The Mother of All Conspiracies

"What people (aside from rulers) don't like about hierarchal societies is that they don't exist for all their members in the same way. They provide a life of unbelievable luxury and ease for the rulers and a life of poverty and toil for everyone else. The way rulers benefit from the success of the society is vastly different from the way the masses benefit, and the pyramids and the temples testify to the importance of the rulers, not to the masses who build them. And so it goes, through every phase of life in a hierarchal society."

- Daniel Quinn, Beyond Civilization

reply to post by loveguy

When you say "govern ourselves", do you mean each individual person governing themselves? Or do you mean the people creating their own government (a government that isn't the current individual governments of the world)?

If you are talking about the former, I really doubt people would all get along without a mutually decide-upon set of rules that applies to all individuals, and a method for enforcing those rules. If you say "They'll make their own rules among them and figure out how to enforce those rules themselves", then you are talking about the definition of government.

If you are talking about the latter, then you are simply swapping one government with w new one -- a new government that is equally capable of having corrupt individuals as any present government.

welcome to the party pal

An Anarchist FAQ

Anarchism is a political theory which aims to create anarchy, "the absence of a master, of a sovereign." [P-J Proudhon, What is Property , p. 264] In other words, anarchism is a political theory which aims to create a society within which individuals freely co-operate together as equals. As such anarchism opposes all forms of hierarchical control - be that control by the state or a capitalist - as harmful to the individual and their individuality as well as unnecessary.

In the words of anarchist L. Susan Brown:


"While the popular understanding of anarchism is of a violent, anti-State movement, anarchism is a much more subtle and nuanced tradition then a simple opposition to government power. Anarchists oppose the idea that power and domination are necessary for society, and instead advocate more co-operative, anti-hierarchical forms of social, political and economic organisation." [The Politics of Individualism, p. 106]"

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by guavas

 

Whoa...are you guys STILL on the topic of hemp?

There's much more important matters to be discussed here...like the thread itself!

The banning of hemp is a huge factor in our resource problems and deregulating the hemp industry would kill pretty much the entire oil industry.

Or you just can't stand you got proven wrong after first questioning the OP's motivations why he questioned the banning of hemp?

The OP is correct but understated. Especially in the realm of math and science vs secrecy. This scenario is well described in ...
Harrison Bergeron (in 12 parts - linked the youtube playlist)

Its also sorta suggested in The Hunger Games - like the mining district stuck in the 1920s technology while the capital has advanced technology of star-trek proportions.

My point is that math/science reality is that WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY. But rather than letting the public enjoy it, its suppressed. Many things, from anti-gravity, Teleportation, Telepathy, mind-control, and on and on. Preston Nichols appears to be a past-co-worker of mine (if true he used a different name and lost 50lbs) - and mentioned the company's past-name (AIO).

Originally posted by Meaningless

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by Meaningless
reply to post by Blaine91555

 

Too many people want peace and no one wants to be told what to do. We keep order by keeping order in ourselves, not in the hands of some government. It is absolutely possible to live in local communities, uniting together and swaying off any intruders attempting to gain control. Do you even know what dictates behavior in humans?

Yes I do

Do you

Enlighten me.

Then you don't.

There are 7 billion souls on this planet, all needing food, shelter and basic needs met. We return to tribalism billions die almost overnight. Your idea's might work if you have a tiny population of hand-picked individuals.

The first time you have plenty of food and water say and a tribe near you does not, it all falls apart. What do you do? You form a military to protect you, prisons to house the captives (providing you don't simply kill them instead), laws to guide you and people to enforce the laws. You go right back to a system of laws and the rule of law to survive and protect yourselves.

Why would we wish to go through the pain of finding out again why we need a government and laws to have a peaceful prosperous society. Would it not make infinitely more sense to fix the problems with the highly successful system we have now?

Or are you proposing we all split up into small tribes, all 7 billion of us? How would that work exactly? Who decides who gets the good, food producing land and who does not? Who decides who gets the water from a river and how do you guarantee the tribe upstream does not take it all or divert it? Who maintains the infrastructure, roads, bridges, marine traffic, air traffic and all that goes into supporting 7 billion people? Who controls simple things like water wells to keep the aquifers from going dry? It's not as simple as your idea's suggest. Anarchy leads to chaos and suffering.

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

"What people (aside from rulers) don't like about hierarchal societies is that they don't exist for all their members in the same way. They provide a life of unbelievable luxury and ease for the rulers and a life of poverty and toil for everyone else. The way rulers benefit from the success of the society is vastly different from the way the masses benefit, and the pyramids and the temples testify to the importance of the rulers, not to the masses who build them. And so it goes, through every phase of life in a hierarchal society."

- Daniel Quinn, Beyond Civilization

Would you replace that with a system of anarchy incapable of providing even basic needs at a level eqaul to the task of feeding and protecting us? Anarchy is the survival of the fitest and if you think Capitalism is bad, take an honest look at what anarchy truly leads too.

No need to yell

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by loveguy

I've had to share a lock-up once with a bunch of illegals. One thing I noticed was that when rations were given; cookies or whatever the cops felt like throwing in our cage on the way to the dumpster...

It didn't matter who of these illegals got their hands on which goodies; they would hand it off to the eldest, and he would make sure that everyone got their portion. Even a gringo such as myself!

So to think we are incapable of governing ourselves is drinking the pee that we are told is coolaid, and good for us; absolutely ludicrous!

Then what you are saying is that we would immediately recreate a government and a set of rules (laws), along with an enforcement mechanism (Courts, Jails etc..) That is true and it would lead us back to the system we have now out of necessity. All Laws come from necessity. All government comes from necessity. You are in fact making my case for me.

What you saw happening in that situation was a government being formed.

Mexico ironically is a great example of this in action. 50,000 dead since 2008 due to rule by the man with the biggest gun. Once the government of the people failed, the government by the strongest replaced it.

Another example of a place with true anarchy in recent history is the story of the Congo. Remove all law and all government and it turned into a horror story of epoch proportions.

These are occasions where government has already been conceived. And the failings of it's administered practices are in full view. If there was no directive, there would be no policy/practice, unless the directive being all for one and one for all.

I'm not locked in a box filled with a helpless mentality that I owe something to someone who is here under the same circumstances as myself, but is somehow more special...or entitled to lead me to my doom.

reply to post by modeselektor


Huh. That video pretty much obviates most of my post. If I had known that video existed, I'd have just posted that instead with a few addendums. I guess I can find comfort that clearly I ain't the only one that sees this.

But the video reminded me of a particularly horrifying experiment with monkeys, when it was talking about turning the livestock on each other.

A bunch of monkeys were stuffed into a large cage, and hanging from the center of the ceiling of this large cage was a banana. The monkeys would claw, scramble and climb over each other to get to the banana, but when they did, they'd get blasted with water from a firehose.

After a while, they'd stop trying to get the banana.

Then they would replace one conditioned monkey with a fresh monkey, and when that fresh monkey tried to obtain the banana, the rest of the monkeys would go berserk and attack that monkey. After a while, that fresh monkey would no longer try and get the banana.

After a while, they eventually rotated out all the first generation monkeys with fresh monkeys and the same thing would happen, the conditioned monkeys would attack the fresh monkeys - without ever knowing there was a firehose, or why they would attack the fresh monkey going for the banana.

Each one in turn would be conditioned without any effort from the guy with the firehose.

Someone please tell me where I can find a 40 hour work week! That would be amazing. I could actually have a life outside of work. Quite honestly, I don't think I know anyone who works 40 hours a week. Everyone I know either works 60-80 or is in between jobs (I work in a project based business). Anyway, other than that... I don't think that there was a massive conspiracy leading up to where we are now... I do think there has been a slow erosion of freedoms and fairness because people, inherently want power and money and power and money begets more power and money. It is true that most of the middle class is so busy working and trying to keep their heads above water that they don't have the time or brainwaves to spare to pay attention. That said, I'm amazed at the people who think they're paying attention when all they're really doing is repeating the talking points that are the script to the elite's agenda of dumbing us down and pitting us against one another. There's a lot of that on this site sadly.

reply to post by Fylgje


This is the thing that truly bothers me the most of all this. We are conditioned to think that somehow, it's living naturally and being self-reliant that are the wicked, evil things to do. But buying food engineered in a lab, is somehow the righteous, correct thing for upstanding citizens to do.

Does the phrase "Filthy Hippy" ring any bells? Living naturally is WRONG! What you really need is to buy our stuff! Don't be like a filthy hippy and become self-reliant, that's wrong! They never bathe, you don't wanna be like THEM now do you? Here, buy my stuff so you won't be like them! They're filthy! And dumb! And they're potheads and tree huggers! That's bad! Here, buy my things! You NEED to buy my these things if you don't want to be like THEM.

It's totally and utterly psychotic.

Just look at the stigma attached to anyone who even so much as thinks of dropping off the grid. If you bring it up with your workmates at the office, they'd all look at you like you had lobsters crawling out your ears.

reply to post by Starchild23


Everything is going perfectly according to plan

reply to post by Blaine91555
Get rid of government and everything will be open to all. Food, shelter, clothing, care, water, etc. We are told there isn't enough resources, not enough land blah blah blah but the fact of the matter is that there's so much out there that can be shared with everyone.

Seriously, learn about what is actually on the land around you or what could be. LOL you think the system we have now is "highly" successful? I'm sure those people in Africa would love to let you know how the system really operates. Ultimately, you have not lived in a time with no government so you can't say life without it would be worse. Life surely wasn't meant for governments to rule the lower classes, you should know that.

Originally posted by loveguy
...I'm not locked in a box filled with a helpless mentality that I owe something to someone who is here under the same circumstances as myself, but is somehow more special...or entitled to lead me to my doom.

First of all, stop viewing the people in government as people who have more entitlements than you. If you view them as people who are just like you (even the ones in government who THINK they are more entitled than you), then you can actually have power over them. If you want to be equally as entitled, grab those entitlements for yourself.

The "victim mentality" among the masses is just as big a societal problem as the "feeling of entitlement" among the elitists.

reply to post by Meaningless


really,,,.. enough for every one huh?! lets start sharing your stuff first . Can I give you my address so you can mail your stuff to me. No worries I will cover the shipping fees....

reply to post by reddwhite


Well, first of all, we have to identify the problem first before we can begin trying to fix it. We're still in the identification stage. Once everyone identifies what the problem actually is, then greater minds than mine can begin think-tanking the solution.

Capitalism, I think is the way to go, but it's just so damn susceptible to abuse...I'm not sure, but barter and trade is only natural and it's because of barter and trade throughout history that helped shaped the world for the better IMHO. We just have to armor the hell out of it to make it as immune to corruption as possible...how do we do that?

Well, like I said, I'll let greater minds handle that, if that's even the way to go. First, let's get everyone on the same page as to WHAT the problem is first.

reply to post by loveguy


It's about working together, not every person for themselves. It's about that and the rule of law to protect the weak and to protect against those we consider evil. There will always be a percentage of us who are sociopathic and a danger to us and it is they who will rule by force lacking any mechanism, like a central government to enforce the rule of law.

It's a great concept and valid to discuss, but the TRUTH is that it simply will not work the way you think it will. We are interdependent on each other in a huge way in today's world. Does your idea take it for granted that it's every person for themselves and completely ignore the massive suffering and death that would happen overnight on a global scale?

Actually you can live that way right now, inside the US anyway. I don't know about other countries, but here you can and some groups do. Why should others not interested in that spartan life (nearly all of us) be forced to bend to your will? Why should we give up a solid infrastructure, laws and bodies to enforce them, a military to protect us from outside enemies, a good standard of living and ..................

We don't need anarchy and we know it won't work anyway. We need lot's of things in our system improved or fixed and sanity dictates you do so carefully and slowly, always under the rule of law in a Free Society (as free as one can be to avoid chaos).

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by loveguy

 

When you say "govern ourselves", do you mean each individual person governing themselves? Or do you mean the people creating their own government (a government that isn't the current individual governments of the world)?

If you are talking about the former, I really doubt people would all get along without a mutually decide-upon set of rules that applies to all individuals, and a method for enforcing those rules. If you say "They'll make their own rules among them and figure out how to enforce those rules themselves", then you are talking about the definition of government.

If you are talking about the latter, then you are simply swapping one government with w new one -- a new government that is equally capable of having corrupt individuals as any present government.

edit on 4/18/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

Hi, thanks for asking.

If there be a 'communal directive' it should be "all for one and one for all" ; this practice could extend to surrounding communities. There will be more communities that are more for the all 4-1-1-4-all that there will be 'horray-4us-and-f-u'. It will be for the good of all to decimate communities who think they are here under different/dillusionary circumstances and are entitled to more than their portion allotted them during creation/evolution...

reply to post by guavas
[

Nice read. I agree with you. I know I am part of there monkey's who work 9-5 but if I didn't like you said I would be in an institute with my theorys, or I would be living on the street. Just to make sure I am not a dumb monkey I do something THEY call illegal atleast once or twice a week!!! Nothing major but just to feel alive!