Mainstream idealism sets up people to obsess about “making the biggest difference” so that they can “make up for” their unexamined self-rejection (guilt, shame, etc). In the most simple stories of heaven and hell, those who insist that they are not in heaven and that they need salvation through some exclusive, limited way… are presumably experiencing hell. Maybe if they perform the correct rituals to bribe Santa with cookies and tithes, then they can be freed from sin and, after they die, be rewarded with heaven.
So, we are programmed with ideals about how life is and how life should be (or should not be). We are told things like how governments should be, which functions to blind us from how our own government might not be exactly “how governments should be.” However, the naive pupils still blindly believe that “our government USED TO BE perfect,” so they then think “who has ruined our government?” Then they argue amongst themselves for a few decades over how to protect our government from becoming how it should not be (assuming that it is not already that way).
The entire process is hysteria. Virtually all governments use propaganda to present themselves as a “kinder, gentler imperialism” – at least on occasion.Schools do not teach the basic nature of language, which is to govern (to influence, to organize, to focus, to control, etc). They also may not reveal their own methodology or motives.
The idea of an “either/or” world is convenient and certainly a valid orientation: either right or wrong, either just or unjust, either what should be or what should not be. We can call this a “black/white” or binary or dualistic “worldview.” It is actually just a pattern in language.
We can divide any spectrum in to two exclusive categories or several overlapping categories, like blue & red & yellow, as well as maroon and magenta and other “subcategories” of red. How many “real” colors are there? What is the best number of colors to divide a rainbow in to? (This is mostly a matter of how many different distinct categories a particular language happens to have for the various hues of a rainbow.)
One of the most important points in the religion known as the USA is that it is not a religion. The USA’s rituals are not religious rituals.
“Either something is a religion or [else it must be] a ____, but never both!” Those kinds of “mutually exclusive” categorizations are optional.
In the spells cast by the sorcerers of the USA, their curses are not curses. When someone is possessed by a living entity called cancer which spreads through their body and eats them alive, that is not mythology. That is a scientific fact because demonic possession by cancer is a central idea of mainstream demon worshipers.
Posts Tagged ‘government’
What is the nature of governments? They are operations of organized violence.
A widely-recognized point of historical innovation was the Prophet Noah’s implicit declaration of war (on behalf of the Hebrew tribes) against the rest of humanity. The idea apparently was that “we, the elite, must establish court systems in order to govern all of humanity by force (or else an apocalyptic catastrophe worse than the recent Great Flood will wipe out all of humanity).”
This was distinct from the prior legal system internal to the Hebrew tribes. Noah’s declaration was basically “our group is the only rightful authority not only over our own 12 tribes as before, but now over all of humanity.” (That was in contrast to the time prior to Noah’s declaration of a Seventh commandment – “to establish courts of justice” – to add to the six that, according to Hebrew tradition, existed prior to Noah.)
However, we see similar declarations of universal or global authority in many places and times, such as the Holy Roman Empire’s declaration of global political domination in the 1400s. Empires are inherently “expansionist” systems. Isolationism is the exception (when two adjacent empires respect each other’s boundaries), not the standard in human history.
Later, by the time of Moses, (as recorded in the book of Numbers), the Hebrew tribes began their massacres and enslavements of neighboring tribes such as the Midianites. As for the various military campaigns of the Hebrew tribes in the last few thousand years, those are naturally not documented in the Bible.
However, there are many traditions that claim the ancient Hebrew prophet Abraham as a patriarch. One branch is the Holy Roman Empire and another set of branches would be the various Muslim empires.
I occasionally say that the propaganda campaigns (of operations like public schools and mainstream news and even churches) are very effective at (#1) distracting folks from the most significant issues and (#2) only focusing on those primary issues in ways that grossly confuse people, leading them to say things like “math is too hard, economics is too complex, and by the way my health is threatened by a demon called cancer that is going to attack me and possess me and eat me alive, so let’s focus on preventing reverse psychology so we can earn our way in to heaven after our actual lives are over.”Governments form out of the economic interests of those who form them. Through organizing their individual capacity for violence in to gangs called by such names as “the sheriff department,” these groups can influence the masses very efficiently.
They may set up rituals for how to determine who owns what. For instance, if Jack walks west across the border of Oklahoma (part of the USA) in 1844 in to the part of Mexico now known as Texas, is Jack an illegal immigrant or a trespasser or what?Jack stays there and claims to suddenly be a land owner of acreage in a part of the USA that the USA calls Texas. He pays taxes to the USA and not to Mexico.
The government of Mexico “disputes his claims.” They says that he is a variety of insulting things like a criminal tax evader. They send thugs to arrest him, to take his belongings, and to kill him in a public ritual of human sacrifice.
Jack says “come and get me because I am protected by the ink of the US Constitution, you buttfaces!” So, soon Jack is killed.
Then, the USA gets mad that Jack was killed. They send some cavalry in to “annex” Texas from Mexico by force. (Of course, they were planning to annex Mexico anyway and they recruited Jack to be sent to Texas to stir up a dispute and be a “victim” of the Mexican government so as to justify a “retaliation” to “protect innocent settlers like Jack.”)
Then, some native american family whose forefathers have been living in the area for 900 years return from their summer vacation. The governments of Mexico and the USA flip out and say that these trespassers have a mental illness called “being an Apache” and send some more cavalry to protect the “innocent settlers” from the “bad people.”But what does this have to do with currency? Not much yet.
However, when property taxes in Texas must be paid in Mexican pesos, then that creates demand for Mexican pesos, right? After the USA “annexes” (invades) Texas, that means there is a reduction in demand for Mexican pesos. Further, the property taxes there must now be paid in whatever currency that the local warlords dictate.So, for a while Texas property taxes are paid in Confederate Dollars. Then later they are paid in some other currency.(Note that the above currency references a “treaty of peace” between the Confederate States and the United States. Did that really happen? Did the US later violate that treaty and “invade” the South? Or, did the confederates concoct a story that there ever was a peace treaty? Hmmmm….?!?!?)So what is the foundation of all public demand for every currency on the planet? A court system of organized violence threatens to perform an act of economic detriment to someone and demands payment in a particular currency. In other words, systems of extortion form the basis of every currency on this planet.Is this taught in schools? Will it be made in to a big budget movie? No and no.
That would be contrary to the purposes of public schools and mainstream entertainment. However, all that I just told you is easy enough to observe. It is kind of like saying “Every year in Canada, winter is colder than summer.”
Another innovation in the influencing of public opinion was the printing press (and publications like newspapaer and magazines). Later, that became raido and TV and so on. Again, the media outlets focus on certain issues and ignore or dismiss others.
So, centralization of authority ALWAYS corresponds to less receptivity to certain kinds of content as well as “bias” toward big funders. When there is a decentralized set of media outlets, then it can be challenging for a single “tyrant” to influence every single media outlet (or school or church). It is harder to censor or suppress information without centralized distribution and control mechanisms.
In particular, the “wire services” of AP & Reuters allow for huge numbers of media outlets to all program the masses with the same “curriculum.” Further, when there is a regulatory power like the FCC watching every move by AP and Reuters, then that effects content, too.
Plus, there are many cases of fabricated propaganda that governments create and then feed to the private media. Edward Bernays wrote about the deceptions that he used as a US government contractor to get the US public to be more receptive to the idea of invading Europe. He “sold” World War 1 to the US public. How? Deception was a reliable method (consistently effective). He made up emotionally-charged accusations and then had a big budget to get those stories published as “news.”
In WW2, while our allies the USSR were slaughtering tens of millions of their own citizens, they also massacred about 22,000 Polish people and blamed it on the Nazis. Because the USSR was our ally and the Nazis were our enemy, the US (and UK) media publicized the Katyn Forest Massacre as another Nazi atrocity. It was not.
Further, the idea of a massive holocaust in Germany is notable relative to the devastation conducted by the USSR in Ukraine and elsewhere. The popular figure for the total deaths in the German holocasut is 6 million. Not only is that figure considered by many to be immesnely inflated, but it is still dwarfed by the series of genocide conducted by the USSR (the US ally).
But the US government’s “ministry of information” did not “feed” AP & Reuters stories about the genocides of our communist allies. Instead, the Katyn Forest massacre was blamed on the Nazis as well as a variety of emotionally-charged stories, like making soap from human flesh or using human skin for lampshades. If some of these stories were “recycled” inflammatory content created by Edward Bernays, they were not publicized for accuracy but for emotional impact.
So there are many layers to the issue of centralizing information. There are clear cases of falsehood like the Gulf of Tonkin “attacks against the US” that the US used to justify aggression against Vietnam. Basically, the US Navy traveled many thousands of miles to bring immense military power to the edge of Vietnam, then publicized a report of an attack against a US vessel, then “retaliated.” The report of the original attack was later admitted as entirely false, but the invasion itself did not stop because of that detail.
The current “official” version of the story is that the US Secreatry of Defense McNamara intentionally deceived President Johnson. However, some radicals assert that the US invasion of Vietnam was a choice made long before that, with the assassination of JFK to remove him as a “barrier” to the invasion. LBJ may have been ignorant and naive or may have just been smart enough to have a lower-ranking agent (lower than his rank) be the “bad guy.”
What about matters of health? Would commercial interests lobby for the creation of US government agencies to advance the interests of the lobbyists? Would the lobbyists try to influence their agency (the one that they created) so as to protect the economic interests of the lobbyists?
If margarine sales depended on a demonization of saturated fat, could the commercial interests get the FDA to approve the use of margarine (whether safe or healthy or what) and also permit a demonizing of saturated fat? What if the lobbyists could get the FDA to do the demonizing itself and at the expense of taxpayers? That would be a great result for a lobbyist or PR firm, right?
The idea that the FDA or the CDC ever had any scientific credibility or integrity is an interesting idea. Where did you learn it? From the government-operated schools and government-regulated media?
Consider the allegation by the FDA that cholesterol is a dangerous substance. Millions of species of animal on this planet all have livers and all of those livers are constantly producing cholesterol, which can then be made in to estrogen and cortisol and vitamin D. How many of those animals are harmed by cholesterol?
The FDA can publicize the idea that all of those animals are harmed by cholesterol. That is not only false, but ridiculous. Even now, though, if you go to a grocery store or search online for cholesterol, you can find reference to “lowering cholesterol” as if that is a good thing. (What if there is extensive evidence that lowering cholesterol has huge long-term detriments?)
What is the actual issue that led to the demonization of cholesterol? Cholesterol is sent to damaged tissue to help repair it. So, there is a correlation between cholesterol and various kinds of medical conditions.
The FDA, as an instrument of lobbyists, publicized the idea that cholesterol caused the damage to the tissue. This is exactly like saying that the presence of paramedics CAUSES medical emergencies. It has no scientific credibility and never did.
However, demonizing cholesterol was recognized as a profitable promotion. This allowed for the creation of a new industry: toxic drugs to impair the function of the liver in regard to the manufacturing of cholesterol.
Some radicals assert that the FDA has always been an instrument of special commercial interests (created by them and directed by them). They say things like “the only thing the FDA has ever done is to conduct a war on science.”
However, anonymous sources within the FDA have issued statements saying “we operate only to promote the interests of you personally and of all of the other human resources that we manage.” Hillary Clinton recently said, “This is a huge relief to know, right?”
So, as to the issue of “holding the government officials accountable,” who will do that? Other government agencies? Really?
The wise thing to do is to “wake up” to the nature of governments. They are systematically violent and deceptive.
In the case of the 1979 Iran hostage situation, certain US politicians took actions to delay the release of the hostages to promote the campaign of Reagan over Carter. Among the leading agents of the operation were Oliver North and Caspar Weinberger. They illegally laundered drug money from central America and they illegally traded in weapons in order to convince the Iranians to keep the US hostages captive until Reagan’s inauguration.
North was later convicted (and sentenced) and Weinberger was indicted (plus 4 others) and awaiting trial. President GWH Bush had the legal right to interrupt all of those legal punishments and did so.
Marc Rich was not as well known. He was involved in illegal smuggling of oil out of Iran during the embargo of the late 1970s. After massive donations to causes “near to the heart of Bill Clinton,” Clinton also reversed the convictions against Marc Rich (which included tax evasion and fraud, etc).
Those are events within our lifetimes. Prior to our lifetimes, were governments less violent or less deceptive? Government propaganda all over the world may suggest that “our government, which is so unlike the evil governments of so many other places and times, has always been the best one ever.”
This is a brief exchange in regard to this recent blog: https://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com/2014/08/19/the-myth-of-declining-government-honesty/
Daniel Fritschler So they can’t see how other government’s operate and how even the history books speak of dishonesty and corruption when it comes to the American government. Maybe they do see it but are just afraid to acknowledge it…blind because of fear and not naivety? Maybe?
Daniel Fritschler I think in today’s day and age of technology either you have to be avoiding the truth of how systems or societies work or you are just cowered in a corner because of fear. Perhaps the third group just isn’t intelligent enough to put the puzzle together and view the big picture but I would bet most are.
Daniel Fritschler I mean you can’t tell me people conform because of their peers or pressure from others after high school(or just an imaginary or perceived threat) but they can operate from the real threat or the fear of knowing what the government is capable of. So the fear shifts from other people as in friends, acquaintances and/or family to an actual threat or the corruption of the imperialistic empire.
The idea that the US government was previously more honest than lately has been a popular idea… for centuries. It is based of course on a particular perception about past honesty.
Those who independently study the nature of government may encounter some simple facts about all governments. (Note that in order to distract the masses from independent research, governments often make it a high priority to program the masses with pro-government propaganda through indoctrination systems of schools which may be government-regulated, or even government-funded or, in the most extreme cases, even operated by governments.)
The mainstream media is similar (though in the US, the media is not as socialized as the primary school system). If you care to research the history of US government pro-war propaganda, two good sources are War is a Racket by USMC Major General Smedley Butler (1935)
Throughout the years various men of military service have spoken up and….
There is also this book from 1928 in which the nephew of Sigmund Freud (who was also the founder of the PR industry) details how he invented inflammatory anti-German propaganda in order to incite antagonism in the US public so as to reduce the resistance to the first US invasion of Europe (what later became known as “World War One”)
S.O. asked: “how come?”
The Prophet Noah said that unless the Hebrew tribes imposed a government court system on all of humanity, then a new apocalypse would destroy humanity. These court systems extorted wealth from their subjects and dictated the form of payment to be used to pay the invented debts that the government extortion rackets claimed from the masses.
However, it was not just guile and trickery that made this system so effective, but brutality and intimidation. The massacring of the Midianites ordered by Moses was one instance of slaughter that spread terror (and compliance) throughout the growing zionist empire. The Holy Roman Inquisition (with it’s tortures and crusades) is a branch of the same system of organized coercion. All governments have this same basic foundation.
That author’s take is the same kind of thing to me. If this was a poker game, this was not a one-round game. This was, to me, an experiment by the Feds in regard to what reaction they could produce. I would not be surprised if almost all of the protesters have been identified and received increased monitoring (and even targeting).
The reality is that challenging armed government agents can go very poorly for the challengers. That point seems to be completely ignored in the comments of the story that you sent me. I am sure that he has knowledge of protests getting demolished in places like Ohio (in 1970 when 4 college students were shot by the US National Guard), the Ukraine, Africa, Cambodia, Israel, Arabia, or Teinanmen Square (and note that the photographed incident below actually was notable because it was so unusual that the civilian was not simply killed).
The central point of George Orwell in the book 1984, which so many seem to miss, is that governments may occasionally set up events to draw out “protestors” to identify themselves to the government. Many “anti-government” authors are funded by governments (even if the actual source of the funding is hidden from the author). Some anti-government groups are started by the government (or inflitrated and then co-opted).
Anyway, here is what he said to glorify the actions of the protestors (and the text in bold is his emphasis, not mine):
BLM showed up with “lawful orders” backed up by two different (federal) courts. But the People did not perceive those order as being morally justified. Therefore, they chose not to recognize those orders as being lawful. As was the case at Bundy Ranch, Americans can and do think for themselves in such scenarios, and at any moment, they may decide that YOUR actions as a federal agent are grossly unlawful, immoral or unconstitutional. If enough people arrive at the same conclusion, you will sooner or later find yourself surrounded and possibly arrested by the People at gunpoint.
This concept does not compute with many federal agents because they were not taught the real roots of power in a free society. They are taught that a law written on a piece of paper is an absolute, irrefutable power which can never be questioned by lowly “civilians.” In reality, a law is nothing more than mutual consent of the governed. That consent, it turns out, can be invoked at any time if those who apply the law do so in a way that is egregious or unreasonable. All government power comes from the People, after all, and can therefore be revoked by the People if government becomes abusive or overreaching in its exercising of that power.
Laws mean nothing, after all, if they are not based on a sense of justice which can be recognized by the Common Man (or woman).
Keep in mind that some times when a group assembles to protest the actions of the US as unlawful or unjustified, the US (for instance) does not stop. Did the US stop occupying Germany or Japan because of protests? No: 70 years later, troops are still there.
Did the US continue to the invasion of Vietnam even though some Vietnamese shot back at them? Yes, for many years.
What about Iraq? Did people really believe “we will pull out the troops as soon as I am elected” when some politician said that? Some people may be very naive. Some of the most naive may be some of the most vocal.
Anyway, with new technologies like social media, information (and photos or videos) CAN travel quickly. Those who USE that mechanism or at least RESPECT that mechanism may have a reduced reactivity to “social media” hysterias started by others.
- The Devil’s New World Religion (gunnygblog.wordpress.com)
- The 10 Commandments of Government (directorblue.blogspot.com)
- At Least 22 Defense Industry Stakeholders Used as ‘Pundits’ by US Media to Sell Syria War! (socioecohistory.wordpress.com)
That systematic redistribution of resources is the primary purpose of governments. Ideals of “fairness” and “justice” shift over time to match with government programming: “who deserves the biggest disability subsidy? Who deserves the biggest reparation for racial discrimination: freed slaves or colonized natives?” These ideals shift over time, usually gradually, to justify the latest revenue programs, such as a $1,000 minimum fine for filing taxes late or a $500 minimum fine for driving a car with a cracked windshield or a $200/month fee for mandatory national health insurance.
- Wealth Redistribution Crushing to Young Workers (sdw872.wordpress.com)
- The Foibles of the Redistribution of Wealth (dannesrepossessions.wordpress.com)
- Redistribution of Wealth (phil2100su2013.wordpress.com)
- A Brief Primer (stabnow.wordpress.com)
- GST: A recipe for economic disaster (hornbillunleashed.wordpress.com)
- Taxation (siroptimus.wordpress.com)
- Privatization (venitism.blogspot.com)
- The Dialogue Continues (bothwell.typepad.com)
- News to Me: Taxation Is Robbery (politicalcrazyness.tumblr.com)
- The Paradox of Imperialism (webabuser.blogspot.com)