Some Thoughts About the World, Society, Ad Infinitum.

Perhaps these reflections will help someone expand their own worldview.




Every system starts with an individual. We can speculate that an individual generates a meme (the question here would be: what prompted this particular individual to generate the meme), which is then spread among the population (other individuals). The nature of the spread is what one can refer to as a ''thought transfer'', the transfer which causes others to be infected by a certain meme, like a mental contagion. Here, we can ask:

1. What are the types of transfer?
2. How are others infected by the meme? Do they realize it? What is the extent of this realization?

There seem to be two types of memes in place. One, the overt one, changes the system and everyone realizes it (Communism-Capitalism, for example). Then, there is the covert meme, which seems to transcend the boundaries of the overt meme, e.g. men and women wearing certain things and behaving in a certain way regardless of the overt meme in place.

1. Is their behavior natural, as some proponents would like us to believe, or perhaps manipulated as well? If so, what are the forces behind the manipulation, and to what end?

Whether it is a totalitarian regime or a democratic one (although one could contend the difference is merely superficial in nature as both regimes depend on the surreptitious imposition of memes), the covert meme remains unchanged/partly changed. The partial change is not really significant, however, which leaves many individuals with a feeling of a ''false paradigm shift'', because the change only took place overtly, leaving the underlying structure intact. Questions:

1. What generates the overt memes?
2. What generates the covert memes?
3. How do the two types of memes interact with each other?

Society is a collection of individuals who agreed to abide by a set of principles. One can contend, however, that not everyone consciously agrees to many rules surrounding them. The consensus is in fact imposed on many different levels, and - perhaps - this is the main difference between a totalitarian regime and a democratic (regime). Still, in order for societies to function, the imposition has to be there, regardless of whether one is talking about run-of-the-mill ''sheeple'' or a (supposed) ''rebel''. Questions:

1.Being part of a system, can one really be a free thinker? Can one really claim to be ''enlightened'', not a ''sheeple''? Haven't the criteria for this assessment also been provided by the very system one operates in? Could it be our language limits our perception and precludes us from experiencing other scenarios, as shown in 1984 with the idea of ''newspeak''?

2.Is it possible we are indeed dealing with three separate societies: the official (mainstream) one, the buffer-society, and the underground society? It certainly seems plausible in case of our current conspiratorial milieu, whereby one could surmise the mainstream society is in fact used by the underground society, and the go-between, the buffer-zone, acts as a bridge. Of course, the level of awareness is grotesquely misrepresented, as the underground society - in this particular model - is going to be perfectly aware of its two antecedents, whereas the mainstream and the liaison may not have that awareness.

It would stand to reason controlling others via a carefully-crafted imposition of memes needs to be based on two basic principles:

1. The meme which gives the population a frame of reference as to what is real/unreal;
2. The individual(s?) in charge of the memes would most likely have to be psychopathic.

When analyzing any kind of material, our minds are flooded by a myriad of preconceptions. Differentiating between memes imposed on us and our own thoughts seems to be the sine qua non of successful development toward the true self-awareness.

1. Could it be the vast majority of the population has been bombarded by all sorts of systemic messages in order to act as thought police? If so, what kind of ''bombardment'' techniques are in place to ensure this scenario, and to what end?

If one could prove the implementation of memes is preordained, then the latter would mean ''the powers that be'' is indeed a tangible phenomenon.

To finish, some questions nobody seems to be asking:

1. Who wrote all the propaganda leaflets/articles/et al., during totalitarian regimes, such as Communism, denouncing certain segments of the population as ''unproductive, bourgeois, etc.?'' Same could be asked of other regimes, and - indeed - about our situation today.

2. Regardless of the regime, there has to be a think-tank which can deal with the ''subversive elements'' within a particular population. In order to deal with the ''subversive elements'', this think-tank needs to understand the ''enemy''. But how can it be ensured the exposure is not going to impact the loyalty of the think-tank members? Who is the go-between between the think-tanks and the population? Indeed, who's to say the think-tanks aren't actually of the same ''intellectual level'', as the ones who try to oppose them ''on the ground'', while the vast majority - the ''sheeple - is oblivious to the fight taking place around them?

How come, then, one group has all the resources and keeps the truth hidden while the other group has a limited amount of resources and is trying to expose the truth? What caused the discrepancy, better yet, a chasm, between the two groups?

3. Could a torrent of modern conspiracies surrounding 2012, the new world order, etc. actually be a red herring?

4. How is the above pertinent to our ''daily grind'' and is the ''daily grind'' a clever invention of the system to ''keep the animals on a farm''?

5. Could it be all the ways we are told are going to solve our problems, such as living-off-the-land, voting differently, permaculture, etc., are actually diversions from real solutions? If so, what are these solutions?

6. In today's world, how important is individual opinion? Does it really matter what someone writes on a forum, talks about with their acquaintances, etc.? Can a particular opinion be turned into another meme? If so, how?

7. Could it be that without the ''memetic inculcation'' people would be akin to animals, literally feral and uncivilized? If so, where does that take us in terms of free will and nature of consciousness/reality?

8. Is conscience an innate phenomenon, or - perhaps - psychopaths are the ''perfect human beings?'', as conscience is a by-product of social conditioning?

9. Could all sorts of ''business courses'', which are often promoting psychopathic tendencies, actually be designed to manipulate people into accepting their ''inner reptilian'' as the main guide, by promoting the ''might-is-right-winner-takes-all'' attitude?

10. Could the process of ''ascension'' be easier, or perhaps only available to, the ones who - compared with society at large - have genius-level IQs?