Wal-Mart Executives, the Rothschilds and Psy

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 11:17 PM
link   
I mean the trouble I’ve always had about all of this is determining what, exactly, is the point? It sounds like we sometimes take for granted that the end must be worthy of the means, but what is the end? Is it really worldwide subversion or domination and/or enslavement of everyone? Is that really it and what does that get anyone? What does it even mean?

We all know power is an aphrodisiac, but it’s not the only one, is it? And aren’t the other aphrodisiacs much easier and perhaps, even more satisfactory? Or is the idea that “ruling the world” really would be the ultimate thing of all time? No one’s ever done that – I mean, the whole world (and everybody and every thing on it). In this case, is it not so much that power is an aphrodisiac or the thing needed/wanted in order to do something else; but that power, itself, is the ultimate and only goal? And this is not the big-guy-on-campus kinda power or CEO-type power or senator/governor power or even president or king power; this is the real deal – completely at the top, worldwide, absolute power. And because of that, it’s impossible for us slaves to understand that goal and to know how it would feel and what it would mean for the one or ones who had it?

As for me, I figure that if I had no restrictions of any kind, there are lots of things I would and would not do because of the money, power and absence of authoritarian control that I would have at my disposal. I can imagine, at some point, though, while taking a vacation from beating my slaves or screwing my harem or blowing up cities with nuclear bombs for amusement (were that to be my thing), I might want to take a vacation from my life of … vacation … and really, just chill out on a beach on the French Riviera, let’s say, drink a particularly good piña colada or three and maybe listen to some Stevie Nicks or Live or Beethoven on my iPod … or iPhone .. or iWhatever. (After all, it’s a cliché, right, how hard and incredibly taxing it is ruling the world, right?)

I have to think that even though the flavor of my indulgences might be different than those in the elite who would qualify as practitioners of world domination, surely they too would, even if it were for temporary respite, have their guilty pleasures: a world-class opera? The finest five-star dinner from one of the world’s finest chefs? A luxurious gown created by a world-renowned designer? One hundred and fifty acres of sublime and profusely-stocked wildlands for hunting my favorite big-game? But these guilty pleasures would surely be dependent on the socioeconomic reality of the modern world: an infrastructure of mind-blowing complexity is incumbent in providing the world with all the tools, resources and requirements it needs, from the simplest to the most gratuitous; whether water, fibers for clothing, materials for assembling shelter, the creation and assemblage of books, auto manufacturing, air conditioning, television, the Internet or the latest cell phone or tablet.

I mean surely kings of old would luxuriate in their pleasures; but back then, we might be talking only about matters carnal … or booze, court jesters, plays, poetry, music, food, dancing, what have you. But in simpler times, most of these things could be provided by an individual or a small group. Even a castle full of gold, jewels and meat wouldn’t take all that many slaves – easy if you’ve conquered a neighboring land or two, which surely you would have were you the king or whatnot.

But today, who wouldn’t want to be able to check out the latest Channing Tatum movie or eat caviar and/or pâté or go to the MoMA (even if you do end up stealing its bounty for your own abode)? Not good enough? Would it sound better if you slept in a waterbed on a jet airplane while you traversed an ocean so you could do some of the same things on the isle of Capri while sipping Champagne and nipping at priceless truffles? Wouldn’t you want a Maserati in your garage? Or a Tesla? Maybe one of those souped-up houseboats? Speaking of houses, who’s going to build your house, connect the sewers, cut the grass and maintain all of this? Who’s going to protect you from hurricanes, tornadoes, fires and civil uprisings? Slaves, yes of course. But how about the fertilizer for the lawn, the gas for your vehicles, the foam for the chaise-lounges in your screening room, the processors for the electronic equipment that runs your projector and/or espresso machine, the clothes for your slaves, the actors and crew of your favorite flicks? But all of these things are the output of a worldwide infrastructure that depends on so many people and systems working together.

Strangely enough, it’s almost as if this is support for emphasizing how even the most insignificant person at some little junky factory in some Podunk, middle-of-nowhere town plays their role and ultimately, is vital in the grand scheme of things. But this almost seems diametrically opposed to the “principle” of worldwide power over everybody else. How can an individual slave be even relevant?

Of course, you could stand by the oldie-but-goodie that the best slaves are the happiest slaves and the happiest slaves are the ones who don’t know they’re slaves. But, that’s already the deal, right? That’s not something anybody needs to be working toward … we already know we’re all slaves.

Even an engine is just greased cogs, really … and so is the brain of the driver of the vehicle that houses the engine. Is the grease on the cogs inanimate for a reason? Has the mission already been accomplished? Are postmodern slavery and freedom maybe the same thing … a tripped-out interpretation of a sociological singularity?




posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 02:56 AM
link   
I got the strangest sense of deja vu reading through this. It was all new and then bam, like an echo from a previous post, probably by you, all the same word for word something I've read before. Then I look and its a new thread so I haven 't been here specifically but maybe I've even authored threads like this one. we are all slaves to something. some are slaves to money, some are slaves to material things, but it is an overarching theme that reoccurs on ATS as it should/ its a part of the nature of man./



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 07:29 AM
link   
Being the king of the world does sound fun, but don't forget the pesky younger brother is always scheming to have you killed so he can rule the world.

Might be hard to enjoy the Pate when you know it has been poisoned, better not drive the masseratti as the mechanic may have been paid to cut the brake lines.
Better off just locking yourself in a steel vault.





new topics
 
1

log in

join