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 Dependency Agenda

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   

The Dependency Agenda


When you want to control something, or harness its productive power, you must both learn how to use it and also – through a process of innovation and development – change it to be as usable as possible. In short, we make things work for us! Aside from nomadic Siberian reindeer herders, among a few other examples, we don’t follow our cattle – we fence it in right where we want it. When we train our dog, we know how its mind works and that by a method of treatment/punishment we can make it behave pretty much how we want it to.

Likewise with humans…



We are trainable and we can be manipulated to yield more for the people who have the knowledge and will to manipulate. We can also be manipulated to not realize we are being manipulated. I’m not going to pretend that this hypothesis doesn’t rest on bias and assumption, of my own, which I am convinced of after years of research and pontification:
  • That there does exist a Global Elite who see human beings as cattle.
  • That this Global Elite has a very longstanding heritage.


Two bits of information became apparent to me over the past two days and spawned the idea for this thread, so I’ll use them to explain the premise:

The Transition from Hunter-Gatherer to Farmer

Yesterday I found, and enjoyed, this thread. It details claims that the move, thousands of years ago, from hunter-gatherer to agricultural society was possibly the worst thing that could have happened to us. To explain why, I’ll invoke an older thread which describes the advantages of the hunter-gatherer based on observations of still-existing hunter-gatherer tribes:
  • They enjoy almost unbelievable egalitarianism.
  • They're damn happy people, laughing freely way more than we do.
  • Outside a division of labor, women have total social equality with men.
  • They rarely resort to violence or war.
  • Their health is more robust than ours, and they're frequently immune to diseases ravaging their sedentary neighbors.
  • Their social lives are rich, and they have the free time to indulge themselves.
  • Their senses appear many times sharper than their own, and many seem curiously immune to extremes of temperature.
  • Their strength often seems unbelievable.
  • They intelligently use their time to create more productive environments that needs little care.

The former thread goes on to claim that the rise of agriculture actually caused famine and inequality. Why? Simple! We forgot how to gather for ourselves and we learnt to rely solely on both the farm and farm-worker, and more importantly – the whims of mother nature. Furthermore, farms gave rise to land ownership, and he who owns land will fight to defend their own or to acquire others’ (so warfare became commonplace). He who owns land also controls food production and becomes powerful – causing social inequality and slavery.


Internet/Technology

The second bit of information that arose was yesterday’s news that major British Internet provider will soon be requiring people to opt-in for access to pornography. This issue itself doesn’t interest me, but its connotations do. The real issue is that our access to the Internet is controlled, and can be limited or taken away by some kind of metaphorical ‘kill-switch’.



I, and greater men than I, have often wondered why the Internet is allowed to exist as freely as it does. The answer is obvious and ingenious when we look at the big picture; we are being domesticated and softened by our free use of the Internet. Think about it – you want to know how to fix the headlight on your car, google. You want to know how to produce vinegar for that survival situation, google. You want a rare battery for your watch, ebay. You want to feel like you’re being active in the fight against tyranny and ignorance, make some noise on ATS. It’s all right there at our finger tips – no effort required. Our computer, when connected to the Internet, is one big plate on which almost EVERYTHING is handed to us. How would we have managed 50 years ago? Being ‘handy’ enough to know how to fix our car was knowledge handed down or shared by the local community; making vinegar was something our Grandma knew and communicated to us; that watch battery had to be hunted for and was treasured not taken for granted; and we actually got up, grabbed a sword or gun and put our oppressors to the gallows instead of feeling pacified by a few minutes of online-moaning.

The Internet is like agriculture – it seems to be a wonderful gift, and in many ways it is. But for that very reason we became so dependent on it that we willingly forgot how to be without it. And more importantly, those things we became dependent upon are controlled by someone, thus that persons controls us. Same goes for fossil fuels, the welfare system, religion and even entertainment. All of these things are now provided by a central source rather than coming from within us or being provided by people we actually know.

What we have to ask ourselves is… how deliberate is all of this?!

Bearing in mind the wealth of ‘dangerous’, revolutionary information on the Internet, it is difficult to conceive of a reason why it is not more restricted… other than the one given in this thread of course. Yes the Internet drives Capitalism, more so whilst free – so that’s a good reason. But the handful of companies who really profit from it and have any sway with that finger hovering above the ‘Internet kill-switch’ will always find a way of profiting from the Internet, whether it be free or restricted.

The issue of whether agriculture was introduced, thousands of years ago, in a deliberate attempt to cause dependency is a more difficult one to address. This is the earliest example of curbing self-sufficiency I can think of, so if someone can prove it then every example since falls in with the ‘dependency agenda’. Even the source quoted earlier in this post, which introduced me to the notion, only suggests that our choosing of agriculture over hunter-gatherer living was a genuine mistake and not part of a deliberate conspiracy. But one has to wonder how we could have made such a terrible mistake so late in the history of mankind, after tens of thousands of years doing ‘the right thing’. Did some malevolent hand guide us?

I’ll leave you with one final thought and will resist venturing into controversial territory:
Aztec legend tells of a god, Quetzalcoatl, who came to them by boat and taught them ‘civilisation’. By this, they mean agriculture, social hierarchy and the sciences. Egyptian tradition speaks of ‘seven sages’ who did something similar for them. Both were worshipped, and their symbolism now intertwined with the most established secret societies who exist today. How far back do these societies go, and what social developments throughout history are they responsible for?




posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Not to mention using the Internet to organize and orchestrate revolutions.
It's like drawing up plans on a chalkboard in the enemies lunch room.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by TerryMcGuire
Not to mention using the Internet to organize and orchestrate revolutions.

Yes. Much like the way agriculture was used to justify landownership and war. These things are always sold as 'progress' and 'civilisation', and who would dare question the absolute benevolence of such things? Truth is, some seemingly positive developments are Trojan Horses for highly detrimental changes.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 


The society that you so romantically put up is not as Eglitarian as you believed.

1.The old and sick were left to die on their own in the cold exiled, lesser mouths to feed.
2. The female child or deformed were murdered if they find that their society cannot sustain them, even though they had a HUGE SPARSELY POPULATED LANDMASS.

I could list more.They were utilitarian to the core.

Mankind needed to progress, and civilisation from the hunter gatherer phase would never had led to our future promise we see today, despite the utilitarian selfish elites' actions. There is ugliness we see now.

But alongside, we saw beauty in many human endeavours, such as Bill Gates, Mother Theresa, JFK, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Su Ki, Yeltsin, Gandhi, Steve Jobs, Micheal Jackson, James Watson/Francis Crick(DNA)etc, etc, brought us hope for egalitarian mankind that had sought always to leave none behind.

They were never dependant on anyone. They blaze d their own earthly trials. So too can anyone of us, if we only try.
edit on 12-10-2011 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 

You make some good points, but they don't destroy my argument that we have been made dependent. Perhaps the loss of self-sufficiency is a price worth paying for the 'advances' we've begotten. But I would pose this question to you: Is the advancement of civilisation and technology a prerequisite for happiness? Do computers really make us happy or would we have been equally (or more) happy having never discovered technology?



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 03:23 AM
link   
Interesting... there's a theory (here) that suggests ADHD (attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder) is actually the remnants of a hunter-gatherer mindset, or what occurred in some humans when we were forced to adapt. Evidence perhaps that agriculture is unnatural to humans. Or maybe we just haven't had long enough to evolve and properly adapt to it.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cythraul
Interesting... there's a theory (here) that suggests ADHD (attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder) is actually the remnants of a hunter-gatherer mindset, or what occurred in some humans when we were forced to adapt. Evidence perhaps that agriculture is unnatural to humans. Or maybe we just haven't had long enough to evolve and properly adapt to it.


THis is the thing, in modern life we are protected from pretty much all external threats, we don't have to worry about being attacked by a predator or fight a competing tribe, so we have all these chemicals that don't actually get used as we don't find ourselves in the environments that they were needed for. I think this can explain many of todays mental health issues.

Most of us now live in human created environments, protecting ourselves from the natural world, which in itself isnt natural.

edit to add star and flag interesting post, something i think about quite a bit.
edit on 13-10-2011 by woodwardjnr because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 04:07 AM
link   
Cheers woodwardjnr. I've always been sceptical of sanitised living. I'm not worried about exposing myself to germs and I only wash my hands before eating if they're noticeable dirty. But that's a side point...

I suppose it's as important to think of this dependency in terms of physical as well as mental. Not only have we been ideologically programmed to be dependent on central sources, but also physically. Our bodies have become soft and weak - well illustrated by the graphic at the very top of the thread.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 04:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 


I guess my argument would be, that this is of our own doing. We are constantly looking for easier ways in which to do things, finding better ways at making life more comfortable.
Example, we are not happy with just a tv, we need a remote control, so we don't have to move from the sofa to change the channel. We went from using horses to do our hard work to the more efficient use of machinery, these are quite random examples , but I'm using them to illustrate how humans have chosen this way of life in many ways rather than it being forced upon on us. It's what makes us human, Always looking for methods to make life easier and more efficient.

We may end up eventually turning into the human battery of the Matrix, with our brains willingly plugged into an extremely advanced version of the internet, where it is impossible to tell the difference between what is real and what is a program. look at the way people have become so connected to their computers already. Maybe our next stage of evolution will be part human part computer, will our striving for eternal life and comfort lead us in those directions?



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
I guess my argument would be, that this is of our own doing. We are constantly looking for easier ways in which to do things, finding better ways at making life more comfortable...

True. However, we lived as hunter-gatherers for far longer than we have lived as farmers and I find it difficult to believe it would have taken us so long to naturally come to 'the right decision' - one that is unequivocally beneficial in all areas of human life. Perhaps we did willingly sacrifice self-sufficiency and liberty for ease - much like we have with the Internet.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


that sounds suspiciously like the plat of a certain well known movie...ever since i first saw the matrix i started to wonder about the machine...and i think u may be right,with our lazyness and complancency it would not suprise me if the norm would be happy in such a controlled environment.....reminds me of the WOW episode of south park if you havent seen it you should its gold...

peace



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 05:20 AM
link   
It is interesting to ponder what they next step in the dependency agenda might be. What are remaining things we are still individually in control of and capable of? Matchmaking? Procreation? Art? One may only need to read 'Brave New World' for ideas.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 

Much of it will depend on how we weather the storm of the up coming financial collapse. We may have to go back to relying on ourselves sooner than many are ready for.. We are a pretty pampered lot here in the west. In my opinion it's more likely we are heading for a mad max future rather than that of the matrix.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cythraul
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 

You make some good points, but they don't destroy my argument that we have been made dependent. Perhaps the loss of self-sufficiency is a price worth paying for the 'advances' we've begotten. But I would pose this question to you:

1. Is the advancement of civilisation and technology a prerequisite for happiness?

2.Do computers really make us happy or would we have been equally (or more) happy having never discovered technology?


Thanks for your reply.

1. A resounding yes. With civilisational advancement, we no longer live in the fetid jungles or follow its barbaric laws. With the advancement of tech and science, the live birth rates had increase significantly, and we are living far longer than our ancestors, major illness slowly eradicated, etc, etc, - all of which FACTS no one can deny.

The other issue is happiness We can either live in the jungles or in condominums and yet be not happy.
What truly then is happiness? The answer is contentment with what one has and seek no more. At least with science and tech progress, there is more humanity now, to share our journey this life, to achieve our ultimate destiny - to the stars.


The issue of depency lays with the governance of mankind. I know not many subscribe to religions, but still, religion in its basic form was no more than a guide that lifts a civilisation out of the jungles, with roles, rules and responsibility for each on how to behave within a closely knit society so that harmony can exist.

With the advent of the Messiah, a council of twelve was set up, to assist in the transformation of governance from the highly abused monarchy systems of the ancient past. It was the earliest form of democracy using civilisational tenets of ancestors than seclularism republic practiced by the greeks which had not been able to get rid of monarchists elements, nor gave the greeks a good life except strife.

The peaceful religion of Islam then heralded a new form governance, - Anarchy - whereby EACH man acts upon his conscience as taught by the tenets of the Koran, responsible for himself and society, WITHOUT clerical heirachies.

Unfortunately, such style of governance proved too advanced for the simple arabian folks that no sooner had the good Prophet Muhammed, blessed is his name, passed on and body not yet even cold, monarchist elements took over and ruled the arabs, finally and mercifully ended by young turks in the early 19th century whom destroy and buried the Caliphate, never allowed to rise again, and returned to democracy instead.

Regardless of whatever form of governance doctrine - democracy, republic, communism, socialism or even the uncomprehended anarchy systems, there will be some loss of self sufficiency, for mankind is not ready to be independent enough to follow the true anarchy system.

Thus, we are still at the present level - democracy, ruled by a council of elected legislators, executives and the impartial judiciary system. It still has its flaws, but is still undeniably the best system to achieve at least peace, if not harmony, for the rule of law is present and guaranteed only in democracies and not other governance systems.

Where the rule of laws or the governance breaks down, the masses still have a chance to voice out, be heard, and with the power to ensure its governors correct the errors, that they fully and jolly well know what they are without even the masses mentioning it.

Thus, the occupation of civilisation's capitals you see today, and more to come, incremental in every possible way to be heard, if the administrators still refuse to mend their ways, or worse, take action against them.



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101

Originally posted by Cythraul
1. Is the advancement of civilisation and technology a prerequisite for happiness?

1. A resounding yes. With civilisational advancement, we no longer live in the fetid jungles or follow its barbaric laws. With the advancement of tech and science, the live birth rates had increase significantly, and we are living far longer than our ancestors, major illness slowly eradicated, etc, etc, - all of which FACTS no one can deny.

The other issue is happiness We can either live in the jungles or in condominums and yet be not happy.
What truly then is happiness? The answer is contentment with what one has and seek no more. At least with science and tech progress, there is more humanity now, to share our journey this life, to achieve our ultimate destiny - to the stars.

Thank you for a very interesting post - though much of it was on a bit of a religious, albeit pertinent, tangent. With regards to the above point - happiness; I'm sceptical that technological advancement is a prerequisite for happiness. As you said yourself, happiness may be contentment with what you have. That probably sums happiness up for me, though I do suspect hunter-gatherers may have had more than we credit them with (freedom, peace, leisure, security and as deep a spiritual connection with the natural world as any could want).

Technology doesn't make us happy - it's what it enables us to do that makes us happy. For example, technology saves time that we can then spend on socialising, leisure, art and entertainment. Technology, in the form of television, lets us marvel at the natural world we so rarely come into contact with. Technology at the gym makes us strong and fit. Technology lets us farm, which lets us eat. Technology helps find cures and medical treatments.

But what if we could have time, nature-contact, strength, fitness and health without the need for a middle man, technology? Wouldn't we be as happy as if we'd come by those things with technology?



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cythraul
Technology doesn't make us happy - it's what it enables us to do that makes us happy. For example, technology saves time that we can then spend on socialising, leisure, art and entertainment. Technology, in the form of television, lets us marvel at the natural world we so rarely come into contact with. Technology at the gym makes us strong and fit. Technology lets us farm, which lets us eat. Technology helps find cures and medical treatments

But what if we could have time, nature-contact, strength, fitness and health without the need for a middle man, technology? Wouldn't we be as happy as if we'd come by those things with technology?


You asked me a question and I am obliged to answer, even though I am embarassed to do so for it makes me out like those lofty philosophers that feed on air or gurus whom scammed millions of dollars out of others for rather simple answers.

The answer is truly simple and you already have it deep in your heart and yet only unaware of it.

You had already readily admit it had been TECHNOLOGY that had ENABLE us to be happy.

Very often, in our most depressed moments, we know WHAT makes us happy. The keyword lays in the 'WHAT'. So far, it had been tech that had been the bridge. When we missed someone so bad, the phone ( tech) was that bridge to connect. When we are so sick, it had been (tech again) that makes us well. And so much more examples.

Compare that to how our ancestors in the jungles lived, I am sure you would prefer today than their yesterdays.

Tech is the bridge. Without that bridge, the happiness that you seek may never materialized, as it had been for our ancestors. And if Tech can ENABLE us to be happy, it can only be a good thing. No one would give up on a good thing.

While we may be happy with what we have already, it is not difficult to improve upon tech further, just as our forefathers had improved upon what had been taught freely in the ancient past, to bring us more happiness, if not for ourselves, it will be for our future generations. Our ancestors had lived in caves, but today we had our footprints on the moon.

There is nothing that can stop mankind, if we only improve further upon our tech to bring further happiness, correcting whatever errors that may had come with it due to greedy monsters that lived in our midst.

Einstein believed that light(photons) is the limit of speed. But today we realize neutrinos is far faster and broke the record. So too, so much of our long cherished SHAMAN beliefs in life science. There is still so much, so much more to learn and improve our species further.

The entire huge universe awaits us mankind......




edit on 14-10-2011 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 05:17 AM
link   
Seeker... I did say technology now enables happiness, but I also said that the same happiness can (and once was) reached without the need for technology to make it so. You gave the example of the telephone and being able to reach a loved one. Well, prior to the industrial age, we would have lived very close to all our loved ones. Families did not disperse as they do now and a loved one was usually a mere walk away. Technology caused the environment whereby people split up and travelled for work, and technology brings those people back together. But before technology the telephone was not necessary. For the most, the positives of technology are only undoing the previous negatives of technology.



posted on Oct, 30 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Posting to review later.



posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by blazenresearcher
Posting to review later.

Just in case you didn't know, you can "subscribe" to a thread which does the same as replying to it. There's a button under the "FLAG" button at the top.



posted on Dec, 19 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Yes. I came across this thread from another and I must say thank you for expressing what I have been feeling for such a long time. Interestingly enough you posted a picture of the matrix (off topic I know) which blew me away when I saw it (but lacked the understanding why it appealed to me).

We are being manipulated without even knowing it and conditioned to accept our current dysfunctional (and broken) system of governance and economics (both which run everything else). Our technological advances have made our lives easier (as far as in the industrial, agricultural society that we live in), but has also made us reliant, and in fact, has disempowered us more than we can imagine.

TV is a great propaganda tool that has enslaved billions since its invention. Rarely do people actually talk about the medium rather than the content (we need question the pros and cons of TV as opposed to the content in it). That's just one quick example of technologies' supposed neutrality. There are many more of course, but most don't question it (Read "In absence of the sacred" great book).

Elites in control know this and put fear into the hearts of people whenever the conversations turn into whether the state is necessary, whether hunter gatherer or non-agricultural societies are a better alternative. Even talks of moneyless societies or zero growth economies have the most brainwashes amongst us (unknowingly of course) screaming socialism or anarchy.

I also loved the part of the "gods" teaching man sciences, hierarchy and agriculture. Seems like civilization came out of nowhere 7000 years ago or so. Many mythologies (and religions) speak about them and interestingly enough their tales are similar. Obviously I have read 12th planet so that line of thinking appeals to me (not a fanatical believer however, but open minded).

Great post man very though provoking.

edit on 19-12-2011 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-12-2011 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-12-2011 by Chewingonmushrooms because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join