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.

 

The Egyptian Protesters are Wrong

page: 6
63
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
However, everyone is stuck in a fantasy. They think the "President" still has power. He doesn't. He never did actually, that's the trick we have been fooled by.

All the President can do, is sit in a bunker and use his telephone and TV cameras to blab with his mouth. He has no real power at all.

We are all brainwashed into thinking that these "positions of power" actually exist. But they do not exist, they are mere illusions.



I thought this was common knowledge amongst this website, I feel like this is not news.
It's great it's being said don't get me wrong!
I just felt like everyone already knew..




posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by beansanmash
You are correct in your thinking, however, those thoughts only apply to a democratic leader.

The power of non-democratic leaders differ from democratic leaders. A democratic leader derives his power through the consent of the governed, while a non-democratic leader derives his power from his control of the governed.



ALL rulers rule by consent of the governed, democratic and despotic alike. NO ONE can rule a man who refuses their rule - all they can do is kill him, and even that is on his own terms, not theirs.

Furthermore, ALL rulers derive their alleged "power" from control of the governed. Government itself is nothing more than a attempt at control, and only works against those so consenting to be controlled by it. Without their consent, their willing abdication of their own power to another, no control is possible, hence no governance.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
The Egyptian protesters are wrong actually. Here allow me to explain exactly why.

Within a few days of the protests growing larger, the "people" overwhelmed the police, and the physical actual government dissolved quickly.


And the rest of your opinion can be ignored because you have missed the point.

The president dissolved his government without realising he is a figurehead that needs to go, the peopel are protesting his very existence. If he stepped down and opened the elections then the protests would quickly stop. Your opinion seems to miss this point which i find odd.

Whether you have this view of higher powers or not, the peope are complaining about the person in power, the top person, the figurehead of an organisation and it is that person, along with the rest of the government he supported that needs to go to restore peace.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Passafist


Just wanted to say, just because you don't believe in government doesn't mean you believe in Anarchy completely. IMO this would work well as long as people look at their government as INDIVIDUALS and not a collective breathing monster.


We have anarchy and violence right now because we believe in fantasies that lead us down the path to a false conclusion.

Once we finally realize the truth, that all of this is illusion, we will get much closer to a peaceful society based on reason rather than might.

Once the futility of it all becomes clear, I seriously doubt you will be able to find any good reasons to commit violent acts. Almost all of our reasons will be swept away with the tide, so to speak.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by eMachine
 


Exactly.

It amazing how little people nowadays know about responsibility!

What it means to be able to help, change and do things for the better.

What is means to KNOW that what you or another person's actions have consequences that YOU could've changes or been a part of, and THEREFORE if the actions are bad, YOU COULD'VE CHANGED THEM and if they were good, YOU COULD'VE BEEN A PART OF THEM!

If you did nothing, you responsibility level is low.

Responsibility goes ALL the way down to picking up trash on the street. You see someone throw trash on the floor? You can pick it up, you can make YOUR area look nicer.

A man litters, he creates a consequence. He makes a place look worse even if it's very little. (You know, it adds up, look at all the ciggerettes everywhere...)
Now you see the man littering, you can change it. You can pick it up, you can tell him, you can change the circumstances to the better, and therefore, it is your responsibility as well as the litterer to change things for the better!

- Nico Collu



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


so they're tired of their government and are fighting back, but they're wrong? What should they do? Lay down and do nothing?

Please, enlighten us.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by LightofLiberty
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Umm, maybe I should tell you that he has power over the military and police, and political institutions of Egypt. That is power. If he didn't have power, how could he have become President? Most definitely he has power...but not for long.


Serious question: How's that power over the military and police working out for him at the moment? It appears that the police have thrown in their lot with the protesters, and the military is just sitting and watching, not acting against them.

So how's that power thing working out for him at the moment?



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by arbitrarygeneraiist
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


The problem with saying that everything is a mere illusion, as I personally do think most things to be, is that there still needs to be some sort of semblance of law and order amid the chaos. Otherwise why should people obey laws, take orders, live a "good" life, etc?


Isn't "taking orders" what creates all of these violent atrocities?
Isn't the "law" part of what leads us down this path to insanity?

"You have to do it, it's the law". - No I don't think so.

I base my decisions off of "Right vs Wrong". Not on some law. Not on orders handed down to me. I would become "Wrong" if I started listening to someone else.

Instead I will chart my own course. I will follow my "heart".

I have never found so much peace and order in my life.
Until I started to reject laws and orders.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   
Egypt has been a dog of the USA for a while now and I think they would like to change that, IF, they realize it.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


I agree.

Also, sometimes we on ATS need to "get real".

We tend to always think problems and issues come from a higher power above the countries control.
I agree that in many cases this is the truth, but not always.

We also forget that the ordinary man does have power, and in numbers gains power.

We think that it's impossible to change situations.
But right now, in this case, we are talking about Eqypt. Things are CHANGING BY THE ORDINARY MAN! Not by the president, not by The Illuminati, or Rockefeller or the Bankers elite etc.

Things are changing at ground level!

Basically what I want to say is that we need to stay real, be real, think logical, because sometimes we get all into who REALLY is in power etc. and yes, they are definitely valid arguements, but things need to be taken one at a time, and with what is happening now and with what the protesters are demanding, I think it's is the most correct movement, EVEN if it means only one step up the ladder.

- Nico Collu



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:39 PM
link   
I'm not really down with the whole anarchist theme of a country. We don't really live as "one". There is nothing making people get up in the morning to take care of they're kids properly. In that atmosphere there would be no money since there is no government, there would be no banks. People would barter trade through their lives and if they have nothing to barter, then either they stay stranded and learn for themselves, OR they becomes slaves to those who will help (if they're that evil).

Either way you look at it, there WILL be some form of power. We are humans, nobody will settle to be at the bottom of the barrel, only the strong will survive.

Anarchy is another brainwashed system, thought up in opposition against the official government. People liked the idea so much because they hate their governments' rules, they haven't stopped to think ahead.

As long as the is love there will be hate.. People will protect what they love, thus war and violence will never end. The thought of peace will never come unless people are willing to work for free, this is where religion kicks in, because if people see a man (in search of power) they would want to know, what makes him better. Well God is not a man, he is divine and He created you and that guy can talk to Him. Perfect example is for those who have seen that movie, "The Book of Eli". The antagonist was looking for The Holy Bible to have control over them.

As long as people want something, they will work to get it, there will ALWAYS be one, that wants power, thus making him a "leader" once they achieve their goal, if the people let them succeed.

It seems people have forgotten what a life of anarchy brings so they demand it. Go for it, I bet China wouldn't mind conquering us. Even if the whole world went into anarchy, humans would turn into warriors and live everyday like it's their last, yeah there will be a SLIGHT moment of peace, but after a few years, if that, we will lose what we need.

Now, I'm not calling for a Capitalist, Communist, Socialist, and damn sure not Facist life style, but not Anarchy either. People have not reached the point in there lives where they will do something for somebody if they need help in return for something they need. I hate to say this, but Freemasons have this idea on lock. Now I don't know what kind of things they do in secrecy, but that karma idea they have going is where we all need to be, but even in that situation it creates a sort of tribe style society.

I think we should all sit down and come up with something that will work with and for everybody, excluding th elites of course, I say locked them all up in deepest dungeon known to man..



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by gunner50cal
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Thier cost of living is no delusion, Their cost of gas and their government suppresion is no delusion . i can sorta see where youre comin from but they have finally woken up and have grown a huge set of cahunas to do this . If thats what it took to get out of their dilusion then more power to them!


Our illusions of Government increase that cost of living don't they? Through taxation, highway robbery...

Government doesn't exist apparently, so that "suppression" emanates from individual humans who are deluded into harming others in favor of their idealistic beliefs.

I do not think our human race has quite awakened yet. We are getting closer, but still have a long way to go.

Have you seen the streets of Cairo ? You call violence and chaos "waking up"? I don't.

We are fighting something that doesn't even exist.

Once we realize it's not real, there will be no fight. We will finally have peace.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Civilized:

1. Having a highly developed society and culture.
2. Showing evidence of moral and intellectual advancement; humane, ethical, and reasonable:
...


You bring an interesting point in your chain of thought. The only problem I can see with it is that many people cannot handle the responsibility to care for themselves. One could venture that the human race will never command the ability to do so. Then there are those who, by handicap, cannot take care of themselves and would need a structured life set out by others so they can accomplish something close to normalcy. However while I ponder this for a while longer, your definition of "civilized" prompted me to post a video. I think it fits your definition rather well.



I hope at least some find it though provoking.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by LethalMouse

1- Is really big and can personally whoop everyones ass under them. (doesnt need followers)
(obviously this doesnt work on a grand scale)

2- Personally has a nuke, death ray, or god knows what mass death weapon in his enclosed palace and is crazy enough to blow everyone to smitherines unless they do what he says. (think Lex Luther minus Superman)


Violence is not power.

Violence is just a tantrum that a psychopath throws to punish others for daring get in their way.

You can kill me, and I don't care too much.
You will never have power over me, ever.

If I get afraid and do what I am told, I am still fully in power of myself. I am choosing to acquiesce.
The power has always, and will always, lie 100% within ourselves.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 




However, everyone is stuck in a fantasy. They think the "President" still has power. He doesn't. He never did actually, that's the trick we have been fooled by.

All the President can do, is sit in a bunker and use his telephone and TV cameras to blab with his mouth. He has no real power at all.

We are all brainwashed into thinking that these "positions of power" actually exist. But they do not exist, they are mere illusions.


A military that follows whoever is in charge is not an illusion. While I agree if nobody followed his orders he would have no power, try getting people in the military to speak up and tell each other to stop following orders - they wouldn because the military by design installs a fear of speaking up.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by axeman007
You are valid in thinking your opinion may matter, however, in the big picture you could no be more wrong. This is not an attack on you in any way shape or form, but the argument you propose is naive. Mubaraek has ruled, peacefully and successfully for 30 years, and the public is revolting only in hopes of more freedoms due to Tunisia's success. Of course every society has the right to protest their own government, and God bless the Egyptian people, but I lost all respect for this entire affair today, when it turned violent. I have been there, Egypt, many times, and know what a tolerant and peaceful society it is, and am disgusted it has come to this. God bless the Egyptian people.


Rather than an opinion, I think it was more of a realization that my opinions and ideals were illusions.

Mubarak only has power over his own life and choices.

The Egyptians could not have ever revolted if Mubarak had power. --- Chew on that one for a bit.

How could we have a right to protest our own ideals? In the street by throwing Molotovs?
This is pure insanity.

All we have to do is change our minds, and our actions. Individually.

I am changing my mind over the last few days. Therefore it's not impossible.

We are acting in the opposite direction of where our collective aspirations are directed.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by PrimePorkchop
 

What they're doing is right, but I fear the result will not be what they really want. The philosophy fueling their actions is wrong. A new leader cannot improve their situation much.

No, they should not "lay down and do nothing". They are out there rallying together right now. They are in the perfect position right now to spread truly revolutionary ideas and find real solutions to their problems. Solutions that don't depend on someone else fixing things for them.

They have the power and opportunity right now to resolve to change all their lives by working together for what they really want. IMO, that's alot easier and more reasonable than trying to find someone they can trust to make decisions for them.

I think it will be a crying shame if they have this revolution just to make another 'leader' who will screw them over the same as the last guy...



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by LethalMouse


BUT, the 5% is really only viable for comic book mad scientists or someone in a very small place with a small poppulace.

Two times when one "leader" has real power:

1- Is really big and can personally whoop everyones ass under them. (doesnt need followers)
(obviously this doesnt work on a grand scale)

2- Personally has a nuke, death ray, or god knows what mass death weapon in his enclosed palace and is crazy enough to blow everyone to smitherines unless they do what he says. (think Lex Luther minus Superman)


Yeah, but one he's killed off everyone else, where is his "power" then? Who is left to hold any power over? Who is left to do his work for him? No, that would sort of be the ultimate LOSS of power.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sound.Voice.Productions
If this were true, it would mean that we are alone, we are one and our actions do not effect others and neither do the actions of others effect us.

The real truth is: We are responsible for our own actions 100% and we are responsible for the actions taken by others as we live among others and there is such a thing as cause & effect.


We are alone in our actions.
Our actions DO affect others, that is why we are personally 100% responsible for what we choose to do.

Thinking you are responsible for OTHERS actions is the problem here. It leads you to attempt to CONTROL them, and to trample their human rights in the good intention of " being responsible for them ".

It's a road to hell.

No one is responsible for my actions. If they were, that would make me their slave.
And that's not an acceptable outcome.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984

Originally posted by muzzleflash
The Egyptian protesters are wrong actually. Here allow me to explain exactly why.

Within a few days of the protests growing larger, the "people" overwhelmed the police, and the physical actual government dissolved quickly.


And the rest of your opinion can be ignored because you have missed the point.

The president dissolved his government without realising he is a figurehead that needs to go, the peopel are protesting his very existence. If he stepped down and opened the elections then the protests would quickly stop. Your opinion seems to miss this point which i find odd.

Whether you have this view of higher powers or not, the peope are complaining about the person in power, the top person, the figurehead of an organisation and it is that person, along with the rest of the government he supported that needs to go to restore peace.


The hold that our beliefs have on us is strong.

My proof that it is an illusion, is this:

Will Egypt suddenly be a whole new society when this 1 man finally admits he has no power?
No.

This is like taking one piece of hay out of a haystack, and saying the stack is totally rearranged now.
It's a massive overstatement.



new topics

top topics



 
63
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join