|
Post by Atrahasis on Dec 19, 2004 9:09:03 GMT -5
"Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."
~ Hermann Goering, Nazi leader, at the Nuremberg Trials after World War II
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Dec 19, 2004 9:10:21 GMT -5
"The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth becomes the greatest enemy of the state."
~ Dr. Joseph M. Goebbels - Hitler's propaganda minister
|
|
|
Post by Lord Schtupp on Dec 22, 2004 18:24:44 GMT -5
Which is exactly what is unfolding in Bush's NeoCon Washington today. Total thought control is their goal. Masters of spin. Masters of communication really. The consolidation of thier power is obvious to those who chose to open their eyes, the first step of course was this overwhelming consolidation of Corporate Media that occured in 95-96 of which Clinton, ever the moderator, holds almost total blame for wanting to appease everybody. Textbook move, with the textbook of couse written by those pioneers of Modern Political Power, the Nazis. You must agree that the Media is their most powerful weapon.
May sound paranoid but its the truth.
I dont know if this is the direction that you want this thread to go, but these two quotes are accurate when applied to the situation today in America. -LS
|
|
|
Post by USS Mariner on Dec 22, 2004 22:08:41 GMT -5
Figures why I'm a communist sympathist... The ACTUAL meaning, not the United Soviet Socialist Republic. Though I'm sure you both realize that... Even though the Republicans are supposed to have a "conservative" ideology (the most extreme being fascisim ofcourse,) I think it's blatantly obvious that there are no true "liberals": both parties are actually a single unified meta-party, only with two "faces." Quite effective in trying to play the crowd. Hitler would be proud.
|
|
|
Post by Coz on Dec 22, 2004 23:33:32 GMT -5
Unfortunately I believe "We the people" lose no matter which side sits in the White House. The political climate of the US has become a ruthless extension of personal and financial powerbrokers representing a diversity of special interests and greed.
The specific groups that broker this power and money to the various parties and politicians is the truely evil puppet masters.
All media groups have an aganda. Some suppress the truth in one way, while others can do it in an equal but opposite manner.
It takes a committed "truth seeker" to hear both sides and realize the truth is not found in either but is a compilation of both as well portions that ommitted by both sides.
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Dec 23, 2004 2:05:43 GMT -5
Which is exactly what is unfolding in Bush's NeoCon Washington today. Total thought control is their goal. Masters of spin. Masters of communication really. The consolidation of thier power is obvious to those who chose to open their eyes, the first step of course was this overwhelming consolidation of Corporate Media that occured in 95-96 of which Clinton, ever the moderator, holds almost total blame for wanting to appease everybody. Textbook move, with the textbook of couse written by those pioneers of Modern Political Power, the Nazis. You must agree that the Media is their most powerful weapon. May sound paranoid but its the truth. I dont know if this is the direction that you want this thread to go, but these two quotes are accurate when applied to the situation today in America. -LS Shtupp, there's no such thing as thread hijacking in my book, because everything is related to everything else, and people can see this if they only expand their personal peripheries. So you can go ahead and post any thoughts you like. Ever consider that the real threat to having a viable democracy in America today is NOT the regular mainstream media, but is much more specific: FOX news? The role and reason d'etre of the media in a free and democratic society, philosophically speaking, is to act as a foil to the government whenever and wherever it has legitimate reason to do so, because everyone in a democracy needs to be well-informed if it's to make the correct moral choices, and by that I mean choices that do not merely put money in your own pockets but rather ones that create a better world and reality for all to live in (that IS one of the implicit characteristics of "democracy"). People have to be able to watch the government and criticize it, both when it is doing well and when it is doing poorly. That is the very definition of impartiality and critical thought, characteristics which higher education, academia, and even science encourage. And yet you have FOX news which is so blatantly partisan it is not even funny. On their webpage, during their campaign, they had a link with a nice friendly smiling picture of W asking for donations. I expect to see that kind of thing on the personal webpages of the individual candidates, but when it appears on a newsnetwork, it means only one thing: They are campaigning for that person. Philosophically speaking, that automatically disqualifies that network from being one that is useful to a free and democratic society. It might be OK for a banana republic or the middle east or other godforsaken places, but not for the USA. And yet the masses of the Americans, from the right wing of course, have orgasms over how great FOX news is for a fair and balanced appraisal, etc. I don't think they realize that what they are getting is less news but more great entertainment, because it IS fun to see your soldiers storm somebody's house in Iraq and terrorize the women and children there. It IS fun to see imbedded reporters reporting on how they are shelling a place or are being shelled. But it all has to be categorized as sensationalism. The real newsworthy material is the philosophical implications that news carries and what it can tell you about the current reality, all of which unfortunately involves thinking, and sometimes a great deal of it. But the fact is that entertainment can be a great way to distract people from thinking, even to the extent that it can make people unable to distinguish between what is real news and what isn't. The other American mainstream media sources at least are doing their job of criticizing the government's actions. I believe we can trust them to do that even if they love a given person, like Bill Clinton, because he did deserve to be criticized after we all found out he got BJ's from Monica Lewinsky. The media of a free and democratic society MUST report the bad as well as the good. And a word about news conglomeration: Breadth and depth of coverage is also important, and these days it's the largest network, CNN, which can most effectively do this simply because they have a vast amount of resources. In contrast, that means the smaller a network is, the less you can depend on it...CBS is an example, and the influence of the other TV news networks is concommitantly waning. So you may think that the big media is a conglomerate, but I feel it's a necessary one, and at the very least it shows how the smaller networks like FOX can run a greater risk of falling victim to (or even intentionally) misdirection, conspiracy, and collusion. This is a subtle point that I don't think a lot of people have realized, however. Just consider this: With FOX news, you can expect them to downplay or play damage control if Bush was ever involved in something bad, because their network is just a defacto (if not literal) extension of the government's power.
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Dec 23, 2004 2:14:07 GMT -5
Figures why I'm a communist sympathist... The ACTUAL meaning, not the United Soviet Socialist Republic. Though I'm sure you both realize that... Even though the Republicans are supposed to have a "conservative" ideology (the most extreme being fascisim ofcourse,) I think it's blatantly obvious that there are no true "liberals": both parties are actually a single unified meta-party, only with two "faces." Quite effective in trying to play the crowd. Hitler would be proud. Well, we'll never know if it would've been different this time around because Kerry of course was not elected. But as for what Bush is doing, Ill say this for him: He's NOT "playing to the crowd". Playing to the crowd to some extent is a necessary aspect of a democracy. The defnition of fascism, however, is to do whatever you want and somehow get the mases to follow you, whether they like it or not, or whether it's good for them or not. The brain-washed define this as "good leadership". The ones at the top of the food chain who really know what's going on would probably echo the words of Hermann Goering like in the above quote (privately, to themselves of course): "But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. "
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Dec 23, 2004 2:38:56 GMT -5
Unfortunately I believe "We the people" lose no matter which side sits in the White House. The political climate of the US has become a ruthless extension of personal and financial powerbrokers representing a diversity of special interests and greed. The specific groups that broker this power and money to the various parties and politicians is the truely evil puppet masters. All media groups have an aganda. Some suppress the truth in one way, while others can do it in an equal but opposite manner. It takes a committed "truth seeker" to hear both sides and realize the truth is not found in either but is a compilation of both as well portions that ommitted by both sides. That's a cozy definition of truth, but I submit another one for you to consider: You can't distinguish it at first, because in a war (and politics is war) it is the first casualty. It may come out much much later after a lot of time passes, but by then it's too late and you may find that you yourself have done things that you now regret. The fact of the concentration camps of Nazi Germany are an example. The fact that Sadam had no WMD's and that the Republicans were jumping to conclusions is another. But we found out all of this truth just too darned late. Therefore, our goals as individuals as well as groups should be one thing: To choose principles for behavior that endeavor to create a better world and reality for all, and thereby principle, and not "facts", become truth. Relying on a principle of good and sensible conduct is a lot better than relying on factoids that may or may not turn out to be BS after the nuts hits the fan, which by then is too late. But here's the hard part: This will involve making some sacrifices. This can be a pill that the easily scared do not want to swallow, which is what makes it so easy for a fascist government to smack the the simple-minded portions of the masses into submission. If truth is principle, then knowing the truth can also be defined as having good character, because character can be defined as being able to distinguish what is good and what is evil, and moreover not resorting to evil or creating it indirectly. That's how you can tell if someone if a good apple or a bad one. If he causes evil, you can tell where his character lies. Jesus himself said this in a different way. Sounds really simple, but people who follow people like that themselves have been deluded because they have been brainwashed into thinking that "truth" is an external factoid, and that the more factoids that you accumulate then the more "truth" you have. HA! The nature of factoids is that it can all be BS....the framework for considering ANYTHING has to be an overall principle (state of mind) that should be objective and ethical, and that is the only "truth" you need to know. The trouble is though, that too many Americans have their ethics handed down to them by institutions and organizations which say "step in line", and that IS the church and their party. In that context, knowing the truth and having it are just about impossible (for them). Again, which brings us back to the point of how important it is to be vigilent and independent in thought.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Schtupp on Dec 23, 2004 5:18:19 GMT -5
Shtupp, there's no such thing as thread hijacking in my book, because everything is related to everything else, and people can see this if they only expand their personal peripheries. So you can go ahead and post any thoughts you like. Ever consider that the real threat to having a viable democracy in America today is NOT the regular mainstream media, but is much more specific: FOX news? The role and reason d'etre of the media in a free and democratic society, philosophically speaking, is to act as a foil to the government whenever and wherever it has legitimate reason to do so, because everyone in a democracy needs to be well-informed if it's to make the correct moral choices, and by that I mean choices that do not merely put money in your own pockets but rather ones that create a better world and reality for all to live in (that IS one of the implicit characteristics of "democracy"). People have to be able to watch the government and criticize it, both when it is doing well and when it is doing poorly. That is the very definition of impartiality and critical thought, characteristics which higher education, academia, and even science encourage. FOX News? Theres an oxymoron for you. No Atra, Im afraid that the corporate media has, in its entirety, has put ratings and corporate well being far far ahead of truth and investigative jounalism. The Fox network is simply the most blatent, but the other three networks are equally guilty. Im sorry its very late for me and I must end here, but Im eager to continue this discussion and will do so in the next couple of days. I will collect evidence and believe me, it will paint a frightening picture. If you or anybody else has the opprotunity to tune in to Democracy Now, I urge you to do so. -LS
|
|
|
Post by Lord Schtupp on Dec 23, 2004 5:28:27 GMT -5
Just a thought but perhaps you should consider moving this thead into your political section if possible.
I gotta tell ya but after I made my first post in this thread, I got the distinct feeling that you had posted the quotes as a way to ummm, well, fishing (for lack of a better word) to see what might turn up.
In any case thank the Maker you have your own BBS now.
|
|
|
Post by Atrahasis on Dec 23, 2004 10:58:02 GMT -5
Just a thought but perhaps you should consider moving this thead into your political section if possible. I gotta tell ya but after I made my first post in this thread, I got the distinct feeling that you had posted the quotes as a way to ummm, well, fishing (for lack of a better word) to see what might turn up. In any case thank the Maker you have your own BBS now. Well, after being silenced by the right-wing mind-slaves on trumped-up charges, I did try to frequent a place that was a reasonably popular hub. The problem with them however was that the top echelon liked to pick fights with every other Star Trek group out there. Which finally made me realize that someone like me who wishes to express things and sometimes has a message to communicate can't afford to be under the political thumb of anyone, nor to be affiliated with people who are just plain arses. I recommend to everyone else to re-evaluate how free you really are, wherever you are! And I'm not just talking about forums either. These days especially, if you want to say what you want to say, you have to be where nobody else can reach you.
|
|