Despite the mainstream media trying to claim otherwise, Alex Jones is not fake news. In fact, I think Jones fills an important media niche that is dangerous to leave unfilled.
To the uninitiated, Jones is the quintessential conspiracy theorist. Him and his crew at Infowars cover a variety of topics that are ignored, or even unknown, to the mainstream media: internet censorship, globalism, deep state, Satanic cults, even transhumanism.
I do not blame the general public for dismissing Jones as a circus act, as he is notorious for pushing the envelope. Not only is he willing to explore any topic, regardless of its absurdity, but he does it with a level of intensity that would give Benito Mussolini a run for his money. Opinionated rants are his signature style after all. It would not be Alex Jones if he did not go on an angry, unscripted rant at least once a day. Sometimes he even takes his shirt off. But behind all this pandemonium, there is important work being done.
The mainstream media routinely criticize Jones for saying things which are not true. They argue that his misinformation, “fake news” as they like to call it, puts his viewers into a paranoid state of mind which in turn makes them dangerous. His tendency to speak off the cuff provides plenty of ammunition to his critics who believe this to be the case, but I think this is a misrepresentation of what he actually does.
It is true that much of Jones’ material is not factual per se, but rather speculation based off factual information. I do not think there is anything inherently wrong with him doing this; in fact I am glad there are people like Jones who are willing to do this.
I do not know why this is, but it seems that mainstream society is trapped in the mindset that the only “real news” is that which reports information that is 100% verified by reliable sources. Ultimately, I think this is a dangerous way of thinking that is antithetical to discerning the truth.
Every profession has its own methods for discerning the truth, but the one I am most familiar with is the scientific method. Even the scientific method allows room for speculation. In fact I would argue that every scientific truth is rooted in some form of initial speculation.
The scientific method follows a simple protocol: a hypothesis is presented. The hypothesis is tested via repeated experimentation. If the experimental results match those predicted by the hypothesis, the hypothesis is validated. New hypotheses can in turn be built off the now validated hypothesis. If the hypothesis is not validated, then it either needs to be modified and the process repeated, or it needs to be discarded.
The scientific method is the most logically intensive system of discerning the truth that I am aware of, and even it allows for a surprisingly large amount of speculation. The only requirement for a hypothesis to be considered scientific is that it has the potential to be proven wrong via experimentation. As long as this requirement is met, it does not matter how absurd the hypothesis is; the presenter of the hypothesis is still acting within the confines of the scientific method.
These are not word games that I am playing; there is practical significance behind this. Consider the work of the American biochemist Kary Mullis. Mullis was instrumental in developing polymerase chain reaction (PCR), a technique which revolutionized the field of genetics. It was so revolutionary that he was awarded the 1993 Nobel Prize in chemistry, the highest honor that can be achieved in the field of chemistry.
Mullis was just as famous for making outrageous claims as he was for discovering PCR. Among other things, he has professed a belief in astrology and that HIV does not cause AIDS. He even claims to have been abducted by aliens. It is true that some of his more outrageous hypotheses may be pseudoscientific, but the beautiful thing about the scientific method is that this does not matter. The work he did in developing PCR was scientific, regardless of the other claims he made.
So what does this have to do with Alex Jones? I, for one, think Jones and Mullis have similar ways of thinking. Both have a (perhaps unhealthy) attraction towards the theatrical. Both are known for making outrageous claims. And both have a tendency towards uncovering truths which may go otherwise unnoticed by more conventional thinkers.
Like it or not, Jones has helped uncover some truths that are largely ignored by the mainstream media. There really is a global elite that is operating a shadow government to promote the globalist economic model. Silicon Valley really is committed to promoting transhumanism in conjunction with social justice; something I personally believe to be a dangerous combination. The Illuminati really do have a level of influence on our culture that is dangerous to ignore.
You may be asking, why don’t people like Jones and Mullis dispel with the kookery and stick to what they are good at: revealing truths that would otherwise go unnoticed by more conventional thinkers? Unfortunately, I do not think it is that easy. For people like Jones and Mullis, their kookery and knack for uncovering the truth are probably a package deal, meaning that you cannot have one without the other. Perhaps these are the manifestations of a personality type which is intrinsically suited towards open-mindedness?
Regardless, people like Jones and Mullis have proven themselves to be important components of humanity’s pursuit of the truth. Instead of shunning them, maybe mainstream society should work with them and recognize that they have a comparative advantage in forming hypotheses while also acknowledging that they have a tendency to allow their imaginations to run wild? This could prove to a potent combination.