It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What if ME was a conspiracy to rewrite history?

page: 2
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: audubon

Fiction and satire it may be but sometimes its like he could actually see the future.
It sure seems as though those in power would like to implement the very thing he was warning against.

I read it when I was too young to really understand it, to be honest, and its in a pile of stuff that I keep saying I'll read again.
I seem to buy more books than I get the time for as it is.




posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: audubon
I think the main antidote to worrying about history being digitally-rewritten is that the internet is the exact opposite of centralised.

Anyone (or any corporate body or government) that wanted to forge the historical past would have to be almost omniscient and omnipresent to track down, gain control over, and then meticulously 'doctor' everything - not just the work of historians, but the sources that the historians used - in order for it all to fit with their enormous hoax.

This is why regimes like China and North Korea tackle the problem at its root by simply blocking huge chunks of the internet regardless of content.


But you wouldn't need to go into such depth when the majority of people take the opinions of authority figures as fact. There are many examples of people gobbling up fake news and sharing sources like the onion as truth, when it's satire.

Besides I'd imagine that there are algorithms, and bots that could be programed to search for keywords on the internet and flag these for reviewal or automatically change them



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Kalixi

Precisely.
Most people are pretty accepting and studies show that a lot of people remember (and believe) headlines without properly digesting or questioning content.

Once they've rounded up all the smarty-pants of the future, the rest would be putty in the hands if those in charge.
Gradually withdrawing sources of information until BIG BROTHER is the only place for information and its game over.....


LEVEL TWO.



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Tulpa

Yes: have seen that happen first-hand.
People who were once the life of the party, become very withdrawn, and just smile and nod. No longer sure that anything they have to say is relevant.

If that were to done on purpose: that would be clear evil.

Sometimes feel like we are starting down that road.



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 09:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Tulpa


Fiction and satire it may be but sometimes its like he could actually see the future.


That's only because the techniques he was writing about have not changed.

That line "Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia" was inspired by the way the UK and USA regarded the USSR as a deadly threat from 1917 onward... right up until the moment the USSR suddenly became useful as an ally against Hitler. Then, when the war ended, the USSR was immediately recast as a deadly enemy again. All this was the recent past when Orwell died in 1950.

It's more familiar to modern readers in the context of Saddam Hussein's Iraq being an ally of the UK and US for as long as it suited us, then suddenly becoming a pariah for invading Kuwait, with the consequences we all know today.

Orwell was satirising the totalitarian regimes of the 1930s and 40s. In his novel the 'atomic war of the 1960s' serves as the plot device for wiping out democracy, and enables him to construct his fantasy world. He has no vision of how such a system could really arise, and if he had such a vision it was pretty irresponsible of him not to warn us!



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: audubon

Philosophizing with so crates, excellent.



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 09:20 PM
link   
a reply to: audubon

I always have to chuckle when I see that old cliche...

"George Orwell wrote 1984 as a warning not a blueprint".



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nothin
a reply to: Kalixi

Perhaps it is a conspiracy to sell more fencing, for all of us skeptics to sit on?

Funny as that is on the first level: on a deeper level: one could say that it's a conspiracy to make us all unsure, of what we really know for sure.
We find an outlet, in basking in the bliss of ignorance, and making the best of life and it's ever-growing unknowns.


I believe there's a CIA meme or quote to that affect.



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Kalixi

For what benefit??

They an already throw you in a concrete box by saying "I smelled pot in the car.."


Also just imagaine what a conspiracy on that scale would take logistically.

How many people need to be in on it??

How much would that cost??

What is the benefit you will get??



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 11:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Kalixi

I don't think the Mandela Effect is a conspiracy to rewrite history simply because the so many of the allegedly altered things are things one can hold in his own hand to see it isn't what he was thought he knew, e.g., Berenstein/Berestain Bears books.

Other than discrepancies like that the idea in the OP sounds like a neat theory. Often, I myself have wondered if the events at Tiananmen Square were rewritten in the history books for some reason. That's a tricky one for me personally to wrap my mind around whereas the Berenstain Bears is easier to attribute to suggestive or false memory. In any case, while I would love to attribute ME to some government or elitist conspiracy to rewrite history (Lord knows it happens all the time) I think the aforementioned discrepencies are plenty evident of that not being the case.

It would make a great plot for some dystopian novel.



posted on Jul, 6 2017 @ 12:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Kalixi

For what benefit??

They an already throw you in a concrete box by saying "I smelled pot in the car.."


Also just imagaine what a conspiracy on that scale would take logistically.

How many people need to be in on it??

How much would that cost??

What is the benefit you will get??




Logistically it wouldn't be that hard at all, it'd only take a few bots and algorithms to rewrite and insert subtle changes, that add up over time. In the Hitler example, you could write a fake news article about a NAZI-run orphanage that helped lots of kids despite the horrors of the Holocaust. There are many articles you could fabricate about the Holocaust highlighting the "reasons" behind it and making them sound logical and "like it was warranted"; Jews being bad people who raped women and children, lived in ghettos and didn't integrate into society. (Obviously this is just an example and if this were to be written about the Holocaust I'd be disgusted) You wouldn't even need people in the know just one computer programmer and one clinical psychologist.

Let's not forget cultural marxism is already happening. Take Hitler; one would be forgiven to believe his body-count of 6 million dead would be the highest in history; but far from it.




MAO ZEDONG China (1949-76)
Regime Communist
Victims 60 million
China’s so-called ‘Great Helmsman’ was in fact the greatest mass murderer in history. Most of his victims were his fellow Chinese, murdered as ‘landlords’ after the communist takeover, starved in his misnamed ‘Great Leap Forward’ of 1958-61, or killed and tortured in labour camps in the Cultural Revolution of the Sixties. Mao’s rule, with its economic mismanagement and continual political upheavals, also spelled poverty for most of China’s untold millions. The country embraced capitalism long after his death.

JOSEPH STALIN
Soviet Union (1929-53)
Regime Communist
Victims 40 million
Lenin’s paranoid successor was the runner-up to Mao in the mass-murder stakes. Stalin imposed a deliberate famine on Ukraine, killed millions of the wealthier peasants – or ‘kulaks’ – as he forced them off their land, and purged his own party, shooting thousands and sending millions more to work as slaves and perish in the Gulag.



Historically Mao and Stalin had the blood of tens of thousands more people on their hands. Why don't we say that "Trump is Mao" or "Hillary is such a Stalin"? A: because they were the head of communist states.


The benefit would be a great one. To reference my Hitler example yet again; if Hitler suddenly became a good guy who's killing of Jews was justified to save Germany from social and economical problems that they caused; then suddenly the current migrant crisis in the EU can be 'figured out' in the same way. The masses may no longer see forcing people who are deemed a possible terror threat into jail/detention before they commit a crime. Maybe the masses could be more justified into supporting their Gov't reinstating the death penalty or even see the cleansing of the Muslim ghettos as a positive thing. Otherwise without the masses support for such extremes it would lead to anarchy on the streets; violent protests and international condemnation.



posted on Jul, 6 2017 @ 03:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Kalixi

Physical libraries at man on the street level rarily carry much realworld books and mostly cater to bored housewives and elementiry level schoolkids who always get censored for agespecific targets. Physical information sources of merit are limited to higher education where indoctrination and massaging of the background has already been installed into the minds of readers. In most cases i think libraries are heading to digitized copies of sources as few people need handson with the originals that are either scarce or locked away in "safety" due to age. Eithe way the "original" works are now in a fluid changable medium as digitial data and can be manipulated. Very few people are allowed to compare that original to the digital unless they have an own copy. As paper biodegrades eventually no originals remain and only possibly-modufied versions remain.

When you base further work on an already compromised source and THAT work is used for another changes and/or errors compound until its no longer possible to revert back to where a change started. Thats for one work of real fact now mess with dozens of "authoritive works" and ME occurs.

The entire works of humanity doesnt need to be touched if you focus on a select topic/subject. Pick history and you mess with humanity's identity. The holocaust helped shape the Jewish people. Nazis shaped Germany for both good and bad. If you mess with that you mess with their Jewishness and therefor change their future how you want it to change with the right push. The same goes for "whiteness" "blackness" and any other identify-through-history groups



posted on Jul, 6 2017 @ 03:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Imperion
a reply to: Kalixi

Physical libraries at man on the street level rarily carry much realworld books and mostly cater to bored housewives and elementiry level schoolkids who always get censored for agespecific targets. Physical information sources of merit are limited to higher education where indoctrination and massaging of the background has already been installed into the minds of readers. In most cases i think libraries are heading to digitized copies of sources as few people need handson with the originals that are either scarce or locked away in "safety" due to age. Eithe way the "original" works are now in a fluid changable medium as digitial data and can be manipulated. Very few people are allowed to compare that original to the digital unless they have an own copy. As paper biodegrades eventually no originals remain and only possibly-modufied versions remain.

When you base further work on an already compromised source and THAT work is used for another changes and/or errors compound until its no longer possible to revert back to where a change started. Thats for one work of real fact now mess with dozens of "authoritive works" and ME occurs.

The entire works of humanity doesnt need to be touched if you focus on a select topic/subject. Pick history and you mess with humanity's identity. The holocaust helped shape the Jewish people. Nazis shaped Germany for both good and bad. If you mess with that you mess with their Jewishness and therefor change their future how you want it to change with the right push. The same goes for "whiteness" "blackness" and any other identify-through-history groups


Wow... book burning for the modern age... No need to force people to burn the books that don't comply with the current rhetoric, just alter it and society changes course.

Everyone knows the nefarious side of the coin but i wonder if it could be made into a positive as well?

How would a positive social change through the changing of literature and history mold a future society into a utopian one?

Perhaps wishful thinking but why not?
edit on 6-7-2017 by AkontaDarkpaw because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2017 @ 04:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kalixi
a reply to: badw0lf




Youd think if they were trying to re-write history, they'd make it so the internet didn't exist. Because as you say, we can all check things. So why would they allow it to be discovered.


I think the internet was invented and came into existence well before this possible plan was hatched. The internet sparked globalisation, they wouldn't prevent/destroy that

Information is power and discerning fact from fiction has been a major theme for the West in the last year, (with fake news etc) and this is all about the control and manipulation of information


Knowledge is power, and knowledge shared is power lost.

Fundamental rule of the darkness...



posted on Jul, 6 2017 @ 05:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Kalixi

You're a little late to the party but welcome.
We already discussed this theory and i believe changing history is more like causing a ripple effect instead of seeing an instant result. The thing is that i can't proof JFK's car had only 4 passengers and it's the same with the 6 passengers on the other side. Both versions are (now) correct. I read on /x/ that the ME was probably caused by CERN in 12/12/12. That was also the day we all died and were resurrected in a simulation. Apparently it takes a long time for the changes to take effect and now the simualtion is glitchy as hell. I don't know if this could be true but it is another possibility.

There is also a huge risk in changing history because you could end up killing yourself in the process. You can't just go back in time and kill Hitler for instance. Not even a quantum computer could foresee the changes of doing that with even an accuracy of 100%. There is also the possibility that people shifted in a different timeline and some of us are now the remnants of the old timeline with our old memories still intact. The old timeline probably ceased to exist as soon the new timeline was created. Basically the world is now full of people from different timelines or even different dimensions like the merge that almost happened in Fringe for example. I strongly believe that CERN was buid for some shady purposes and now they don't know how to reverse it. The sudden increase in unknown anomalies(stairway to heaven,city in the clouds) could be another side effect of the experiment.

Another ATS member suggested that we could be trying to shift the whole planet into another galaxy to avoid the impact of an unknown planet(Nibiru/Planet X) or a deadly asteroid. I got two distinctive ME experiences that i can't just dismiss with only the faulty memory explanation alone. It's odd that people still try to convince people that this never happened because if it didn't then why do they care so much? As far as i know there is no harm done in believing that the ME phenomenon is real.



posted on Jul, 6 2017 @ 08:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tulpa
a reply to: audubon
I must read 1984 again sometime but if I recall correctly (no joke intended) didn't most of the population accept the BIG BROTHER without question and not even try to remember?



That's sort of like people blindly believing every YouTube (or other internet) conspiracy theory out there without actually taking the time to use critical thought and a little research in order to confirm whether or not it is true.

It's much easier to blindly believe something -- especially if it already agrees with your preconceived notions -- rather than first taking a neutral stand on each new piece of information received, and then doing a little research in order to validate or invalidate that information.

People these days want to skip that "first take a neutral stand" part of information gathering. They instead want to skip right ahead to "believing or not believing", but the problem there is that a person's preconceived notions (which may or may not be correct) could affect whether you believe or disbelieve a new piece of information.

edit on 2017/7/6 by Box of Rain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2017 @ 04:30 AM
link   
a reply to: AkontaDarkpaw

Who gets to decide what should/shouldnt be changed and how do they determine why that change and what it would ripple forward into the future?

Looking at an option...a human decided that dinosaurs were bad news and terrible at being so timeported the entire planetary nuclear arsenal back in time to nuke the planet killing dinosaurs and setting things in place for humans. Or not do that and we could be living in Dinotopia by now...

Or blow a butterfly off course in china and reroute hurricane Katrina?

Who watches the watchers? Who gives them the right to create an ME...
edit on 7-7-2017 by Imperion because: Typo



posted on Jul, 7 2017 @ 03:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Imperion
...a human decided that dinosaurs were bad news and terrible at being so timeported the entire planetary nuclear arsenal back in time to nuke the planet killing dinosaurs and setting things in place for humans. Or not do that and we could be living in Dinotopia by now...


Wait...So humans created a time machine, then went back in time to kill off the dinosaurs so that humans could eventually arise, otherwise there would never be humans?

Holy paradoxes, Batman!



posted on Jul, 7 2017 @ 11:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Box of Rain

Using that as a way out there extreme idea yo show scales of meddling. Going all out someway everyone would notice vs a butterfly no1 cares about. Who would know which butterfly was selected to cause a change. Dramatic event or just a little wave of the hand. Either can cause major changes at the right/wrong place and time...



posted on Jul, 9 2017 @ 11:16 AM
link   
how come only western history and pop culture is changing?

Funny we haven't seen any "Mandela" reports from anywhere other than the US and UK mostly eh?

I



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join