|
Anaxagoras -> RE: Alex Jones Creates Hysteria Amongst His Readers/Listeners (6/28/2011 2:10:54 PM)
|
XS the posts are becoming a bit long. Its partly my fault but will probably put others off reading so I'll keep this as brief as possible. I think things should be toned down because if the invective worsens it'll become a fight which is a waste of time.
quote:
ORIGINAL: xssve
quote:
ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
quote:
ORIGINAL: xssve
quote:
George Bush Senior was US ambassador to the United Nations for two years in the early 70's. Linking him to some sort of NWO conspiracy because he was part of some family planning programme perhaps of questionable morality is not sufficient to re-evaluate pretty clear sentiments as expressed in his speech about a stronger UN.
It's a clue as to what he might mean by "credible".
I don’t think so. You can’t alter the obvious meaning of his words based on a single project he was a member of two decades earlier. I don’t know anything about the project in question but assuming a form of eugenics was included in the programme, then bear in mind this was also the case in some European countries up until the 1970’s. Like phrenology, eugenics was a respected part of science for a long time until it gradually became discredited several decades ago and is now regarded as unethical.
Doesnt' mean there aren't still those who subscribe to it, there is quite a large body of evidence here, racism is a political tool as well, and a highly effective one, which is the lesson of NAZI Germany, which in spite of Godwins law, is a textbook example of media manipulation triggering a centripetal defensive response, and inciting widespread mob violence.
I already mentioned ACORN, and a great deal of the resistance to Obama is latent racial stereotypes simmering just below the surface, it's very hard not to see that, even if it's in poor taste to point it out.
I agree with most of that. I believe too many people put down dislike of Obama to racism although its definately a factor for a significant number I believe. I thought the sums Bush Jr. gave ACORN were grossly exaggerated.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
I really don't think so. Most conspiracy theories originate from two places principally: the far-right and far-left. The political fringes. They can be unhealthy places morally speaking.
quote:
Since when? It's a whole new world, PR wise, viral marketing, virtual networks updated in real time - these things did not exist for practical purposes 20 years ago, and it's changed and accelerated dramatically in the last Ten years, one cannot base assumptions on historical patterns, right wing philanthropies for example, spend huge amounts of money on this stuff, a lot of it comes out of AEI, it's straight up disinformation, and it's disseminated through the various media organs on the internet, the NRO, etc., radio and television, within hours, if not minutes.
Since when? For over one hundred years. The Internet is just a new tool that both the far right and far left use, most effectively I might add. They are one of the big winners of the Internet revolution.
Instant mass media has only been around since the Fifties, the internet as a widespread medium, only since the Nineties, they're both very different than print media the immersion factor is very different - I think you mentioned the Protocols, that was disseminated through print media, and hardly the first of such things, pamphleteering is as old as the printing press, but it wasn't coming at you 24/7 from every direction, you could read it and think about it, discuss it, etc., now you can isolate yourself to a specific channel, Fox, Limbaugh, NRO, for example, and really have no idea what is going on outside that channel - that's all you're accusing Hunky of, but both channels are rife with conspiracy theories, you can't just pick and choose which ones you prefer, you're going to have to apply critical thinking here, check sources, make some effort to determine what the reality of the situation is.
Fair point about the media having greater power today. I know people have issues with Fox but its not nearly as bad the Alex Jones type outlets. Anyone can take issue with their discussion jocks but at least its pure news casting is reasonably accurate although I'm sure plenty of others will scoff at that remark. [8|] BTW you're forgetting radio since the twenties.
quote:
It's the nature of modern information stream - infotainment - I linked to several credible sources, that deal in fact, not sensationalism, but at least one of them is out of business because not enough people are looking - Jones appears to not have the same problem, he's at least getting people to look, and that's how free speech works when it comes to media - viewership = advertising revenue, it's as simple as that.
The dumbing down of news is a problem. It became more acute in the 80's. The situation with the media is not ideal but I don't think it is merely a puppet of the authorities. If anything I think it can have excessive sway on governance.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
People wheel and deal all the time. Many people are greedy and self serving. The same goes for organisations. Its an unfortunate part of human nature. Yes there is corruption and often a lack of transparency. Reality is messy. People are messy morally speaking. Same goes for some institutions all of which are human made. I can accept those points and question the morality of politicians etc. without going through the conspiracy theory portal of believing for example that the US government would willingly kill 3,000+ of its own people. This is a key point about conspiracy theorists. It is a re-orientating of one's perception of reality to become a conspiracy theorist. Such people look for it under every stone. Any lack of clarity, any contradiction spells evil intent, Goldman-Sacks and the NWO. That is a perverse paranoia where mere doubt can validate views. You should appreciate that there is a distinction between accepting that governments can be corrupt where conspiracy can happen, and allowing it to infuse entire worldviews. The latter is corrosive to society.
quote:
Lol, corruption is corrosive to society, free speech is all that stands between us and corruption, that is the purpose of the bill of rights, all of our freedoms are predicated on free speech, that, not the government, is the ultimate guarantor of your rights, of everyone's rights, it's worth the price of listening to a few rants - right wing conspiracy theories do real damage, Jones isn't telling anybody to kill people, he's not trying to overthrow the Constitution or the Bill of rights, he's ostensibly advocating enforcing it - unlike others I could, and have mentioned.
You seem to be implying I made points which I have not made. Of course free speech is important as is an open society and of course corruption is corrosive too. However, spreading fear where it is not warranted, seeing evil intent where it cannot be reasonably inferred has the potential to be hugely damaging to civil society even more so than corruption unless the latter is so severe that it gravely undermined the functioning of society in its totality. It’s not a matter of believing that conspiracies do sometimes happen. It is a matter of seeing them all the time, everywhere one looks. It is a fundamental re-orientation of perception.
Uh, corruption typically consists largely of spreading fear where it is not warranted, seeing evil intent where it cannot be reasonably inferred, it inherently involves "a fundamental re-ordering of perception". You are responsible for your perceptions, it's your duty as a citizen to check facts, and you can't check them if you never hear them - what world do you live in? Is there some ultimate, absolute and infallible source of truth I don't know about? If there were, we wouldnt' be having this conversation.
Have the organs of corporate media not been implicated in racism, or the Red Scare, anti-Union activity, smear campaigns on people with inconvenient views? Happens all the time, and it generates a certain degree of reasonable paranoia - corruption is the source, conspiracy theory is a symptom of it, when it isn't a tool of corruption itself, free speech is the antidote, and that means you're going to have to do better than try to conspire to selectively censoring points of view you don't like because you consider them "dangerous" - that's a tool of facism, Who decides, and where do you stop?
I disagree, corruption occurs for a few different reasons and has differing symptoms, and we are not fully responsible for our perceptions, most are involuntary. No of course I don't have any definitive source of truth. I wish I had. I look at the mainstream media. I usually read or watch a few sources if I have the time and try to build up a picture as best as I can.
As I said to Termy, all human institutions are fallible and imperfect. Yes indeed it is well known that some media institutions pursue direct political agendas. It shouldn't necessarily generate paranoia but simply a level of scepticism. This has been understood for a long time, resulting in the common adage "don't believe all you read".
I really don't think conspiracy is simply a result of corruption. Conspiracy theory has existed for a very long time and seems to be generated by a variety of factors including hatred and prejudice.
quote:
You say, "I can accept those points and question the morality of politicians etc. without going through the conspiracy theory portal of believing for example that the US government would willingly kill 3,000+ of its own people.", but it happens all the time, it's a matter of historical record, Operation Northwoods was a Pentagon generated strategic study that concerned doing exactly that, the Lusitania, even Pearl Harbor - you telling me the entire Japanese fleet was able to steam within striking distance of Peal Harbor and nobody noticed?
The notion that there was no deception or conspiracy is the thing that begins to strain credulity here - the CIA was running cociane into the country in the Eighties, it's a matter of historical record, established in a United States court of law, it's not a theory, it's a fact, it's a fact that it enabled them not only to fund covert operations in other countries, but drove down real estate prices in select markets here, and that certain people "coincidentally" made a lot of money off that, people with CIA connections - it wasn't "the government", the postal service wasn't involved, the FBI wasn't involved, I doubt sincerely that the bulk of the CIA itself was involved, it was a select group of people with an agenda, operating with public resources, under government auspices, with no accountability or oversight.
Wouldn't you want to know if that were true or not?
It is, look it up - there's money involved here, people playing hardball, it's not some abstract ideal of good and evil, it's people doing what people are prone to do, have been doing for Thousands of years - sweeping it under the rug isn't going to make it go away, it just enables it.
You are still suggesting that I am saying there are no conspiracy theories or that they should be silenced. I have actually said the opposite to you repeatedly. I don't want ot start another shitstorm as I don't like entering into eternal debates which are wasteful of time for all involved but there is no robust evidence I know of that proves FDR knew about the Pearl Harbour attack before hand even though he did want to bring the US into World War Two. The theory that the CIA ran cocaine into the US in the 80's is not as clear cut as you suggest. It may have happened but its unclear if it did or not: http://www.justice.gov/oig/special/9712/ch01p1.htm
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
Conspiracy theorists forward the view that the government is extremely evil. One of the biggest theories is 9/11. What conclusion does this theory forward: at will the institution that should protect its civilians can kill large numbers of the people it represents for no other reason than to start war. That is an assertion so beyond the pale in terms of reason that it’s an absurdity to even countenance. All they would have to do is invent having one of their ships and a couple of planes destroyed by a foreign force to invent cause to start a war. It would be far easier to do and essentially as effective. The thing is that if people truly believe their own government would cynically kill a huge number of innocents at will then trust breaks down to such an extent that all authority becomes the enemy. People would understandably pick up guns and an amass against this enemy. Some have to an extent with unofficial militias and heavily armed families often retreating into the back of nowhere. If such ideas became mainstream beliefs then the damage they could cause would be immense. It could destroy the country.
No, but it could certainly destroy the careers and reputations of the people involved, I fail to see how that would be a bad thing - because some of them worked for the government? all the more reason - you have every right to know what the idiots you elected, and the idiots they hired, have been up to.
In this case, that particular conspiracy theory is neither right nor left, and as far as "anti-government", the entire justification for a government is to protect the rights of the individual - if it isn't doing that, its already destroyed - the "government" is just people, and we all know that not everybody is trustworthy.
It's your goddamn duty as an American not to trust the fucking government - that's why we have checks and balances and free speech, so you can get some idea what the hell is going on, because the second people think they can get away with shit, they will.
You seem to be essentially denying here hardcore conspiricism could cause serious destruction despite some significant indicators to the contrary. Thus we will never agree on this issue. I never said trust the government but I did say we shouldn't see the government as intensely evil either unless there is genuine cause and unproven conspiracy theories are not a sufficient reason to do so. BTW I'm not a "goddam American" - look up the info next to my profile.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
quote:
I think he comes up a bit short of messianic status, he's a shock jock, but like I said, he covers a lot of stories that get short, or no play in the mass media, more power to him.
His stories get little coverage in the mainstream media for good reason. Most are quite frankly nuts so no, definitely not “more power to him”. There needs to be more factual accountability for these people.
We agree on the accountability issue, we just disagree about which people should be held accountable and to whom, Jones is only accountable to his audience, in spite of your alarmism, he is not holding the lives of billions in his sweaty little hands, paranoia is not illegal.
How about Jones' "alarmism"? Could that be damaging? I think Jones is accountable to everyone in the US if he is putting damaging lies out there which are instilling undue fear in people of the authorities. Paranoia is not illegal but is it a good thing? Paranoia, the very word you use repeatedly, is by definition a fear or anxiety that is typically not warranted: "Paranoia is a thought process believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs concerning a perceived threat towards oneself." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoia
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
quote:
Sure, Conspiracies happens all the time, so what are you saying? Pretend it isn't there? If there are conspiracies, there will be conspiracy theories, you want to end conspiracy theories, end the conspiracies - not gonna happen, we'll have to keep limping along with all of it, one thing that doesn't change much is human nature.
I never implied we should pretend conspiracies never happen. It depends on what you mean by conspiracy. There is criminal conspiracy. That happens quite a lot. There are low level conspiracies that occur as a result of corruption, but that’s just people wishing to feather their nest rather than bring in grand plans covertly. There probably are higher level government conspiracies that do happen on occasion. Things like Watergate. It is the latter that conspiracy theorists see as happening all the time and they conflate it with corruption. Then they throw other elements into it such as fiendish desires to control or kill off the populace. They also integrate personal prejudice such as an unhealthy obsession over Jews. Now there is the internet this stuff can go viral which makes it extremely dangerous. Regardless of actual conspiracy, there will be conspiracy theories where there is radical doubt and certain kinds of hatred. We should encourage greater transparency and accountability in governance rather than going off the deep end and feverishly imagining the government is out to get us somehow.
But it is, always has been, since the dawn of time, that's what the American Revolution was all about, that's why the constitution was written the way it was written, because men wanted to be free of corrupt, arbitrary, fiat rule - it was a conspiracy - though in this case, it's a conspiracy that succeeded - and one that history remembers somewhat more fondly than it remembers others.
Yeah revolutions start as conspiracies and some are good but we're talking about a somewhat different phenomenon here.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
quote:
"When the government is honest, the people are simple, when the government is corrupt, the people are devious".
--Chinese aphorism.
Well I don’t know how much stock to put in a Chinese aphorism but many who live under pretty good governance yet are very dissatisfied with it. Our perception is just as much a factor if not more so.
People are never satisfied, there's always going to be drama queens, it's a way of getting attention - again, you are responsible for your perceptions, there is no final authority here other than the empirical evidence.
I disagree, I dfon't think we are responsible for our own perceptions. We can't knowingly shape he we wish to see the world. Perception is a complex mix of education, social background, upbringing etc. We can make an effort to educate and better ourselves but that is guaranteed to change our perceptions. I agree though that there is no final authority other than empirical evidence. And yet even when presented with it, many conspiricists simply reject it. This is one reason why I think it is unhealthy. One example would be Obama's birth cert, the veracity of which is still denied by many.
|
|
|
|
