Wikipedia: Hidden in Plain Sight
Discover more from FreePolitik
Listen to an audio reading of this article:
The phrase hidden in plain sight is considered by some to be one of the methods used by those who seriously contemplate ruling the world. They put the truth right out in the open, so nobody can see it. Hidden in plain sight. Only a master psychologist would understand human beings to such a degree to even consider such a course of action.
As a disclaimer, I know this article will probably be greeted with groans of disbelief, and possibly some hate mail, for even suggesting that Wikipedia is a source of truth.
“Wikipedia is controlled by the globalists ffs!!”
Newsflash #1: All digital information is controlled by the globalists, unless you want to share information in the woods, or speak out about the crushing weight of global power under a bridge to avoid censorship and monitoring by the NSA or CIA or whoever. Pick your favourite spy organisation.
“We are the first people in the history of the planet for whom this is true, the first people to be burdened with data immortality, the fact that our collected records might have an eternal existence. This is why we have a special duty. We must ensure that these records of our pasts can’t be turned against us, or turned against our children.”
― Edward Snowden, Permanent Record
Newsflash #2: ALL DIGITAL COMMUNICATION IS RECORDED PERMANENTLY.
There, I got that off my chest, (but I don’t feel any better about it.)
On a side note, Substack is a wonderful platform, I’m so very glad it exists, and I really love the quality of contributing writers. But how do I know anything about Substack? Well, I looked on the Wikipedia article about Substack, which has 31 clickable links to a variety of sources that anyone can follow up and learn more. So exciting. There’s nowhere else on the internet where you can find this much info compiled in such an easy manner. Go ahead and do a search, if you don’t believe me.
The second criticism that is repeated ad nauseam about Wikipedia, (by people who never go on Wikipedia) is that “anyone can go on Wikipedia and change it.” True. But why don’t people go on Wikipedia and change it then? The general public can edit it anytime.
Here’s someone who did this just yesterday:
There is also a lengthy discussion in the Talk section about the fact that most of the sources are from the WEF website, and also a major contributor to the WEF article is a WEF member:
While I was cruising through the article about the WEF, I discovered that Canadian Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, is not only a member of the WEF, but she is also a trustee on the board that governs the WEF. I also discovered Freeland was educated at Harvard and Oxford, majoring in Russian and Slavic studies. She wrote a book called Sale of the Century, which chronicles “Russia’s journey from communist state rule to capitalism.” While Freeland was attending University of Kyiv, she came under the scrutiny of the Russian KGB, because she was working with journalist Bill Keller of The New York Times to document the Bykivnia graves, an unmarked mass grave site where the NKVD (the Soviet secret police) disposed of tens of thousands of dissidents. She attracted the attention of the KGB, who tagged her with the code name Frida. Soviet newspapers attacked her as a foreigner meddling in their internal affairs over her contacts with Ukrainian activists.
Her wikipedia bio has 106 clickable citations for even more in depth study. There is no where else on the internet where this kind of info is available.
The world will turn in whatever direction that the most passionate and committed people on the Earth make it turn. It is up to us, now more than ever before in the history of humanity. The global elites are working 24/7 to achieve their goals. They are motivated and committed to making their nightmare global technocracy become a reality.
Okay, so enough preaching, what about Wikipedia?
Wikipedia was co-founded by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger, a couple of internet geeks. The English Wikipedia has 6,622,016 articles, 45,069,362 registered users, and 129,698 active users. A user is considered active if they have made one or more edits in the past 30 days. Jimmy Wales stated in 2009 that “It turns out over 50% of all the edits are done by just 0.7% of the users ... 524 people ... And in fact, the most active 2%, which is 1400 people, have done 73.4% of all the edits.”
According to a recent article by Business Insider:
When you put it all together, the story becomes clear: an outsider makes one edit to add a chunk of information, then insiders make several edits tweaking and reformatting it. In addition, insiders rack up thousands of edits doing things like changing the name of a category across the entire site -- the kind of thing only insiders deeply care about. As a result, insiders account for the vast majority of the edits. But it’s the outsiders who provide nearly all of the content.
Does Wikipedia have bias? Yes, for sure it does, but just to add another disclaimer: ALL information has bias, because all information is provided by human beings who all have prejudice, bias, perspectives and differing worldviews — with no exceptions.
Larry Sanger left the organisation in 2002 and since then he “has argued that despite its merits, Wikipedia lacks credibility and accuracy due to a lack of respect for expertise and authority. Since 2020, he has criticized Wikipedia for what he perceives as a left-wing and liberal ideological bias in its articles.”
Larry Sangar complained bitterly that, “Examples have become embarrassingly easy to find. The Barack Obama article completely fails to mention many well-known scandals: Benghazi, the IRS scandal, the AP phone records scandal, and Fast and Furious, to say nothing of Solyndra or the Hillary Clinton email server scandal—or, of course, the developing “Obamagate” story in which Obama was personally involved in surveilling Donald Trump. A fair article about a major political figure certainly must include the bad with the good. Beyond that, a neutral article must fairly represent competing views on the figure by the major parties.”
The Wikipedia entry on Barack Obama has 30,000 words and 505 citations, basically a short book.
To continue, would conservatives prefer that Wikipedia have more conservative content? If so, why are conservatives not participating in the editing of Wikipedia to level the playing field?
Larry Sanger adds, with emphasis, that “Meanwhile, as you can imagine, the idea that the Donald Trump article is neutral is a joke. Just for example, there are 5,224 none-too-flattering words in the “Presidency” section. By contrast, the following “Public Profile” (which the Obama article entirely lacks).”
Another awkward fact that Wikipedia has been trying to change is that 85-90% of Wikipedia editors are male. Wikipedia so far has failed to attract more female editors. The reason there are less women is because men are more combative in the “editing wars” that take place in the Talk section of articles. This makes what women perceive to be a hostile environment. Men are deemed to be generally more belligerent, and also more confident of their opinions than women.
Oddly enough, a brief look at the Wikimedia Foundation website, that boasts of 700 member staff, reveals that Wiki is dominated by women. The top four dudes are dudettes:
As the saying goes, follow the money. Another source of bias comes from those funding Wikipedia through its lengthy list of big-money donors such as Google, Facebook, Amazon and private donors such as George Soros, Pierre Omydar and other so-called philanthropists who fund everything that has a pulse. The number one financial contribution is from the Sloan Foundation, which itself was established by General Motors president, Alfred P. Sloan, who is infamous for partnering with the Nazis during the second world war.
From the Wiki article on Sloan:
In August 1938, a senior executive for General Motors, James D. Mooney, received the Grand Cross of the German Eagle for his distinguished service to the Reich. "Nazi armaments chief Albert Speer told a congressional investigator that Germany could not have attempted its September 1939 blitzkrieg of Poland without the performance-boosting additive technology provided by Alfred P. Sloan and General Motors".[5][26][27] During the war, GM's Opel Brandenburg facilities produced Ju 88 bombers, trucks, land mines and torpedo detonators for Nazi Germany.[26] Charles Levinson, formerly deputy director of the European office of the CIO, alleged that Sloan remained on the board of Opel.[28]
Wikipedia registered its net assets at a whopping US$231 million (plus a US$100 million endowment) by the end of June 2021. Wikipedia is owned and operated by Wikimedia Foundation, the San Fransisco-based non-profit run by founder Jimmy Wales. Though it is often said that San Fransisco is a center of left-leaning politics, it should be noted that Substack is also based in San Fransisco, so accusations of guilt-by-location should be qualified.
Who really runs Wikipedia? There are a group of 36 Stewards who are anonymous, except for Jimmy Wales. They have full power and control over any article and any editing. They are from all over the world. Only one is female, and they are all multi-lingual, with only one with no second language other than English.
We are in a battle for the truth. The mainstream media is controlling the narrative and social media giants like Facebook, YouTube, Google and Twitter are pushing hard to censor and control the truth. However, websites like Wikipedia are open to volunteers to work quietly and carefully, behind the scenes, and ensure that the truth is not a one-sided narrative. After all the edits are made, articles can become locked. It is up to those who have a good handle on truth, to represent, promote and protect that same truth.
Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.
~ Buddha
My work is entirely reader-supported. If you enjoyed this article please consider sharing it with like-minded people. Upgrade your subscription to “paid” if you appreciate what I’m doing, or buy me a coffee at Paypal.me/freepolitik.
Follow me on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Rumble, Bitchute or YouTube. If you want to read more you can buy my book, How to Defeat the New World Order. The best way to keep up to date with what we’re doing is subscribe to the mailing list at VictoryCanada.today which will get you an email notification for our social activism, and on Substack, whenever I write another article.
All works are co-authored with my partner MB Bose. Thank you for your continued support and encouragement.