>What do you think?
Never ask me what I think. I might tell you.
>I would like to start a secret society.
Sounds like fun to me.
>However, people can be swayed and are swayed by the media
>and religious institutions, and cultural identity, etc.
Hmm. So far your secret society isn't sounding like a very nice secret society. Are you planning on swaying people to your school of thought by
manipulating them, as do the groups you mentioned?
>There is also too much information.
>For every argument for something there is an equal amount
>of information against. And so no one really knows for sure.
Ok. Are you proposing to eliminate information so people will be less confused? There's certainly a precedent for this. Nazi book burnings come to
mind, but just be sure you understand what you're getting yourself into. Ensuring that people only come to hear *your* answers is a very effective
means of control, but if you really want to solve the worlds problems, this might not be thes best way.
>Then it dawned on me. We need an organization
>like no other organization every conceived of.
Well, I'm not convinced that more beaureacracy is likely to help, but if you want to form a new secret society, I'd suggest learning from the
ones that already exist. Look at any group that has already survived for centuries and ask yourself how they did it. Emulate.
>An organization that might collect information and
>be a storehouse of all human knowledge.
You mean...like a library? Or the internet? It's been done. Also...tough to reconcile this with your idea above about there already being too much
information. Slow down. Try to figure out what exactly you'd like to do.
>An organization with the primary purpose to direct human
>thought, through subtle influences,
This is a means, not a purpose. No need to limit yourself.
>in order to ensure the survival of our species.
Well...ok. But, what sources of possible extinction are you worried about? If you're just worried about us killing ourselves in a religiously
inspired nuclear war, or something, rather than go to all the effort you're describing, wouldn't it be much simpler to simply encourage our species
to start expanding and colonizing our planets, other solar systems? That way...if we blow ourselves up, it's just one planet, and not such a big
deal. The species continues.
>An organization that would create religions and
>orchestrate popular thought.
Well, ok. It's been done, and plenty means exist to do this...but is this really the best way to accomplish your stated goals? I would expect the
"secret" part of a secret society would become increasingly difficult to maintain the larger its membership became. But, the more members, the
easier it will be to be a powerful force, and the easier it will be to survive across generations. But...creating religions and manipulating societies
is sort of a dangerous business. Not only do people not like it so much if they discover it, there are probably a great many more established groups
already doing it, who won't like competition. So...by doing this you create a lot of problems for yourself, and like I mentioned above, it may not be
the best way to accomplish what you're looking for.
>What would it require?
>Well it would require an enormous initial investment
Not at all. Start small. Build membership and collect tithes or dues. A few tens of thousands of religious followers could very easily provide all
the funding you need. Look at Waco. Even with only a little over a hundred followers David Koresh was able to support a rather large compound.
>It would require a large facility in a secret location, mostly
>underground and built to withstand any event or natural disaster.
Umm...why? That sounds like a lot of unneccesary effort. Are you planning on holding member meetings here? It might be easier to hide in plain
site. Establish an entirely public organization with some totally innocent official function. feeding starving children in Africa or something. That
gives you an official front, so you can hold your meetings in plain site and no one will think anything of it. (Plus you can collect funds openly and
siphon them as desired.) Then you have a secret "inner circle" who really knows what's going on. Much simpler that way.
>In addition, such a building would have to grow it's own food
>supply it's own power
Again, why? Are you planning on living with your members in isolation from the rest of society?
>and be large enough to store vast amounts of information
>Such a computer would need to be long-lasting, durable
>and simplistic, with few parts; and only parts which could
>be easily replaced.
As in...in the event of a nuclear holocaust sort of EMP effect? Ok. I see where you're going. In that case, I recommend microfiche instead of
computers. It's small and will allow suitable size/information ratio...and is extremely low tech. basically all you'll ever need to read it is light
and some means of magnification. Even if all circuit based technology is totally destroyed, worst case you could redevelop the means to view your
library by simply grinding a few magnifying glasses and working in strong light.
>And such an organization would need a group of people
>committed to the cause, so much so that
I think the standard method here is to promise a utopian existence in the afterlife. Union with God, lots of sex, just depends on what sort of
followers you'd like to attract.
>they would be willing to not only commit their own lives to it
>but also the lives of all of their future generations
Properly indoctrinate children from birth, and this problem will be taken care of within single generation.
>since the organization cannot take on new recruits
>for fear of being influenced or exposed.
>but could never accept outsiders.
Again...just stick with the inner and outer circle model I mentioned above. Or more likely...several circles. Newcomers to your organization are
admitted to the outermost circle, and are slower indoctrinated into your belief systems. As they progress, they are slowly allowod into the more inner
circles, all the while being constantly evaluated by the established body. Say...have nine circles, but only tell newcomers about the first three. At
this level, they're only performing the "official" functions of your group. Saving orphans...the rainforest...whatever. All the while you're
subtlely indoctrinating them in the belief systems of your group. Only the ones who seriously buy into them get promted to the second and third
circles. And then...after a number of years of devotion, you can secretly choose extremely dedicated individuals from the third circle and tell them
that there are fourth through sixth circles, and invite them to join, but they have to swear never to divulge that information. And, of course, you
thouroughly train and indoctrinate everyone in the organization so that if anyone ever goes public and starts posting threads here on ATS about your
group, members of the first through third circles will believe completely that there are only three circles, and that the organization is good because
it saves starving children, orphans and the rainforest, and they will naturally defend the group. Members of the higher circles will know the truth,
of course, but they can similarly provide propaganda as needed.
>those people would be more willing to commit if they
>believed that their organization was one which has
>existed since the beginning of time.
Not neccesarily. Look at the Mormon church. They've only been around for 150 years or so, but they are one of the largest, wealthiest religious
organizations in the world.
>It would have to be rich with symbolism and meaning,
>and have artifacts that could withstand some scrutiny.
...oh. I'm sorry. I misunderstood the purpose of your post.
[edit on 12-9-2005 by LordBucket]