Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

How much power do Masons have?

page: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 12 2013 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 




What is the power in the example I provided it and who controls it?


The example you gave about the soup kitchen the power is on the organizers I thought that was obvious, the recipients of the "benevolence" do not have any power (and so have a submissive posture) and the volunteers range from controllers to "useful idiots". As for the non monetary gains I already gave you many examples they range from personal felling of worth and accomplishment (whose validity can be argued) to social gains like recognition from "peers" (near the same level of below in the social pyramid) or economical as the work can be used as credentials. I covered all this before...



How could a volunteer receive remuneration and still be a volunteer?


As for the usefulness of the action I also presented as disputed, feeding people in hunger serves only to diffuse a deeper social problem it does not address the dependents need of being able to feed themselves. Are you slow to understand simple social-economical relation or being intentionally dense ?

A for the controllers advantage it can have many ranges, from money laundering, economical support of some channels (food producers, transportation services, etc) to money management and collection aspect (already seen recently in the news) to indirectly support of parallel activities (it is not by chance than religion, even organized crime is often mixed in this type or actions).



The Marhsall Plan is irrelevant


No it is not, it is the demonstration of the same type of logic and forces in a larger scale, people in Europe were dying of hunger amidst the ruins of war and America offered to feed them. This is even more grave since Nations, just like Corporations do not act at all altruistically. As I covered earlier a person can be altruistically but it does not work well in groups, the larger the group the more fractures there are in the intentions and goals (the more exertion of control is required).



How am I receiving payout, other than personal satisfaction, when I donate my time?


I'm myself a volunteer in other projects that I donate my time to a valid goal but at the same time I benefit from recognition of the work that is done. As I said before there are plenty of ways may benefit, since all work has costs it would be impossible for any one to "donate" it otherwise, especially in the context that everyone is obligated to compete in society... Personal satisfaction is a payout.



I donate my time, not money and I do not claim my time on any of my income tax returns. Where I volunteer is non-denominational and non-political. So again I ask you to answer my direct questions.


I did, as I had before, but more directly again since you failed to understand the points I was demonstrating or be capable of detecting the similitudes in your exact example. It's a mater of scale (as I had pointed out).
edit on 12-5-2013 by Panic2k11 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 13 2013 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Panic2k11
The example you gave about the soup kitchen the power is on the organizers I thought that was obvious, the recipients of the "benevolence" do not have any power (and so have a submissive posture) and the volunteers range from controllers to "useful idiots".


As we have a rotating schedule with every member of the group being responsible for a different Saturday there is no leadership in the sense you are conveying. Also, no one forces anyone to attend, there are other pantires and kitchens in the area.


As for the non monetary gains I already gave you many examples they range from personal felling of worth and accomplishment (whose validity can be argued) to social gains like recognition from "peers" (near the same level of below in the social pyramid) or economical as the work can be used as credentials. I covered all this before...


You know montetary means 'money' so a 'personal felling of worth' has nothing to do with financial remuneration. You examples are poor at best and do not outline how anyone who volunteers gains recognition from the peers or uses their donated time as 'credentials'. You need to be specific as to how this mechanism would operate.


As for the usefulness of the action I also presented as disputed, feeding people in hunger serves only to diffuse a deeper social problem it does not address the dependents need of being able to feed themselves. Are you slow to understand simple social-economical relation or being intentionally dense ?


No smart mouth, we are not discussing the deeper socio-economic issue that causes persons to be hungry, stick to the topic which is how does volunteering cause people to have power.


A for the controllers advantage it can have many ranges, from money laundering, economical support of some channels (food producers, transportation services, etc) to money management and collection aspect (already seen recently in the news) to indirectly support of parallel activities (it is not by chance than religion, even organized crime is often mixed in this type or actions).


You do love tangents. Stick to the example I gave. Explain how a these things occur when no money is changing hands and all foodstuffs are donated.


No it is not...


Yes it is. We are talking about a soup kitchen. While I understand the bankrupt European states are on a trajectory that may require continental soup kitchens the Marshall Plan is not relevant to the conversation.


I'm myself a volunteer in other projects that I donate my time to a valid goal but at the same time I benefit from recognition of the work that is done.


Then you are doing it for the wrong reasons and should probably reassess how you judge others and what you think their perception of you happens to be based upon your actions. This is a rather ego- and self-centric position to take and displays your jaded and cyncical approach to life.


I did, as I had before, but more directly again since you failed to understand the points I was demonstrating or be capable of detecting the similitudes in your exact example. It's a mater of scale (as I had pointed out).


Scale is not the discussion. You asked for a specific example and I gave one but you seem to enjoy attempting to link neighborhood-level action to a governmental-level, post war effort to rebuild Europe. The two could not be more dissimilar.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


I'm going to stop here as I think you are intentionally being dense and there is no point in continuing engaging you. I continue to state opposition to your rational and respect your right to do the same to mine...

The discussion started in a general topic, you reduced it to a smaller and specific case that only you have information about. To me no problem but you started to refute general views just because they were general (even if valid in your reduction). Here I cease to comply with that imposition of rules as they not permit a fair dialog...



As we have a rotating schedule with every member of the group being responsible for a different Saturday there is no leadership in the sense you are conveying. Also, no one forces anyone to attend, there are other pantires and kitchens in the area.


I gave you examples that are generally applicable to all types of tasks (including voluntary work). You continue to fail to see how I'm not attacking your voluntarism but simply claiming that voluntarism exists mostly because there are positive returns to those that perform it. This is indisputable...



You know montetary means 'money' so a 'personal felling of worth' has nothing to do with financial remuneration.


That is a false dichotomy. You spend money (or effort) to feel good or gain a feeling of worth. Effort is equal to work, work is energy expenditure and therefore monetized. It seems that you are the one that does not understand money (and the "evil" it is)...



No smart mouth, we are not discussing the deeper socio-economic issue that causes persons to be hungry, stick to the topic which is how does volunteering cause people to have power.


I was disusing the deeper socio-economic issues, just because you directed it to a example case about a soup kitchen and demanded me to go along does not remove me from my initial goal and the validity of my statements so far, that you fail to interject any opposition beyond simple dismissal...



Scale is not the discussion. You asked for a specific example and I gave one but you seem to enjoy attempting to link neighborhood-level action to a governmental-level, post war effort to rebuild Europe. The two could not be more dissimilar.


I tried to reply in terms of your example but I do not know the particulars that you continue to add, I still can't read minds and you seem to fail to understand that I started by a generalization and even added that there can be exceptions at very small scales. But continuing to point out that there is always a gain to those that perform a task or they wouldn't do it.



You do love tangents. Stick to the example I gave. Explain how a these things occur when no money is changing hands and all foodstuffs are donated.


No I just refused to fallow you to you real or imaginary specific case to continue to defend the points I was making. Since you agree that there is always a gain, even if you chose to be blind to the other interactions (and possibilities of instrumentalization) of that type of activity I see no point in continue...

Try to do some research if you fail to see the validity of my claims (even of your example may be some type of exception regarding intentions it also fails to address the real social issue)...


As 1930 drew to a close, Capone embarked on a major publicity campaign. He opened a free soup kitchen for the people who had been thrown out of work by the deepening Depression. During the last two months of the year, the soup kitchen served three free meals a day. "The soup kitchen was carefully calculated to rehabilitate his image and to ingratiate himself with the workingman, who, he realized, had come to regard him as another unimaginably wealthy and powerful tycoon"(Bergreen).



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Panic2k11
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


I'm going to stop here as I think you are intentionally being dense and there is no point in continuing engaging you. I continue to state opposition to your rational and respect your right to do the same to mine...

The discussion started in a general topic, you reduced it to a smaller and specific case that only you have information about.

Uh....no....the discussion started on a specific topic and AM's keeping it on-topic to whit "How much power do Masons have?".


Originally posted by Panic2k11


You know montetary means 'money' so a 'personal felling of worth' has nothing to do with financial remuneration.

That is a false dichotomy. You spend money (or effort) to feel good or gain a feeling of worth. Effort is equal to work, work is energy expenditure and therefore monetized. It seems that you are the one that does not understand money (and the "evil" it is)...

No, yours is the false dichotomy. Monetary gain means money gained. Full stop. If money is not gained, there is no financial remuneration and your belaboured attempt to equate an apple with an orange will not make a difference.


Originally posted by Panic2k11


You do love tangents. Stick to the example I gave. Explain how a these things occur when no money is changing hands and all foodstuffs are donated.


No I just refused to fallow you to you real or imaginary specific case to continue to defend the points I was making. Since you agree that there is always a gain, even if you chose to be blind to the other interactions (and possibilities of instrumentalization) of that type of activity I see no point in continue...

Try to do some research if you fail to see the validity of my claims (even of your example may be some type of exception regarding intentions it also fails to address the real social issue)...


As 1930 drew to a close, Capone embarked on a major publicity campaign. He opened a free soup kitchen for the people who had been thrown out of work by the deepening Depression. During the last two months of the year, the soup kitchen served three free meals a day. "The soup kitchen was carefully calculated to rehabilitate his image and to ingratiate himself with the workingman, who, he realized, had come to regard him as another unimaginably wealthy and powerful tycoon"(Bergreen).


But guess what Capone did? HE SPENT MONEY and he did so in a non-voluntary manner as he was countering a negative public impression. Your attempts at rationalising and equivocating do nothing to change fact.



Fitz



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Panic2k11
The discussion started in a general topic, you reduced it to a smaller and specific case that only you have information about.


Considering you claimed to be able to refute specific example I provided one (and you accuse me of being dense):


Originally posted by Panic2k11
This is extremely basic deduction and I will gladly discuss any exceptions that you can provide to prove this wrong.



To me no problem but you started to refute general views just because they were general (even if valid in your reduction). Here I cease to comply with that imposition of rules as they not permit a fair dialog...


Which means your cynical and jaded approach to charity and volunterism has broken down because the persons I described in my situation do not fall under the sad umbrella of how your perception of these works operates.


I gave you examples that are generally applicable to all types of tasks (including voluntary work). You continue to fail to see how I'm not attacking your voluntarism but simply claiming that voluntarism exists mostly because there are positive returns to those that perform it. This is indisputable...


'Generally applicable' was not the caveat you provided, you said 'any'. Shall I quote it again?


That is a false dichotomy. You spend money (or effort) to feel good or gain a feeling of worth. Effort is equal to work, work is energy expenditure and therefore monetized. It seems that you are the one that does not understand money (and the "evil" it is)...


My time off from work is not monetized unless I choose it to be so, i.e. second job. Volunteering on my time off from my career is not monetized because I am doing these things for free. Hence your equation is invalid. Your calculation is based on a narrow personal perception of what it means to donate one's time.


I was disusing the deeper socio-economic issues, just because you directed it to a example case about a soup kitchen and demanded me to go along does not remove me from my initial goal and the validity of my statements so far, that you fail to interject any opposition beyond simple dismissal...


I directed it there because of your challenge. If you could not live up to what you offered (and you have not (The Marshall Plan as rebuttal for a soup kitchen for Pete's sake)) then you should not have made the challenge to begin with.


I tried to reply in terms of your example but I do not know the particulars that you continue to add, I still can't read minds and you seem to fail to understand that I started by a generalization and even added that there can be exceptions at very small scales. But continuing to point out that there is always a gain to those that perform a task or they wouldn't do it.


Since I only particpate 'at very small scales' how does your very general analogy hold true in my case and those that work with me? That was a rhetorical question, it does not.


No I just refused to fallow you to you real or imaginary specific case to continue to defend the points I was making. Since you agree that there is always a gain, even if you chose to be blind to the other interactions (and possibilities of instrumentalization) of that type of activity I see no point in continue...


The gain is for those who get a hot meal instead of going hungry.


Try to do some research if you fail to see the validity of my claims (even of your example may be some type of exception regarding intentions it also fails to address the real social issue)...


As 1930 drew to a close, Capone embarked on a major publicity campaign. He opened a free soup kitchen for the people who had been thrown out of work by the deepening Depression. During the last two months of the year, the soup kitchen served three free meals a day. "The soup kitchen was carefully calculated to rehabilitate his image and to ingratiate himself with the workingman, who, he realized, had come to regard him as another unimaginably wealthy and powerful tycoon"(Bergreen).


What does Al Capone have to do with me and a group of my neighbors participating in the local soup kitchen?



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by allthatjazz83
 


lol thats a shame you come across regular masons , some people here know a few who are higher up


Keep thinking what you do...



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreedomEntered
reply to post by allthatjazz83
 


lol thats a shame you come across regular masons , some people here know a few who are higher up


Keep thinking what you do...


Explain "higher up" - in your own words, of course...



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreedomEntered
reply to post by allthatjazz83
 


lol thats a shame you come across regular masons , some people here know a few who are higher up


Keep thinking what you do...


I keep reading on here about all these non-Masons who know about these higher ups and this fabled inner circle so Do not keep us waiting , who are these people who know those who are "higher up" ? And who are these higher ups ? names please since you are in the know . Wait , let me guess , you will not name names for fear of their safety !? There is always a reason why CTs' will not name anyone (or name men who are in no way tied to our Fraternity) when truth be known , you all are talking out of your rear ends .

I would love to know because I am fairly ( and I stress Fairly) high up in my jurisdiction as a District Deputy Grand Master , I am in regular contact with MY higher ups and would love to meet these other higher ups so we can get together and do all our plotting together , instead of state by state plotting , as a matter of convenience of course . (that was sarcasm , just in case you missed it ) .
edit on 14-5-2013 by whenandwhere because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-5-2013 by whenandwhere because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-5-2013 by whenandwhere because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by CINTELA
 


Greetings to all,
Through my search and travels I've found the "power" to reside within Masonic service....To God, to neighbor and to self. The power I'm refering to can be considered as "development". Growth in our relationship with that Sacred Diety, to our neighbor; treatingthem with the utmost respect as we would like our neighbor to treat us and to ourselves; behaving in a manner that represents maturity and discipline, striving to respond rather than react to the daily trials of life and living. Educating self in the many faucets and dimensions of scholastic advancement opportunities that the world of liberal asts and sciences have to offer man (and mankind)......THe true power is truth, no one can give it nor take it from us...



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Solamen
 


So very well said.

The "power" in Freemasonry is not the power some people think it is. It is not external influence, or social, political, or monetary gain. It is personal growth. Freemasonry is betterment of oneself through knowledge, and through lessons that can be applied to each man's life to make one a better person, a better man, a better neighbour, husband, father, and so on. We don't talk about religion or politics, and most jurisdictions frown on engaging in business within a Lodge. It's not a religion, but in the ways mentioned above, it can be seen as a spiritual journey. One would hope to gain self control, respect and tolerance for others, and hope to grow enough to have others show us the same.

People are afraid because we have "secrets". In reality, those "secrets" are trivial things in the outside world; just a few passwords, grips, and words, all easily found on the internet. They are the ways one Mason can recognize another, and they trace back to the ancient stonemason's guilds - sort of like a Union card today. The reason a Freemason won't tell those secrets is not because they're things no non-Mason can know, but simply because we have promised not to tell them. Keeping that promise is central to proving the honour of the individual - if a man can be trusted to not let those things be known, he can be trusted with anything a Brother wants to tell him. Unless a Brother confesses something criminal, and then it's the Mason's duty to tell the proper authority.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by CINTELA
How much more power do you think a Mason has over an average person?.


What power you give them.



posted on May, 24 2013 @ 11:10 AM
link   
remember the G.

What evidence supports mason teachings that the creator of the world were Adan Kamon or Wisedom?
That Jahwe was a lesser god or angel or even son of the devil?
The exchange of energy & spirits with Sirius?
What is the purpose of modern obelisks?

thanks for getting factual



posted on May, 24 2013 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by alagrange
remember the G.

What evidence supports mason teachings that the creator of the world were Adan Kamon or Wisedom?
That Jahwe was a lesser god or angel or even son of the devil?
The exchange of energy & spirits with Sirius?
What is the purpose of modern obelisks?

thanks for getting factual


Getting real: Did you post this on every thread?



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 05:07 PM
link   
The masons do not have much power beyond having good connections with publicly successful people.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Initiate
The masons do not have much power beyond having good connections with publicly successful people.


Almost, but it would be perfectly correct if you said:

"The Masons do not have any power beyond having good connections with their lodge Brothers, some of whom may be publicly successful people."



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by IslandMason
 


What a typical, low-ranked, clueless mason you are.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Initiate
What a typical, low-ranked, clueless mason you are.


What does that make you?



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by CINTELA
 


Well considering it's tight knit group yet very accessible. And considering there is no way to know who and where the top is. Per say. I'd consider it to be pretty powerful. Especially since it' global and represents the working man.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Initiate
 

And you know this how?

reply to post by metalholic
 

We started a thread talking about the leaders of Freemasonry.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Initiate
reply to post by IslandMason
 


What a typical, low-ranked, clueless mason you are.





And what a typical intellectually stunted, Icke-and-Schoenbelen-programmed robot CT you are, spewing the same old tired lies.

What is it that makes people like you think you know any more about Freemasonry than a Mason does? If I was to follow your logic (or lack thereof), I should start telling hospitals all about brain surgery, because I obviously know more about it than actual doctors.


Or do you think Masons are all telling you the same story, over and over, year after year, with no deviation or changes, because it's a lie?





new topics




 
0
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join