It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in "advanced" countries.
Originally posted by Skippy1138
reply to post by kro32
Did you watch the videos? The answer to your question is stated by McDonald himself.He says the goal is " a gradual dissolving of society". They can't just come out and implement what they want all at once.People would never go for it in that fashion.They are using the "death by a thousand cuts" method. A little cut here, a little cut there.Each cut individually isn't fatal, and you may not even notice it........
The two parties should be almost identical so that the American
people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.
Either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it every four years by the other party which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.
our ability to go back to the tradition of our Western society and to resume its development along its old patterns of Inclusive Diversity.
Originally posted by Skippy1138
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
I don't get why if he was a "NWO stooge" he would be bashing the NWO? Just trying to to understand a little more what you're saying....
Now fast foward 25 years and we can see that yes, we are a whole lot closer to these things coming to pass, and a lot fewer Americans would deny that it's happening. Yet at the same time most of the Americans who have become aware of this grand conspiracy have to a large extent resigned themselves to the belief that it's inevitible that these people are too smart, to rich, to powerful, corrupted too many things already to ever roll it back and stop it. In other words they are being gradually conditioned to accept it. Accept it through a staged process where the vilian never comes out and says this is what I am going to do, try to stop me. It's always the guy denouncing it, and the guy saying oh that's just crazy talk, all brought to you by a big corporate interest/media that is almost always as in this case part of the CFR therefor part of the conspiracy. So ask yourself a simple question, why would a 'serious' tv show like Crossfire have on a guest that the other guests don't believe and think is crazy about a conspiracy that they and in essence the network say doesn't even exist?
One of the founding members was Fred Koch, founder of Koch Industries,