74 replies to this topic

[ComradeJ]

If you'd know their agenda, they'd be the worst secret society in history. Besides, you said it yourself, evil doesn't exist. It's just an opinion. Worth hearing them out, their ideas have lasted for 200 years, which is a lot longer than yours.

Maybe so, but we fought against fascism in World War II, now your saying accept it because of "their ideas" have survived. I mean what?

Fascists had they're time, and it failed. Nazi-fascism does not work, we've seen it.

But where was the fatal flaw? The leaders.
What fascism did manage to do in Germany was cause a piss-poor nation to grow into the most successful one for a decade. Economic boom, driven people. Objects to worship...
However, it is again that worshipped person that does the wrongs. Doesn't really matter if it was Hitler or Himmler or whoever, the Nazi leaders found it a good idea to commit mass genocide, invade other nations and what-not. Fascism didn't work because the idea was bad, the people behind it were. Same as with any government, it is the worshipped that turns the idea bad.

Yes, I could ever-so-easily rid the world of rapists, famines, wars and what-not if I just tried...

If you want peace then DON'T FIGHT. Its that ignorance that causes war. If yoiu want peace you can't fight for it. People are too taken in by the propaganda and bullshit and fight for any cause no matter if its left, right or center. Wars are manipulated but they can only happen if WE choose to fight them. Famines are also manipulated. A CIA scientist said that there is technology that can develop desert into lush land, they just don't use it. Why? Because the element of control until they need to use it. Rapists, people who usually had bad childhoods or truama which developed them into psychopaths, if not then there are many other explainations. I dislike the condemning laws. "You did this crime, now do the time." Its never "why did you commit this crime" and getting to understand the criminal and then from that knowledge trying to PREVENT similar crimes happening by eliminating the problem.

If you want peace then don't fight? Last time that policy was used was in the 1930's... Which didn't go especially well. Rather, it plunged the world into the greatest war we've seen so far

I'd like to see any evidence of this technology to turn deserts into lush lands. I'd imagine Texas would've 'magically' become a paradise if such a thing was possible.

I agree with you on crime, but you can't totally ban it by asking people why they did it. Sure, it's a bad childhood often, but not always... And bad childhoods are the cause of decentralisation =p !

Ah, well DX has a nice view on this, where this guy wants to implant everybody with nanites, so they can instantly communicate with eachother, sharing knowledge and forming the perfect democracy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Democracy doesn't exist in the real term, so how would that be possible?

Remember, it's a game. There's some huge AI who can manage all governmental functions, and if all people could instantly communicate with that, you'd have a perfect democracy. No need for a representative one.

Things like DX, 1984, the matrix, star wars and even Harry Potter don't exist simply because of "coincidence," there is so much symbolicness and philosophy within these films and games its ridiculous.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ridiculous? Stories without real-life background are ridiculous.

[Tom]

Fascists had they're time, and it failed. Nazi-fascism does not work, we've seen it.

But where was the fatal flaw? The leaders.
What fascism did manage to do in Germany was cause a piss-poor nation to grow into the most successful one for a decade. Economic boom, driven people. Objects to worship...
However, it is again that worshipped person that does the wrongs. Doesn't really matter if it was Hitler or Himmler or whoever, the Nazi leaders found it a good idea to commit mass genocide, invade other nations and what-not. Fascism didn't work because the idea was bad, the people behind it were. Same as with any government, it is the worshipped that turns the idea bad.

Exactly, so the point of a "global fascist state" wouldn't appeal to you.

If you want peace then don't fight? Last time that policy was used was in the 1930's... Which didn't go especially well. Rather, it plunged the world into the greatest war we've seen so far   

Your still being too small minded. To have stopped world war 2 the german army didn't have to fight and neither did the british. Problem solved. I mean on a more large collective scale, obviously this is far too idealistic but thats the truth. If you don't want war don't fight. The reason world war two happened is because of brainwashing and indoctrination. If the soldiers from both sides didn't want to fight because they themselves CHOSE not to, then the fighting couldn't happen. That is what i meant.

I'd like to see any evidence of this technology to turn deserts into lush lands. I'd imagine Texas would've 'magically' become a paradise if such a thing was possible.

Of course. So would I. I just stating what other "officials" have said. Research it otherwise. Again words can be misleading and i am going to accept lies can come from either "side" of this "conspiracy theory." As i said, only time can tell the truth because its too idealistic to believe people will stand up at this point in time and do something. Maybe a short time in the future, but not in a "confortable" position they won't. Ignorance is bliss only for a certain amount of time.

I agree with you on crime, but you can't totally ban it by asking people why they did it. Sure, it's a bad childhood often, but not always... And bad childhoods are the cause of decentralisation =p !

Of course you couldn't but i'm saying its a start. Bad childhoods are nothing to do with government? They are to do with ignorant people. Ignorance is lack of knowledge and if i wanted to ignorantly state something similar to yours i'd state: Knowledge is power, ignorance is lack of power, therefore lack of knowledge, therefore lack of wisdom, therefore centralisation by the knowledge being within the government. But i wouldn't say that because that is also an ignorant ideology that the government are to blame. Its the people themselves that have to accept responsibility and take power back if they wish to change society.

[

Remember, it's a game. There's some huge AI who can manage all governmental functions, and if all people could instantly communicate with that, you'd have a perfect democracy. No need for a representative one.

True, but then isn't that also dangerous? I-robot style?

Ridiculous? Stories without real-life background are ridiculous.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No i meant ridiculous in the philosophy based on suggested hidden agendas and potentiality of with holding parts of the truth within these games. Basically i'm saying if the agendas are real then they've been staring us in the face all this time through symbolical views and philosophy.

[ComradeJ]

Edit: Crap, what am I doing wrong now? Work, ye quoting system, work!

Exactly, so the point of a "global fascist state" wouldn't appeal to you.

Indeed, but neither does any other form of government. Democracy doesn't run amok when one leader goes totally like the wrong, but it's also sluggish, indecisive and corrupt. Fascism includes little care for people, militarism, and the likes, which I'm against.

Your still being too small minded. To have stopped world war 2 the german army didn't have to fight and neither did the british. Problem solved. I mean on a more large collective scale, obviously this is far too idealistic but thats the truth. If you don't want war don't fight. The reason world war two happened is because of brainwashing and indoctrination. If the soldiers from both sides didn't want to fight because they themselves CHOSE not to, then the fighting couldn't happen. That is what i meant.

Of course, if neither sides would have fought there'd have been no war. If you mean that you want the people to be so individualistic and a-nationalist (or whatever the opposite of nationalistic would be), that would mean a very weak state, ever so easily conquered by one state that does indoctrinate.
Like these days, where us Europeans don't want to go to war, and the Americans don't have any problems with that. Which of the two is mightier at the moment? Americans... Even if that might not last for long.
Problem is, you want a totally weak state, one that could easily be conquered and would provide little economic strength.

Ignorance is bliss only for a certain amount of time.

Men would rather believe a simple lie than a complex truth.
(I believe it was de Tocqueville who said that, but I've been reading about a lot of philosophers lately, so I could very well be wrong)

Of course you couldn't but i'm saying its a start. Bad childhoods are nothing to do with government? They are to do with ignorant people. Ignorance is lack of knowledge and if i wanted to ignorantly state something similar to yours i'd state: Knowledge is power, ignorance is lack of power, therefore lack of knowledge, therefore lack of wisdom, therefore centralisation by the knowledge being within the government. But i wouldn't say that because that is also an ignorant ideology that the government are to blame. Its the people themselves that have to accept responsibility and take power back if they wish to change society.

I do agree on your crime policy. Even if it would cost more money to both do investigation into causes of crime and lock people up (you have to admit, you can't let criminals fill in a form about their childhood and let them go after that), it could provide a much better future. If you look at the US, where they don't care about criminals at all and just sentence people to death, crime rates are much higher there.

True, but then isn't that also dangerous? I-robot style?

Not that I've been paying a lot of attention to I, Robot, but I could never figure out WHY exactly they wanted to prevent the Robot from becoming the benevolent ruler of the world...

No i meant ridiculous in the philosophy based on suggested hidden agendas and potentiality of with holding parts of the truth within these games. Basically i'm saying if the agendas are real then they've been staring us in the face all this time through symbolical views and philosophy.

Which makes me rather doubt it's as dark and evil as they say. Sure, it's an appealing story, evil people secretly ruling the world, but I think that's exactly what it is. An appealing story, and that's all the base it has. People would rather believe a simple lie than a complex truth. Complex truth being that there's not just some ev1l d00dz0rz who are to blame for everything that goes wrong...

Edited by ComradeJ, 09 December 2005 - 03:33 PM.

[Tom]

Indeed, but neither does any other form of government. Democracy doesn't run amok when one leader goes totally like the wrong, but it's also sluggish, indecisive and corrupt. Fascism includes little care for people, militarism, and the likes, which I'm against.

Yes, so the best form of government would be a decentralised free one. Your idea of democracy with a computer would be a good idea assuming it wasn't vulnerable.

Of course, if neither sides would have fought there'd have been no war. If you mean that you want the people to be so individualistic and a-nationalist (or whatever the opposite of nationalistic would be), that would mean a very weak state, ever so easily conquered by one state that does indoctrinate.

Yes true, but if every country was like that. There would be no government and everyone would live in peace.

Like these days, where us Europeans don't want to go to war, and the Americans don't have any problems with that. Which of the two is mightier at the moment? Americans... Even if that might not last for long.

Its difficult to come to such conclusions in times of deceit. They need to keep the european people happy to make europe a single state.

Problem is, you want a totally weak state, one that could easily be conquered and would provide little economic strength.

What is "economic"? Money doesn't even need to exist, its just another form of control to centralise the world power without people realising. Why do you think there is a "world bank"?

Men would rather believe a simple lie than a complex truth.

There is nothing complex about the truth. A simple lie can keep people happy until they realise the truth and think "oh shit, we are fucked." You'd rather live in universal deceit rather than a world based on truth and freedom?

I do agree on your crime policy. Even if it would cost more money to both do investigation into causes of crime and lock people up (you have to admit, you can't let criminals fill in a form about their childhood and let them go after that),

I never said that. I said they would be locked up but they would be helped whilst in prison, psychologically and mentally.

Not that I've been paying a lot of attention to I, Robot, but I could never figure out WHY exactly they wanted to prevent the Robot from becoming the benevolent ruler of the world...

Because no one knows what would happen next. It'll be a fascist state and you said you didn't support fascism? Seriously the robots might seem fine for a start, but when they begin to manufacture themselves it could so easily go wrong. I had a discussion with hooligan before about a similar idea. Man made machine. Man Killed man. Machine might end up mirroring man and killing machine and it all starts again.

Which makes me rather doubt it's as dark and evil as they say. Sure, it's an appealing story, evil people secretly ruling the world, but I think that's exactly what it is. An appealing story, and that's all the base it has. People would rather believe a simple lie than a complex truth. Complex truth being that there's not just some ev1l d00dz0rz who are to blame for everything that goes wrong...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its not complex, its more simple than the lie. I tried to understand the 9/11 official story and there was far too many inconsistences, just as the 7/7 official story. The simple lie is more complex than the complex truth.

[ComradeJ]

Indeed, but neither does any other form of government. Democracy doesn't run amok when one leader goes totally like the wrong, but it's also sluggish, indecisive and corrupt. Fascism includes little care for people, militarism, and the likes, which I'm against.

Yes, so the best form of government would be a decentralised free one. Your idea of democracy with a computer would be a good idea assuming it wasn't vulnerable.

Never said that decentralised government would be good. I don't see any good points of decentralisation.

Of course, if neither sides would have fought there'd have been no war. If you mean that you want the people to be so individualistic and a-nationalist (or whatever the opposite of nationalistic would be), that would mean a very weak state, ever so easily conquered by one state that does indoctrinate.

Yes true, but if every country was like that. There would be no government and everyone would live in peace.

Which would mean changing human nature... Good luck with that. People WANT centralisation.

Problem is, you want a totally weak state, one that could easily be conquered and would provide little economic strength.

What is "economic"? Money doesn't even need to exist, its just another form of control to centralise the world power without people realising. Why do you think there is a "world bank"?

"I'll trade with you. You give me a computer, I'll give you 50 cows"
"What do I need 50 cows for?"
"I don't care, I want a computer and all I have are cows!"

Face it, money provides such an advantage. Realise that in ye olde days, before conspiracies were even invented, only nations with a money-system would reach true prosperity. Throwing away the idea of money is, well, surreal.

Men would rather believe a simple lie than a complex truth.

There is nothing complex about the truth. A simple lie can keep people happy until they realise the truth and think "oh shit, we are fucked." You'd rather live in universal deceit rather than a world based on truth and freedom?

If that lie provides either happiness/prosperity/health, hell yes. I don't care much about truth or freedom if they don't do anything good for me.

I do agree on your crime policy. Even if it would cost more money to both do investigation into causes of crime and lock people up (you have to admit, you can't let criminals fill in a form about their childhood and let them go after that),

I never said that. I said they would be locked up but they would be helped whilst in prison, psychologically and mentally.

One point we agree on.

Not that I've been paying a lot of attention to I, Robot, but I could never figure out WHY exactly they wanted to prevent the Robot from becoming the benevolent ruler of the world...

Because no one knows what would happen next. It'll be a fascist state and you said you didn't support fascism? Seriously the robots might seem fine for a start, but when they begin to manufacture themselves it could so easily go wrong. I had a discussion with hooligan before about a similar idea. Man made machine. Man Killed man. Machine might end up mirroring man and killing machine and it all starts again.

Just don't install Windows on it.

Machine killing machine would be a rather odd idea, if all machines were connected. With one ubermachine, none could revolt or kill another. For as far as machines can be killed anyway.
Making it beneficial to humanity is just a way of programming. Program it to be nice, and it'll be nice. That's the difference. Don't mistake computers for plastic humans.

Which makes me rather doubt it's as dark and evil as they say. Sure, it's an appealing story, evil people secretly ruling the world, but I think that's exactly what it is. An appealing story, and that's all the base it has. People would rather believe a simple lie than a complex truth. Complex truth being that there's not just some ev1l d00dz0rz who are to blame for everything that goes wrong...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its not complex, its more simple than the lie. I tried to understand the 9/11 official story and there was far too many inconsistences, just as the 7/7 official story. The simple lie is more complex than the complex truth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, you believe that because it's so easy. "Evil Americans. Period" rather than a full history of both the US and Middle East you'd need to understand the real deal.

[Comrade Kal]

Actually the Americans have been evil in plenty of other places. Chiefly, South America.

The main point decentralisation are that the government is on a scale comprehensible to it's citizens. The communist state was supposed to be basically a collection of city-states, as organising something like communism is much easier on a local rather than mass scale.

[Tom]

Never said that decentralised government would be good. I don't see any good points of decentralisation.

Make up your mind then. What do you want? Fascism which is basically the mass centralisation we are seeing today or do you want a world where every man women and child is free to experience what the hell they like, WHICH IS PRIMARILY the reason we live on this planet, spiritual experience and where everyone is responsible of themselves.

I think your underestimating the level of centralisation that i'm talking about. I'm talking about where privacy no longer exists and "the state" knows everything about you 1984 style.

Which would mean changing human nature... Good luck with that.

?? Since when does living free and making your own decisions mean changing "human nature." Your pulling shit from your arse as you go along. Thats called "spin"

People WANT centralisation.

Just because you WANT centralisation it doesn't mean its best for people. Fascism is dicating what people want and that indeed is centralisation. You gotta let people make up their own mind, currently they are not. They are being manipulated by fear into this world state. If they told the truth and said, yes terrorism is bullshit, we are using it to manipulate you into a fascist world state do you think people would stand for that? No. Everything has to be kept quiet and people have to be manipulated with problem-reaction-solution.

"I'll trade with you. You give me a computer, I'll give you 50 cows"
"What do I need 50 cows for?"
"I don't care, I want a computer and all I have are cows!"

The only way an economy can work effectively is if its purely decentralised and free. You got a world bank and massive centralisation of the economy, you got power over everyone. Decentralise the economy so money is more free and people can get better jobs. I was simply saying economys are manmade, they are not essential for life, but obviously money needs to be freer so people can be freer.

If that lie provides either happiness/prosperity/health, hell yes. I don't care much about truth or freedom if they don't do anything good for me.

Ignorance is bliss but only for so long. You'll care one day i expect, if you got your house getting trashed and search every day withour warrents or people are getting hauled off for thinking for themselves and being "thought criminals." Truth and freedom is far more important than any illusions my friend, simply because all that exists is infinity and therefore there is infinite truth, love and wisdom. Why not have that freely?

Machine killing machine would be a rather odd idea, if all machines were connected. With one ubermachine, none could revolt or kill another. For as far as machines can be killed anyway.
Making it beneficial to humanity is just a way of programming. Program it to be nice, and it'll be nice. That's the difference. Don't mistake computers for plastic humans.

But Irobot wasn't about that. It showed a robot with emotion and that would sooner or later be developed too. When you have emotion, it shows people get carried away, get high on it but also use ikt for initution.

Yeah, you believe that because it's so easy. "Evil Americans. Period" rather than a full history of both the US and Middle East you'd need to understand the real deal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I see what you mean, but thats only the buildup over years of our ignorance. WE can only blame ourselves. I'm sure if you researched it you'd find it goes back thousands and thousands of years to ancient bloodlines.

[ComradeJ]

Never said that decentralised government would be good. I don't see any good points of decentralisation.

Make up your mind then. What do you want? Fascism which is basically the mass centralisation we are seeing today or do you want a world where every man women and child is free to experience what the hell they like, WHICH IS PRIMARILY the reason we live on this planet, spiritual experience and where everyone is responsible of themselves.

Opinion.

I think your underestimating the level of centralisation that i'm talking about. I'm talking about where privacy no longer exists and "the state" knows everything about you 1984 style.

99/100 people in 1984 loved the way they were living.

Which would mean changing human nature... Good luck with that.

?? Since when does living free and making your own decisions mean changing "human nature." Your pulling shit from your arse as you go along. Thats called "spin"

Hey, centralisation is needed. People go to groups, and that's not just because the reptillians tell them to do so...

People WANT centralisation.

Just because you WANT centralisation it doesn't mean its best for people. Fascism is dicating what people want and that indeed is centralisation. You gotta let people make up their own mind, currently they are not. They are being manipulated by fear into this world state. If they told the truth and said, yes terrorism is bullshit, we are using it to manipulate you into a fascist world state do you think people would stand for that? No. Everything has to be kept quiet and people have to be manipulated with problem-reaction-solution.

But they'll centralise eventually! You can't have anarchism, people would form groups and overthrow all the non-grouped people. C'est impossible. People are too stupid to make up their own mind. If you told them that they were being manipulated, it would only result in violence. Doesn't really matter against who.

"I'll trade with you. You give me a computer, I'll give you 50 cows"
"What do I need 50 cows for?"
"I don't care, I want a computer and all I have are cows!"

The only way an economy can work effectively is if its purely decentralised and free. You got a world bank and massive centralisation of the economy, you got power over everyone. Decentralise the economy so money is more free and people can get better jobs. I was simply saying economys are manmade, they are not essential for life, but obviously money needs to be freer so people can be freer.

Oh, so now we DO need money...?

If that lie provides either happiness/prosperity/health, hell yes. I don't care much about truth or freedom if they don't do anything good for me.

Ignorance is bliss but only for so long. You'll care one day i expect, if you got your house getting trashed and search every day withour warrents or people are getting hauled off for thinking for themselves and being "thought criminals." Truth and freedom is far more important than any illusions my friend, simply because all that exists is infinity and therefore there is infinite truth, love and wisdom. Why not have that freely?

I don't believe either truth, wisdom or freedom exist, but currently I'm too lazy to explain. Let's just say your priorities are those that modern society preaches... Typical?

Yeah, you believe that because it's so easy. "Evil Americans. Period" rather than a full history of both the US and Middle East you'd need to understand the real deal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I see what you mean, but thats only the buildup over years of our ignorance. WE can only blame ourselves. I'm sure if you researched it you'd find it goes back thousands and thousands of years to ancient bloodlines.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Partially our fault, partially inevitable.

This post was rather short because I don't have the time right now...

[Tom]

99/100 people in 1984 loved the way they were living.

Because life seemed easy for them, but if they knew the truth they would not have. Thats the whole point. Its a mirror. Again, as you said with the quote above, its down to opinion

Hey, centralisation is needed. People go to groups, and that's not just because the reptillians tell them to do so...

Groups is not centralisation. Centralisation is when people give their power away, not always willingly, hence why there are protests and then the protests get banned in order to centralise power more and arrest anyone under the veil of ignorance amongst the people. Centralisation is dangerous, thats by view, yet your you, you can believe what you like.

But they'll centralise eventually!

Who is they? Centralisation only happens because people are ignorant and misguided by the story. They give too much trust and responsibility to their governments and the governments lie and abuse that responsibility/power.

You can't have anarchism, people would form groups and overthrow all the non-grouped people.

Not if everyone has the knowledge of their rights and respects everyones rights. If a group attempts that people would just remove them and it isn't physically possible. You cannot physically control people, only mentally.

C'est impossible. People are too stupid to make up their own mind.

Whos problem is that? if they had the knowlegde they would make up their own mind. Thats why i say give them the knowledge and then ALLOW them to choice what they want. Don't do it for them otherwise thats fascism. You can't allow people to choose if they don't know theres a choice. Thats how the veil of ignorance is sprung and then abused. People then say "but i didn't know." Its their own fault, i do agree, but its so difficult to access any information nowadays, hence the conspiracy theories.

If you told them that they were being manipulated, it would only result in violence. Doesn't really matter against who.

It depends, it doesn't have too, but yes it would. Do you think when i say Civil War in america is the only way people will get their power back, that would be the same anywhere. Why is that? Its because people are too "plugged into the matrix", blinded by the illusion to bother with anything else. Most people wouldn't want too. People dislike radical change because they fear it. FEAR again. FEAR is the most powerful control to people. In the future we will no longer FEAR the New World Order, why? Because people will understand it and see what is happening. If it exists, it will become more apparent as time goes on, hence why i say "Time will tell." Why is this? More the centralise power, the more power you have to centralise even more, so it picks up speed. When they start speeding up, jsut as they have after 9/11, people will begin to wake upto it.

[

Oh, so now we DO need money...?

No. You don't need any form of money to SURIVE. But i do agree that money is a good concept if used in the correct way and not controlled. If you control it, people have no freedom.

I don't believe either truth, wisdom or freedom exist, but currently I'm too lazy to explain. Let's just say your priorities are those that modern society preaches... Typical?

Wisdom is learning from experience, of course it exists, truth is difficult nowadays because theres too much deceit. Freedom comes when people realise they are themselves and exist as themselves. They are nothing else. Just Self.

[

Partially our fault, partially inevitable.

No such thing as inevitiablity. Only cause and effect.

[ComradeJ]

99/100 people in 1984 loved the way they were living.

Because life seemed easy for them, but if they knew the truth they would not have. Thats the whole point. Its a mirror. Again, as you said with the quote above, its down to opinion

They don't know the truth and they're happy. I don't see the problem. They're HAPPY!

Hey, centralisation is needed. People go to groups, and that's not just because the reptillians tell them to do so...

Groups is not centralisation. Centralisation is when people give their power away, not always willingly, hence why there are protests and then the protests get banned in order to centralise power more and arrest anyone under the veil of ignorance amongst the people. Centralisation is dangerous, thats by view, yet your you, you can believe what you like.

Isn't grouping giving power away? Letting the group decide part of your life, in return for pow0r and 1337ness?

But they'll centralise eventually!

Who is they? Centralisation only happens because people are ignorant and misguided by the story. They give too much trust and responsibility to their governments and the governments lie and abuse that responsibility/power.

They are the people.
I agree with you on this, but I don't see decentralisation as the answer. If you give power to a government, it can build infrastructure, give regulations to ensure people have a minimum wage, and the likes.

You can't have anarchism, people would form groups and overthrow all the non-grouped people.

Not if everyone has the knowledge of their rights and respects everyones rights. If a group attempts that people would just remove them and it isn't physically possible. You cannot physically control people, only mentally.

Yeah, people respecting other people's right, just out of themselves. Not possible, I'd say.

C'est impossible. People are too stupid to make up their own mind.

Whos problem is that? if they had the knowlegde they would make up their own mind. Thats why i say give them the knowledge and then ALLOW them to choice what they want. Don't do it for them otherwise thats fascism. You can't allow people to choose if they don't know theres a choice. Thats how the veil of ignorance is sprung and then abused. People then say "but i didn't know." Its their own fault, i do agree, but its so difficult to access any information nowadays, hence the conspiracy theories.

People have lots of chances to learn stuff, and this is not just political. Like in Jorg topic, half of the people don't know how long the Earth takes to revolve around the sun. Ask them about famous philosophers, people who are supposed to know a lot about life, and they'll only name names. Ask people what exactly the political parties of their countries want, and they'll have no idea. People are stupid, I've come to realise. Check the spelling on the forums for example.

If you told them that they were being manipulated, it would only result in violence. Doesn't really matter against who.

It depends, it doesn't have too, but yes it would. Do you think when i say Civil War in america is the only way people will get their power back, that would be the same anywhere. Why is that? Its because people are too "plugged into the matrix", blinded by the illusion to bother with anything else. Most people wouldn't want too. People dislike radical change because they fear it. FEAR again. FEAR is the most powerful control to people. In the future we will no longer FEAR the New World Order, why? Because people will understand it and see what is happening. If it exists, it will become more apparent as time goes on, hence why i say "Time will tell." Why is this? More the centralise power, the more power you have to centralise even more, so it picks up speed. When they start speeding up, jsut as they have after 9/11, people will begin to wake upto it.

Then I ask you, what was the problem in The Matrix? 99/100 LOVED the Matrix, didn't WANT to be plugged out. Seriously, because it's not like our current state you shouldn't immediatly dismiss it as bad.

I don't believe either truth, wisdom or freedom exist, but currently I'm too lazy to explain. Let's just say your priorities are those that modern society preaches... Typical?

Wisdom is learning from experience, of course it exists, truth is difficult nowadays because theres too much deceit. Freedom comes when people realise they are themselves and exist as themselves. They are nothing else. Just Self.

What is truth? How can you determine if something is true?

[

Partially our fault, partially inevitable.

No such thing as inevitiablity. Only cause and effect.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The cause being human nature, making it rather inevitable.

[Comrade Kal]

Total decentralisation is bad (until a country is completely ready for it), but total centralisation is even worse.

Also, in 1984, it was mostly a facade, as people regularly got killed because their children reported what they said in their sleep.

It's like, if you were locked in a 5foot by 5foot room and fed bread and water, and told that everybody else lived in 2 foot by 2 foot rooms and weren't fed at all, you'd think you lived in comparable luxury. You wouldn't know there was a world outside, wouldn't know there were other foods and drinks rather than bread and water.

So long as there is centralisation, particularly on a global scale, someone will have the world in the palm of his hand.

[Blodo]

Still centralisation is always needed at some scale. For example all heavy industries, war factories, food production should be in the hands of the government. First of all a government has to be sure they don't exploit their citizens too much therefore the prices will almost always be reasonable, and with a virtual monopoly the quality of the goods wont drop in the idiot race for a lower price (vide today where we literally eat shit, even though for a lower price. People dont have money because they earn less in factories so as to make cheaper products so products with higher quality are outbought compared to the products with lower quality. Given time the lower quality products will be the high standard and slowly outclassed by even lower quality products and so on. It is one of the main reasons why capitalism is a system that is eating itself away slowly.). If the citizens are living badly, it reflects on the overall economy on the country, whereas it wouldnt impact the corporation as much - if at all.
Private-owned shops can in turn be allowed to process resources (such as producing bread production from government owned wheat and other resources needed) and governing services (such as public cinemas, bars, shops, whatever).

Capitalism needs to fall, for the good of the people. What i wrote above is the future, people just need to be introduced with that.

[Comrade Kal]

Quite, but nationalisation should be decentralisation, because they should go to the people rather than the government.

[MSpencer]

If you decentralize and take power away from a strong central government, you send your country the way of the dinosaurs and Bolsheviks. It doesn't work because you're chopping the legs off of your country and then you have to deal with the people and the rest of the world telling it to run a marathon. Without the government, scientific research would grind to a halt (No taxes + no government = no grants + no money) save for some select few vital companies which have the financial means. The military would go into disarray (No taxes + no government = no wages + no new hardware + no reenlistment + no money) and leave the entire country open to attack, unless you want to go the way of the Bolsheviks and give one person a rifle, another ammunition, and send them charging against tanks... Commerce would also stop (No taxes + no government = no government assistance = no exports + high reliance on imports = no money) because the government is currently keeping a ton of companies afloat with aid. When companies fold, also, they cannot honor pensions, so you'd create slums of poor retirees in addition to current low to no income populations. Also, don't respond to one sentence in this. If you're going to respond make it a response, and don't twist my words.
Also for clarification, government means a central, federal government.

Edited by MSpencer, 18 December 2005 - 11:24 PM.

[LeninT34]

If there is a state there is no freedom... there is freedom there is no state.
-Vladimir Lenin