It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: BigBrotherDarkness
a reply to: Peeple
Animals are only species adverse; from food a resource competition... same as humanity; but yet we are in the very same species. Seems kinda counter to the point with out all that resource hogging, one trick ponies, and hedge funding ones bets eh?
So I find the entire thing unethical.
originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
a reply to: Peeple
Yes, another form that exists outside of us. But so called magicians turn to just the numbers and think they alone (numbers) are the way. They are not. Numbers just are. No magic needed.
Kubrick was into some crazy shizzle! And he knew people who were into even crazier stuff. I think a lot of artists have friends who are esoteric. Blake being a good example (his bestie was a Mason. See the thread that was resurrected about him from 2012??) The ideas bleed over into the art. Some seem more aligned to it than others.
Lots of sex magick stuff out there. Madonna being one. But it is all superficial like thinking the numbers are the power. Beyond that narrow view lies vastness. I think that it is all about consciousness.That will be the new science.
originally posted by: Serdgiam
a reply to: Peeple
I'd say most people converse on the basis of how it has affected their lives rather than how it might (or might not) have affected yours.
My own experiences with the Illuminati are not hearsay to me, but you hearing it from me does transform it into that for you.
It all does explain something, but what you take away from it is entirely up to you.
Of course, focusing all of ones time and energy into removing or shifting the influence of these groups could be a bit like pissing into the wind. We like to think it would all be different if "people like me" were in charge, so it becomes easy to solely pursue that.
Talking about it all may not precipitate some sort of mass epiphany of positive metamorphosis, but I'm not convinced that should be the motive behind all conversation across the board. The way I see it, sometimes just shooting the sh!t is healthy.
Personally, I know that my own work can impact the world greatly, but I really don't want every discourse I have to revolve around it. After all, there are only so many times one can see eyes glazing over before it becomes a bit tiresome.
I think the trick is in not letting these limited interactions completely define what we think someone is doing outside of the discussion. Its hard not to do that, as we build our picture of others based on those interactions, but it can be misleading.
For me, the "phenomena" is a bit like gravity or the wind. It can be useful and enjoyable to explore, but it may not be a good use of time to become obsessed with gaining a sense of omniscience and "true" understanding. I tend to favor creation, rather than comprehensive understanding, but I think the two drives play quite nicely with each other.
In many cases, what I'm "selling" has little to nothing to do with the conversation. My life's work is similar to what you say you want to do: create an alternative form of society (in a manner of speaking), simply because I believe we can do better. I don't buy into the concept that technology and nature are at odds, we just design it that way, and that everything from currency to social systems to simply how we perceive these things are not limited to "this is the way its always been done." Outside of this board, my time is spent pretty much entirely on that. Of course, this thread is specifically about "the phenomena," so that will steer the conversation.
The vast, vast majority are simply not interested in specifics and "potential," so I feel its more effective to foster it through real world systems. Sharing the latter through a message board can be problematic though, as the form of communication is almost innately confined to the former.
TL;DR: I think that attempting to define the totality of others through a message board is innately limited and exceedingly easy simply due to the format. So, if we want to really get to explanations and real world changes, we have to specifically steer the conversation in that direction. And instead of just asking general questions and making general statements, it might be more effective to drill the conversation down with increasing focus until we get to actionable ideas and information.
If you want a democracy that emphasizes content, how exactly do you think that can be accomplished independent of any and all current practices? My personal addendum would be; and would that differ if the systems and tools embraced change and evolution rather than the opposite? Can we really know what road will most expediently reach that point?
I think the trick is to create tools that not only shift towards that direction, but themselves operate on those principles of growth, change, and evolution instead of simply advancement of what we already have (hope that distinction makes sense). I can talk about my generators, hvac systems, audio, AI, or anything else, but its hard for that to have any more meaning than saying the Illuminati exists, unless you can hold it in your own hands or live with it as a part of your life.
ETA: the TL;DR was about as long as the rest of the post. Oops
originally posted by: Peeple
If it's true, from my end it looks like involvement in human experiments and "torture", "rape", gangstalking... are these your "illuminati"?
Isn't that exactly what we're doing? What we can do at this moment? But there is a deeper meaning, a force waiting to be tapped.
A new philosophy. Answers. A constructive goal.