Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I'd be lying if I said I weren't participating in the corporate regime... but I at least recognize it. To participate in it and blindly navigate through it is the primary dilemma I see in current times. I'ts exactly why I keep the avatar I do here. The Native American spirit is on the rise, therefore you are right that its a tough nut to crack... I'd go so far as to say its a rock and not edible.

This kind of mindset brings forth the primary usage of heart driven decision making. The industrialization and logic output has physically capped, and there is less and less need to decide on what looks and functions right... decisions are steered by what feels right for all involved more. There is no influence in the world that can steer the free will of heart based decision making... more variables of input from the web is just a small aspect of TPTB fallen influence on the masses.

a reply to: ttobban

I loved your avatar from the first moment I noticed it ...It has such a esoteric voice ..Yes the rock analogy might be a better way of putting it as it denotes a geographical designation ...the someone put us here for their reasons gives rise to nation state first principals . ie language .....its a very blurry subject today though and the mind has to be carefully walked back .The standard model of discourse with its pre-suppositions hardly lends to a deeper more meaningful understanding of why.or where we are today .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

language .....its a very blurry subject today though and the mind has to be carefully walked back .The standard model of discourse with its pre-suppositions hardly lends to a deeper more meaningful understanding of why.or where we are today .

I agree with that wholly. That's entirely why I avoid specifics and tend to trust the conceived probabilities that my morals provide... it's simply my free will. I provide a balance to this by keeping in mind that what may work for me may not be what is best for the masses.

I am an inventor by nature... thus understand that fine tuning things and optimizing them are not my strong suits. I am good for nothing more than a neutral opinion of general probability. Foundation motivated principles is the data to be taken from my input... anything I state to be specific is to relate to how it would occur on my property.

My reason for being around is to possibly help absorb dark around me, and turn it to enlightenment within. I care not to hold ownership to possession. This is the reason Indians are of concern to consumerism, in my opinion... they may dwell among consumers and even participate in it all to some extent, but their love of America is not financially motivated to a large degree as it is in consumer society. Indians tend to only push back when conflict comes on their property. As society builds, it must knock on the doors of these dwellers.

I love America, but that does not come with the responsibilities that I must glorify, appreciate, and allow for financial regimes to hold the masses strangled simply by being born on the lands of these laws. Native Americans will just claim new turf and stand firm as consumers spread...

a reply to: deadlyhope

I haven't cared for either party for quite sometime. I feel they sit in their meetings together and discuss how they are going to Wag The Dog next. How they are going to keep people focused on the governments right hand so they don't see what the left hand is really doing. I feel they are playing us and using the media as a tool. Right now I listening to the audio book 1984 and the relationship between that book and what is going on with our government is staggering.

a reply to: Tarzan the apeman.

Great points... and I will check out that read as well, thanks. The more people I see take on these views, the more I see good things to fall as a result of a fresh start. I will vote for whoever provokes the most change outside status quo...

a reply to: Tarzan the apeman.

Indeed. Amazing a single mind could be so prophetic, isn't it?

Oddly though, the inspiration for the work was quite different than the realities of today, but the similarities are startling!

a reply to: ttobban

I am an inventor by nature... thus understand that fine tuning things and optimizing them are not my strong suits. I am good for nothing more than a neutral opinion of general probability. Foundation motivated principles is the data to be taken from my input... anything I state to be specific is to relate to how it would occur on my property.

Ironically I would be the person going to you to invent something .Ill do the tweaking and learn how to best make the thing work ...if a man built it then I can operate it ... You last word "property" is a full study in itself when looking at what it meant to pre-colonial Native mind sets .The Potlatch as a case in point .The colonial powers could not understand it and banned it ...couldn't have that kind of thinking carrying on . And with consumerism being what it is today its easy to reflect back and understand why .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I mentioned the word property, being a known trigger word for the consumer society, The presence of markets and buying meat in markets is a sea of boundaries that feed complacency and the inabilities to perform even the most basic of life functions... like hunting and feeding one self. Natives that connect to nature don't necessarily honor the lines in the sand drawn in legislation.

Maybe an odd analogy, but I am quite odd. Nature is easy to read, but operates without boundary. If an Eagle flies above, drooling over the deer seen from above, they soon start to put 2 + 2 together... they fly above the hunters looking for deer, and will direct them to the deer. If a hunt is successful, an offering of thanks to the Eagle is left as a gratitude. Often times, the Eagles will steer a hunter onto a claimed property of a consumer. Eagles of today hide and hunt on their own.

If a sea of stores and food is offered to any and all... and it includes measures needed to sustain those that can't not sustain their own basic life needs, then what resides along with that is the acceptance that ideals will trend to include more and more senseless measures to sustain bad choices. I don't need a single person's help with living... I will squat on unoccupied lands and live free instead.

a reply to: ttobban

Natives that connect to nature don't necessarily honor the lines in the sand drawn in legislation.

Ha haha One of the first lessons my dad taught me was how to avoid getting caught ....He was a truly great hunter and fisher . I loved the woods and could trap but couldn't see a moose 10 feet in front of me ...What Native tribe are you from ? eta...just wanted to add this short story I heard years ago but the guy was a Native Chief in the story

A Game Warden is walking along a beach one morning when he spots a man with a bucket of lobsters. The Warden walks up to the man, flashes his badge and says, "You're in big trouble, buddy. Poaching lobsters is a serious offense." The man answers, "You've got it all wrong, these lobsters are my pets! Every morning I take them out for some exercise. I let them swim around in the ocean for a few minutes and then whistle them back in." The Warden looks at the man skeptically and says, "Okay then, prove it." The man proceeds to throw the lobsters into the ocean and both he and the Warden stand there waiting. After a couple minutes the Warden looks at the man and says, "That's long enough, now whistle your lobsters back in." The man turns to the Warden and says "Lobsters? What lobsters?" Read more at www.sunnyskyz.com...

a reply to: Tarzan the apeman.

Agreed.

I believe that people of both parties are very likely to be good people that just have a difference in opinion.

I believe most all men in DC - or higher political positions are likely not great people, and have agendas that work against the common man.

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I hate to let another down and not let it be known that I am not what most define as a Native American. I am essentially a gypsy that was born to a family of the U.S.. I have no ties to a group of title, and instead I operate off of the energies of my environment. Not much family or social connection provides for an easily unattached place in consumer society. If I were able to connect a label to a tribe, I would avoid so and continue on my hunts in nature.

I grew up in a consumer setting like the bulk of us in the U.S.. I just have yet to leave the woods once it was found that consumers have a profound difference between what defines want vs. need. Nature does not connect well with synthetic needs created around them.

The best relation that I can think of to nature and consumer societies inability to connect... is that of the Honey Bee. Poor bees can't pollinate the world they live in because it's synthetic and not connected to Mother Nature. Mother nature will fail to supply bees if consumers keep thinking that Miracle Gro is essential. Sure, they might look like nice and plump tomatoes... but they couldn't stand up to a sustained balance in nature if they wished for it. If there is no need for the Bees to pollinate because it's synthetically grown, the nectar that fruits make will not sustain them. Now let's let realities set in... do we really think that common man will take on the tasks and responsibilities of pollinating the plant lives of Earth? I'd much rather let the bees handle it, and do nothing more then drop human waste on polished properties...

Sorry if I made you think I was Pocahontas' long lost ancestor!

a reply to: ttobban

You know, I believe more in being connected to nature myself.

I feel like I was born in the wrong era.

I feel like I could be happy living in a small cabin in the woods, hunting, fishing, gathering, farming. I do admit I would want books, which weren't printed out as much hundreds of years ago. But really.. Simplicity.

Food, water, shelter are what we absolutely need ( though the definition of shelter is certainly different for some. )

a reply to: deadlyhope

I couldn't agree more. A consumer based existence does not feed balance. And, the more and more that is added... it just does not end. If the consumer based society was so successful, the masses would not see wealth run as fast as they could from their metropolis'. Instead, forests were cut down and nature took a back seat to mansions that the consumers can travel away from the horrors of negative consequence.

From the woods, it does not matter who wears red or blue. As long as needs are met, nature will work its own way out of conflict. In consumer society, in recent past... I got condemned as a crazy person because I stepped before a group to save an ant that was marching along from being stomped on. I did not see a need for the person to stomp the life out of the ant, and the person did not even realize they were doing it. I am more than happy to be seen as crazy to stand up for Mother Nature.

Nowadays, naturalists are willing to forego their position in society to appease a balance of nature... a good portion of that may stem from it being ever so harder to find a comfortable place in consumer society. Whatever the reasons, only the consumers and the ones directly affected by the mindsets they carry are to blame for the failures that come from forming complacent values on dynamic landscapes.

Just think of how many people love burgers, but never in a million years would kill a cow? Such an odd way of thinking... that killing is an atrocity unless it is done off of property and out of sight. It's a giant ocean of what consumers want... not what they need. Or my favorite... I don't drink water because I don't like the taste! Life is not supposed to taste good... hahaha.

a reply to: ttobban

Sorry if I made you think I was Pocahontas' long lost ancestor!

I guess it was your natural philosophy and how nature teaches that caused me to think so .Native American didn't help . As for Pocahontas and the possible link there well you might have got my heart to skip a beat or two . Something as close as second cousin single and looking :>)

a reply to: ttobban

Hmm, not sure I can agree with a bit of that line of thinking.

For thousands of years, we've killed Deer/Antelope/Elk, etc - I don't know how different cows would be.

I suppose the difference is, we are no longer hunters. We raise cows in ways that are not natural, feed them food that is not natural, and kill and process them in ways that are perhaps not as in tune with nature.

We certainly live a life of excess.

When you farm, hunt, gather, etc - The resources you manage are more likely the resources you will put to good use.

When you work 9-5 ... The things you are a consumer of are more than likely not things you need, nor will put to good use.

a reply to: deadlyhope

Why doesn't ATS talk about Fortean phenomena anymore?
Why doesn't ATS talk about conspiracies anymore?
Why does ATS only talk about politics now?

Why has my ATS changed?

Well...

It's because we have already talked about everything. "The old ATS" had a lot of years of history to catch up to when it first came out, but since that time, it has - we have talked about everything. Seriously, there is virtually nothing new that will help us make up our minds about "old ATS topics" - topical politics is basically all that's left...

Haven't we already made up our minds on whether or not:
man has been to the moon?
governments conspire against their citizens and each other?
something was an inside job?
aliens are real?
the pyramids are mysterious?
ghosts and other paranormal entities are real?

Haven't we already answered all the questions up to current events? What is left that we haven't considered?

Anyways, that's what I think.

a reply to: Bleeeeep

There is, very much, some truth in your statement.

In some respects, the "end of the Internet" has been plumbed. Now there are left only current events scraps.

Very true!!

ETA...and there are certain members whose entire world revolves around pointing out the fact that discussions have already been exhausted on most subject, thereby shutting down further discussion. They actually live for it. I've witnessed it! This concept alone does not bode well for the future success of this website. And, in my opinion, the mods should be far more sensitive to this "goal tending". After all, if no one can post anything of a conspiracy nature, if members instantly paralyze them, what is the point...and what subjects are left? Current events? And, what are those...politics, right?

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I know what you mean but who can fairly draw the line between denying ignorance and goal tending?

How could you divide them?

I've often thought that we shouldn't say no unless we can say why not but I know that is too much to actually ask of most people - most people just want to give an opinion, talk about themselves, or say something corny.

So yeah, how could you make it better?

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: deadlyhope

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

and brilliant minds discuss them all.

Ha, I was hoping someone would go there.

a reply to: Bleeeeep

Perhaps I wish that the next step was to find solutions to problems we have found.

Shadow Government/Illuminati/Dynastic family names controlling much of the world are near facts on this site. The thing I might wish could be done, is that we could further prove such things, and find solutions on how to combat them and improve life for the average citizen.