It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why Do People Defend Unjust, Inept, and Corrupt Systems?

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 09:14 AM
reply to post by tangonine

If you want to see a hemp run vehicle, you should check out Hemp is a renewable resource... Oil is not... Like I've said before, if we really want change, we have that ability... Or we can keep on supporting the oil industries which care nothing for you, me & the environment, they only care about profit... Let's not acquiesce to the wants of the few who crowned themselves kings.

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 09:24 AM

Originally posted by tangonine

I tell my wife that when I teach, I check my ego at the door. Likewise, when I look for information, I check my bias at the door. Rare thing, that.

Nope. You are letting your stock market bias/ego(admiited so on page 4) get in the way of rational thought proccess. That is ok because I and others do the same thing. There is no reason to pretend we all want the same thing because we don't.

The way I see you have a few million in shares and want to double or triple that overnight with good solid insider information. You pretend to hate the government while the government goes out of its way to protect you and the other criminals.

Why are you hitting yourself all the time?
Hypocrisy is annoying, especially when you play dumb by saying "define the system inorder to cricise it" and then say "I just watch the weather and stock market reports".

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 09:25 AM
Actually, the system is really good. Not perfect, but really good.

If we could all work together to establish stronger ethics reforms and term limits, we'd be on the road to making the system work as it was designed. Instead, we have factions of people who prefer to topple governments and achieve total anarchy or totalitarian regimes.

Of course, the socialist and communist parties in America (they are alive and well) are working hard towards the ends of total anarchy or totalitarian regimes. Those are the end game victories so they can pick up the pieces and create the United Socialist States of America or UCSA.

Unfortunately, they have been able to brainwash the American people through a number of political groups and through our education system (with large thanks to John D. Rockefeller and his General Board of Education whose aim was to teach collectivism in schools, eliminate individuality, and destroy critical thinking skills in order to have a better worker population).

The biggest problem today is that we have poor skills of logic, which leads us to the blind ignorance of the Occupy movement (though, I think their hearts are in a good place, their brains have been washed). It even leads a culture where almost all the remaining generations have adopted an selfish entitlement mindset, which is not only the destruction of society but also of that person's spirit.

We all have the tactics of the communist party and socialist activist groups to thank for these rotten fruits. Hopefully, people can wake up from their brain scrubs and recognize what's really going on and how everyone, yes everyone, is being played like puppets (by the entities that wish to destroy us).

Again, the Founding Fathers of the United States of America dealt with all these types of issues of tyranny and damaging propaganda. They gave us an awe-inspiring framework that when followed protects us all from tyranny and mob rule alike. Establishing term limits for public office and stronger ethics reforms would get us back on track by removing the incentives for collusion. Additionally, it'd take away the political threats against judges to do their part of the checks and balances system. Then, we also need to restore states rights to keep the federal government in check. These are all elements our great Constitution allows us to address when we're doing our part.

Not quite so incidentally, it's the General Board of Education's destruction of our education (formative minds and socializing) that enables workers at all levels of a company to stay in it and work until it falls apart. Partially from being better for the collective good of the company and partially because they're entitled to an "easier" life. The squashing of the individual and of the ability to reason brings these types of results: people who stay in bad systems. An individual 100 years ago would have none of it.
edit on 14-12-2011 by twoandthree because: Added last paragraph.

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 09:34 AM
I blame religion. Simple as that. People are conditioned through "fellowship" to not stray from the pack

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 09:36 AM
reply to post by TXRabbit

Actually, I would argue that religion helps restore individuality and individual identity. It might be one of the few elixirs to the socialization of our mores.

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 09:58 AM

Originally posted by tangonine

Originally posted by Screwed

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
reply to post by tangonine

I am a OWS participant and

Ehem.. I have a Job

So much for the unemployed hippie theory, yes that was on the news wasn't it? Yes the media not some random youtube clip. Oh yes this is part of damage control, yes those Wall Street aristocrats decided to help a few people get jobs isn't that nice. They made sure the media projected this... because they are so kind

So sincere of them, just like when GM donates trucks to the NYFD after 911 and then do a commercial about it. Ahh yes how sincere of them to exploit the tragedy of 911 to sell cars. Like i go around bragging about donating 2 dollars from my paycheck to charity. When people have to prove and brag to others that they "did a good deed" usually is an act of self gain.

In this case sounds like propaganda, I take it as a insult to assume i have no job.That is what they want the lemmings to think of protesters.

What network was this by the way?... FOX

see where I am going with this

Then you claim al these individuals are wanting free stuff.. . as if you have met with every person at OWS and they were to tell you "we want free stuff" that was a herp derp of you. You clearly have no concept of what the protest was about. It was about corruption and justification . You are in line with the status quo media M.O. then.

Good luck with that

edit on 13-12-2011 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)

What he said!!!!

Says the guy with an avatar with an AK in his hand. shark, jump it much?

What is that even supposed to mean anyway?
How old are you if you don't mind me asking?

This can go either way.

A. Either you are 12 and acting like it which will be excusable .
But you will be asked to put down mommy and daddy's laptop and get your butt to school,
and will show us all who we are dealing with

B. You are an adult and ACTING like you are 12 which is not excusable and will show us all who we are dealing with.

Either way, it doesn't look good for you.

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 10:09 AM
reply to post by twoandthree

I disagree 100%. While there are merits to congregational thinking as it applies to social engineering, I fail to see how following a premeditated doctrine promotes individual thought and freewill. I would expect the exact opposite.

Feel free to start a new thread if you'd like to discuss this further though as I don't want to derail this current topic. :-)

edit on 14-12-2011 by TXRabbit because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 10:17 AM
reply to post by Maxmars

Excellent post.
The main difference between members on sites such as ATS and those that are not, of course, is the obvious fact that we already have a hard time believing what is on the MSM, which, of course, colors reality to their own perception. We are, by definition, a "tainted sample", that is, by the very nature of our presence on ATS, we are not a "typical sample", and of course, in any study, such a sample would be thrown out.
Of course, that does not mean that we are not right in our beliefs.I love a slight adaptation of the old adage "Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean you're not right".

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 10:19 AM
reply to post by Darkchemistry

Link the experiment. Do you think people take you seriously otherwise?

Experiment 1:
Man makes post claiming it's an experiment but doesn't give a link to confirm this.
Experiment 2
Everybody believes him.
Experiment 3
A new guy enters the thread and doesn't believe him.
Experiment 4
Everybody beats up the new guy.
Experiment 5
Eventually, everybody has been replaced. But they still beat up the new guy.
The man doesn't need to confirm his link.
edit on 14-12-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 11:00 AM
A few things to go over again...

The OP's link points out a system can be a government, marriage, company or something similar. I assume this means it could also be church members, political parties, and so on.

This is the link again:
www.psychologicalscience.o rg ...

It states that these things cause us to (blindly) defend the system:
1) Threats to the system and (or?) ourselves
2) Dependency on the system
3) Lack of control in our own lives
4) Inability to escape the system

Don't all of these seem defensive in nature? Might this be an expression of self-preservation? People don't like pain. They don't like being vulnerable. Fear of death is penetrating. Fear of loss. Anxiety. Who wants to be this way? Nobody. We don't always have an easy answer for these things. It's a slog sometimes. And it's not always about us, it could be a loved one.

Everyone from the rich to the poor can be dependent on a nation/system for their energies. All of them can feel threatened by something system-wide. All of them can, at times, feel a lack of control in their own lives. And at one point in their lives they probably also felt unable to leave the system. Haven't we all been here? So haven't we all at least once or twice blindly supported a system or institution, assuming this is all true? None of us should be able to claim immunity.

Might it be human-nature to blindly defend and build up systems like this?

If it's not a done deal, can it be exploited to both build a system OR to dismantle it?
edit on 14-12-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 11:03 AM

The orthodox view of the meaning of the Second Amendment was articulated by Joseph Story in his influential Commentaries on the Constitution. In his view the meaning of the Amendment was clear: The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them. And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burthens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights.[92]

greatly the US a has protection against unjust corrupt and dictotorship state systems.
in the bill of rights 2th ameendment of the constitution of the USA
states that militia's are there for the protection of the free nation against all foreign and domestic .
read above quote as found on

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 11:11 AM
reply to post by MarkLuitzen

You act as though guns and bullets are our only weapons.

I disagree. In fact, I think dependency on guns and bullets to solve problems is a vulnerability.

I know MacGyver was a fictional character, but you remember how he hated guns?

In this world we live in, information and its adaption is more powerful than guns. There may come a time when a single weapon can destroy the whole earth. Is that how we want to solve our problems? Isn't this a bad frame of mind to be in? How much security is necessary to be free?

The problem isn't guns and bullets, it's the information inside our heads.

"Man is always marveling at what he has blown apart, very rarely what the universe has put together, and this is his limitation." - Loren Eiseley
edit on 14-12-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 11:13 AM

Originally posted by rebellender
Cause its the EASY WAY OUT...
....that's my story and I am sticking to it

edit on 13-12-2011 by rebellender because: (no reason given)

Absolutely and thank you for the main reason. Easy is getting way too easy.
Here's your star, and I'd give you another one for "Oh Well" if I had it. One
digression, Mick and I both feel alike in that the real Mac died when Peter
pulled his guitar out of it.
So easy it is to have the truth spoon fed to us just by flicking a switch,
instead of digging for the real thing and rinsing it off a little. Then play on,
and I hope for us all angry enough so the others awaken.

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 11:22 AM
All throughout my Life, if I hav been unsatisfied with thingz, I hav been willin' 2 ask Questionz...
Unfortunately, I hav also encountered many more ppl who just 'couldn't give a damn'.. It seems like
there are alot of ppl around me (including loved onez), who are quite content 2 'play lemmings',
n just 'go with tha flow'.. I guess they figure, tha less thinkin' they do, or less questionz they ask,
tha more 'relaxing' Life will be..

In many wayz I can agree with that.. Even though it ain't Me..

I process evrything thoroughly...

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 11:28 AM
This is what is called "being disconnected from the source".

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 11:36 AM
Our Gov. is unjust and corrupt, and there are some who feel we need to go out and have a full fledge revolution to take our Gov. down. Unfortunately, there are some people who are afraid of losing the necessities needed from our Gov. to survive. So what happens to Americans who rely on social security? Americans who rely on Medicare for medication, or just to stay alive? Do we just treat them as casualties of war? Many like me have paid in hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes, in the hope that one day when we retire; we will have some of those monies to keep us afloat until we bite the big one. Some (mostly younger folk) don’t have a lot to lose. But there are many who will. I am not saying we shouldn’t take out those who are corrupt. These people need to be hung where they stand. I guess the big question to ask is how do we go about it without millions of Americans having to suffer? Does it really have to be one of those "it's for the better good" scenarios?

Great post....S&F
edit on 14-12-2011 by Propulsion because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 11:43 AM
reply to post by jonnywhite

no thats not the real solution . that will be free elections which are not controlled by corrupt individuals and groups.
if that don't work you can have demonstrations and rally's , guns and bullets are the last defence against a corrupt and evil governement whom are not acting and handling according the US constitution and that is why militia's are protected by the constitution so We the people can be free and life freely with out fear of the governement let it be state or federal.
and even though its a lest resort it must be there because its the governement who should be afraid of the people and not people afraid of the governement.
the governement is there for the people and not as they acting now the people for the governement..
people should pay taxes as much as they can afford and not been forced to pay more then they can afford so those people can't get food or other primary neccasity's .
elected people should protect there fellow citizens and not breach there trust, security and privacy .

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 11:53 AM
reply to post by Maxmars

your right...we are in a cruel unjust system designed to trap you from birth untill the day you die.

but everyone has a limit...and one day the governments will go just that little too far and there will be uprising in the most developed of countries

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 02:58 PM

Originally posted by haarvik

Low Personal Control The less control people feel over their own lives, the more they endorse systems and leaders that offer a sense of order.

I find this hard to accept. We are not sheep needing to be led by some secualr messiah from the very wilderness of the dysfunctional that they themselves led us into.... but then, as an ATSer, I have come to terms that we see things froma broader perspective than the MSM likes to encourage.

Nope, this is exactly correct. The majority of people are sheep being led to the slaughter, that is the whole problem. more people would rather be clueless than to fact the reality that their world and way of life is slipping from their grasp. Kind of like my wife. I have a hard time discussing things with her because she doesn't want to hear all of the "doom and gloom" in my topics. I have tried to rationalize with her saying I would rather know the truth than to led blindly into who knows what. This is the mentality of most people. They will gladly follow the path of blind feel good than to accept the reality of their world.

Errrm, you mean you have tried to get your wife to agree with your point of view and 'gasp' she doesn't agree? That means (of course in your mind) that you are right and she is wrong?

You might want to question your mentality at some point.

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 03:08 PM

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by tangonine

I tell my wife that when I teach, I check my ego at the door. Likewise, when I look for information, I check my bias at the door. Rare thing, that.

Nope. You are letting your stock market bias/ego(admiited so on page 4) get in the way of rational thought proccess. That is ok because I and others do the same thing. There is no reason to pretend we all want the same thing because we don't.

The way I see you have a few million in shares and want to double or triple that overnight with good solid insider information. You pretend to hate the government while the government goes out of its way to protect you and the other criminals.

Why are you hitting yourself all the time?
Hypocrisy is annoying, especially when you play dumb by saying "define the system inorder to cricise it" and then say "I just watch the weather and stock market reports".

actually, I have very few shares. I'm just smart enough to invest. I suppose that makes me evil in you're eyes. I'm sorry you never learned how. I haven't doubled or tripled anything. I have no "insiders." I make what little money I make (let's put it this way: it's not enough to buy a prius) every year in stock because as a physicist and a mathematician, I find stocks more of a challenge than a way to make money.

Of course, you wouldn't understand: you view anyone who invests in a company as evil (and yes, that makes you stupid).

You call me a criminal... I'd like to know what crime I committed? You're out of bounds, and you've pretty much gone full lunatic at this point, so I think we're done here.

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in