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.

 

Rahm & Hillary! Never Waste A Good Crisis; Hegelian Dialectic & Karl Marx, Management By Crisis!!

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   
What is the Hegelian Dialectic? Simply put, it is a dialogue between two people that hold different ideas, each one wishing to persuade the other. The presupposition of a dialectical argument is that the participants share at least some meanings and principles of inference in common, even if they do not agree. The Hegelian dialectic can be uses as framework for manipulating the masses into accepting a predetermined solution. In short the Hegelian dialectic is:

First, create or focus in on a problem of gargantuan proportions.

Second, stir up anger, and or hype by all means, using all forms of media.

Third, when people hysterically or angrily demand a solution – the solution offered will take away rights, cost considerable money, remove existing power from the people and give more power to law makers, or governing body.

President Obama's White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel echoed the Hegelian dialectic less than ten days after Obama was elected president. Emanuel said “You never want to let a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before” Emanuel was echoing the Hegelian dialectic; named after one of the fathers of the enlightenment, Georg Hegel. Students of Karl Marx call it “management by crisis”.

Karl Marx, The Almost Capitalist

Some might say that Emanuel's use, knowingly or unknowingly, of the Hegelian dielectric was misunderstood. Maybe true…then along comes Secretary of State Hillary Clinton echoing a similar comment? While in Brussels Clinton told her audience, "never waste a good crisis." Two of the most important members of Obama's administration express the same philosophy by accident?

All the bailouts under President George Bush and President Barack Obama have been implemented under the guise of preventing national or worldwide collapse. Crisis has historically been the justification for governments to seize more power and control over individual liberties. We have seen the government use a crisis to promote economic, political and social upheavals in order to impose their agenda. We have already seen the federal government take a controlling share in many financial institutions.

Are we as citizens being hammered day in day out with continual crisis for a reason? Should we accept it as status quo?
Or is it a subversive movement taking full advantage of decades of manipulation on the part of the powers that be to achieve a desired goal?


"...the State 'has the supreme right against the individual, whose supreme duty is to be a member of the State... for the right of the world spirit is above all special privileges.'" ~ Georg Hegel Source


I put forth the idea that they fully know what the consequences are. For many it is simply a practical matter of eliciting votes from a targeted constituency at taxpayer expense; we lose a little, they gain a lot, and the politician keeps his job. But for others, the goal is more malevolent, overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Warren Buffett:



“I think that the Republicans have an obligation to recognize this as an economic war and realize you need one leader,” he said in a pitch for leaders to unite the way they did after Pearl Harbor. Source



Hillary Clinton “Never Waste a Good Crisis”



Rahm Emanuel “You never want to waste a serious crisis”



Robert Gibbs “never waste a good crisis”




[edit on 19-3-2009 by burntheships]

[edit on 19-3-2009 by burntheships]




posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 12:12 AM
link   
Never Waste a Good Crisis...

Is this Good, Bad, or Ugly?

Ugly. No wonder I tend to stay away from people as much as possible.

What makes my stomach queezy right now is the fact that I totally understand why I shouldn't waste a good crisis. Something inside me knows that this is what humanity is partially about.

"Crisis" helps us know the "good guys" from the "bad guys."

What's sad to me is that someone can spend their whole life being a "good guy" yet it isn't noticed unless there is some sort of "crisis" that he/she saves us from. SAD BUT TRUE. Sad because I admit that I have never "searched" to see if there are any "good guys" when there is no crisis.

I guess we all DO need drama of some kind to recognize "good."



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Naomi Klein wrote a book about crisis as opportunism. It is called "The Shock Doctrine" and it is thoroughly researched. After the book came out in paperback a few months ago, the talking heads were using the word "shock" left and right precisely in the context Klein delineated.

Right now I'm reading Galbraith's "The New Industrial State." I'm not quite 100 pages into it, but a recurring theme seems to be that corporations in America serve the planning function assigned to government in the former USSR. This premise resonates with me, particularly in relation to Hayek's critique of planned economies and the extent to which the Federal Reserve -- established when the USSR was seen an experiment in socialism on the order of the US's experiment in democracy -- seems to serve a classical socialist function.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by dragonking76
Never Waste a Good Crisis...

Is this Good, Bad, or Ugly? Ugly.


Ugly and Scary, considering that we are on the brink of utter financial
chaos!

 



Originally posted by incoherent_television

I have seen clips of her book...Klein calls it "disaster capitalism". I have not viewed the movie Children of Men...have you?



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 09:36 AM
link   
This is not a Democrat thing...nor a Republican thing...it is a Govenment thing...


The president and his aides say they don't want to waste a crisis. That's a cynical way to exploit a national emergency.


www.latimes.com...


Scaring people about X in order to achieve Y is fundamentally undemocratic.


article.nationalreview.com...

After the repeating chorus of "never waste a good crisis" ...then they do the two step...

We must break the excess of fear...


President Barack Obama's top economic adviser says the crisis in the financial sector has led to an "excess of fear" that must be broken to reverse the economic downturn.


www.google.com...

And what does Former President George Bush have to say...
George Bush's complicity


Former President George W. Bush said on Tuesday that he won't criticize Barack Obama because the new U.S. president "deserves my silence,"

www.msnbc.msn.com...



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 09:50 AM
link   
Does anybody else think that Bush is just happy to be out of office?



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 10:25 AM
link   
Scary for sure.
I remember when government was touting the phrase 'Paradigm shift' in the 90's!
Everyone was saying it, also, 'New World Order'. Even recently.
Makes you wonder who is a communist, as well.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 19-3-2009 by Clearskies]



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


Agreed! I also see that a UN panel now says that the world needs to ditch the dollar as the world's reserve currency...I just posted this here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...'

This for sure is one reason we have been "crisised out"...wear us down and make us just give up on U. S. sovereignty!



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Thanks for pointing out and framing the most important issue on ATS, and the most important issue for our time.

The dialectic is pervasive. Simply put, Hegel's thesis says that all of social interacton breaks down into the mental struggle between Bondsman (owner) and the Bonded (owned).

But Hegel's whole dialectic breaks down if the Bondsman, who owns the latter, has a sort of "Ebenezer Scrooge" type moment. Hegel did not live long enough to read Charles Dickens "A Christmas Carol" (1843) but it may have reinforced his own beliefs anyway since his type are usually blind to such forces as identified by greater minds than his (Jung/Freud).

Such paradigm-shifts can happen, and this is the power of Jesus and faith in him. Surely Jesus would haunt/affect/destroy the Bondsman just as he overturned the temple money-power (and left the temple destroyed in fact).

But in fact, if the Bondsman (owner) decides to change the game toward one of Cohesion instead os Dis-cohesion (if he has an "Ebeneezer moment"), then the game changes for all the "bonded" (the owned).

Once the Bondman decides to not be such an arse, and he drops the dialectic paradigm (legalistic and divisive) for the more advanced synthesis paradigm (cohesive and synergistic), then things will change for the better, and not the worse.

We may need new Bondmen entirely, or we may need to become Bondsmen unto ourselves. We may need to stop selling ourselves, completely.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   
Excellent scholary post. Much pertinent information added concerning the Bondman and the Bonded! Fascinating!

Thank you for that post!



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by burntheships
Excellent scholary post. Much pertinent information added concerning the Bondman and the Bonded! Fascinating!

Thank you for that post!


You are quite welcome, and thanks for broaching this subject in such a detailed way. You must know of course that the Dialectic itself will be applied to everything, so let us strive to keep your thread here focused on that key, which is the Bondsman.

Lawyers and judges love the Bondsman-position in which they exist and that is why Hegel is their master-ideaologist. If one has a world-view framed around the idea of the Bondsmen holding that world in their hands, then of course it will become the defacto world system. We do have a Bonded world, at this time.

My mental posture is that of a Bonded person against his will who is waking up, but I do not have violent intent. I believe Hegel's whole bucket of blood will be tossed aside, now that it is proving to be an enemy of humanity



wiki/Jus_cogens

A peremptory norm (also called jus cogens or ius cogens, Latin for "compelling law") is a fundamental principle of international law which is accepted by the international community of states as a norm from which no derogation is ever permitted.

There is no clear agreement regarding precisely which norms are jus cogens nor how a norm reaches that status, but it is generally accepted that jus cogens includes the prohibition of genocide, maritime piracy, slaving in general (to include slavery as well as the slave trade), torture, and wars of aggression and territorial aggrandizement.


So legalisticaly (and this disappoints almost all judges and lawyers and court-people) Hegel is himself an enemy of humanity since he clearly posits a slave-based view of the world.

All of this will be understood someday, and Hegel and Marx will be seen for what they are: Slavers and Bondsmen.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   
This is a thread worth reading!

Thanks to those who researched and presented such challenging ideas in clear-speak.

I simply cannot wait to see "what they" come up with next for us and with the masses of info swirling around in the past few days,it's coming.



posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   
I have no doubt that this manipulation tactic is being implemented right now as we post...

This is a move to further enslave the American populace under the guise of "we will fix the economy with borrowing" and take away your constitutional rights as fast they possible can. The U.S. Government is working at warp speed...



posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


I can't believe the people saying "We didn't see this coming" in the AIG bonuses!
What about Freddie Mac and Fannie mae and the (probably) dozen others doing the same thing?
Misdirection, convolution, obfuscation............
I can see why people are tired of it!
At least our ATS member Whatuknow, is trying to go to Washington to express his/our disgust!!!
Good for him!
Wukky goes to Washington!


[edit on 20-3-2009 by Clearskies]



posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Excellent post, and thanks for that information. We should fight to the end...better to die fighting for freedom than to live enslaved!



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 08:56 PM
link   
'I'm having a very good crisis,' says Soros as him and other hedge fund managers make billions off the recession...


A hedge fund manager who predicted the global credit crunch has said the financial crisis has been 'stimulating' and the culmination of his life's work.
George Soros, who predicted the global financial crisis twice before, was one of the few people to anticipate and prepare for the current economic collapse.

www.dailymail.co.uk...



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Watch this video while you can...this has been yanked off of You Tube before...play close attention to the title...reflecting the Helgelian Dialectic.





posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 07:09 AM
link   
Here is a great text where Hegel's position is described quite clearly, i.e. The Bondsman is actually the validator and in fact creator of the Bonded's consciousness. In fact as he plainly states, consciousness doesn't exist except through other's recognition of it:



Independence and Dependence of Self-Consciousness: Lordship and Bondage

SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS exists in itself and for itself, in that, and by the fact that it exists for another self-consciousness; that is to say, it is only by being acknowledged or 'recognized'.


Wow, can there be a more air-tight seal than when one's own mind is only real in the face of the Master's mirror? Remember of course that Hegel was speaking during a time of mass-ignorance so he wasn't saying that the masses KNEW their consciosness depended on the Master, he was describing a working mechanism which the Bonded could not possibly have noticed about themselves.

Very 'elite' of him to do so, I'd say.

Hegel goes on...



The relation of both self-consciousnesses is in this way so constituted that they prove themselves and each other through a life-and-death struggle. They must enter into this struggle, for they must bring their certainty of themselves, the certainty of being for themselves, to the level of objective truth, and make this a fact both in the case of the other and in their own case as well.

And it is solely by risking life that freedom is obtained; only thus is it tried and proved that the essential nature of self-consciousness is not bare existence, is not the merely immediate form in which it at first makes its appearance, is not its mere absorption in the expanse of life. Rather it is thereby guaranteed that there is nothing present but what might be taken as a vanishing moment that self-consciousness is merely pure self-existence, being-for-self. The individual, who has not staked his life, may, no doubt, be recognized as a Person; but he has not attained the truth of this recognition as an independent self-consciousness. In the same way each must aim at the death of the other, as it risks its own life thereby; for that other is to it of no more worth than itself; the other's reality is presented to the former as an external other, as outside itself; it must cancel that externality. The other is a purely existent consciousness and entangled in manifold ways; it must view its otherness as pure existence for itself or as absolute negation.

Now what I am reading here is that one consciousness is only aware of itself through the incessant and complete pressure which the two consciousnesses must apply to one another, but the Bonded must always submit for he doesn't understand the life-and-death struggle. The Bonded, not seeing the life-and-death struggle, do not have the same consciousness or even th same mind, as the other. At least, that's what I am reading here, how 'bout you?




(a). Lordship

[...]The one is independent, and its essential nature is to be for itself; the other is dependent, and its essence is life or existence for another. The former is the Master, or Lord, the latter the Bondsman.

Φ 190. The master is the consciousness that exists for itself; but no longer merely the general notion of existence for self. Rather, it is a consciousness existing on its own account which is mediated with itself through an other consciousness, i.e. through an other whose very nature implies that it is bound up with an independent being

[...]

The bondsman being a self-consciousness in the broad sense, also takes up a negative attitude to things and cancels them; but the thing is, at the same time, independent for him and, in consequence, he cannot, with all his negating, get so far as to annihilate it outright and be done with it; that is to say, he merely works on it. To the master, on the other hand, by means of this mediating process, belongs the immediate relation, in the sense of the pure negation of it, in other words he gets the enjoyment. What mere desire did not attain, he now succeeds in attaining, viz. to have done with the thing, and find satisfaction in enjoyment. Desire alone did not get the length of this, because of the independence of the thing. The master, however, who has interposed the bondsman between it and himself, thereby relates himself merely to the dependence of the thing, and enjoys it without qualification and without reserve. The aspect of its independence he leaves to the bondsman, who labours upon it.


Did you see that part above? Where only the Master has enjoyment and the Bonded is confused and struggling?

Yeah.




(b). Fear

194. We have seen what bondage is only in relation to lordship. But it is a self-consciousness, and we have now to consider what it is, in this regard, in and for itself. In the first instance, the master is taken to be the essential reality for the state of bondage; hence, for it, the truth is the independent consciousness existing for itself, although this truth is not taken yet as inherent in bondage itself. Still, it does in fact contain within itself this truth of pure negativity and self-existence, because it has experienced this reality within it. For this consciousness was not in peril and fear for this element or that, nor for this or that moment of time, it was afraid for its entire being; it felt the fear of death, the sovereign master. It has been in that experience melted to its inmost soul, has trembled throughout its every fibre, and all that was fixed and steadfast has quaked within it. This complete perturbation of its entire substance, this absolute dissolution of all its stability into fluent continuity, is, however, the simple, ultimate nature of self-consciousness, absolute negativity, pure self-referrent existence, which consequently is involved in this type of consciousness. This moment of pure self-existence is moreover a fact for it; for in the master it finds this as its object. Further, this bondsman's consciousness is not only this total dissolution in a general way; in serving and toiling the bondsman actually carries this out. By serving he cancels in every particular aspect his dependence on and attachment to natural existence, and by his work removes this existence away.

So basically the Bonded works to remove nature from his consciousness, completely. This fear based, and based on the old maxim:



albeit the fear of the lord is the beginning of wisdom, consciousness is not therein aware of being self-existent. Through work and labour, however, this consciousness of the bondsman comes to itself.


In short, Hegel's dialectic was best described in the Irony of the Nazi camps where lucky applicants were told that "Work Makes You Free!"

Indeed, but free from nature? Who wants that?



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Fortunatly, people are waking up with an intrinsic understanding of these principles.

"Independence and Dependence of Self-Consciousness: Lordship and Bondage

SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS exists in itself and for itself, in that, and by the fact that it exists for another self-consciousness; that is to say, it is only by being acknowledged or 'recognized'.

They may not understand how they know that whats happening is staged but they 'feel it' at the gut level! The use of talking points to effect the thinking as in " say something enough and it will become truth " is being recognised for what that is. They know deep inside that they are being manipulated.

Zindo



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 01:47 AM
link   
How it is that after a while of not being caught the criminals begin to be so bold as to just openly speak of thier plans, plunders and pillages.

Hillary Clinton: Foreign Policy Address at the Council on Foreign Relations


Thank you very much, Richard, and I am delighted to be here in these new headquarters. I have been often to, I guess, the mother ship in New York City, but it’s good to have an outpost of the Council right here down the street from the State Department. We get a lot of advice from the Council, so this will mean I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future.


www.state.gov...

[edit on 20-7-2009 by burntheships]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join