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.

 

Risking One's Neck for Better Grog: Mutinies Reveal Tipping Points for Collective Unrest

page: 3
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 





"Open door policies" are, in my opinon, an invitation to come and complain to whomever, and then be told what the CEO says. Management above my level were ready to deliver bad news and exploitative management because that was what they were TOLD TO DO.

I have stated before that I simply refused, because I thought what they were doing was hypocritical and disrespectful....and.....Poof! End of my managerial support.


Welcome to the club. My view was that as a manager, my job was to protect my workers from Upper management so they could get on with doing their jobs. Needless to say I have been blackballed.

I am a capitalist who supports SMALL firms. My experience has been that the large Corp see people as numbers - the change from the personnel dept to the Human Resources dept is the classic example of this change in attitude.

In the fifties, sixties and even seventies people were seen as long term investments to be "groomed" and nurtured and trained. Now we are seen as interchangeable cogs. If we will not work for less why just import desperate third worlders to replace us.


A very prophetic article from 1989:

Of mergers and acquisitions each costing $1 million or more, there were just 10 in 1970; in 1980, there were 94; in 1986, there were 346. A third of such deals in the 1980's were hostile.

The 1980's also saw a wave of giant leveraged buyouts. Mergers, acquisitions and L.B.O.'s, which had accounted for less than 5 percent of the profits of Wall Street brokerage houses in 1978, ballooned into an estimated 50 percent of profits by 1988...

THROUGH ALL THIS, THE HISTORIC RELATIONSHIP between product and paper has been turned upside down. Investment bankers no longer think of themselves as working for the corporations with which they do business. These days, corporations seem to exist for the investment bankers....

In fact, investment banks are replacing the publicly held industrial corporations as the largest and most powerful economic institutions in America....

THERE ARE SIGNS THAT A VICIOUS spiral has begun, as each corporate player seeks to improve its standard of living at the expense of another's.

Corporate raiders transfer to themselves, and other shareholders, part of the income of employees by forcing the latter to agree to lower wages. January 29, 1989 www.nytimes.com... New York Times




posted on May, 20 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 





Ah well. I used to feel a great deal of pity for the common man, but the more I know, the more I realize that they are not so different on the whole from those who exploit them.


In my cynical old age I came to this conclusion:

Socialism/Collectivism appeals to many for the following reasons:
1. Those who have nothing and are too lazy to work for their betterment see socialism as a way to profit from Our Labor.

2. Those who were born into wealth and feel guilt when they see the poor can assuage their guilt by giving away Our Labor.

3. The power hungry can seize control by appealing to our sense of humanity and using our guilt to build up larger and larger government bureaucracies, passing more and more laws but never really correcting the real problems. After all if the problem goes away so does the guilt and the power hungry's control lever.

Mencken said it best: "The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the urge to rule it."

For after all the basic premise of socialism or collectivism is "the needs of the many should outweigh the needs of the individual", and WHO is the largest group??? Why the entire nation so the needs of the individual must be subordinate to the needs of the nation or in real life the needs of the puppet masters who control the government.

No wonder the banking and corporate elite love socialism
It gives them the "moral high ground" for reintroducing feudalism and a return to serfdom where the slaves can not own property instead they ARE property. Not only that but the future slaves will help them put the chains on! Such a deal.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by crimvelvet

Socialism/Collectivism appeals to many for the following reasons:
1. Those who have nothing and are too lazy to work for their betterment see socialism as a way to profit from Our Labor.


While I agree that there are those within socialist systems who seek to profit from the labor of others, I would say that holds true for ALL systems. In any group of humans, (or other animals) there will arise exploiters or cheaters. Its up to the cooperators to keep weeding them out. In any system.

Socialism did not arise from the lazy wanting to exploit the hardworking. It arose from the hardworking being exploited by the lazy. (Aristocrats) It was just a flawed system. It was "reactionary" in the sense that it was the opposite of what had been the status quo, and the thinking is simplistic. "Well, if this didnt work out well, lets try the opposite."

It really didnt address the root cause of the original problem, and it also did not take into consideration basic human and animal nature, and so, it failed. But the people who promoted it were far from the lazy people. In many cases, they were the hardest working, who were just tired of being drained by the idle rich.


Originally posted by crimvelvet
2. Those who were born into wealth and feel guilt when they see the poor can assuage their guilt by giving away Our Labor.


I dont disagee with that entirely. As long as the motive really traces back to guilt. Some "gifts" arent really gifts, but bribes. As long as that is accounted for, im ok with that.




Originally posted by crimvelvet
3. The power hungry can seize control by appealing to our sense of humanity and using our guilt to build up larger and larger government bureaucracies, passing more and more laws but never really correcting the real problems. After all if the problem goes away so does the guilt and the power hungry's control lever.


Again, I dont disagree, but our humanitarian urges are only one possible in, and really, not even the most common. By far more common is appeal to self interest. The Iraq war for instance, was largely an appeal to self interest. They used our fear for our own safety against us. There WAS a humanitarian aspect thrown in to make the appeal more broad and to allow the more intelligent and altruistic to feel good about it, but that aspect was the lesser part of the argument. The bulk of the argument was "this is why this is good for YOU."



Originally posted by crimvelvetFor after all the basic premise of socialism or collectivism is "the needs of the many should outweigh the needs of the individual", and WHO is the largest group??? Why the entire nation so the needs of the individual must be subordinate to the needs of the nation or in real life the needs of the puppet masters who control the government.


Well, the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the individual is also a large part of democracy. Not just socialism. Another problem with the theory of "individualism" is that its a lie. Human beings are social animals. Without writing a book, the idea that it must be either/or, one or the other, is ridiculous. Its actually that we need a balance between the two, much like you see in nature. You need to allow individual achievement and reward, but you cannot sacrifice the group for it. Both Plato's meritocracy and Smiths free market are based on this balancing of self and group interest.

Ayn Rand was a mediocre philosopher. She is one of the main proponents of "individualism" and yet she conveniently overlooks the FACT that the altruism of others contributed greatly to her own success. A lot of successful people over look real cause and effect and attribute all their success to their own greatness, and forget those who helped them, and even luck. In her case, her family, even her extended family, helped her get out of Russia, accomdated her to give her a start in America, helped her get work. Luck played a role in her meeting Cecil B DeMille, and his kindness, not his self interest, caused him to show her the ropes, give her a job despite her evaluation for said job being very poor, etc.

Many rugged individualists are merely egoists. They benefit from cooperation and altruism, but it doesnt suit their ego to admit it. And so they paint themselves as masters of their own destiny, architects of their own fate, and they belittle and abuse those who do not do as well as they. Many "rugged individualists" inherited great wealth, and none of them felt strongly enough about their own convictions to refuse the fortune, and the social greasing on their behalf, to actually place themselves in the position many poor are to prove their own ability to climb the mountain of success themselves.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 





Reciprocal Altruism.

Find people who practice it, and make yourself a community of them, and dont waste your time on those who do not practice it.....


Best suggest I have seen in a long time. But be very careful that the Reciprocity is real. I have been stung many times by the "Talks a big Talk" type who is all great ideas and no work!


Other less nice terms are con men or free loaders



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by crimvelvet
 


Which is why I suggested to wildtimes that you carefully watch people, rather than listen to them. Sociopaths will lie. Happily. They get pleasure out of being "smarter" than others, which is how they see preying off the altruistic. Far better than listening to someones description of their own altruism is to watch them. DO they fight for others when there is nothing to gain for themselves? Or do they only cry out for altruism when their own interests are involved? Are they staunch defenders on principle? (For justice, fairness etc.) Or do they only call out for those things when they are being treated unfairly or unjustly.

Patience and watching will tell you everything you need to know about a person. You just have to be willing to be in limbo for however long it takes for the truth to come out. We, (humans) tend to prefer to know right away, and in our haste, we often use the wrong criteria to make quick judgments.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 





For some weird reason (I think there's a tattoo on my forehead that only sociopaths or the needy can see) people seem compelled to tell me their problems. Doesn't matter if it's a teen on a train, a clerk at a home improvement warehouse, a frustrated coworker, a client, a friend of my kid's, another customer waiting at a mechanic's garage -- it just seems that people who want to vent or need support are drawn to me...and talk to me....perfect strangers to close friends, since I was a preteen, it seems.


It is not weird at all. People see you truly will listen to them and actually care.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 





It seems to point to certain "charisma" that can rouse people to join up with mutineers. An individual who can say "Look how you're weak, you don't deserve this treatment but it's not your fault, and it's also your fault, so do something!"


Leaders are few and far between. You normally do not have a bunch of sheep mutiny, you have to add a goat. Metaphorically or in actual life (My goats always lead the escape attempts not the sheep)




I'm curious about the "replacement" posters who are here. I'm far too new a member to have noticed drastic changes in style/theme/attitude in any one member, but that is REALLY interesting to think about.

Do you suspect there are "sock uppets" here on ATS?

To what extent do you trust that posters on this board are authentic and sincere?

Do you think ATS is being screened for rabble-rousers, or even that it might be a propaganda machine itself?

Hmmmmm.....


...Replacement??? Do not know. Subverted? perhaps.

...Sock puppets - Yes

...screened for rabble-rousers - Of Course

...it might be a propaganda machine itself? It has crossed my mind but more likely infiltrated and used. The last election was rather enlightening. Obama was THE MAN here on ATS. Now Ron Paul seems the more popular....



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 





....We dont have a lot of time if we want to alter the course here. They know it too, which is why some of their moves, (Libya) are so aggressive and poorly propagandized. They need to act quickly before we revolt, and that means we need to stop them before we cannot revolt.


TPTB are very sneaky and have more than one hundred years of study and concrete experiments in manipulating the people under their belts. It is truly a David and Goliath in more ways than we can ever imagine. (The Soviet Union was one of their "experiments" )

I just notice today a possible "Trojan Horse" mentioned here on ATS Leash Being Prepared for Congress It is about the states forcing a Constitutional Convention. The problem is such a convention allows the WHOLE Constitution to be rewritten!

Constitutional Convention: www.watchblog.com...

www.usconstitution.net...



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 





And so, ATS,

What would be your PERSONAL tipping point?

What would you want to be in place before YOU would take action?

What would you be willing to OFFER a sweeping change movement?


I never answered the last question: "What would you be willing to OFFER a sweeping change movement? "

What I actually offered the group I was supporting was research and analytical skills. I can be a leader if I am pushed into it but I am much much better at feeding info to someone who has the charisma that I do not.

Many leaders are backed by research teams they trust and that is where I function best. I am the only one in my family who is NOT a superb salesman.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by crimvelvet
movement? "

I can be a leader if I am pushed into it but I am much much better at feeding info to someone who has the charisma that I do not.



Ha! Thats hilarious. Im the same way. I never present myself for election, I dont run for things, but if crap starts going downhill quick I can and will grab the wheel. Like you, I know my weakness is that I dont care about being political, tactful, diplomatic, or charismatic. I probably COULD if I practiced, but the truth is, I dont care, I find it irrelevant, and I prefer to work with reason and facts, not emotional and guile.

I make a great advisor to a number one, but I dont really care to be that person. I love that a lot of us share the same traits in here. Its interesting because its unusual.

And I completely agree Constitutional Conventions or even Amendments are dangerous ground. We need an amendment, but honestly its better strategy to weed out the globalist scourge government first, or like you say, there is a serious possibility that they will amend it in ways that do not work for the people or the nation, but rather for their own ends.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 





Good grief. And by what authority did he decide this?


This is a really fun game that the sociopaths like to play. I have had it pulled on me a few of times.

This is by the way is a true story:
Ms Sociopath says to the little girl in front of the girl,s Mom. What baby goat do you like??? That one, OH here it is yours! Happy grins all round.

Only one little problem.... I, not Ms Sociopath, own the goats and I now find myself in the position of having to retrieve my STOLEN property (worth $150) from a very tearful little girl while Mom, screaming and curses me and Ms Sociopath laughs herself sick.

My ex-brother pulled the same trick on me and now he is the "cool dude" among the relatives and I am Persona non grata for refusing to allow the theft and have had no contact with any of them for over twenty years.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 





Well, the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the individual is also a large part of democracy. Not just socialism. Another problem with the theory of "individualism" is that its a lie. Human beings are social animals.....


First in the other post I was speaking of the "altruistic" button the "socialists" and TPTB like to push. Of course there are many others, FEAR being another biggie.

On individual vs the group

The idea that the "group" has greater rights than any one individual is very seductive but it is the basis for removing ALL rights from the individual except those allowed by the government who may remove those rights at any time.

James Bovard's quote, "Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner." Or the quote attributed to Ben Franklin "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."

This is the reason the USA is a REPUBLIC and not a democracy. It is the reason the second sentence in our Declaration of Independence states:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Wikipedia calls it a sweeping statement of individual human rights

Human rights MUST originate with the individual. Your right to swing your fist MUST stop just before it hits me in the face, otherwise we are looking at MOB rule.

Should ten immigrants fresh off the boat from Neverganistan have the right to take my farm because there are ten of them and only one of me and they voted to take my well run farm??? Of Course not. Because at least originally this country was set-up as a country ruled by LAW and not ruled by men.


Rule of Law vs. Rule of Men



All of the governments that mankind has instituted in the history of the world can be divided into two categories. Any and every state can be categorized into either rule of law governments or rule of men governments.

History has proven that any nation founded upon the shifting sands of the whim of men will always degenerate into oligarchy and tyranny. However, a nation of virtuous, educated people, which is founded upon and holds to the bedrock of a rule of law system will maintain prosperity and freedom despite the natural occurrences and challenges of history.

This elementary yet strikingly relevant dichotomy is misunderstood by many Americans. And, this misunderstanding is one of the many reasons why our nation has been mistakenly led away from a rule of law system toward something that was not intended by our Founding Fathers.

First, it is important to define the two systems. A governmental system ruled by men is any system in which fallen man directs the course of the nation. This includes not only dictatorships and oligarchies where one man or a select few call all of the shots, but also democracies where majority opinion rules without any restraints or protections for minority opinion and individual liberty. According to our Founding Fathers, democracies were as dangerous as any form of government..... www.propagandamatrix.com...


No system is going to be perfect. But a system that is built on the rule of law and respect for the rights of the INDIVIDUAL is going to be better for most people because, as we have both seen first hand, Sociopaths are like turds, they rise to the top and THEY will be the ones leading the mob!

I really really rather have a system that derives its power from the individual and only those powers and rights that the individual has can be "delegated" to the government.

Again if you do not have the RIGHT to hit me in the face then a Cop, acting for the government, does not have the right to hit me in the face. Once we allow the group to have more rights than the individual then we open the door to the sociopaths leading the mob and are on the slippery slope to tyranny.



Now if we can only get those who mutiny to understand they need a PLAN BEFORE hand AND must be ever vigilant against the sociopaths....

NOT going to happen me thinks.
Especially with all the preparation put in before hand by TPTB - over one hundred years of brainwashing in the public school systems.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   
How very fascinating you all have made my morning! Lots of stuff to think about.

I wrapped up reading all the posts since my last, and these questions have sprung up. (I'm sure others will as I reread your thoughts and comments)...

Is it logical and reasonable to assert that the quantity - the NUMBER of individuals - in a group affects the outcome of the system in place (i.e. socialism, communism, democracy, tyranny, anarchy), and that at a certain "tipping point" there are too many people for the system to continue in that direction?

It's hard for me to take seriously the rhetoric spewing from mouths 1200 (or 12000) miles from my home. It's fine to read the news, watch MSM, listen to NPR, and hang out in libraries, and it's stimulating to be on ATS with intelligent, thoughtful people who are capable of writing more than 140 characters' worth of drivel about what they are having for lunch....(I am thankful that we aren't extinct QUITE yet)....or simply bashing someone else's opinions and minimizing their experiences.

But, like my mother taught me young: "Most of the people in the world are jerks."

Okay, so, we have established that sociopaths have charisma, are bright, and predatory. We know the traits, yet too often we don't suspect until it's too late -- or at least some damage has been done. How, then, does democracy (as in free and fair election of leaders) benefit those of us who can ONLY rely on propaganda, the press, and hearsay to "get to know" a candidate, but then are expected to make an intelligent vote?

It takes YEARS to get to know a psychopath for all they are...YEARS...It can not be discovered in one interview, or one month, or one date, or one year if the person is deeply sociopathic and intent on concealing that flaw of character.

A person of intelligence must NOT trust that the sociopath means well because he says he means well. Or that she is not going to steal from the till because she has never been caught doing so before.

Yet, I would venture to say that EVERYONE ALIVE has at some point in their life mistakenly trusted another person, and been burned. Now, if we divided up into small communites that were self-sustaining and self-governed, THEN we could know who would make a good leader BASED ON WATCHING THEM.

How can 400,000,000 people "know" the POTUS? They can't. Perhaps, and I mean PERHAPS MIchelle Obama knows her husband inside out. But does anyone really KNOW another's deepest motives and thoughts and desires? What sort of a system works for large groups?

Perhaps what we need is a limit to the number of persons engaged behind a leader. The crew of a sailing ship was limited to the number the ship could sustain. The captains were usually rotated in and out, and chosen by the crew. The profit of whatever endeavors were undertaken were shared by pre-determined portions -- the capn usually receiving 2 parts for being the capn, the regular, seasoned crew receiving 1 part, and the apprentices or mercenary sailors perhaps less. In general, the seafarer's lives offered more liberty, better gain for individual effort, and a sense of interdependence -- they NEEDED one another to do their jobs, or they were ALL in peril.

How can we relate the mutiny analogy to the global crisis we now face?

I personally see no way to do so without stopping ALL the current systems, and devolving into small groups of people. But there is no way to eliminate the sociopaths - in fact, more are being created every day - and if EVERY GROUP can not be trusted to live by the Golden Rule, what hope is there?

WT







posted on May, 21 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Unfortunately OP, I think the truth is far darker, the TPTB are researching what leads to rebellions not to try and stop them, but to actually make them happen. In fact if you look at the majority of the leaders and politicians today they actually seem to be doing all in their power to foment rebellion by slapping the people continuously in the face. I am sure they are far more surprised that global rebellion hasn't happened yet, of course, if it does and all the governments fall like dominoes then they will just step and offer the new governments, one designed more to their liking. Peace be with you.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by themessengernevermatters
 


I have wondered if that was their plan, to CAUSE revolt. And then call it a World War. How very disturbing...as much as I learn about people, I just can't wrap my head around sociopath thinking.




top topics



 
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join