evilgenius wrote: That's a dangerous trend in the hands of a runaway social media experiment that puts so much power into the hands of what is essentially Aristotle's mob. There is a reason that many ancients opposed democracy. They thought it always devolved into mob rule.
Newfie wrote:Evil,
And THAT is really a big deal. We have become very revengeful, if we were not already. Was not always so. .
MonteQuest wrote:...
Then on January 5, 2002, Bush reiterated this same lie: “Well, I was sitting in a schoolhouse in Florida ... and my Chief of Staff —well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on. And you know, I thought it was pilot error and I was amazed that anybody could make such a terrible mistake. And something was wrong with the plane...”
In his speech to the nation that evening, Bush said: “Immediately following the first attack, I implemented our government's emergency response plans.” Duh…don’t think so, Dubya.
Where and how was Bush able to watch the first plane hit on TV? Makes one scratch their head, doesn't it?
Newfie wrote:Frequently in these threads folks use "them" or "they" or "TPTB" or some other device (I'll simply call them all "them") to point to some group that they hold responsible for a particular problem. This always confuses me and I have developed a profound dislike for the practice. None-the-less other folks use it often enough that it deserves attention and clarification. If we can't agree on what a word or phrase, if we have no common definition, then it is meaningless.
....
Reading this strengthened my opinion that "them" is a vague and undefined reference to some group who are responsible for some problem. "Them" is poorly defined, nebulous. It works because it takes on a different meaning in each individual, the only commonality being the agreement that there is some group, out of reach, who is responsible. By using a vague word it evokes an emotional response...
...
It however has the advantage of being non specific so the reader can fill in what ever group he imagines, and them have closure and agreement with the author.
Newfie wrote:Zarquon,
Not sure if you are agreeing or arguing?
Tanada wrote:Unfortunately just like any other humans some of the "super elites" will see an advantage for themselves/family in massive wars so long as those wars don't actually topple civilization. Remember nearly all of the elite/super elite group consider themselves international "Controllers of Earth", their wealth is widely spread and if say California breaks away from the USA and becomes an independent nation they can profit from that, especially if the break away is relatively peaceful. On the other hand if the USA Balkanizes as many elites have predicted over the last century then that means they will have new centers of manipulation coming into existence in the new 2-12 regional capitals and for the younger generation of elites moving into control of those new centers is the Great Game where they prove how good they are at manipulation.
IOW while some of the elites will want to keep the status quo others seek to overturn it for personal advantage. About the only thing they collectively fear is a world wide depopulating event that erases their power. No desire for global nuclear war, a manufactured virus that kills 90% of humans or anything else like that as the risk of losing their positions is far too high in those scenarios. What point being a trillionaire if you can't spend it because there is nobody and nothing to spend it on?
...According to the Daily Mail, in the first ten months of 2016, foreigners, mostly Americans and Australians, purchased nearly 1,400 square miles of land in New Zealand, representing more than a fourfold increase over the previous year.
...
There was a dramatic surge in the number of Americans who registered to acquire property in New Zealand following the election of Donald Trump as president. Local agents said that most of the estimated 13,000 Americans seeking to purchase property in New Zealand did not intend to live in the country but they acquired property because they believed the country could provide refuge if there is political or social upheaval in the U.S. following the general election.
Newfie wrote:I’m still not convinced that TOTB exist in any cohesive manner. Surely there are folks with more digital wealth than others but can that really be put into use? I do believe that these influential folks have a lot in common and that can sway the way things go, but I don’t think there is some secret cabal.
Return to Open Topic Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests