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.

 

Manufacturing Dissent

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:04 AM
link   
The world that we live in is a world rife with social injustice, vast economic disparities, and unending war. For the majority of the population this does not seem to be an issue, but in situations such as this, there is bound to be dissent, this thread is about how that dissent has become co-opted by the very people causing all the problems in the first place, and best of all they get to do it all tax free, under the guise of "charity".



"By providing the funding and the policy framework to many concerned and dedicated people working within the non-profit sector, the ruling class is able to co-opt leadership from grassroots communities, ... and is able to make the funding, accounting, and evaluation components of the work so time consuming and onerous that social justice work is virtually impossible under these conditions" (Paul Kivel, You Call this Democracy, Who Benefits, Who Pays and Who Really Decides, 2004, p. 122 ) "Under the New World Order, the ritual of inviting "civil society" leaders into the inner circles of power --while simultaneously repressing the rank and file-- serves several important functions. First, it says to the World that the critics of globalization "must make concessions" to earn the right to mingle. Second, it conveys the illusion that while the global elites should --under what is euphemistically called democracy-- be subject to criticism, they nonetheless rule legitimately. And third, it says "there is no alternative" to globalization: fundamental change is not possible and the most we can hope is to engage with these rulers in an ineffective "give and take".

They set the stage, make it all look "fair" and sit back and laugh.
First, what is manufactured consent?



The term "manufacturing consent" was initially coined by Edward S Herman and Noam Chomsky. "Manufacturing consent" describes a propaganda model used by the corporate media to sway public opinion and "inculcate individuals with values and beliefs...": The mass media serve as a system for communicating messages and symbols to the general populace. It is their function to amuse, entertain, and inform, and to inculcate individuals with the values, beliefs, and codes of behavior that will integrate them into the institutional structures of the larger society. In a world of concentrated wealth and major conflicts of class interest, to fulfill this role requires systematic propaganda. (Manufacturing Consent by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky) "Manufacturing consent" implies manipulating and shaping public opinion. It establishes conformity and acceptance to authority and social hierarchy. It seeks compliance to an established social order. "Manufacturing consent" describes the submission of public opinion to the mainstream media narrative, to its lies and fabrications.


As opposed to manufactured dissent.



In this article, we focus on a related concept, namely the subtle process of "manufacturing dissent" (rather than "consent"), which plays a decisive role in serving the interests of the ruling class. Under contemporary capitalism, the illusion of democracy must prevail. It is in the interest of the corporate elites to accept dissent and protest as a feature of the system inasmuch as they do not threaten the established social order. The purpose is not to repress dissent, but, on the contrary, to shape and mould the protest movement, to set the outer limits of dissent. To maintain their legitimacy, the economic elites favor limited and controlled forms of opposition, with a view to preventing the development of radical forms of protest, which might shake the very foundations and institutions of global capitalism. In other words, "manufacturing dissent" acts as a "safety valve", which protects and sustains the New World Order. To be effective, however, the process of "manufacturing dissent" must be carefully regulated and monitored by those who are the object of the protest movement

Where's the funding come from?


In a bitter irony, part of the fraudulent financial gains on Wall Street in recent years have been recycled to the elites' tax exempt foundations and charities. These windfall financial gains have not only been used to buy out politicians, they have also been channelled to NGOs, research institutes, community centres, church groups, environmentalists, alternative media, human rights groups, etc. "Manufactured dissent" also applies to the "corporate left" and "progressive" media, funded by NGOs or directly by the foundations. The inner objective is to "manufacture dissent" and establish the boundaries of a "politically correct" opposition. In turn, many NGOs are infiltrated by informants often acting on behalf of western intelligence agencies. Moreover, an increasingly large segment of the progressive alternative news media on the internet has become dependent on funding from corporate foundations and charities.

The tried and true divide and conquer is of course part of the overall strategy.



The objective of the corporate elites has been to fragment the people's movement into a vast "do it yourself" mosaic. War and globalization are no longer in the forefront of civil society activism. Activism tends to be piecemeal. There is no integrated anti-globalization anti-war movement. The economic crisis is not seen as having a relationship to the US led war. Dissent has been compartmentalized. Separate "issue oriented" protest movements (e.g. environment, anti-globalization, peace, women's rights, climate change) are encouraged and generously funded as opposed to a cohesive mass movement. This mosaic was already prevalent in the counter G7 summits and People's Summits of the 1990s.

Then they separate some of the leaders of the opposition, and after sufficiently stroking their egos, send them back helping to insure that any meaningful dissent is essentially stifled.



The ploy is to selectively handpick civil society leaders "whom we can trust" and integrate them into a "dialogue", cut them off from their rank and file, make them feel that they are "global citizens" acting on behalf of their fellow workers but make them act in a way which serves the interests of the corporate establishment:

It's not just the big corporations that are in on it, but their lackeys, the government want in on the fun too. You gotta love how they throw cops, posing as demonstrators, into the protest rallies, just to make sure a good violent riot gets started.



We are dealing with a diabolical process: The host government finances the official summit as well as the NGOs actively involved in the Counter-Summit. It also funds the multimillion dollar anti-riot police operation which has a mandate to repress the grassroots participants of the Counter-Summit, including members of NGOs direcly funded by the government. . The purpose of these combined operations, including violent actions of vandalism committed by undercover cops (Toronto G20, 2010) dressed up as activists, is to discredit the protest movement and intimidate its participants. The broader objective is to transform the counter-summit into a ritual of dissent, which serves to uphold the interests of the official summit and the host government. This logic has prevailed in numerous counter summits since the 1990s.

Here's the link I based this post on:
www.globalresearch.ca...

I hope this helps to show just how cunning and manipulative TPTB are. They are determined to maintain the status quo by all means necessary.




posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   
The more you learn the more staggering the system become. In the opening pages of Alan Watt's Cutting through the matrix he reflects that once you wake up you begin to see the bars that surround you. The control of dissenting organizations, and opinions is key to control. If you have limitless assets, and generations of experience then control becomes a science.

I was just reading Manufacturing Consent. It is amazing that our political discussions are decades out of date. The intelligence and education of the electorate wallows in stagnation. The idea that opposition could be co opted on such a scale is incomprehensible to most. It is only after having your mind shattered repeatedly can you acquire the eyes to see.

It is interesting you mention Toronto. Witnessing police dressed as protesters burning police cars was wild. The evening news description of the events was so completely false it took my breath away. That moment I realized that it was all controlled. This is how it works. Dissent is co opted, discredited, and if all else fails destroyed.

It should be noted that control is not total. A grassroots organization that forms at the right time, and at the right place is unpredictable to some extent. The leadership might be bought and paid for, but if enough embrace the belief system the movement grows.

This is an important topic. I am surprised it was glossed over by the ATS community. Thank you for bringing it to discussion.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 06:35 PM
link   
In my opinion the Tea Party is a great example of a grass roots effort hijacked completely by the PTB.

Great find and thanks for sharing...



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by stephinrazin
 


Thank you for replying to my thread, I figured it was DOA ! I'm glad someone noticed it.
I can imagine after witnessing first hand the events in Toronto, and seeing the media spin it was quite shocking. It's one thing to hear of things like this going down and another to actually see it in action.
I have hope as well, that we can have meaningful change. We just have to remain vigilant on the issues of where money comes from, and what is expected in return for that money.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


As all things the Tea Party is a mixed bag. It began as a grass roots protest born of the Ron Paul presidential run, and to a lesser degree the 9-11 truth movement. Dick Armey, and two PACs called Freedom Works and Americans for Prosperity became involved. They helped fund the Tax day protest, and began to put tiny amounts of money into Tea Parties. It can be argued that the co opting began then. Koch money is behind the PACs. This could be merely political maneuvering, or even controlled release of popular dissent. Who knows why it was created. I am concerned about what it can achieve.

All in all though, to this day the Tea Party is 95 to 99% grassroots. The majority of fund raising, organization, and both time and effort is local. Sarah Palin and the Tea Party Convention are late comers trying to take advantage of popular opinion. Many pundits and mainstream analysts act as if the Tea Party and the Republican party are inextricably linked. This just is not so. People are pissed, and the Republicans happen to be the minority party. Most are right on social, economic, and foreign policy issues. Where they split is on deficit spending, size of government, and unjust taxation.

All the rhetoric debate, and the demonization of the Tea Party is just because the mainstream media fear them. This is as active the American people have gotten in generations. How to you defeat a movement? Co-opt, and if that fails turn the people against them. The hate the left seems to have toward the Tea Party is hardly natural. Media and politicians roaring about racism has been very deliberate. Combine this with the portrayal as an ignorant gang of rednecks carrying hateful signs, and you have molded public opinion. Truth is unimportant. This rhetoric debate is the culmination of the media attack on the Tea Party. Even if you are hardcore leftist the fact that the media attacks and discredits at will is troubling. Do you think and urban mainly minority political movement would not be attacked by the media just as quickly? Anyone who wished to have a free society must acknowledge the prevalent danger, and methods used to quell dissent.

This is the propaganda model at work. Media has been so completely co opted by interests that is makes me wonder if it was ever free. All citizens should be cognizant of the dangers that controlled systems discussed on this thread.



This is just one more system. All political debate is to be confined to issues tightly regulated, and propagated by one of the two approved parties. If one party shifts outside of "mainstream," or controlled issues they become a target.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


Exactly,the Tea Party is the latest in long list of grass roots movements to be de-railed by the established oligarchy.
Whether the movement is social, or political the tactics used against them all seem to be off the same page in the playbook. Infiltrate, neutralize, and once control is established see if they can figure out how to make a buck off it.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 06:47 AM
link   
reply to post by jlv70
 


However from your op Every group pro or con has been infiltrated and is controlled by the PTB...left, or right. I only used the Tea Party as an example. I meant no harm or disrespect towards Tea Partiers, and I agree with alot of what they have to say, But if you re read what the op posted, it's just a illusion or a shadow of what it was meant to be, and was used quite effectively in conning the voter and motivating them to come out and vote. This is key, it made people believe in the system again. A very good indication that this is true was the record breaking money that was put into the recent mid term election. They inspired you to vote, and this vote helped the very same party that is responsible for the situation we are currently in.

BUT!

It doesn't matter who you voted for, because the PTB is behind the scenes on both sides. Notice how there is no change in foreign policy and issues like the patriot act, gitmo, and the wars?? There is no difference because the same groups directs all....We need to understand this as a group!

reply to post by stephinrazin
 


95% to 99% isn't enough to be grass roots, the media attacks the Tea Party to give it's members some sort of justification to have hope. Then the Tea Party's rhetoric scares the hell out of right wing republicans, then off to the polls they all flocked, thinking they were voting for CHANGE. Does anyone here expect any change in the next 2 years? Will gitmo close? Will the wars end? Will deficit spending end? Will the Fed lose any power or influence? Will the government serve the people or continue to serve the corporations? Will lobbying end? Will special interests end? Will the rises in taxes end? Will we keep losing our liberties and freedoms? The 5% to 1% is who controls the Tea Party....This is what the article posted is telling us.

What political party benefited the most from the rise of the Tea Party? Was this the intention of any Tea Party member?

Im not attacking the Tea Party, you could replace the name with any other political or social group. Just using it as a example....

Come on ATS lets here your opinions on the OP story!!!! This is huge, and should be discussed at length.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by LDragonFire
reply to post by jlv70
 


However from your op Every group pro or con has been infiltrated and is controlled by the PTB...left, or right. I only used the Tea Party as an example. I meant no harm or disrespect towards Tea Partiers, and I agree with alot of what they have to say, But if you re read what the op posted, it's just a illusion or a shadow of what it was meant to be, and was used quite effectively in conning the voter and motivating them to come out and vote. This is key, it made people believe in the system again. A very good indication that this is true was the record breaking money that was put into the recent mid term election. They inspired you to vote, and this vote helped the very same party that is responsible for the situation we are currently in.

BUT!

It doesn't matter who you voted for, because the PTB is behind the scenes on both sides. Notice how there is no change in foreign policy and issues like the patriot act, gitmo, and the wars?? There is no difference because the same groups directs all....We need to understand this as a group!

reply to post by stephinrazin
 


95% to 99% isn't enough to be grass roots, the media attacks the Tea Party to give it's members some sort of justification to have hope. Then the Tea Party's rhetoric scares the hell out of right wing republicans, then off to the polls they all flocked, thinking they were voting for CHANGE. Does anyone here expect any change in the next 2 years? Will gitmo close? Will the wars end? Will deficit spending end? Will the Fed lose any power or influence? Will the government serve the people or continue to serve the corporations? Will lobbying end? Will special interests end? Will the rises in taxes end? Will we keep losing our liberties and freedoms? The 5% to 1% is who controls the Tea Party....This is what the article posted is telling us.

What political party benefited the most from the rise of the Tea Party? Was this the intention of any Tea Party member?

Im not attacking the Tea Party, you could replace the name with any other political or social group. Just using it as a example....

Come on ATS lets here your opinions on the OP story!!!! This is huge, and should be discussed at length.


Oops. Sorry bout posting that quote alone.
I apologize if I came off sounding defensive, but I grow saddened by attacks on any deviation from controlled political discussion. You are correct that the Tea Party is an example of how well controlled, and manipulated all social movements are. My only point is that to concede defeat, and expect these movements to fail ensures it to happen. The powers that be can only guide people if they are uneducated, and allow themselves to me mainpulated. If enough are exposed to ideas, and thought processes that challenge the status quo I have faith change is possible. Possible does not mean likely though. I acknowledge the difficulties, but to do nothing is unacceptable to me personally. I heard Agenda 21, the Fed, Obamas birth, NWO, and other issues being discussed at Tea Parties. Where else have these issues been broached in the minds of mainstream right minded people?
edit on 18-1-2011 by stephinrazin because: accidental click.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by stephinrazin
 


You're absolutely right, it come down to not letting the parameters and possibilities be defined by the ruling oligarchs. Just because they've set the stage doesn't mean that that is where we have to have our play.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by LDragonFire
In my opinion the Tea Party is a great example of a grass roots effort hijacked completely by the PTB.

Great find and thanks for sharing...



Yes hijacked and maybe started by ??:

holyspiritvictorious4ever.blogspot.com...



The original Tea Party in Boston was a false flag

operation created by American Freemasons to start a war between the British Monarchy and

the native tribes. Both sides would weaken themselves and then the revolutionaries would rise

up , throw out the British and seize "cleared" Indian lands in the Ohio Valley and beyond.

Likewise , the current "Tea Party" movement is a psyops or spyops. An illuminati propaganda

font or front that pretends to oppose Obama. He is a CIA asset as well. His father was too.



new topics

top topics



 
9

log in

join