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.
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by NoHierarchy
Antony Sutton discussed in his book "America's Secret Establishment" how the Dewey system has been implemented to make us all into little specialized cogs in the wheel of society. The individual exists for society, and not the other way around. This is called Statism, and Dewey pushed a Statist ideology. I was just reading last night about Noam Chomsky as someone had posted a vid of him, and it turns out he believes in the Dewey system...Ha, who would have guessed that a self-described anarcho-socialist would subscribe to such a Totalitarian system!!!!
Ideologically identifying with anarchism and libertarian socialism, Chomsky is known for his critiques of U.S. foreign policy, and he has been described as a prominent cultural figure. His social criticism has included Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988), co-written with Edward S. Herman, an analysis articulating the propaganda model theory for examining the media.
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Originally posted by doobydoll
I am ECSTATIC that I am no longer chasing my tail trying to keep the damn wolves from my door. I am happier now than I've been for the longest time, and anyone who has a problem with that can kiss my lily-white arse.
Of course! You are a loser who now elected to be a leech. The kids that you claim you have raised don't give a rat's poont about you, Mom, so you exploit your country's socialist trends and freeload off others. So much to congratulate yourself with, my favourite loser!
Our problem is not that we don't have enough stuff -- it's that we don't have enough ways for people to work and prove that they deserve this stuff.
The question we have to begin to ask ourselves is not how do we employ all the people who are rendered obsolete by technology, but how can we organize a society around something other than employment? Might the spirit of enterprise we currently associate with "career" be shifted to something entirely more collaborative, purposeful, and even meaningful? Instead, we are attempting to use the logic of a scarce marketplace to negotiate things that are actually in abundance. What we lack is not employment, but a way of fairly distributing the bounty we have generated through our technologies, and a way of creating meaning in a world that has already produced far too much stuff.
Well, then these jobs were simply moved overseas. If you will, the country was strip-mined of potential by laissez faire attitude of the government.
Originally posted by Cuervo
reply to post by doctornamtab
We have the infrastructure to switch to free energy alternatives, to farm sensible foods (not inefficient subsidized beef), and to provide basic healthcare to everybody who pledges allegiance to our flag. We have enough EMPTY houses owned by banks (that we bailed out with our taxes) to house the homeless. Beyond this, it's simply maintenance. If you want luxury items, you must work. If you want a car, you must work. If you want things that actually place a burden on society to provide (which food and shelter doesn't need to do), you must work. But basic human necessities can be met with no burden on the working class (the only class needed). It's not "communism", it's "common sense".