Advanced Search
Welcome to Omgili,
Omgili (Oh My God I Love It ;) is a search engine for discussions. With Omgili you can find answers and solutions, debates, discussions, personal experiences, opinions and more... To learn more about Omgili click here.

This is a complete preview of the discussion as it was indexed by Omgili crawlers. Use this preview if the original discussion is unavailable.
Click here to view the original discussion.

We need another Joe McCarthy

Ya know, the more I ponder, research, and read about this great man, I think, "Wow, the 21st Century needs another Joe McCarthy!" It's true, too. After reading the things I have read, this McCarthy guy was very brave - JFK even called him an "American patriot." We call it "liberal" now, but we all know what that word really means - it's the "soft" way of saying "socialist" or "communist." There's not much difference between socialism and communism, so I'm going to just refer to it as communism. But we need to expose the Left's agenda for what it really is: Communism.

Pure, unintentional communistic ideas that are just destroying this country. I'm almost to a point right now where I could write an editorial -- which I might soon. But, yeah...if you haven't read much about McCarthy, I suggest you do.

That man, to me, is one of my political heroes (from what I've read thus far). Anyone have anything they'd like to share about this?

We talking about the same McCarthy of the political witch hunts and House "Unamerican" activities committee?

Joey is a far-right, homophobic, fundamentalist politician-wannabe who somwhow thinks the FSP is the right place for him.

??? (And he keeps posting in the wrong forum).

Ah, a fascist.   That explains it.

Joey, While I agree with you on the evils of communism, I can't agree about the 'heroism' of McCarthy.

There is a huge difference between prosecuting someone for wrong actions, or for wrong thoughts.

Thoughts are protected by freedom-minded people, even silly or evil thoughts. Something for you to think about, since you aspire to the school board - Do you realize the collectivist nature of the public school system?

Do your research and think it through.

If you are truly against socialism/communism/collectivism then you must be against government schools.

If your interest is education, you will do more good for the world and the cause of freedom by working to destroy public education than by joining it.

If we discourage guys like Joey from school boards will our kids be better off with the ones he's trying to displace? If he should work to destroy it what better place than from within. Our rulers, the media have done much to demonize McCarthy since his attempt to do the same to them. To counter the charges that McCarthy "caused a reign of terror" allow me to Quote: a few statistics of the era: Number of Persons killed: Zero Number of Persons wounded or injured: Zero Number of Persons tortured: Zero Number of Persons arrested without warrant: Zero Number of Persons held or imprisoned w/o warrant: Zero Number of Persons evicted, exiled, or deported: Zero Number of Persons deprived of due process: Zero Some "reign of terror." If you consider the media's soft coverage of what goes on in the CIA, FBI, BATF, NSA etc..

And how little alarm they caused over the Homeland Security Act  and Patriot Act you have to consider whether "Freedom of  the press" (free to those who own it) is an insurance for freedom or not.

McCarthy knew the media was subverting America  and used unethical methods of fighting a far more unethical media.

Sure, in the grand scheme of things, McCarthy wasn't that bad.

Maybe his heart was near the right place.

But you said it yourself - at best, he used unethical methods. The end does not justify the means.

And besides, in the end he failed didn't he?

He didn't stop the collectivization of America.

Some hero.

Quote: from: Norris on May 18, 2003, 11:27:05 am If we discourage guys like Joey from school boards will our kids be better off with the ones he's trying to displace? If he should work to destroy it what better place than from within. Joey, If your intention is to work from within to destroy it, then you've got my support.

Is that what you are doing? Here's a link you may find interesting - http://sepschool.org/misc/faq.html#Howlong

Joe McCarthy wasn't all bad.

I have a friend who's a libertarian & a big fan of McCarthy.

I haven't studied him that much, but I understand that his claim that there were at least 200 Communists in the executive branch was recently confirmed by opened Soviet files.

Also, I believe McCarthy didn't have much to do with the harassment of private individuals who were suspected of harboring Communist sympathies.

In a sense, I can see it as perfectly reasonable to have a Congressional committee charged with rooting out totalitarian subversion of our institutions;

On the other hand, "McCarthyism" clearly went too far when it started poking around in Hollywood.

Joey, It may not be politically expedient to answer Kling's irresponsible question, a printout of this thread might be presented to the school board years from now by a political opponent, hehe.

Quote: from: JasonPSorens on May 18, 2003, 03:24:17 pm Joe McCarthy wasn't all bad.

What?!?  McCarthy publically interrogated great American Composer Aaron Copland.

The Free State and America need less McCarthy's not more.

Elizabeth, "Shooting the messenger" by calling him names is a debate tactic used by those attempting to silence someone  whom they disagree with. Frankly I'm suprized that someone who has contributed as many posts as you have would do this. Calling McCarthy names might have been apropriate, as he is the subject of the debate, not Joey. Using the term "phobia" implies a Doctor-mental patient relationship which is pretty condescending. Why not just use logical reasoning to convince others their position is incorrect if that's what you believe?

Quote: from: Karl on May 18, 2003, 07:03:02 pm She was testifying that because of Joey's personal views, he is not qualified to make the assertion that "we need another Joe McCarthy" in order to increase our freedom. The person making the argument was attacked instead of the argument itself.

Hollywood legitimizes this style of debate on sleasy talk shows.

Let's not yield to their power of suggestion. It's in our collective interest to learn how to debate logically. www.datanation.com/fallacies/attack.htm

I was replying to Reaper -- providing some context for his astonishment.

I wasn't replying to Joey -- such an absurd statement seemed to be such an obvious troll that it didn't merit response.

Senator Joe McCarthy was an alcoholic pedophile and tool of J.

Edgar Hoover.  He caused more harm to this country than the communists ever did, by giving the Left a multitude of martyrs and an automatic smokescreen against any sort of criticism.

The communists (as such) are gone, but the damage he did lingers. The end does NOT justify the means.

Quote: from: Dalamar49 on May 18, 2003, 05:57:54 pm Quote: from: JasonPSorens on May 18, 2003, 03:24:17 pm Joe McCarthy wasn't all bad.

What?!?  McCarthy publically interrogated great American Composer Aaron Copland.

The Free State and America need less McCarthy's not more.   OK.

As I say, I haven't studied him or that period.

I only wanted to note that he wasn't "all bad."

Quote: If your interest is education, you will do more good for the world and the cause of freedom by working to destroy public education than by joining it. Actually, to change the system, you must first work within it, at least that's what I've always learned;

I mean, seriously, what's better?

Raising up a posse of gun-wielding patriots ready to storm the capitol building(s), or grooming a freedom-loving, die-hard American wanting to learn as much as he can so that he CAN change the system?

I'm not some savior, I'll admit that, and I'm surely not perfect, but from what I have learned about McCarthy, that man had guts. He truly had guts and the balls to stand up for something he STRONGLY believed in, and had FACTS to back it up with -- the liberal-saturated media took him to task for it and didn't give him credit whatsoever. The way I see it - and I don't care if my past posts come up - I'm not afraid to state what I think - the People of this country have a RIGHT to know, and NEED to know what their politicians have done, and who they have appointed, and who they have hired, and who they have put in charge of policy-making or governing leadership positions. I have a RIGHT to know who all is in the Council on Foreign Relations, or the Bilderbergers, or Skull & Bones - pass that off as "conspiracy theory" all you want, but you cannot tell me that those organizations - like the Communists - aren't influential in shaping this nation's governing policy. Read up on the Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto;

Every single damn one of them is alive and working in this country at this very moment!

How did this come about? The media - of which I am a member - has one sole role: be a watchdog over government and its elected officials - McCarthy was someone who came along and did a great service to this nation. Communists have a right to organize, speak, think and do anything the Constitution allows, but the second you have those guys in strategic leadership positions is when they become ENEMIES.

Would you people ever vote for Sean Penn or Fidel Castro to serve the public?

I would hope not. Let the Commies have their fun, but the second they start getting into office is when we've got to start fighting fire with fire.

And Elizabeth, with all due respect, don't call me a "homophobe" when my socially conservative Christian view on the lifestyle doesn't jibe with yours;

That's such an old trick used by the whiny-baby gay-rights people.

I'm not "afraid" of homosexuals, so therefore, I am not a "homophobe." And, um, Norris, thanks for your imput (thanks to everyone for their imput) but I don't think I'm the *only* free state member to have run. Now, I will say this: I attended a Midlothian school board meeting last night, and the opponent who beat me (by 18 votes in a four-way race) took every single word from what I had said in the candidate forum two weeks ago and berated the school board!

I was smiling like you wouldn't believe...haha, so who knows, we might have an outspoken voice for the taxpayers after all. The meeting ended at 2:40 a.m., though, so yeah, that part sucked.

But I'm asking questions about EVERYTHING related to the budget, to the teachers, to the school district, just really trying to grasp as much as I can. So the support - be it online or around my community - really does help.

And this forum thread has gotten off track, I do admit;

And the only reason I even post on this thing is to get feedback, as Norris said, on my campaign, the website, etc. I've actually toned down my message a LOT since that candidate forum two weeks ago;

I'm going to save this for another post, so hold on...

Like I said, the media didn't give McCarthy credit;

And neither do the sheeple taking bits and pieces of the story: http://www.sierratimes.com/archive/files/aug/23/morse.htm

Quote: from: Mountain Troll on May 18, 2003, 09:05:32 pm He caused more harm to this country than the communists ever did, by giving the Left a multitude of martyrs and an automatic smokescreen against any sort of criticism.

Sure, McCarthy wasn't perfect and sure two wrongs don't make a right.

But the monolithic media decides who the martyrs are what to use as a smokescreen.

McCarthy was the last politician with enough guts to challenge the dominant world power;

The monolithic media.

This is why he must be demonized.

Yes, he gave them many opportunities to do so, but one must consider that the media has the power of scrutiny and the power of smear and the power of censorship. Joey, When little independent newspapers like the one you work for get offers to buy, or competition that's willing to operate at a loss to put yours out of business, pay very, very close attention to who is doing this, don't be fooled by straw men.

You'll see.

Straw men? What the heck are those? We have a big, Establishment paper who also owns four "community" papers around the county, not to mention the mega one in our county seat, and they have tried their hardest to run us out of business (needless to say they beat us in advertising dollars by a 3-to-1 margin) but they are not the most widely read. So from a reporter's standpoint, we DO need more Joe McCarthy's.

The Establishment media will not report "what really goes on." Unfortunately, we're the only independent paper in Texas - sigh.

See here Straw Man (http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html) Don't you wish students learned a decent amount of history in public schools nowadays.

You know, like, American History even. (how I hate the terms "like" and "sweet") Maybe they could learn English or American on the side as a second language to whatever pidgeon they started with.

Joey, A straw man is like a front man or middleman who acts on behalf of others.

Business offers are often made by a straw man to conceal the identity of true buyers. I recently placed an ad with a small, independent (I think) newspaper;

The Alpine Avalanche (in Texas).

I found that there was another up and coming newspaper;

The Alpine Observer in this small town of about 5000, which seems odd considering the lack of demand.

When I called them they offered to run my ad for free.

H Although I have no proof, this is typical monolithic media modus operandi. How long can a paper like yours survive against  monopolistic maneouvers like this?

Would it operate at a loss for years if neccessary to get the truth out? McCarthy was wise to the media and thats why he had to be smeared.

What we need is NOT another McCarthy....

But another Thomas Jefferson

Quote: from: Norris on May 18, 2003, 11:27:05 am If we discourage guys like Joey from school boards will our kids be better off with the ones he's trying to displace? If he should work to destroy it what better place than from within. Our rulers, the media have done much to demonize McCarthy since his attempt to do the same to them. To counter the charges that McCarthy "caused a reign of terror" allow me to Quote: a few statistics of the era: Number of Persons killed: Zero Number of Persons wounded or injured: Zero Number of Persons tortured: Zero Number of Persons arrested without warrant: Zero Number of Persons held or imprisoned w/o warrant: Zero Number of Persons evicted, exiled, or deported: Zero Number of Persons deprived of due process: Zero Some "reign of terror." If you consider the media's soft coverage of what goes on in the CIA, FBI, BATF, NSA etc..

And how little alarm they caused over the Homeland Security Act  and Patriot Act you have to consider whether "Freedom of  the press" (free to those who own it) is an insurance for freedom or not.

McCarthy knew the media was subverting America  and used unethical methods of fighting a far more unethical media. Livelihoods destroyed: Numerous.

Quote: from: Kyle on August 02, 2004, 12:07:03 am Livelihoods destroyed: Numerous. If Libertarianism was implemented, the livelihood of millions would be destroyed.

So what if the livelihoods of the enemies of freedom are destroyed? The followers of big "L" Libertarianism harp on about "statism" as though it were the root of all our problems, choosing to ignore the promoters of state. Mass media is at the top of the food chain.

Elected officials are below that.

The state is not the problem, it's a weapon.

Weapons don't cause tyranny, those who control these weapons do.

We are a nation of sheep.

I'll admit to being of two minds about McCarthy.

On the one hand, he attempted to expose those who would subvert the government and the Constitution.

On the other hand, his methods were not purely ethical.

Besides the fact that some people were "blackballed", what were the effects of this so-called witch-hunt?

People were exposed for what they were.

And is "blackballing" wrong, if done by a non-government entity?

On other threads, posters have talked of shunning.

Isn't this the same as blackballing?  Of course the media needed to demonize him.

He would be a handy rallying cry every time they couldn't come up with a rational response for something.

The Venona Papers document the extent of Soviet activity in the United States in the McCarthy Era http://www.rinfret.com/venona.html

I see McCarthyism is alive and well among the tiny minority of conspiracy theorists and fundies in the FSP. Oh well.

What can you do but sigh?

Sorry, I could not resist but to post this private message from Norris: Quote: --clipped-- sigh   ::) Edit:  Hmmm...

I'll respect Norris' right to say things in private.

Quote: from: LeRuineur6 on August 02, 2004, 03:13:03 pm Sorry, I could not resist but to post this private message from Norris: sigh   ::) Don't you think it's intellectually dishonest and cowardly to hide behind forum rules to support your position?

I suppose since you have violated my privacy by posting my PM publicly you can at least get me banned as a means of avoiding having to debate a topic that you choose to ridicule my position on.

Quote: from: Norris on August 02, 2004, 03:24:09 pm Don't you think it's intellectually dishonest and cowardly to hide behind forum rules to support your position? What?

Quote: from: LeRuineur6 on August 02, 2004, 03:47:50 pm Quote: from: Norris on August 02, 2004, 03:24:09 pm Don't you think it's intellectually dishonest and cowardly to hide behind forum rules to support your position? What? I'm sure you understand that this topic is censored and that I cannot reasonably defend my position under these circumstances.

Forget, for a moment, the fact that this is a taboo topic in the world today. I understand how you arrived in the FSP, but I do not understand why you do not allow fellow FSP members to change your mind in the least bit. I've been outdebated on many occasions on these forums and that caused me to change my opinion on various subjects. However, you do not give any ground, you just ignore all evidence to the contrary.

Almost as a religious zealot, you have pre-planned your response to every possible question of your conspiracy theories. Just open your mind to our point of view for a moment.

Of all people on Earth that you do not trust, why won't you trust your fellow FSP members to change your views? I stopped debating you long ago because I believed you were a lost cause.

Prove me wrong.

When debating, the objective is exposing the truth and subjecting your beliefs to the scrutiny of others.

Winning is not the objective and niether is compromise or "trust". I am willing to debate it anytime and unlike most others, will not resort to ad hominem of all sorts as seems to be acceptable these days.

Remember you are the one who bailed out.

You were out debated and refused to admit it.

If you are not willing to even consider my viewpoint, why do you play "categorize the messenger" games?

This is nothing more than another form of ad hominem and is intellectually dishonest.

If you boys need an uncensored place to debate whatever it is you claim is censored on this board you can to either of these without fear of being censored: http://forum.freecountyproject.com/ http://www.freestatecafe.org Oops!

There goes the "I can't defend my position because it's censored!" excuse.

Quote: from: Reaper on August 02, 2004, 05:45:32 pm If you boys need an uncensored place to debate whatever it is you claim is censored on this board you can to either of these without fear of being censored: http://forum.freecountyproject.com/ http://www.freestatecafe.org Oops!

There goes the "I can't defend my position because it's censored!" excuse. Thank you.

I'm already signed up there and would be willing to debate it with LeRuineur or anyone else there if he is inclined to.

No excuse needed.

I edited this and reposted it to make it politically "correct", which honestly doesn't help the discussion IMO, but anyway: Regarding some conspiracies, the real problem isn't that those in positions of power can be categorized in various ways to say statistically they are this or that.

You could say that 90% of politicians are white or that 75% of them are men.

Does that mean that the people in any of these groups is specifically trying to ruin anyones life?

I mean hey, they're virtually ALL Americans right?

So Americans are really the real problem, correct? Yes, there are likely inbalances in the system.

Blacks are underrepresented, and wealthy individuals are overrepresented too.

That doesn't mean I'm going to generalize it and say rich people are intentionally undermining the system, it just means that I want to exercise a choice to not be forced into supporting something that's against my interests. You know what the problem is.

It's not anyone in particular, or certain religious groups as much as it the guy that's going to come to your house and harrass you for not paying enough for someone elses pet projects. It's simple to find out what people are the ones trying to enforce this without subscribing to any conspiracy theories, guesses or mainstream media.

Object to support someones pet project, wait till the messanger comes to tell you that you have to support it, then go up the chain of command and appeal to everyone on the way up.

You don't have to worry whether India has a secret plan to get America and Israel to fight, or whether Russian economic hardships are a ruse etc.

And most of all, you'll know you never jumped to an incorrect conclusion, propogated as a 'secret' conspiracy that everyones already heard. Almost noone really has any first hand information on any conspiracies (Seriously, we only hear what's in the mainstream media and that's not necessarily bad, it's just a fact of life) and I've met people that claimed to have personal knowledge of different things and odds are they really don't IMO. Don't worry about the rest of the world, just do what you can within your means and the rest will take care of itself is my opinion on most all the conspiracies. Yep, they'll come (if one of the conspiracy theories is correct) and lock me up for 20 years for saying that but they'll also have to deal with the problem of supporting my family while I'm gone, or what to do with the family living off the welfare my taxes pay for, or the relatives that rely on my help and the companies that can't ship without me ...

It'll be another drop in the bucket of lost growth in GDP and lost civil liberties.

Someday the bucket will be full. Sorry peeps, I've got hope for America again but seriously when they said freedom wasn't free, I think they really meant it.

Spread the word and let's make a Free State!

Quote: from: SteveA on August 02, 2004, 06:07:17 pm Regarding some conspiracies, the real problem isn't that those in positions of power can be categorized in various ways to say statistically they are this or that.

You could say that 90% of politicians are white or that 75% of them are men.

Does that mean that the people in any of these groups is specifically trying to ruin anyones life?

I mean hey, they're virtually ALL Americans right?

So Americans are really the real problem, correct?

The conspiracy is multi-faceted and can't be proved based on a single criteria of evidence, but when you put the whole picture together;

Means, motive, (physical) evidence, opportunity, modus operandi and modus agendi providing you don't yield to the prevailing taboos concerning which distinctions are not politically correct to draw....a whole new reality will emerge and be confirmed over and over again.

Quote: Yes, there are likely inbalances in the system.

Blacks are underrepresented, and wealthy individuals are overrepresented too.

That doesn't mean I'm going to generalize it and say rich people are undermining the system, it just means that I want to exercise a choice to not be forced into supporting something that's against my best interest.

There is a taboo against "generalizing" for a reason, and it is censorship.

Generalizing, though unfair to some individuals, is just a way of drawing distinctions.

If you say 90% of garbage cans are tipped over by dogs and 10% by cats, it may be unfair to some dogs but this unfairness does not make it any less true. Quote: You know what the problem is.

It's not anyone in particular, or certain religious groups as much as it the guy that's going to come to your house and harrass you for not paying enough for someone elses pet projects. It's simple to find out what people are the ones trying to enforce this without subscribing to any conspiracy theories, guesses or mainstream media.

Object to support someones pet project, wait till the messanger comes to tell you that you have to support it, then go up the chain of command and appeal to everyone on the way up.

You don't have to worry whether India has a secret plan to get America and Israel to fight, or whether Russian economic hardships are a ruse etc.

And most of all, you'll know you never jumped to an incorrect conclusion, propogated as a 'secret' conspiracy that everyones already heard about.

One cannot distinguish who is in charge by challenging puppets and pawns.

Look for the invisible chain of command.

Think strategic value.

Mass media has the power of suggestion, the power of scrutiny, the power of censorship and the power of smear.

This is not immediate or total power, but that's good anyway as incremental changes spread out over a long period of time are difficult for most people to notice.

Quote: Almost no one really has any first hand information on any conspiracies (Seriously, we only hear what's in the mainstream media and that's not necessarily bad, it's just a fact of life) and I've met people that claimed to have personal knowledge of different things and odds are they really don't IMO.

Claims of personal knowledge may or may not be valid, but are subjective and thus of little use in separating the wheat from the chaff.

There are many secret societies and no way for us to have detailed, accurate technical knowledge of their agendas but we can use our heads and figure out the fundamentals based on human nature, for example: we know they must have some kind of vows of loyalty and consequences to breaking these vows.

This is just common sense.

Quote: Don't worry about the rest of the world, just do what you can within your means and the rest will take care of itself is my opinion on most all the conspiracies.

It hasn't worked yet.

Here we are steps away from WW3 and global totalitarianism.

Individuals can't compete for power with organized groups.

Quote: Yep, they'll come (if one of the conspiracy theories is correct) and lock me up for 20 years for saying that but they'll also have to deal with the problem of supporting my family while I'm gone, or what to do with the family living off the welfare my taxes pay for, or the relatives that rely on my help and the companies that can't ship without me ...

It'll be another drop in the bucket of lost growth in GDP and lost civil liberties.

Someday the bucket will be full.

Why would they care about your family?

Look what happened to the Hungarians.

The JBT's "confiscated"their food at gunpoint and left them to starve.

Quote: Sorry peeps, I've got hope for America again but seriously when they said freedom wasn't free, I think they really meant it.

Spread the word and let's make a Free State! Yes.

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, not narrow-focused anti-statism.

I've debated with you at length, Norris, and will not waste any more of my time on such a pointless effort. Conspiracy theorists try to prove theories with any evidence available (or not) rather than trying to reach conclusions based on all available evidence.

That is why it is pointless to argue with them. Whoever is right will be proven right in the end.

In the meantime, you can fanatically defend your imaginary fantisies all you want with someone else.

The basic issues you're talking about are: 1)  Media has a very large influence on policies in America.

Ok, not many people will dispute that and getting rid of some of the methods these monopolies are enforced through law will help but in and of itself, I don't think media conglomerates can be charged with 'being too big'.

Intentionally presenting harmful fraudulent information (for example, to manipulate the stock market or misrepresenting a dangerous product for sale) I would think should be something that could be prosecuted in courts.

Of course, if you have public opinion on such a case manipulated by the defendant themself, that'll be a tough case. But overall, if someone can, in a free market convince ten million people Colgate really does make your teeth whiter than Pepsident and people are happy to believe this, I can't fault the media.

Maybe Colgate really is better ;).

It's obvious the media has a LOT of control over politics (Schwartzennegar and Reagan were primarily products of media and I'm sure many other politicians were 'made' by media) but at least if we can get a freer market going you'd be free to support whatever competing media sources you felt better represented your views. If you gave government the power to specifically select what large companies were 'good' or 'bad' for the U.S., you'd be opening up a can of worms we'd never get the lid back on.

That's a non-option. 2)  Power in the U.S.

Is not distributed very evenly and there are groups that tend to have a bit more 'equal' representation than others.

Again, you'd have few people disagreeing with that one.

Once again though, reducing the the overall size and scope of government will help this.

I don't think you could ever equalize everything and don't really believe that's a good idea either.

There will always be disparities;

Groups coming into power and later leaving, that's just part of change.

But if everything was reduced, even though some group of people might control a majority of government functions, the influence is limited. 3)  You claim that profiling can be a useful tool and though I can't say you're 100% wrong (we've got people claiming searches toward terrorists should be focused on muslims) and it's a tool that police currently use in finding criminals (you don't grab search an elderly woman when you're looking for a light skinned man in his 20s), it's a very poor tool in using to try to convict someone of guilt.

Like I said, probably 75% of politicians are white.

If we have problems in politics does that really mean that it's specifically white people that are causing the problems (I guess that claim could be true but what does it mean?

Asian politicians wouldn't have similar problems?). I think it's the same problem with the War in Iraq.

We've had some terrorist attacks in the U.S.

Maybe half a dozen by muslim groups (ok, maybe more but not all big) and let's say we've just had one from an American (McVeigh).

There are something like one or two billion muslims in the world and 300 million Americans so the ratios match pretty close and we can rather confidently say that muslims are almost equally as an American to cause a terrorist attack! Maybe that doesn't specifically address your concerns but it's still applicable.

I think most any group of people have a mix of the good, the bad (and the ugly ;D).

I mean, shoot, the FSP is a perfect example - damn, I'm beautiful but most of you guys are so-so!

LOL  Dude, just kidding :) The thing is, if you've got some brokers manipulating the stock market unfairly, prosecute them.

Don't assume all brokers do the same thing. 4)  If there really was an all-seeing 'secret' conspiracy that everyone knew about, it wouldn't be secret.

If it was all powerful and didn't want anyone to know about it, then we would be denied any legitimate information about them and anything we did talk about would be at most, luckily, if it had any real corelation.

So the only way anyone would even be able to have a discussion about it would be to either have personal knowledge (which can always be doubted, because the conspiracy itself could through up flak and create other rumors), so it couldn't be really 'secret', and couldn't be very powerful either if it couldn't stop people from talking. So all I can say, is that I've met a lot of people with a lot of opinions and observations and the sky hasn't fallen yet.

(Yes, it's not impossible but if it really was as big as the sky, there'd be no point in worrying) 5)  I don't think you have to worry about every Tom, Dick or Harry being thrown in prison or being shot etc.

If someone's reaping some benefits, they need people to provide those benefits.

I've yet to see a total dictatorship last forever.

Economies and populations have to grow, unless you're willing to toss everything down the hole.

That has been the view of our nuclear defense policy - mutually assured destruction and it's worked ok.

(Let's hope our nuclear defenses can't be sabotaged though ...

That could suck the really big one).

Maybe there's a better way to assure we don't end up under a dictatorship but like people have said, the only thing to fear, is fear itself.

We empower our leaders, and in one sense it's 100% voluntary.

We all have the choice of what we do in life.

Keeping everything peaceful and limiting hysteria should be moderately high on that list, IMO. P.S.

I've heard the rumors that we're all ruled by aliens that look like us :).

Wouldn't they just love you to believe that one?

(Think about it) Oh well, I tend to ramble.

Have a good evening, Norris.

If we get the Free State going things will be that much better so we're doing good.

Quote: from: LeRuineur6 on August 02, 2004, 10:20:36 pm Whoever is right will be proven right in the end.

That's the easiest way to test a theory.

The only problem is that prevention will no longer be an option.

Quote: from: SteveA on August 03, 2004, 12:24:32 am I don't think media conglomerates can be charged with 'being too big'.

About a half-dozen men control most of the media in the western world.

If you take into account their collusion, don't you think that's a lot of power of suggestion, scrutiny, censorship and smear?

Quote: Intentionally presenting harmful fraudulent information (for example, to manipulate the stock market or misrepresenting a dangerous product for sale) I would think should be something that could be prosecuted in courts.

How the heck could it be proven?

When all the financial media get ready to badmouth one corporation and pump and dump another, great derivatives opportunities abound.

It doesn't matter if their stocks are going up or down, what matters is knowing what is going to happen ahead of time.

They can't get caught if they let cronies play these deals behind the scenes.

What could you do if you were a prosecutor?

If the kingpin of your case was the fact that they were all of the same ethnic group there would be no sense in persuing it in today's political climate....your career would be finished.

Besides these folks probably have the SEC wrapped up.

Quote:  but at least if we can get a freer market going you'd be free to support whatever competing media sources you felt better represented your views.

What would make you assume they compete?

Media is both about money and power.

If they compete, this power is lost.

Quote: If you gave government the power to specifically select what large companies were 'good' or 'bad' for the U.S., you'd be opening up a can of worms we'd never get the lid back on.

That's a non-option.

I have pondered this and concede you are right.

But this illustrates why anti-statism is the blind approach and extreme vigilance is the right way to secure our freedom.

We simply can't categorize our problems and solutions all under the heading of state. I'm definately all for reducing the size and scope of government, but realize the problem is partly systemic and partly collusion of TPTB.

Quote:   .  Like I said, probably 75% of politicians are white.

If we have problems in politics does that really mean that it's specifically white people that are causing the problems (I guess that claim could be true but what does it mean?

Asian politicians wouldn't have similar problems?).

I'll illustrate the chain of command again: Media Puppet Politicians Bureaucrats Sheeple. Mass media need only suggest how to stand on issues and almost the entire herd of Congresscattle will follow along.

Imagine yourself a social-position cherishing politician.

You have social position in one hand and smear in the other.

Which one do you choose?

The chain of command in America which is taught in schools is a BIG FAT LIE.

Mass media is at the top.

They play left and right and middle against each other and the herd in between never notices who is in command.

Quote:   4)  If there really was an all-seeing 'secret' conspiracy that everyone knew about, it wouldn't be secret.

Examine the words secret and censorship.

These concepts are not neccessarily absolute.

The existence of secret societies like the Skull and Bones, Trilateral, Freemasonry, Bilderbergers, CFR, Club of Rome, Bohemian Grove and Illuminati are not a secret, but the mass media does not point any scrutiny so the dumb masses never think about them or the fact that the media protects them from scrutiny.

I am not claiming to have discovered a great secret on my own.

Tens of thousands know about this.

They are all without influence.

Influence is a closely guarded and expensive commodity.

It is bought and sold at above it's value as a money machine.

I'll explain the mechanics of this later.

Quote: and the sky hasn't fallen yet.

I'm referring to people who are extremely cunning in the use of strategy and timing.

Quote: I've yet to see a total dictatorship last forever.

We have never had global dictatorship before.

World government is the objective.

The rulers will have complete information on the everyday movements of the herd, and will have complete control of outgoing information.

This wil make it easy to round up and starve out whole regions of people who seem likely to resist.

THIS HAS HAPPENED BEFORE.

TPTB did this to the Hungarians.

Quote:  the only thing to fear, is fear itself. And fear of being put into all the dreaded categories that are used to herd our thinking.

Well, you have pointed out a lot of things that can be weaknesses and I appreciate it.

It's good if people don't just stick their head in the sand and not try to make sense of the world but trying to work with too much information or theories that may not actually correlate with reality is dangerous too. I could probably take everything you've posted here and point to how some truly secret group was trying to manipulate you into stifled their competition. I agree people need information and should use it to be watchful but ultimately this is a land where people are innocent until proven guilty and that's actually good and If you're worried about the media, what if we allowed the media to hype up differing groups against each other?

That's the underlying problem.

Yes, I love picking on a few socialists now and then but that's mostly entertainment, and hey they're easy targets ;) but maybe a lot of them actually mean well and are misguided or there are maybe a large number of things we still agree on. The two paths to resolving some of the problems between groups we see in the U.S.

Are: 1)  Agree to disagree (and go our separate ways on some things) 2)  Get together enough power to flatten the competition (not really a win/win situation) At some point I admit you've still got to be willing to defend yourself against those who will never view #1 as an option.

Underlying all politics is the implicit use of force if no satisfactory arrangement can be reached.

(We pretend like voting resolves the issues, but it doesn't.

It just says one side of the #2 option has more people). Yes, I've rambled but the intent was to say that we need to work toward a mroe satisfactory arrangement for everyone in America and that includes some of the people in power too.

I don't think it's unobvious that there's a fracturing of political desires in different groups and I think many agree that if America falls, it'll be from the inside-out so if an outside group were trying trying to cause problems, they'd love to create internal conflict.

And it doesn't even help much pointing fingers if the ship is sinking.

And if it's sinking it's partly because of finger pointing.

Yes, the media puts puppets up and plays a show that doesn't address real issues and you're right that eyes need opening.

Well, I commend on your attempts to open eyes, Norris.

I can't fault you there. Overall though, what goes around, comes around.

So it's important to give everyone a fair shake, even if you think their interests are impedeing yours.

I'm glad you see the importance of being cautiously watchful, instead of overly zealous (I'm probably half hypocrit on the zealotry part ;D)  In the end I think just trying to get control of your local conditions can be a lot more productive than worrying too much about what people are doing everywhere else (and again, I'm at least half a hypocrit ...

Ah, but politics is such an entertaining to watch team sport ;)).

It's also much easier to avoid being manipulated by conspiracies (imagined or not) when you're working with things you can really see and do something about. You've pointed out potential weaknesses in our system and emphasized the need to be cautiously watchful, and I'd agree with you.

I emphasize problems with trying to generalize, theories can only provide a road to travel in searching for a personal truth, you can't rely on third hand information to be correct, personal knowledge is the only thing I think can be relied on and hysteria is not beneficial to the state of things. Quote: It doesn't matter if their stocks are going up or down, what matters is knowing what is going to happen ahead of time. Good point, and why I recommend not listening to the media when you buy or sell stocks.

Even an uninformed random choice is sadly likely to outperform an 'informed' view, unless it's personal information. Quote: Quote:  but at least if we can get a freer market going you'd be free to support whatever competing media sources you felt better represented your views. What would make you assume they compete?

Media is both about money and power.

If they compete, this power is lost. I'm saying, working toward increasing the amount of personal control you have over your life, in and of itself can solve much of the problem and the best part is that you don't even have to worry about the level of truth of any conspiracy. If you can retain the product of your labor, freely associate and communicate, well dang, if that's not getting out from under the thumb of whatever group of people might be trying to rule the world, I don't know what is. See what I mean, it's a simple solution that takes care of everything. Hey, and if it doesn't work out or someone decides that's just not an acceptable way for people to live, so free like that, then there's something that needs fixing and it takes no guesswork at all.

Pass that barrier by and see if another pops up.

Rinse and repeat until you die trying (I guess it's not impossible) or you're satisfied.

What more could you possibly ask of people than that?

That seems like the ultimate plan to me, but maybe I'm just biased. (Apparently I lied when I said I was out of stuff to say ;))  Well now I am.

Good luck

Quote: from: Norris on August 03, 2004, 06:43:06 am I'll illustrate the chain of command again: Media Puppet Politicians Bureaucrats Sheeple. Elder Race Secret Societies Governments/Corporations/Mass Media/Organized Religions Sheeple William Bramley and Zecharia Sitchen have done a lot of work detailing the history and organization behind it. The Gods of Eden (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0380718073/qid=1091562985/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/102-8193243-8786560?v=glance&s=books&n=507846#product-details), by William Bramley Genesis Revisited (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0380761599/qid=1091563127/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-8193243-8786560?v=glance&s=books#product-details) by Zecharia Sitchen The visible factions are played off against each other for the overall gain of the conspirators.

Steve, You are a pretty smart guy and have made some good points, but Quote: from: SteveA on August 03, 2004, 08:46:01 am I'm saying, working toward increasing the amount of personal control you have over your life, in and of itself can solve much of the problem and the best part is that you don't even have to worry about the level of truth of any conspiracy. If you can retain the product of your labor, freely associate and communicate, well dang, if that's not getting out from under the thumb of whatever group of people might be trying to rule the world, I don't know what is. You are not taking into account that most of the dumb masses are not as smart as you.

Free will is largely a myth, and this is why I don't think big "L" Libertarianism is the solution to our problems. You may be offended by the idea that people can't decide things for themselves and I am not advocating that the govt make these decisions for them. In the unlikely event that we secure the liberties you speak of, we would still be far short of insuring any long term liberty because the media has control  over the will the masses.

The masses will continue to be herded with the powers of suggestion, scrutiny, censorship and smear.

Liberty is not sustainable unless the majority of the people want it. The only way we will achieve any of the Libertarian objectives in this climate is if TPTB want it.

If America experiences a short term empowerment of Libertarian ideals it will so that TPTB can implement some of their globalization/one world agendas like open borders and international trade.

They will not allow termination of the welfare state first, which is a prerequisite to making these ideas work. As I stated earier, individuals can't compete with groups for power.

No rigid ideology will insure our freedom without extreme vigilance.

As long as those who control the media usurp our vigilance, we are on a downhill slide to world totalitarian government .

Until we find a way to prevent TPTB from herding us in this direction, nothing outlined  by any of the "Great Libertarian thinkers" will save us. What are we going to do about the will of those who are easily herded if we don't own the media?

Even if we had our own media, as long as "political correctness" prevails, TPTB can pretend to be our friends while infiltrating and subverting it.

Quote: You are not taking into account that most of the dumb masses are not as smart as you. I have an ego but to make sure humility is added as a redeeming trait also ;), I'd have to say we all have different skills.

Something as simple as being able to communicate without conflict is a skill that likely takes years to master.

Even being a patient parent with your children is quite a challenge LOL. I don't know how that applies to anything but everyone has different proficiencies and that's why people tend to work better in groups (voluntarily and hopefully beneficial to all, of course). Quote: Free will is largely a myth, ... Sidenote:  Yes, we're a product of our environment but no matter what chain of logic ensues from that (product of environment = not responsible for actions = no punishment = no deterance = potential for rampant crime from irresponsible people) we have an interest in self-defense as every model (including anarchists) acknowledge. Sorry, I had to put that up for the rare individual who might feel that excuses them from responsible actions involving other. Quote: and this is why I don't think big "L" Libertarianism is the solution to our problems. Agreed.

The capital letters 'L', 'D', and 'R' don't change anything and even campaign issues seem to have questionable value.

It's issues, track records and real results we need. Quote: You may be offended by the idea that people can't decide things for themselves and I am not advocating that the govt make these decisions for them. I'm very flexible in thinking and offended by little.

I understand your context.

Yes, relying on any arbitrarily defined small body of people, always leaves a weakness.

Even the 'good guys' can't be relied on all the time. My personal beliefs are that there's an undeniable truth for everyone - the condition of our lives.

I believe in evolution;

People who deny reality or can't deal with it are more likely to have problems.

Whether it's a group of people trying to ignore the fact that an acre of land will only grow so much food or an individual who thinks some cosmic source of power will make it so gravity doesn't affect him if he tries to fly - You can try to talk sense into people for ages but ultimately just like any family, at some point you've got to let people go on their way if they aren't happy.

Besides, maybe there really is a way to grow more food on that acre of land, or the wings he claim will let him fly actually do work. Quote: ...Liberty is not sustainable unless the majority of the people want it. Look for a smaller group in which it is a majority.

Don't stress over the rest of it too much. Quote: The only way we will achieve any of the Libertarian objectives in this climate is if TPTB want it. God has a plan too that I don't know of.

We all have plans.

Whether or not our desires happen to coincide is irrelavent.

If there's conflict over something, there'll be conflict over something and we try to resolve it when that bridge is crossed. Worrying about displeasing someone and changing your actions to match their pleasure is exactly the problem.

We don't need more sheeple.

We need people who can and are willing to look at the target of getting America back to a simpler, less burdensome system and return our freedom to live life as we see fit. Let's look at an analogy of what would be the ultimate enforcement system for a society:  It would be an all-seeing, all-knowing, ever present, judge, jury and executioner who could reward or punish to an extent beyond our imagination.

Does that sound familiar?

Is that a system you want to live under? The question is, does it exist or not.

I don't believe in things I don't have evidence for and it seems rather crippling to be held to live under such a system that I can't even know what their desires might be. Do they want a productive economy in the U.S.?

Do they want a low crime rate?

Do they want to have the technology developed to colonize Mars someday?

I can't imagine why not, and (assuming they exist) they must know that to achieve such things there's an undeniable physical reality that requires tradeoffs.

Do they want to destroy the world?

Well, they almost by definition have the power so there's little I can do about that except hope there's someway it could be stopped. So whether or not there are any such (almost mystical) people/beings etc.

Seems to make little difference in the actions I should take in trying to limit the amount of control other people have over my personal life.

I don't want to live under a communist state where everyone is 'taken care of' and you have no free will to choose how you want your life to be.

It would be a pointless existance. I know, I ramble. Quote: If America experiences a short term empowerment of Libertarian ideals it will so that TPTB can implement some of their globalization/one world agendas like open borders and international trade.

They will not allow termination of the welfare state first, which is a prerequisite to making these ideas work. For one thing, we don't need to worry about the entire U.S.

We just try to get an example in one area going but I agree with you that there are some issues that need to be addressed first and more strongly - for example, spending cuts are IMO at least as important as tax cuts.

Free social services need to be addressed before the freedom to migrate is pushed.

Yes, we've tied ourselves in some knots that aren't easy to untangle, but it's not impossible to undo. You're right though, I'd hate to see only a select group of issues that might match globalization efforts pass while seeing everything else resisted.

Thank you for bringing that up.

It's a real concern. Quote: As I stated earier, individuals can't compete with groups for power.

No rigid ideology will insure our freedom without extreme vigilance.

As long as those who control the media usurp our vigilance, we are on a downhill slide to world totalitarian government .

Until we find a way to prevent TPTB from herding us in this direction, nothing outlined  by any of the "Great Libertarian thinkers" will save us. Groups are just individuals.

Tyranny is destructive.

Heading downhill out of fear that going uphill might offend someone is sheeple thought.

Any ruler would love to have subjects that intuitively could guess what his desires were and would automatically follow them without question. Quote: What are we going to do about the will of those who are easily herded if we don't own the media? I think the option may be only to try to set an example and hope some people see it.

Forcing and manipulating people isn't going to solve the underlying problem either.

We are already too susceptible to it - most anyone could walk up to your front door with a badge, claim to represent something authoritative sounded and likely most people would let him to do what he wanted.

It works great when everyone is honest and truthful but it provides little defense against criminals. Quote: Even if we had our own media, as long as "political correctness" prevails, TPTB can pretend to be our friends while infiltrating and subverting it. Yep, that's not impossible either.

It would be a shame to see.

Well, we either try or we don't.

Maybe there's some better plan out there but what can I say?

I love the idea of the FSP and if nothing else comes of it, I hope it will get people thinking.

Not doing anything = guaranteed failure.

Trying, at least gives us some chance more than 0% of succeeding.

The odds are in our favor from that point of view :) and actually when you take off the shades, it's kind of sunny outside :)  It doesn't take a lot to get a few ideas going in N.H.

And not a lot of to swing a few election results either (Seriously, even 6K peeps we have signed now would have a HUGE effect in the primary elections, but we still need more people for a better guardband).

Quote: from: SteveA on August 03, 2004, 08:19:14 pm Something as simple as being able to communicate without conflict is a skill that likely takes years to master.

I recognise and admire this skill of yours, I'm rather abrasive myself, perhaps because I separate fact from feeling and often reject feeling in the process.

Quote: Worrying about displeasing someone and changing your actions to match their pleasure is exactly the problem.

We don't need more sheeple.

Music to my ears.

Quote: Let's look at an analogy of what would be the ultimate enforcement system for a society:  It would be an all-seeing, all-knowing, ever present, judge, jury and executioner who could reward or punish to an extent beyond our imagination.

Does that sound familiar?

Is that a system you want to live under?

Definately not if it's the current powers that be, as I am certain they do not have my best interests at heart.

I can't imagine that I would like it if anyone had these powers over me but who knows, a benevolent dictator  might be better that the status quo.

I'm not very optimistic about this, though.

Quote: The question is, does it exist or not.

I don't believe in things I don't have evidence for and it seems rather crippling to be held to live under such a system that I can't even know what their desires might be.

I could provide plenty of evidence but it would not be appropriate for this board.

Quote: there's little I can do about that except hope there's someway it could be stopped.

There is plenty we can do.

TPTB have gotten away with undermining our free Republic by controlling the flow of information.

It's simply a war of ideas.

Drain the pond and expose the alligators.

Quote: I know, I ramble.

I have a habit of separating philosophy from analysis, and morals from strategy.

I think if you tried this you would understand my point of view.

Try seeing all the maneovers from a stricty strategic standpoint.

Forget about morals of philosophy for a minute.

It's just a power struggle.

Every position, every angle has strategic value to someone.

Never assume your adversary has the same philosophical or moral obstacles to using these opportunities to get the upper hand that you may be hindered by. Philosophies are great food for thought, but I meet too many folks on forums that tell me how great some XYZ philosophy of theirs would be if only everyone would adhere to them.

Why waste time on fantasy when you know they won't adhere to them? Quote: I think the option may be only to try to set an example and hope some people see it.

I don't think that if the FSP is successful on a state level, the masses will see this and emulate it.

Mass media determines what the masses see and if they don't like FSP, they will scrutinize every minor misstep of FSP participants and use them to categorize all of them, they will exaggerate every mistake repeatedly, they will find ways to smear the leaders they can't control, they will censor any data that favors us, they will say NH is a haven for terrorists because there are too many personal freedoms with mass media in their hands, the opportunities are almost unlimited. Marxism/ communism caught on widely without an example, but it had TPTB with all their influence to promote it.

The moral of the story is an example can't hold a candle to influence.

Quote: and manipulating people isn't going to solve the underlying problem either.

Manipulating people has worked great for our adversaries, they have captured our minds with song and motion pictures and herded us to the precipice of totalitarianism.

What strategy do you suggest?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating manipulation, I just want some suggestions on stategies they can't circumvent.

Quote:   Not doing anything = guaranteed failure.

Not fully analyzing the problem = guaranteed failure of the solution.

Quote: Quote: Something as simple as being able to communicate without conflict is a skill that likely takes years to master. I recognise and admire this skill of yours, I'm rather abrasive myself, perhaps because I separate fact from feeling and often reject feeling in the process. LOL!

No, I was actually thinking I have a tough time doing that.

It's easier when you've got people who are friendly throwing around ideas but I have a bad habit of getting impatient :( Dude, you've been great.

I didn't intend to imply anything about you.

Just that people have different skills and I think it works out good like that having people concentrate on what they feel proficient at. Quote: Music to my ears. Kewl, I thought you might like that :) Quote: Quote: Let's look at an analogy of what would be the ultimate enforcement system for a society:  It would be an all-seeing, all-knowing, ever present, judge, jury and executioner who could reward or punish to an extent beyond our imagination.

Does that sound familiar?

Is that a system you want to live under?

  Definately not if it's the current powers that be, as I am certain they do not have my best interests at heart.

I can't imagine that I would like it if anyone had these powers over me but who knows, a benevolent dictator  might be better that the status quo.

I'm not very optimistic about this, though. I was actually trying to draw an analogy between this and what effect God has on religion.

I know this isn't the religion forum but to me it seems like the way people can be manipulated by saying, "if you do that, God will be displeased" etc. As much as I admire some religious teaching, I think the mystical parts aren't 100% helpful. Quote: Quote: The question is, does it exist or not.

I don't believe in things I don't have evidence for and it seems rather crippling to be held to live under such a system that I can't even know what their desires might be.   I could provide plenty of evidence but it would not be appropriate for this board. Well, I'm thinking I'll stick my head in the sand for now and let them come tell me personally.

I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories and even if some of it is true, it seems no valid reason to do anything different. Quote: Quote: there's little I can do about that except hope there's someway it could be stopped.   There is plenty we can do.

TPTB have gotten away with undermining our free Republic by controlling the flow of information.

It's simply a war of ideas.

Drain the pond and expose the alligators. Ok, I admit information is generally good but I don't want to expend the energy chasing the info around.

Personally, I think I've heard plenty of them ...

And what does it do?

To me, it says the FSP is even more important to see working.

Don't you think you'd see alligators easily if you got rid of the other preditors?

And maybe we'd get through draining a lake only to find a nice lake gone and no alligators in sight. I wish you didn't have so much stuff to worry about.

We seem to be at an impasse on this one.

To me it seems that such worries are needless and can hold people to inaction.

Maybe it's an important self preservation skill :), maybe it leads us down the same path we've been following for too long now.

I just can't live in a world filled with doom and gloom and am trying to sidestep around it.

They'll have 299,999,999 other people in the U.S.

And that should be enough to keep 'em happy.

Quote: from: SteveA on August 04, 2004, 01:19:39 am Well, I'm thinking I'll stick my head in the sand for now and let them come tell me personally.

Why would they tell you before such time as it's irreversible?

Quote: I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories and even if some of it is true, it seems no valid reason to do anything different.

Whether or not you are a fan of theories or not has no bearing on their validity. Quote: Ok, I admit information is generally good but I don't want to expend the energy chasing the info around.

Personally, I think I've heard plenty of them ...

And what does it do?

Unless you have first taken the time to train yourself in logical ways to separate the wheat from the chaff, chasing info around will expend much energy.

I don't know if you are old enough to have acquired enough wealth to have to spend many hours figuring out how to invest it, but you will eventually see the need to hone this skill for many reasons.

You might as well get it over with.

When you do, you will quickly draw the right distinctions and ask the right questions to make your life bullstuff resistant.

Studying epistemology and logical fallacies are a good start.

Another is to apply the tried and true "MOTIVE, means, evidence, opportunity, modus operandi and modus agendi".

Then you will be able to quickly analyze human events.

Quote: I wish you didn't have so much stuff to worry about.

We seem to be at an impasse on this one.

To me it seems that such worries are needless and can hold people to inaction.

Maybe it's an important self preservation skill :), maybe it leads us down the same path we've been following for too long now.

I just can't live in a world filled with doom and gloom and am trying to sidestep around it.

They'll have 299,999,999 other people in the U.S.

And that should be enough to keep 'em happy. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

Unfortunately it does not work if we hide our heads in the sand and let the other 279,999 people worry about it.

They like sand on their faces too.

To me, it's like telling ghost stories around a campfire. I really can't give much of a more concrete example than that.

Obviously we've got groups fighting over things in America, some are more prominent than others but in the end they're still people who tie shoes one at time and could likely carry on a civil debate if the need was pressing. I think most conspiracy theories actually cause more harm than good because it propogates the belief that we don't have much control over our lives, and that's true if you believe it, so what value is there to it? Also, relying on media and others to give you information about what reality truly is, is just another form of control.

You can see it for yourself.

Where are you being held back?

What actions are you being limited in?

Trying to correlate those to something barely visible on the horizon is, I believe, a lot harder than it seems. For example, a lot of people might think Bush himself is causing a lot of problems in the U.S.

And if he were removed from office it would make a huge difference.

I think it would change some names in the news stories and yes, some policies, but effectively the same underlying beliefs people held would exist.

Let's say the media has too much power in the U.S., is it due to a few people in control of it or an underlying faith and simultaneously lack of concern for such a system?

Maybe I'm a hyprocrit.

But let's say instead we had you be the new media distributor and you could tell everyone the evils of centralized media - does it change anything for other people?

Not really, they're still relying on someone else to tell them to rely on themselves.

Swapping one king for another doesn't ultimately change much.

I think we both agree that people need to become more independent instead of relying on centralized planning for everything.

I don't know how to convince people of that except to show how things can be better and let them make the decisions for themselves.

You can't force them to change or they become accepting of the force, or rely on you as a leader, you just have to point out that what they've come to accept as inevitable, isn't necessarily and hope they gain a new perspective.

You've got some good perspectives, hopefully I've got a few, we just take what we can use from each other and continue trying to teach people how to untie the knots.

In the end, they've got to do it for themselves.

Discussion Title: We need another Joe McCarthy
Title Keywords: need  another  McCarthy 



Omgili Home About FAQ Plugins Usenet