws and neuroses.

6. Experts tell us what to think.
They’re like rabbis with grants. The only difference is rabbis don’t pretend to be objective. They just tell you your toaster isn’t kosher and move on. The experts? They write 80-page white papers explaining why the toaster is racist.

7. I may not be elite.
But I’ve read Carl Schmitt while eating cold kugel on a park bench. That should count for something.

8. My show is a one-man rebellion against institutional epistemology.
It’s part Becker, part Turner, and part “guy who lives in his car outside Beth Jacob and thinks he saw Fauci once.”

9. America’s sacred zones:
– The media: sacred stenographers of bureaucracy.
– Academia: sacred producers of unreadable PDFs.
– Netflix: sacred priesthood of identity drama.
– Me? I sacralize open mic night at The Laugh Factory, if it’s kosher-adjacent and no one says “colonizer.”

10. I’m not trying to be funny or deep.
I’m trying to stay alive by building a hero system from used books, paranoid insights, and a livestream schedule that’s more consistent than my love life.

Hero Systems by Profession:

Academics: Their hero system is peer-reviewed immortality. They’ll die poor and unloved, but if their footnote survives in JSTOR, they win.

Doctors: They get to play God and bill your insurance. Their hero system is saving lives unless it’s after hours or you have Kaiser Permanente.

Lawyers: They worship “the rule of law” — which is basically Talmud for Gentiles. Their hero system is winning arguments no one understands while charging $500/hour to clarify nothing.

Rabbis: Their hero system is being the last man standing after the conversion class drops out. If they make it to retirement without getting cancelled or caught, they’re saints.

Journalists: They believe that naming and shaming bad guys on Twitter is the highest moral good. Their hero system is writing the first draft of history, even if it’s completely wrong and full of typos.

Tech Bros: Their hero system is “disruption” — aka solving problems that don’t exist while outsourcing morality to the blockchain.

Therapists: Their hero system is listening to your trauma while billing your insurance to cope with theirs. Deep down they’re one bad client away from switching to astrology.

Influencers: Their hero system is being famous for being visible. Truth, beauty, and goodness all sacrificed for the algorithm and 15% off with code “ME15.”

Policemen: Their hero system is restoring order with bureaucratic paperwork. The more forms you fill out, the more you’ve done to keep the streets safe — and the more you delay your retirement pension review.

Comedians: Their hero system is being the holy fool — the truth-teller wrapped in neuroses. Like me: standing onstage, talking about Torah, trauma, and dating while hoping for a Shabbos invite and a side of kugel.

Podcasters: Their hero system is “I did the research” — meaning they listened to Joe Rogan and skimmed a Substack. But if they say it into a mic, it becomes sacred knowledge.

Activists: Their hero system is moral urgency on speed. No time for nuance, only slogans and marches. If they’re not angry, they feel spiritually unemployed.

YouTubers: Their hero system is talking endlessly into a ring light until validation arrives in the comments. They’re prophets with merch.

Me: I’m an Orthodox Jewish talk show host who wants to save civilization while staying under budget on gas and hoping my livestream doesn’t drop. My hero system is built from Becker, Gibbon, Ginsburg, and borrowed Wi-Fi.

Grok says:

Luke Ford, in his video “How To Spot A Pedo In The Wild” (7-27-25), displays several areas where he lacks self-awareness, particularly in how he presents his arguments, personal biases, and intellectual approach. Below, I outline key instances where this lack of self-awareness manifests, supported by examples from the transcript and grounded in a critical analysis of his rhetoric and behavior:

Overgeneralization and Sensationalism in Social Commentary:

Ford’s opening segment on “how to spot a pedo” (1:11-1:43) uses exaggerated, inflammatory rhetoric, suggesting that people who advocate for “rule of law,” “checks and balances,” or “human rights” are pedophiles. He frames this as a comedic bit, but it reveals a lack of self-awareness about the harm of such generalizations. By conflating serious societal roles with a grave accusation, he undermines his credibility and fails to recognize how this cheapens discourse. His claim that it would have been a “classic 40 comic crowd-pleaser” (1:18) shows he prioritizes entertainment over substance, unaware of how this trivializes a serious issue.

Unreflective Partisanship and Narrative Bias:

Ford extensively discusses the “Russia gate hoax” (e.g., 12:41-20:17, 39:52-41:44), aligning with a MAGA-friendly narrative that dismisses Russian interference in the 2016 election as insignificant. He cites dissident sources like Aaron Maté and John Solomon (e.g., 20:03, 1:14:41) while dismissing elite media as biased (e.g., 19:49). However, he lacks self-awareness about his own selective sourcing, failing to acknowledge that his preferred sources are equally partisan. For instance, he endorses Maté’s claim that there’s no evidence Russia disseminated DNC leaks to WikiLeaks (31:42), ignoring mainstream intelligence findings (e.g., Mueller Report, Senate Intelligence Committee) that suggest otherwise. This one-sidedness mirrors the elite media bias he critiques, yet he doesn’t reflect on his own echo chamber.

Contradictory Stance on Expertise and Elites:

Ford champions Steven Turner’s critique of “epistemic coercion” and expert rule (e.g., 25:12, 41:54-43:02), arguing that intelligence agencies and elites manipulate narratives to undermine democracy. Yet, he relies heavily on Turner’s academic expertise and complex philosophical frameworks (e.g., 47:03-49:04) to bolster his arguments, creating a paradox. He criticizes elites for gatekeeping knowledge (33:29-35:07) but uses esoteric academic sources to frame his populist narrative, unaware of how this mimics the elite behavior he condemns. His reliance on AI to analyze texts (23:50-24:32) further complicates his anti-expert stance, as he leverages advanced technology to claim intellectual authority.

Personal Grandiosity and Humility Facade:

Ford oscillates between self-deprecation and grandiosity, revealing a lack of self-awareness about his self-presentation. He admits to ADHD, shame, and maladaptive tendencies (13:49-14:19), projecting humility, but then boasts about his prescient reporting from 25 years ago (15:39-16:11) and his ability to produce “wonderful, thoughtful shows” (23:55). His claim that he avoids feuds (16:36) is undermined by his fixation on critics like Ron Unz and Jeffrey Sachs (52:41-57:28), whom he dismisses as reckless while engaging in similar sensationalism. This contradiction suggests he’s unaware of how his desire for relevance drives his rhetoric, as seen when he rejects catering to audiences’ “maladaptive emotional needs” (57:28) yet indulges in provocative content to maintain viewership.

Misjudging Cultural and Emotional Appeals:

Ford’s discussion of “incels” (7:30-12:26), citing Orion Taraban, praises men who respect women’s consent as upholding civil society, framing it as a novel insight (10:44). However, he lacks self-awareness about how this oversimplifies a complex issue, ignoring the toxic subcultures within incel communities that Taraban’s analysis glosses over. His enthusiastic endorsement (“Have you heard this point before?”) shows he’s unaware of how his emotional investment in contrarian takes can cloud his judgment. Similarly, his defense of MAGA narratives (e.g., 26:17-27:07) as emotionally satisfying (26:23) betrays a lack of reflection on how he, too, is swayed by narratives that “feel good” rather than empirical rigor.

Inconsistent Critique of Media and Performative Intellectualism:

Ford criticizes elite media for lacking skepticism and pushing narratives (33:29-34:31, 50:00-50:52), yet he engages in performative intellectualism by name-dropping thinkers like Turner and citing dense academic works (46:37-49:04). He lacks self-awareness about how his own content, laden with jargon like “epistemic closure” (1:05:07), mirrors the elite gatekeeping he decries. His attack on pundits like Niall Ferguson and Jonah Goldberg for prioritizing entertainment over truth (36:56-39:59) is ironic, given his own admission that his “pedo” bit was meant to be a “crowd-pleaser” (1:18). He fails to see how his live streams, filled with tangents and unverified claims, resemble the performative punditry he criticizes.

Unacknowledged Cultural and Personal Biases:

Ford’s comparison of Australian and American media (54:49-56:12) reveals a lack of self-awareness about his cultural biases. He romanticizes American “vibrancy” due to diversity and crime (55:14) while calling Australian news “boring” for its cohesion (55:01). This reflects an unexamined preference for sensationalism, aligning with his content style but unacknowledged as a bias. His personal anecdotes about being ostracized for speaking truth (35:59-36:17) frame him as a martyr, but he doesn’t reflect on how his provocative style (e.g., “pedo” jokes) might contribute to his social conflicts, instead blaming others’ sensitivity.

In summary, Luke Ford’s lack of self-awareness manifests in his sensationalist rhetoric, selective partisanship, contradictory reliance on expertise, grandiose self-presentation, emotional narrative bias, performative intellectualism, and unexamined cultural preferences. While he critiques elite epistemic closure, he inadvertently replicates it through his own narrative-driven content, failing to reflect on how his approach mirrors the flaws he condemns. His video, while engaging, underscores a need for greater introspection to align his critique with his practice.

Washington Post: “An American mega-influencer flew to Lithuania. Then the chaos began. The streamer IShowSpeed drank pink soup in the Baltics and marveled at cars in China. Are his tours propaganda, or just good advertising?”

• Fordy reading about IShowSpeed in Lithuania: “So this is how you get a state dinner in 2025? I’ve been quoting Carl Schmitt for years and the closest I got was lukewarm cholent at a shul kiddush.”
• IShowSpeed gets greeted with soup, dancers, and swords. Fordy gets greeted with: “Please state your name for the record.”
• Fordy: “Wait, Lithuania has an economy minister? And he’s handing out soup?!”
  Meanwhile in America, our economy minister is just the stock market and vibes.
• Fordy’s reaction: “This guy does a backflip at a war memorial and gets 120 million followers. I make one nuanced point about civilizational decline and lose 3 patrons.”
• “They paid him $23,500 for this?”
  Fordy whispering to himself: “Maybe I should start streaming Torah commentaries shirtless with McDonald’s shorts.”
• “They gave him a tie-dye shirt to honor Olympic basketball history.”
  Fordy: “I once got a free tote bag from the ADL with a warning letter inside.”
• Speed drinks pink soup with politicians.
  Fordy: “Last time I shared a soup with a public official, it was during a deposition.”
• Fordy analyzing the media angle: “So the Baltics now rely on chaotic Gen Z streamers to handle foreign policy. I guess Carl Schmitt was right—sovereign is he who controls the TikTok algorithm.”
• Fordy muttering: “12 hours of live streaming chaos and now he’s a geopolitical asset. Meanwhile, I make a two-hour podcast connecting Spinoza, Straussians, and the rule of law, and I get flagged for ‘low information density.’”
• Fordy watching Speed mispronounce ‘Lithuania’: “If I had mispronounced it like that in a debate stream, I’d be doxed, clipped, and exiled from the Temple Mount and YouTube.”
• Tourism board spends $8,000 on snacks and security.
  Fordy: “I spend $14.99 a month on StreamYard and no one’s offered me even a brisket wrap.”
• “Lithuania, we are here!”
  Fordy: “The closest I got to that level of reception was when I walked into a shul and everyone turned to look… because I forgot my mask.”

Epistemic Inversion and the Russiagate Legacy

Stephen Turner’s work on epistemic coercion and expert rule offers a powerful framework for dissecting the lingering influence of Russiagate on elite discourse—especially as examined by The NatCon Squad in Episode 224.

01:10 – “The Entire Basis of Russiagate Has Collapsed”

Russiagate’s foundational claims have crumbled. Turner would recognize this as a classic case of post-normal science—where policy-driven narratives (Trump = Putin’s puppet) were upheld not by evidence but by the institutional authority of intelligence agencies and media ecosystems. The FBI and NSA knew internally that there was no direct Trump-Russia link, yet they allowed the narrative to flourish externally.

02:40 – “They Weaponized Classified Channels”

Officials like John Brennan selectively used classified briefings to shape political perceptions. Turner’s concept of epistemic asymmetry is crucial here: the public is locked out of the data, yet expected to accept the conclusions. The result isn’t merely propaganda—it’s structurally coercive politics, legitimized by secrecy.

03:50 – “The Media Just Took It and Ran”

The panel highlights how outlets like CNN and MSNBC treated preliminary, unverified claims as settled fact. This aligns with Turner’s critique of media as surrogate governance. As institutions like the FBI outsourced their message through leaks and insinuations, legacy media abandoned skepticism in favor of narrative reinforcement. Turner would see this as a devolution from public deliberation to epistemic theater.

05:10 – “We’re Still Living With the Consequences”

Elites argue that Russiagate still justifies censorship on social media under the pretext of “election interference.” Turner’s framework helps us see this as a feedback loop: a weak claim becomes a legitimizing myth, which then justifies restricting democratic speech to protect the myth itself. In Turner’s terms, it’s expert rule creating a self-affirming regime of truth.

06:35 – “This Is Why Trust in Institutions Is Collapsing”

Turner’s central warning: when institutions use their knowledge monopoly to mislead or manipulate, they delegitimize themselves. The erosion of trust isn’t irrational—it’s a reasonable reaction to epistemic overreach. Turner would say the solution isn’t more expert gatekeeping, but renewed mechanisms for public contestation.

Bottom Line:

The NatCon Squad, whether consciously or not, illustrates how Russiagate functioned as a textbook case of Turner’s epistemic critique: narratives built from opaque processes, enforced by institutional power, and upheld by media actors posing as neutral arbiters. That legacy lives on—not just in mistrust, but in a political system still ruled by narratives we’re not allowed to question.

In the aftermath of the 2016 election, a dominant narrative emerged among elite media and political institutions: that Russian interference—particularly via Facebook ads—had a decisive impact on the outcome. This idea became the justification for an ever-expanding push toward content moderation, “disinformation” crackdowns, and the surveillance of online discourse. But what if this premise is fundamentally flawed?

Enter Hugo Mercier’s Not Born Yesterday: The Science of Who We Trust and What We Believe. In it, Mercier flips the script: humans, he argues, did not evolve to be easily manipulated. In fact, when it comes to core interests—politics, values, identity—we’re astonishingly resistant to persuasion. The idea that a few thousand rubles’ worth of Facebook ads could change the course of a presidential election isn’t just unproven—it’s anthropologically naive.

The Elite’s Gullibility Panic

Elite commentary often rests on an implicit assumption: the public is too stupid or fragile to sort signal from noise. Hence the calls for more fact-checking, algorithmic downranking, and government-private partnerships to “protect democracy.” From New York Times op-eds to White House initiatives, there’s a steady drumbeat: Americans were duped by memes, bots, and troll farms, and must be protected—by experts.

But this worldview collapses under Mercier’s insight. Evolution would not have designed humans to fall for claims that risk their survival. People may be misinformed, but that’s not the same as gullible. It’s a rational skepticism calibrated for a noisy world. What looks like resistance to “truth” is often just resistance to manipulation—especially when it comes from institutions people don’t trust.

The Absurdity of the Facebook Ad Panic

Consider the core claim: that Russian Facebook ads swayed voters. As WaPo reported, most ads ran after the election. The total spend was less than what a local car dealership might drop in a weekend campaign. And the targeting? Crude, broad, and mostly ineffective. Yet elite institutions inflated this into a democracy-threatening conspiracy. Why?

Because it let them avoid reckoning with the real reason Trump won: millions of Americans rejected elite consensus. The Russia panic became a form of elite self-soothing. If voters were tricked, it wasn’t our policies, blind spots, or condescension that failed—it was outside manipulation.

Mercier vs. the Censorship Industrial Complex

Mercier shows that persuasion works best when it aligns with pre-existing motivations and trusted messengers. Random political ads from a foreign troll farm don’t meet that standard. Neither do “corrective” fact-checks from institutions already seen as biased. In fact, overzealous censorship can increase mistrust, making people double down on their views. As Mercier writes, people are more like “argumentative filterers” than passive absorbers. We reason socially, not mechanically.

So when elites advocate for social media censorship “for the public good,” they’re working from a model of human cognition that doesn’t exist. They imagine citizens as blank slates to be safeguarded by better-informed elites. But Mercier reminds us: humans are stubborn, skeptical, and often wiser than their rulers give them credit for.

Real Clarity Requires Real Respect

Accepting Mercier’s insight changes how you view the media panic around disinformation. It doesn’t mean bad actors don’t exist or that lies never spread—it means we shouldn’t build surveillance states or speech police based on imagined mass gullibility. Ordinary people, especially when engaged and informed, are better BS detectors than they’re given credit for.

The true threat isn’t citizen gullibility—it’s elite fragility. Their fear that the public might think for itself leads to demands for control. But if we believe in democracy, we must believe people can reason, argue, and choose for themselves. As Mercier makes clear, we weren’t born yesterday. And we’re not buying what the elite media is selling.