Governments, World Banks, and Tin Foil Hats

[Steve Austin]

Okay, I think I've got it now: 128 is the break between Above Average and Competent. ERE ACTUAL is having some fun with us here, as 128 is 2^7; is Competent the 7th level? I haven't been paying attention to all the levels.
Recommend that someone who is close to 64 (2^6) posts run a similar experiment to see if that is the break between Average and Above Average.
Apparently there is no level higher than Competent, though perhaps ERE ACTUAL has reserved 256 (2^8) for the next level that he adds to the cul...I mean...community.

[Mo]

I'm coming up fast on 16, we'll see what happens...

[Matthew]

@Steve
That is hilarious! As I have come to realize that my posts on this subject has raised me from Above average to Competent:) I also wonder if I should be lowered to incompetent lest people think I know more than anyone else.

[jacob]

@Steve - I see you're checking the levels for signs of a conspiracy? Right on, commander! 256 is gonna blow your mind. Then you think you'll have made a mistake and wait for 512 thinking perhaps that someone has nefariously changed the rules---because someone actually did change the rules at 16. As 512 rolls around things are going to get really weird, because nothing happens. Then somewhat will happen around 1000, but it won't be 1024. Could the powers that be have made a math mistake. 2048 will confirm it. It doesn't. The binary theory has now failed 4 times in a row. But all along, there has been a secret message in this very post, that gave a clue to the levels.
@All - Go ahead, but don't go overboard with it. I consider it somewhat off-topic to the forum, but I'll allow off-topic stuff to a degree because of our ERE similarities makes it interesting to see what comes out of any discussion.
I think in most cases conspiracies are the attempt to ascribe the systemic behavior of many self-interested people and organizations to the machinations of a single and much smaller group because the latter is easier to understand. Systems theory (like many other abstract concepts) is anthropomorphisized to make it understandable. When things are complex is it usually possible to spin several different stories that will fit all known facts yet be completely different. Consider how many different religions exist, for example. Is there any use to this beyond giving "meaning"? Not really. Only if a theory has predictive powers is it useful.

[Matthew]

@Jacob
Always so intellectual. I would love to hear any thoughts you have on the subject? As Robert mentioned, I don't think it is all good for peoples psyche...

[JohnnyH]

Being informed might be depressing and negative for your psyche if you obsess on it... But what is the alternative; willful ignorance?
It would be a less complex existence if you could actually believe the nonsense on the TV.

[HSpencer]

@ All
I normally used the following in my study of CT:
THEORY
is greater than
FACTS
which result in
CONFUSION
which result in
UNFOUNDED ASSUMPTIONS
@ Steve
I may never earn COMPETENT so I think I am going to ask for a

meritorious promotion to that rank instead!

[murpheyw]

Shh! Did you hear that.

[Robert Muir]

Jacob, I was going to mention what you called the "Self-interested individuals" bit. When you have millions of humans, all looking out for number 1, you're going to have some very weird convergences. I liked your comparison of the belief in a god to belief in the Illuminati.
JohnnyH, there's being informed and then there's obsessing. I'm aware of the conspiracies, just as I'm aware of serial killers. It's possible for either one to have a direct influence on my quality of life, but I feel that possibility is remote and if it happens, all the knowledge in the world is unlikely to help deflect it.
Say, for the sake of argument, that there is an organization that is working toward a one-world government. If I knew for a fact that this organization existed, there's nothing I would do differently, either in isolation, or in collaboration with my fellow citizens.

[jacob]

@Matthew - Conspiracy theories get one thinking, but they get one thinking about the wrong things. It's a little bit like celebrity news that way. Personally, I know the terms, but it's not like I'm following them in detail. My 2c.

[JohnnyH]

@Robert: I agree... but serial killers are a very small threat. Numerically easy to dismiss. Governments are not. I have family that lived (and died) under the Nazis and the Soviets...
Loss of liberty is unsettling and it crosses my mind often in these war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength times.

[Marius]

I try to be careful with “conspiracy stuff”.
It’s good to be a critical thinker, to be careful what you accept as “probably the truth” and to check facts instead of just believing anything you read …
but that attitude shouldn’t only be used when reading MSM but also when reading conspiracy publications.
Now I’m NOT saying the conspiracy buffs here are gullible and uncritical, but I know some who definitely are. They’ll believe anything posted on a conspiracy site or told by a new age character. And the conspiracy sites I’ve seen, often seem to publish anything people throw at them as if it was the undisputed truth.
My personal impressions, badly summarized in the middle of the night:
- People with big economic interests want to network, and have clubs and associations, just like other types of people.
- There is a lot of lobbying going on in the developed world. By representants of economic interests, trade unions, consumer organisations, ecological organisations, etc. For a number of reasons the influence of economic interests can be particularly powerful. It’s logical that those who have the most to lose, try to protect their interests, but this can go too far and probably often does. It's becoming increasingly obvious.
- International cooperation can be very beneficial and is preferable to no cooperation (think cold war or a world where each country has its own technical standards, making commerce and plugging in your electrical devices during a trip impossible). Cooperation can gradually lead to regional or world governments. A world government is not inherently bad, but if it becomes oppressive, there’s nowhere to run… There have always been political refuguees who had to flee from their country, but how do you become a political refugee from earth? I’m not too worried about this, but if a world government would have unlimited powers and we’re unlucky it could become very unpleasant.
- Are there false flag operations? Almost certainly, but it’s difficult to recognize individual ones.
- Are there lizard people or "greys" on our planet? How should I know? As with God I suspect they don't exist, but have no idea how I could 100% exclude their existence.
- Is there a plan? It’s theoretically possible that the most influential people from the most influential associations are connected – it’s a small world and many sit in several of these things - and share a vision for the future. If that vision exists at all (beyond "we want closer cooperation"), it could be good or it could be evil or just egoistic. I have no idea, I’m not invited to their meetings.
SUMMARY OF MY OPINION: conspiracy theories aren’t automatically wrong or right. They usually seem hard to verify. A world government is a very delicate matter.

[Marius]

I wrote my previous message in a hurry in the middle of the night. I should have worded it differently, but can't edit it anymore.
A risk of conspiracy stuff is that it contributes to an "us versus them" mentality, which is maybe the single biggest cause of unpleasant situations/events in the world. That is one of the reasons I want to be careful with it. There's enough hate and fear in the world already.
Since 9/11 the world has lost a lot of freedom and privacy. Some may be pushing towards a big brother society on purpose, it's certainly a trend, but I'm not convinced that means there's a worldwide conspiracy.
I think disinformation is rampant, but not necessarily because of conspirations:
Governments probably can't afford to be up-front about the mess many of them are in, otherwise nobody would buy their debt anymore, panic would ensue and their currency would be destroyed. The markets react mercylessly each time a member of a government says something really negative about his own economy.
I suspect the financial markets are being manipulated. That doesn't require vast conspiracies, just watchdogs that aren't interested in causing trouble to powerful banks, and governments that hope the economy will recover if they manage to keep up appearances.
The economy needs consumers to consume, producers to produce and politicians want to be re-elected. Mainstream media are concentrated in few hands that aren't working in the public interest, but use them to keep the consumer consuming and make or break politicians. Doesn't require vast conspiracies, just self-interest and a system that allows this kind of situations.
NEW SUMMARY: conspiracy theories aren’t automatically wrong or right. They usually seem hard to verify. Never blindly trust information, consider the possibility that it's incorrect. Media and experts are probably usually biased. A world government could have great advantages, but lead to an utopian or dystopian world. Take care not to fall into the "us versus them" trap (not easy, I often fail), 'cause reality isn't black and white and hate and fear don't make the world a better place.

[Matthew]

Is anyone familiar with the works of Noam Chomsky? I have not read his books but I have seen a few things. His stuff is shocking because I don't believe that he's crazy (big eyed grin).

[Marius]

Hi Matthew, he looks like an interesting man.
I do cringe when I read that "He holds workers should own and control their own workplace". So if I'd build a company and would hire people, I'd have to share ownership and control with them? I would prefer that to be optional! I want to be the master of my destiny and if I pay people to help me with my plans, I don't necessarily want those people to change those plans.
"He describes himself as a socialist, specifically an anarcho-syndicalist, and is therefore strongly critical of "authoritarian" Marxist and/or Leninist and/or Maoist branches of socialism. He also believes that socialist values exemplify the rational and morally consistent extension of original unreconstructed classical liberal and radical humanist ideas to an industrial context. Specifically he believes that society should be highly organized and based on democratic control of communities and work places." (not really my cup of tea, but it sounds a lot better than authoritarian socialist regimes)
His Wikipedia page does mentions views that I like. Examples:

He claims double standards in a foreign policy preaching democracy and freedom for all, while promoting, supporting and allying itself with non-democratic and repressive organizations and states such as Chile under Augusto Pinochet, and argues that this results in massive human rights violations.

He has argued that the mass media in the United States largely serve as a propaganda arm and "bought priesthood" of the U.S. government and U.S. corporations, with the three parties all largely intertwined through common interests.

Chomsky opposes the U.S. global "war on drugs", claiming its language to be misleading, and referring to it as "the war on certain drugs." He favors drug policy reform, in education and prevention rather than military or police action as a means of reducing drug use.


How do you feel about him?

[Matthew]

I don't agree with all of his views. He pushes an ideal that in reality probably would not work for everyone because of the 5% who are bad seeds.
He reads many different languages so he is able to read both sides of world news stories so he is able to find out when our news is lying or ignoring things. He made me more aware of what I should have already known, that we shouldn't believe everything we see and read regarding news.
He has done a lot of public speaking and it appears a lot of people are interested in what he has to say (I know I was from the few documentaries, definitely recommended Netflix). He removed the vail on how the media can brainwash by just not reporting on issues. I would say he would make a very interesting 60 minute episode (if they didn't cut him down to 10). Since he says they have never given and will never give him more than 5-10 minutes to talk on TV, this makes everything he has to say about news appear more true in my opinion.

[Matthew]

Some great documentaries:
The Corporation

Why We Fight

Flow

Who killed the electric car
Disturbing but interesting (if you want to spend time thinking on the wrong things):
America: freedom to fascism

Fiat Empire

Occupation 101

Life and Debt

Endgame

The End of Suburbia

David Icke-Big Brother

Zeitgeist (Not really recommended...too disturbing)

[Matthew]

I really loved "King Corn"

[HSpencer]

@ The Dude
Try David Icke "And The Truth Shall Set You Free".
About David Icke. Lots of people think he is a nutcase. My question is how can a nutcase have such a technically accurate lock on history, not only US/UK but also World History? The guy has his odd moments in his books, but he is spot on when it comes to unraveling the way some things may have gone down.
Now, I have read three (3) of his books. The first one was "The Biggest Secret". I read it, digested it, and a few days after the digestion, I threw it in the dumpster. The second was "Lifting the Veil". I read/digested and pitched. But these books stick with you--you want to go and get them back out of the dumpster.

3d one was "And The Truth Shall Set You Free". I kept this for a reference book. I have used it as such numerous times when reading other books. He has something in this one.

David Icke???

You decide.

ps: I have not read "Big Brother" but may order it on your suggestion.

[Matthew]

These are actually movie documentaries. I don't know much about David's books. I am also not sure how strongly I suggest half of these documentaries as people mention that they get you thinking about the wrong things. If something is disturbing, and there is nothing you can do about what is disturbing you, then maybe we are better staying ignorant about these things?
However, I mention them for people who would like to be aware of issues/possibilities that are not brought up in most media.

I have always had the outlook that I would rather know something than not know it, but maybe this is not best for everyone. Especially if there is not much that can be done from the individual perspective. I do not think there are many actions we can take with some of the possible truth David mentions without the knowledge being widespread. I kept this thread going for the individuals who are interested in views different from the norm. While a lot of this stuff is most likely biased/fabricated information I find a lot of it interesting because it has a lot of stuff I have never heard about. Being interesting topics I find it strange I have never heard them before.
Probably because news is pretty much the same information from different channels like Noam Chomsky might indicate in "Manufacturing Consent"
A lot of this stuff is on Netflix. Other stuff is probably available free on the internet.