The Paradox of the Left/Right Political Divide and the Denial of Conspiracies

reply to post by Amaterasu


Well I think you and I and many of us know what the scarcity paradigm is doing to us as a society, and a world.

Yet I fear what ever conveniences better technology might bring aren't going to end the corruption that is endemnic in our system, and the deciet and frauds that run it.

That's going to take a lot more than a new energy source I fear.

It's going to take people becoming personally responsible at a grass roots level and disciplining their own personal actions towards change and demanding it of government at the same time, while seriously agitating for it in my humble opinion.

Hopefully we won't completely destroy the environment and ecosystem before new technology is introduced, though once again there when you look at the situation in Japan and the Gulf of Mexico it's getting dicey to say the least.

Thanks for joining in my friend.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

The Paradox of the Left/Right Political Divide and the Denial of Conspiracies

There are very few with this clarity of vision. Most are quite caught up in the political games, playing the part of partisan gladiator, ready even to fall upon their own sword on command. Trying to point out the uselessness of this course is a waste of time because instead of anyone getting the message, you find yourself on the wrong end of the attack from both sides.

But I guess that, at this point here in 2011, it should be becoming pretty doggone evident to even the most diehard warrior that we have all already lost. Our republic has long since perished; replaced with a structure answerable first to the corporate special interests who pay far more than we and wield more power than a single vote.

The masquarade goes on until such time as the PTB understand that the gig is up... then we become the ant farm.

Great post!

reply to post by redoubt


Thanks my friend, I do tend to agree our Republic is all but lost at this point, and nearly two centuries of growing corporations spurred on by the Industrial Revolution combined with the wealth and power structures of the old world have compromised the nation in every core and meaningful way that it can be.

Yet I still have hope that in the elleventh hour that the people might still yet rise to the occassion during that precarous period that the corporate government will jeapordize itself with, in the final acts of consolidating its gains when at last it has to fully expose itself to the people in order to do that.

Will the people be too beat down, too impoverished, too intimidated by the superior technology and weapons employed by the hi-tech security apparatus, or will they rise up when hope is all but lost and they have nothing left to do and sieze back the wealth of the world and the bounty of the earth from the very few hands that own it and leverage it for power and control over us all.

I am hoping the latter, and I think the odds increase in the people's favor the more people wake up and accept the dire circumstances of our shared predicament between now and then.

They have to spend so much time, money and effort to sap and subvert the human spirit for a reason.

In the end it often proves to be indominable.

Thanks for posting my friend, great observations.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

Well I think you and I and many of us know what the scarcity paradigm is doing to us as a society, and a world.

Yet I fear what ever conveniences better technology might bring aren't going to end the corruption that is endemnic in our system, and the deciet and frauds that run it.

See, that's the thing... The system will not be needed. There will be no motivation to corrupt, to deceive or defraud. Because money represents meaningful energy expended, as the cost of energy is removed top to bottom, We will get to a point where things are free and it has only been our energy to gather/collect/take whatever it is that We charged others for. Robots can do the gathering/collecting/taking/farming/industrial work/servant's work/etc.

Once that point is reached, the effort to exchange money for anything becomes more than it's worth. And once money is gone, so is the motivation for virtually all crime (sex crime being the remaining issue).

That's going to take a lot more than a new energy source I fear.

I suspect it's because You aren't seeing deeply enough into the fact that money IS energy, in one sense. If We have all this energy, money becomes moot as We replace the representation (money) with the real deal (energy).

It's going to take people becoming personally responsible at a grass roots level and disciplining their own personal actions towards change and demanding it of government at the same time, while seriously agitating for it in my humble opinion.

That would make it an impossibility, I suspect. Any plan that begins with people changing, being disciplined, is bound for a VERY hard row, or failure. Likely the latter.

Hopefully we won't completely destroy the environment and ecosystem before new technology is introduced, though once again there when you look at the situation in Japan and the Gulf of Mexico it's getting dicey to say the least.

I hope so too. What particularly pisses me off is the fact that They had electrogravitics (with overunity and antigravity) back in the 1950's! They could have released the tech then. Of course, it threatened Big Oil... So...

Here We are with black poison that We have to pay through the nose for - when We could have been using clean plenum energy all along.

Thanks for joining in my friend.

My pleasure. [smile]

Originally posted by HappilyEverAfter
I like this description above so I'm going to use it to preface my addition,
on top of all that was shared in Sparts post , I would like to say that personal identification to a 'position' 99.9% of the time trumps and rules out any address of identification to "need" in problem solving engagements whether they be local or global, and as those positions are defended and attacked the needs, (of all parties, notice i didnt say sides) become buried forgotten and remain unaddressed.

I've always said truth is the first victim.

Truth is the first victim to die in a conflict,

It is the last buried due to selfish agenda driven people dragging the headless corpse.

A gruesome trophy that will share the point of a pike to show off to the world.

But truth cannot be held prisoner, dead or otherwise, it becomes a victim along side the cannon-fodder.

And truth does not walk on either side in a conflict except as a passenger being flouted.

Truth looks on in disdain of being abused and misused.

For no one in any conflict has a grasp on truth unless they are both the winner and loser.

To be a part of both sides one must not have gained or lost ground and seen focus on the larger picture.

Or else the smaller engagement swallows them whole.

Originally posted by HappilyEverAfter
What is left to sift through are ashes of confusion and ambiguity, and it is the 'perfect' place to park a populace and observe the swirling inaction, and voracious consumption of 'press releases, and media created snacks of distraction",
It's the invisible fence, the sleight of hand, the borrowed time needed to advance an agenda, on a short term memory population.

Confusion, ambiguity, loss of focus, these are all a part and parcel of chaos in action.

Those willing to profit off of that chaos are usually the ones using divide and conquer.

To cause the conflict to begin with.

Originally posted by HappilyEverAfter
Tragedy awakens some, but only to the current tragedy not to the many planks laid prior that gave access to either remove a right you once had but didnt protect or to enact a new rule to limit your freedoms.
You HAVE TO be a good leader to yourself before you can ever recognize what a good leader would be in front of you.
You will find no integrity in ambiguity, and that has become the leaderless language.

edit on 5-5-2011 by HappilyEverAfter because: stet

You do have to be a good leader to recognize a good leader.

Just as you have to be a good leader to recognize a bad leader.

And as well you have to have made mistakes and learned from them.

In order to not repeat them like history is wont to do.

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


A truly brilliant post my friend, "truth is the first victim".

So much of the rancor and emnity then comes from the fact that the truth can not really be murdered, and those in search of it, become the nuisance and the enemy of those who would murder the truth, or feel that they are best served by the lie.

I like it straight, I don't care how bad it is, I would prefer to know the truth, whether it's ugly or beautiful, convenient or imprisoning, good or bad, hopeful or hopeless, one simple truth remains.

You can't get to where you want to go, if you don't know where you are and where you are starting from.

As long as truth eludes the American people, and the world, so will prosperity and peace.

It really is that simple.

So for those who want to murder the truth, run from it, hide it, or pretend a lie is the truth, you aren't murdering the truth, you are murdering any chance for a better and brighter tomorrow.

reply to post by PixelDuster

I will no longer participate in the charade.....

Both you and Terry have said you will not participate in the charade. To a point I certainly understand that point of view but can I suggest you take a long hard look at the independent canadidates??

If nothing else if enough of us vote for an independent or at least vote AGAINST the criminal now seated in the District of Criminals, it might serve as a wake-up call.

reply to post by crimvelvet


You know it might, but the truth is it's not just the politicians that are sorely needing to be changed but many of the laws, and cheif amongst them the lobbying laws, and the corporate citizen laws, that give corporations and special interests, more access, in fact almost exclusive access to sitting politicians once they are ensconsed in Washington.

Still there is another danger that abounds and that's the Department Heads of Government are not elected, they are appointed, by one man, with only a handful of people then 'confirming' or rejecting the appointment.

A nation of hundreds of millions of people, and the most powerful positions in Washington aren't elected positions at all.

Finally the open ended commerce clause really needs addressed giving congress unlimited ability to regulate interstate commerce, which we are all made a part of through the census conducted by the department of commerce, and almost 600,000 codes most of which are commerce related that regulate every aspect of our existence with a rate of 4 being added each week.

The commerce clause is the constitutions weakness, and the political appointees are the government's vulnerable point to being usurped from us, and the corporate and special interest lobbyists and their deep pockets are what crowd out the people's voices from being heard.

Electing a few independent politicians who are immediately going to be tempted by big corporate donors and special interests and the corruption that exists rampant in both parties isn't going to shore up the weaknesses in our system that led to the corruption, morass and break down of good government.

Only we the people can do that.

They say "If you don't vote, you don't have a right to complain". WRONG!

If you vote you don't have a right to complain, BECAUSE IT'S YOUR FAULT THE GUY GOT ELECTED!

I have 100% right to complain because I refuse to vote and agree to this bs!

Thought you would like that one.

PT. I just want to say Kudos for a well thought out, and diplomatic thread.
And kudos as well to all who have responded in kind thus far.
No dialectics.
No semantics.
No oneupmanship.
No partisanship.
No propaganda...
Just a good intelligent discourse, and the sharing of ideas and viewpoints on important topics that we can all relate to. I can’t tell you how much I have enjoyed reading every post thus far.

And although I have a few thoughts of my own I might like to add. I first need to collect them into a coherent, and at least somewhat, articulate form first.

For now I just wanted to say

reply to post by Klassified


Thanks for that wonderful post.

I think in part that what we can see here is how setting the tone in productive ways, makes a real difference in the quality and done then of the discussion.

In contrast the tone that the mainstream media and politicians often set are angry, negative, partisan and divisive, kicking off then a debate that is likely to be the same.

I look forward to reading what else you have to share.

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

...."The problem" is people tend to want someone to follow instead of leading themselves and others.

I certainly agree with you there.

As I see it the source of the problem is fourfold.

First is genetics. We are social creatures so not that many leaders (Alphas) are born to begin with. If everyone was an "ALPHA" we would not be able to coporate as well as we do.

Second, John Dewey, Father of modern progressive education and a co-founder of the American Fabian Society, determined how to change the American school system into a system that would produce "co-dependents" and NOT independent thinkers.

Third, there has been a movement to convince parents it is necessary to provide an "ultra-safe" environment for their children. People are now afraid to allow kids on their property for fear of a lawsuit. Heck you do not dare let a kid feed a calf, pet a goat, chase the pigs, climb the fruit trees, explore the cave or ride you horse without a release signed and witness by a lawyer AND a multi-million dollar insurance package! Unfortunately wrapping kids in cotton and sitting them in front of the boob tube or a computer instead of having them interact with reality, has produced a society that cannot distinguish between reality and illusion

And most recently, any kid who show "anti-social" behavior is labeled and doped to the gills.

These are the smart kids who are bored out of their skulls because the course work has been dumbed down, these are the kids who question, these are the kids who are the independent thinkers. These are the kids who are our future leaders.

....During the '70s, researchers began to test the effectiveness of "chemical therapy" using Ritalin in the classroom as a way to deal with student behavior and attention problems. In order to see if "chemical therapy" was the answer,

teachers with no medical background were given the authority to prescribe Ritalin to their students.

It was believed this method of treatment would take care of any "discipline problems" the children had, so the teachers could focus more on educating students, rather than correcting behaviors.

In the 1970s, around 150,000 children were taking Ritalin. Just four years later, in 1974, the number had climbed up to 500,000 children. By 1977 there were an estimated 1.8 million kids using Ritalin on a day-to-day basis. Between 1990 and 2000, the production of Ritalin in the United States increased seven-fold. In 1991 over 3 million prescriptions for Ritalin were written. By 1998, over 11 million Ritalin prescriptions were written.... www.cpyu.org...

....Psychiatric drugging of children is big, big money, raking in billions a year.

But it's also a form of tyrannical social control. By classifying out-of-the-box, divergent behavior as 'mental disorders' that must be subdued with medication, our next generation is conditioned into being good robots who know not to deviate from the status quo.... www.naturalnews.com...

Are there really problems with the drug?

...The Food and Drug Administration’s Pediatric Advisory Committee is currently investigating the popular Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD) Ritalin due to recent reports of several severe side effects on the children who take it. Ritalin has been the subject of new studies that indicate it may cause some children to experience hallucinations or suffer from psychotic, violent, aggressive, or even suicidal behavior patterns.

Furthermore, medical experts now believe that Ritalin could comprise a significant risk factor in juvenile cancer in a cross section of children. A group of researchers comprised of scientists from the University of Texas and the M.D. Cancer Center discovered a connection between Ritalin use and curious chromosome damage in 12 children during a recent study. Further research is needed to determine if there is a solid connection between Ritalin use and the rise of cancer cases in children.

Ritalin use can also cause serious side effects that include headaches, sleep disturbances, abdominal pain, and loss of appetite. Figures from Novartis indicate that Ritalin use increased 500% between 1991 and 1999 and topped 29 million prescriptions in 2004. The number of children on Ritalin worries many health and diet experts because the drug suppresses the appetite, and children on the drug could become malnourished or suffer from stunted growth in the future..... www.sddefenselawyers.com...

So who is behind all this drugging of our children???

Can you say IG Farben? Remember the largest mass extermination factory in human history called Auschwitz? It was a 100% subsidiary of IG Farben. And our old friends the Rockefellers? "In 1939 a "Drug Trust" alliance was formed by the Rockefeller empire and the German chemical company IG Farben...."

The Nuremberg Tribunal dissolved IG Farben into Bayer, Hoechst and BASF, each company 20 times as large as IG Farben in 1944. For almost three decades after WWII, BASF, Bayer and Hoechst (Aventis) filled their highest position, chairman of the board, with former members of the Nazi regime. Bayer has been sued by survivors of medical experiments such as Eva Kor...

How come every time I turn over a rock the slimy thing that crawls out is named Rockefeller....

I used to listen to 'progressive' (Liberal) am radio at some time every day, and only to one maybe 2 hosts, as I could not tolerate the rest of them. Now, I have banished it from my ears altogether. Ever since the OBL surprise, I found those hosts to be like, "Conspiracy Theorists BAD. President GOOD!" I cannot differentiate them from the ultra far right radio talkers during the Bush Admin. Plus, I got sick and tired of the Leftwing pervs mostly defending the --socially-- Liberal agendas, instead of the plight of the American man who needs a job in order to keep his family okay. God help you if you get in the way of someone's alternative sexual gratification.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
They say "If you don't vote, you don't have a right to complain". WRONG!

If you vote you don't have a right to complain, BECAUSE IT'S YOUR FAULT THE GUY GOT ELECTED!

I have 100% right to complain because I refuse to vote and agree to this bs!

Thought you would like that one.

I can't fault this thinking, and often think what a powerful message it would send to the system and powers that be if we all just opted out of a national election, and the only people voting would be the candidates and their relatives.

Could you imagine the Mainstream Election Coverage, from the exit poles to the results, as they desperately looked for things to talk about and some reason to explain no turn out?

That would be classic.

On a side bar, your Voter Registration Card is in fact a social contract that binds you into many of the laws and codes and constructs of the system.

Many people would be well served to read the fine print on it and grab a good legal dictionary.

The devil is in the details.

Thanks for posting.

Originally posted by simone50m
I used to listen to 'progressive' (Liberal) am radio at some time every day, and only to one maybe 2 hosts, as I could not tolerate the rest of them. Now, I have banished it from my ears altogether. Ever since the OBL surprise, I found those hosts to be like, "Conspiracy Theorists BAD. President GOOD!" I cannot differentiate them from the ultra far right radio talkers during the Bush Admin. Plus, I got sick and tired of the Leftwing pervs mostly defending the --socially-- Liberal agendas, instead of the plight of the American man who needs a job in order to keep his family okay. God help you if you get in the way of someone's alternative sexual gratification.

A good many people who have opted out of the left/right divide, really don't see any discernable or quanitfiable difference between the two main rival political parties.

There stated platforms are different, but their methedology and policy making and agendas once in office are really the same.

Many see the two party system as simply a blame game, where the shortcomings of the government aren't blamed on the government, but one man, or one party, and the continuation and broadening of bad policies is excused because the other party first instituted it.

Meanwhile the politicians from both parties are in bed with the same exact corporations.

So where is the actual difference, besides the personal choice someone makes to vote for one or the other?

Great post, thanks for sharing.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Well written and delivered point, S&F.

As the saying goes and is currently being proven out, "United we stand, divided we fall"

There is now also a disturbing trend that has surfaced over the OBL death, since there are a number of questions arising to the multiple variations and inconsistencies of the story being offered we now have a new term for those that question the official story "Deathers" -

'Deathers' take over where 'birthers' left off.

So now it seems if you question the official 9/11 story you are a "Truther", question the current POTUS' place of birth you are a "Birther", and now if you do not swallow the official OBL story you must be a "Deather", this to is to create the divide that you speak of, to keep the masses fighting amongst themselves leaving those in power to not only not have to answer the tough questions but be able to dismiss them entirely as "Truth/Birth/Death-er" nonsense.

The sad part is, I did not really give too much to the "Birther" story, still view it as more of a distraction than a true issue, but now that they have so quickly dubbed the new class of questioners as "Deathers", it makes me think more about the validity of the questions raised over all these issues.

After thinking about your OP. I think what we tend to overlook at times is the politics of fear. And I think this is at the root of 21rst century “political” agendas. Not that it’s anything new mind you, but rather it’s a ramping up of the same old tactics those in the seats of power have always used. Unfortunately, I see a crescendo coming in the near future, and I’m not sure how we can stop it.

The psychology of fear used liberally, but smartly against the masses is a powerful tool in the hands of less than honorable people. And when I speak of fear, I’m talking about a wide range of tactics. Not just in your face fearmongering.

The fear of excommunication, and being an outcast, to control conspiracy buffs, and others who stray from the groupthink and consensus reality hive mindset.
The fear of viruses and diseases to get your children to vaccination centers.
The fear of “terrorists” to get you to give up your liberties by consensus.
The fear of surveillance to criminalize normal behaviour. “If you don’t have anything to hide...”
The fear of corporatized institutions masquerading as government “authorities” to tax, fee, and fine you into financial ruin no matter how financially stable you may be.
The list could go on ad infinitum.

What i see is a knee jerk response from most people when you approach the edge of their paradigm. One must be cautious in this area, because for them to relent, even for a moment, is to question what has become their core belief system carefully programmed and nurtured for decades in many cases.
And our governing bodies know this, and use it to their advantage.

It reminds me of a scene in the movie “They Live”. It’s worth watching if you’ve never seen it.



The character who finally looks through the glasses sees things beyond what he could ever have imagined, and it truly changes him.

That scene typifies what its like to get many people to stop and think about things like your OP, and use critical faculties instead of societally programmed responses.

ETA: To clarify. The point of the video clip is not so much the fight, but the fear based reaction of the character who refuses to put on the glasses. Which he himself voices earlier in the movie.

reply to post by Hijaqd


Great post my friend, and as you have pointed out it is all about divide and conquer word games, where the coined words have both a definition and a conotation that makes a direct slander and implication about the validity and motives of the person with actual real questions in search of real answers that the government simply doesn't want to have to satisfy.

Rather than all people asking themselves, why the government doesn't want to satifsfy those questions, they begin making excuses for the actual goverment and excusing it from having to, based on some warped notion, that the party in power arrived there by a majority, and the majority of Americans are satisfied by that, and that Americans who aren't satisfied by that, presumed to be in the minority, simply because they aren't satisfied, no longer have any right to question, or legitimate reason for doing so.

So instead of a government of the people, by the people, we end up with a government that some people percieve as exclusively theirs and as such above reproach and beyond questioning.

This has led to one disaster after another, and a government that becomes increasingly autocratic and dictatorial no matter which party is in power.

Which because of primarily partisan politics a large and vocal number of Americans are all to happy to accept as some kind of personal victory, simply because they are a member and voted for that party, even though the policies of the government are having disasterous consequences for the American people and the world.

In essence the government is giving license to the people who do support it, to defame, slander, and sully those who don't or question it, and pats them on the back for it.

Is this the system our founders really envisioned, and is this the system we all want to live under, where every 4 to 8 years close to half the country, gloats over, and attempts to lords over through slander and defamation, and bullies the other half?

I believe this government but they are playing way to much dangerous politics and are becoming untrustworthy.

Originally posted by Jobeycool
I believe this government but they are playing way to much dangerous politics and are becoming untrustworthy.

Can you respect though others who have legitimate questions, and their right as Americans to demand government be accountable, transparent and answerable to the people and concede that the government has an obligation to answer to the American people, and not just the people who want to give it atta boys, and pat it on the back?