why would anyone want to start a revolution?

longtime lurker, first time poster. i'm mostly interested in the occult and secret societies but sometimes i read the more politically oriented forums here and i'm always taken aback by the amount of angst and unrest.

moving toward a more unified, connected world is the only way we as a species are going to achieve peace and prosperity. the advances in standards of living and education that the 20th and early 21st century have brought with them are staggering and i'm excited for what the future can hold if we can all come together.

people are paranoid about the power being in the hands of the "elite" but two things. first, who is better qualified to make decisions that dictate the fate of humanity than the elite? do you seriously prefer government of, by, and for the mediocre?

second, with or without the move toward an interconnected world and the eventual formation of a world government, the "elite" are always going to be in charge. put a group of people on a desert island in the pacific and a caste system and divsion of labour is naturally going to occur. it's unavoidable.

the ideals of adam weishaupt were commendable. a world based on ideals like these would be far preferable to the helter skelter chaos that existed before the movement toward consolidtation of power for the common good. these are similar to the ideals espoused by plato in his republic.

here are the facts: more can be accomplished for the common good when power is consolidated than when everything is in a state of chaos and disorder. the "elite" are considered the elite for a reason and they are the best people to lead in the changing world. the interconnectivity of the world is unavoidable, borders want to disappear and information wants to be free. here is the kicker: this gestalt shift doesn't need to be violent or painful. it's only going to be violent and painful if people insist on making it violent and painful by complicating the transition. if you think about it for even a moment, the so-called "new world order" is an improvement in every sense of the word.

I have no problenm with people coming together. I have a problem with rich people bring everyone together to gain more capita. They don't have good intentions. And why revolt? Why lay down and except being raped?

Do you really like paying taxes on both ends of every transaction, whether you are buying or selling?

Do you like the fact that people are getting killed because your precious elite are trying to make more money?

Do you like having exactly 0 privacy?

Do you like being told how to live your life?

Do you enjoy being told which substances you are allowed to put in your body?

Do you like being told which substances will be put into your body whether you like it or not?

Do you like the fact that elections are rigged so that the guy who wants to kill brown people for oil can certainly be elected?

Do you like having your kids brainwashed in gov't sponsored training camps?

Do you like watching your paycheck get hacked to pieces for the welfare of some lazy slob, before you even see it?

If you answered yes to any of these questions there is a good chance that you are simply SHEEPLE.

Originally posted by Myendica
I have no problenm with people coming together. I have a problem with rich people bring everyone together to gain more capita. They don't have good intentions. And why revolt? Why lay down and except being raped?

you have been raped along time by them .
you father mother grand parents all have been raped
but it isn't such a bad life is it

reply to post by Myendica


i don't understand why people are so quick to scapegoat the "rich". jealousy maybe, or else just a lot of misinformation. probably a bit of both.

but wealthy people keep society running. first of all they pay ridiculous, sometimes punitively high taxes and on top of that they fund private charities. look at the bill and melinda gates foundation. look at carnegie and morgan's charitable interests.

i honestly think that soviet style communism never really died out. it's still being kept alive in some liberal circles and it is part of why so much disinformation is being spread trying to spread the seeds of class envy and outright class warfare.

Originally posted by downtown436
Do you really like paying taxes on both ends of every transaction, whether you are buying or selling?

taxation is not the exclusive domain of the "new world order". in fact the so-called elites tend to favor keeping taxes down.

Do you like the fact that people are getting killed because your precious elite are trying to make more money?

this is hopelessly vague. which people? where? you need to be a little more specific. i'm not in favor of anyone getting killed but i'm not even sure what you're trying to say here specifically.

Do you like having exactly 0 privacy?

hyperbole. i do believe the government has the right, the obligation, to gather intelligence. people who are not doing anything wrong have nothing to fear.

Do you like being told how to live your life?

not everyone would be told how to live their lives. just those who needed assistance.

Do you enjoy being told which substances you are allowed to put in your body?

this has nothing to do with having a united world. and it's very very vague. do you prefer having no restrictions over what we can put into our bodies? legalizing heroin for instance?

Do you like being told which substances will be put into your body whether you like it or not?

again i have to say, respectfully, what? do you mean vaccination? because yes i am in favor of mandatory vaccinations for children.

Do you like the fact that elections are rigged so that the guy who wants to kill brown people for oil can certainly be elected?

i'm not sure how relevant the american political process even is really. i definitely think that by the 1920s intelligent people were beginning to realize that, while the facade of democracy was a good idea democracy itself was a failure. as for "killing brown people for oil" foreign policy decisions are always more complex than that.

Do you like having your kids brainwashed in gov't sponsored training camps?

you mean the public school system? i never attended a public school so i can't speak to this, but many of the most interesting and original people i have known seem to have come out of public schools just fine. if you're taking about anything else, then i'd have to say it is probably hyperbolic.

Do you like watching your paycheck get hacked to pieces for the welfare of some lazy slob, before you even see it?

no. i dislike this strongly. but social services and entitlement programs are one of the best ways to keep control of the poor and unruly. these programs should be cut and streamlined, but if someone refuses to participate as a citizen then the best way to keep them under control and try to convince them to begin to live productive lives is to make them dependent. the biggest problem with these programs is that they encourage overbreeding with people who shouldn't be breeding at all, but this is something that can be experimented with and refined. i certainly don't think anyone should ever live off the teat of the government better than someone lives doing something productive. tweaking is needed here.

So you think a bunch of pampered spoiled rich egotist should be in charge of the entire world? My aren't you well conditioned.

You know what happened in the French Revolution don't you? That is what happens when the elite take themselves too seriously and take advantage of their fellow man for too long.

What makes most people rich is the accident of birth. Those are the people most commonly called the elite. Many of the rich got that way by theft, smuggling, and trickery. Those who earned their fortune in their lifetime are not included in their little club except by special invitation.

Our politicians are mostly composed of social climbing plutocratic lapdogs who kiss the elites ass for advantages. You want your life controlled by these type of people then you are a part of the problem. Don't worry though you are in the majority.



[edit on 8/2/2008 by UFOTECH]

Originally posted by Slothrop

Do you like having exactly 0 privacy?

hyperbole. i do believe the government has the right, the obligation, to gather intelligence. people who are not doing anything wrong have nothing to fear.

I hope you aren't serious. That's a sheep mentality for sure, regardless of the topic and I barely even buy into the NWO. Seriously you are either hopeless naive or too much of an idealist. All people in power want more power; they achieve that through control of others. Doesn't matter who gets in the way. In the NWO world people are talking about, you have no rights.

I am sure those people who had their homes broken into while sleeping and terrified by a police SWAT team when they did nothing wrong feel the same.

Or that 13 year old girl who was accused of having Ibuprofen on her. So they searched her bag because she said "She had nothing to hide." They still didn't believe her and gave her a strip search against her will.

I am sure people would have taken your statements somewhat seriously if you didn't use that pathetic reasoning to answer his question. Judging from that I can guess you are the type of person to roll over no matter what happens.

I guess it would depend on who is the elite and how it is determined. Is it by wealth and percieved power? Political arguements aside, we can agree that GHW Bush is a fairly wealthy and powerful man. He was once the Director of the CIA, VP of the US and eventually President and a WWII vet to boot. I met him in 1988 during a campaign stop. At 17, I was well aware of who and what he was, gave proper ettiquette by refering to him as Mr. Vice-President but was by no means intimidated by a guy that could order me arrested on a whim. I was able to ask him questions in conversation and one that I asked was if he ever imagined that he would be here today like this when he was alone out in the Pacific hoping to be picked up. He said if one the boys on that sub had told him he would President someday he would have laughed in their face.

How about celebraties? Paris Hilton, Cher, Willie Nelson...would you follow their lead or orders?

Here is a secret, fame and power are perceptions. If people believe you to be famous or powerful and enough people believe it to be so then you are. If not, then you are not. It doesn't change things and make you special although you can develop the idea that you are. If enough people no longer believe a person to be famous of powerful then they are not. Look at Tiffany (the singer) when is the last time that you thought about her?

How about the super wealthy then. The Rothchilds and Rockafellers and such. Their wealth came from taking advantage of others, not by the sweat of their own brow but the by fruits of others labor, not exactly role models now are they? And here is the other side of that coin, their wealth in money all hinges on our faith in fiat currency. If the people of the world no longer accept the dollar, pound and euro as "money" then vast sums of their wealth goes with it.

I guess it all really depends on true leadership and universal acceptance as to if life would favor Gilligan's Island or Lord of the Flies...Star Trek or Star Wars, if you don't like the previous example. Of course both example remove deep seated dogmas of religious beliefs and predjuces of race, creed, etc.

Now don't get me wrong, I like the idea of John Lennon's Imagine a much as the next guy but he also wrote Watching the Wheels which is taking bliss in doing nothing of note.


[edit on 2-8-2008 by Ahabstar]

Originally posted by UFOTECH
So you think a bunch of pampered spoiled rich egotist should be in charge of the entire world? My aren't you well conditioned.

my my. generalize much? it's natural that leaders be egotistical. men capable of leading men need high opinions of themselves.

You know what happened in the French Revolution don't you? That is what happens when the elite take themselves too seriously and take advantage of their fellow man for too long.

you probably realize that the french revolution was largely financed by members of the "elite" who had fallen out of power. the class warfare was a pretext. it was infighting among the well-born using the lower class and the petit bourgeoise as pawns. this is exactly the kind of thing you seem to hate and yet you're holding it up as an example?

What makes most people rich is the accident of birth. Those are the people most commonly called the elite. Many of the rich got that way by theft, smuggling, and trickery. Those who earned their fortune in their lifetime are not included in their little club except by special invitation.

henry ford. nelson rockefeller. andrew carnegie. ringing any bells?

the refrain that "the only way to get rich is to be born that way" smacks of defeatism and cynicism.

Our politicians are mostly composed of social climbing plutocratic lapdogs who kiss the elites ass for advantages.
You want your life controlled by these type of people then you are a part of the problem. Don't worry though you are in the majority.

by your own admission, the politicians are not "in control". they're window dressing. i feel that it is in the best interest of everybody that the world continue to come together and yes, i do feel that certain men are born to lead, born to be great.



[edit on 8/2/2008 by UFOTECH]

reply to post by ragnarak

I hope you aren't serious. That's a sheep mentality for sure, regardless of the topic and I barely even buy into the NWO. Seriously you are either hopeless naive or too much of an idealist. All people in power want more power; they achieve that through control of others. Doesn't matter who gets in the way. In the NWO world people are talking about, you have no rights.

that's a huge leap to go from "people in power want more power" to "in a unified world you will have no rights at all". there will always be checks in power. even now there are those among the elite who keep the other elites in check.

besides, why on earth would anyone want to create a world in which people have "no rights"? it's not only unethical but it is terrible strategically. plato, machiavelli, even strauss all agree that even the humblest of citizens need some rights and some liberty. it's true that some personal liberties have to be curtailed for the common good. but people have to be given some freedom and some outlets in order for the society to be stable. in fact, those who are gifted in areas that matter will be and always have been encouraged to pursue their interests and aspirations.

I am sure those people who had their homes broken into while sleeping and terrified by a police SWAT team when they did nothing wrong feel the same.

Or that 13 year old girl who was accused of having Ibuprofen on her. So they searched her bag because she said "She had nothing to hide." They still didn't believe her and gave her a strip search against her will.

there are isolated incidents in which power is abused, although i don't really think swat teams break into the homes of the innocent and roust them from bed as a matter of course. the people who did that to the 13 year old girl will doubtless be disciplined.

it's true that sometimes the police and military may exceed their authority, but those cases have to be dealt with on an individual basis. it isn't as though they're dragging innocent people out of bed and executing them as happened in soviet russia. but police harassment of the totally innocent is not only contemptible it's stupid. people do need to respect and fear the law, but they shouldn't be made to hate it. officers who go too far need to be disciplined and reined in.

reply to post by Ahabstar

I guess it would depend on who is the elite and how it is determined. Is it by wealth and percieved power? Political arguements aside, we can agree that GHW Bush is a fairly wealthy and powerful man. He was once the Director of the CIA, VP of the US and eventually President and a WWII vet to boot. I met him in 1988 during a campaign stop. At 17, I was well aware of who and what he was, gave proper ettiquette by refering to him as Mr. Vice-President but was by no means intimidated by a guy that could order me arrested on a whim. I was able to ask him questions in conversation and one that I asked was if he ever imagined that he would be here today like this when he was alone out in the Pacific hoping to be picked up. He said if one the boys on that sub had told him he would President someday he would have laughed in their face.

that is an instance of false modesty on the part of ghwb. prescott always brought him up to do great things in the world and from his youngest days he was a leader of men. he was a good man and a decent leader.

How about the super wealthy then. The Rothchilds and Rockafellers and such. Their wealth came from taking advantage of others, not by the sweat of their own brow but the by fruits of others labor, not exactly role models now are they? And here is the other side of that coin, their wealth in money all hinges on our faith in fiat currency. If the people of the world no longer accept the dollar, pound and euro as "money" then vast sums of their wealth goes with it.

this sounds exactly like it came from the communist manifesto. for the record, the rothschild fortune is much older and its origins more obscure than the rockefellers. nelson rockefeller worked his butt off making his money. it's true he profited more than his workers, but it was also his capital he was risking.

there are so many rothschilds with so many diverse interests it isn't coherent to speak of them all as a single entity.

[edit, typo]

[edit on 2-8-2008 by Slothrop]

reply to post by Slothrop

I have read what you have to say here and I conclude that you are nothing but an butt kissing whore of the elite. Pucker up much?
Piss off!

Originally posted by UFOTECH
reply to post by Slothrop

 

I have read what you have to say here and I conclude that you are nothing but an butt kissing whore of the elite. Pucker up much?
Piss off!

i'd prefer to have a civilized exchange of ideas if that's possible. resorting to namecalling is usually a sign of someone getting frustrated that they are not able to refute what is being said.

i believe there are rules of decorum here and i'd appreciate it if you would abide by them. thank you in advance.

Let me give you some clue about the so called elite. My family was the royal family many many years ago in our home country. My family was in power and one of our distant relatives went to Britain and talked the then king into backing him in a coup against my family.

This traitor to his own family with British backing won of course since they out manned us 3 to 1. Our family was not only run off from our castle we were hunted to the last man, woman, and child. That is right when they found us hiding they would kill the women and children as well as the men. They then made it a punishment by death if anyone in the nation had our family name. That is right if you had the accident of birth to have our last name they would slaughter us.

This is the ancestors of the same people who are in power today. They are murdering scum for the most part. They kill for power and that is something your simple dumb self seems to admire.

You seem to think that those who are the most ruthless and terrible are the ones who should rule all man kind. What a naive person you are. You have no clue who you are speaking for. They do not care for their fellow man. They seek to rule through force and intimidation and theft of the property of others.

My family fought on both sides of the revolutionary war and fought on both sides of the civil war. There are always divisions in any nation as there is in any family. Some have the stones to fight for what is right and some do not.


[edit on 8/2/2008 by UFOTECH]

Originally posted by UFOTECH
Let me give you some clue about the so called elite. My family was the royal family many many years ago in our home country. My family was in power and one of our distant relatives went to Britain and talked the then king into backing him in a coup against my family.

This traitor to his own family with British backing won of course since they out manned us 3 to 1. Our family was not only run off from our castle we were hunted to the last man, woman, and child. That is right when they found us hiding they would kill the women and children as well as the men. They then made it a punishment by death if anyone in the nation had our family name. That is right if you had the accident of birth to have our last name they would slaughter us.

it has always been the case that the strong do as they will and the weak endure what they must. your story is certainly...colourful. very cinematic.

taking it at face value, though, the total obliteration of rivals in a monarchy was not an uncommon practice. any other course of action would likely have been considered rash and foolhardy. power games are often brutal.

This is the ancestors of the same people who are in power today. They are murdering scum for the most part. They kill for power and that is something your simple dumb self seems to admire.

from a single anecdote that happened undisclosed generations ago you conclude that generations of descendants of the house of windsor must all be ruthless? that is extremely poor logic.

and even if your story is true, perhaps the english made the right decision. maybe your ancestors were very poor rulers who needed to be replaced. perhaps it was just in the interest of the english crown to see them replaced for some reason, for the good of britain. as i said, the international power and politics can become nasty business sometimes.

incidentally, insults and ad hominem attacks such as "your simple dumb self" don't advance your argument, they only make you look like you are flustered and have run out of things to say. please try to be polite.

You seem to think that those who are the most ruthless and terrible are the ones who should rule all man kind.

hardly. but i do believe that those who would aspire to rule must be capable of being ruthless, when necessary.

What a naive person you are. You have no clue who you are speaking for. They do not care for their fellow man. They seek to rule through force and intimidation and theft of the property of others.

not at all. but all rule must be backed by the threat of force. in the worst case scenario, rulers must be able to bring force to bear against enemies to preserve their power. it isn't an ideal situation and no one in their right mind wants it, but it's the way the game is played.

My family fought on both sides of the revolutionary war and fought on both sides of the civil war. There are always divisions in any nation as there is in any family. Some have the stones to fight for what is right and some do not.

i'm not sure why you said this, what position you were trying to advance. for my part, i am descended from the doctor who rode with paul revere on his midnight ride and from some other pretty established american families, so i guess we were on the right side of the american revolution if that somehow matters?


[edit on 8/2/2008 by UFOTECH]

Originally posted by Slothrop
i definitely think that by the 1920s intelligent people were beginning to realize that, while the facade of democracy was a good idea democracy itself was a failure.

Democracy isn't a failure. Is it perfect? Of course not. Nobody is perfect, and when those imperfect people are the ones with the power, you won't receive perfection. I personally replace democracy in the above quote with the communism you seem to be imposing. Communism is a good idea, the goal is perfection. Perfect harmony and union among humanity. It fails however, because it puts all the power in a select few of (imperfect) people which Disallows it from reaching that goal of perfection. At least democracy shares the responsibilities over a greater variety. Everyone has different abilities. To narrow down to a select few of elite, would be a huge mistake because yes, face it everyone does stupid crap like lie, cheat and, steal or make decisions to further empower themselves. You can't get around that. Therefore, The only thing people have in common with each other, is that we are all different. Until that is any different, Communism will continually fail because, as long as people have their own agenda's, there can't be a successful governing elite, and that is where democracy succeeds. It lives off of that very power of the individuals' ability to think for themselves. In conclusion, unifying under the power of the elite will fail, until that elite is/are God/Gods/Divine power/What have you.

reply to post by Dienekes


communism is a repugnant idea, even in theory. it also isn't the opposite of democracy. democracy is to communism as apples are to oranges. the former is a fundamentally flawed political system (useful in small doses and as window dressing) and the latter is a fundamentally flawed economic system.

Originally posted by UFOTECH
Some have the stones to fight for what is right and some do not.

Stop feeding the troll, UFO. The troll has no repros.

My family has walked a similar path. People don't understand that the man was right. "The lie is different at every level."

The poor and middle classes are the pawns in a rich man's game of chess. Once in a while they'll sacrifice one of their own, but they usually manage to rescue their fellow in some way.

People need to turn off the idiot box and start engaging their minds. Black is winning.

reply to post by Slothrop


Might want to check into Nelson Rockefeller a bit more. We are talking the same one that was appointed VP under Ford correct? That Nelson was born into the family fortune, but rather than form/be a member of foundations like David (and a few groups that drive people bonkers like oh the Trilateral, Bilderberg and such) Nelson was only involved with the CFR and UN.

For the most part Nelson's ambitions were mostly political such as being the governor of NY during the Attica problem and making a few unsucessful runs at the presidency.

As for the Rothschilds fortune by arranged marriages and consolidated central banking, war proffiteering (going back to the Nepoleonic Wars), selling of information and even their status of nobility was bought...yep some good role models there.

As for references to Carl Marx, hardly. I follow the belief that everyone has a bit of genius about something. The bum on the street knows far more about survival on nothing than you and I ever will hopefully. In fact my guiding motto is "Never refuse another man a drink of water. It is something that we all need and anyone working beside me has earned." I think you will find that tends to follow a brotherhood of man espoused by Jesus far more than communial property of Marx.

Now while Marx's grander ideal of sharing of resources is noble enough, human nature of greed and lust of power causes "elites" to rise like pond scum in such a closed loop system (see USSR, Cuba, China, N. Korea for examples).


“And remember, where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that. All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.” --Lord Acton