Gender and racial discrimination, exploitation and so forth are only effects. The real problem is that it is possible to suppress the people with false Science or false descriptions of the world; that supports Might Is Right. Or like this. We are not genuine citizens.
This is an example in the upcoming Section Two - Discover and Dissolve The Hidden Slave Rules - check the Teaser
...
It
is difficult to find eye openers that clearly show the Western trick of
how Dictatorship is called Democracy; as it usually demands lots of
explanations and backgrounds.
But this example is the perfect eye opener.
And from there it is easy to get how the same pattern is used in all other questions.
This
example shows how a minister, in a nation that is usually recognised as
so called Democratic openly rejects a petition made by thousands of
healthcare professionals.
And then became the rejection the same as Democracy and a guarantee of perfect healthcare provided by the political élite.
…
the petition that is made is a repetition of a dark picture that does
not fit what Swedish healthcare and hospitals actually delivers, …
The
petition was written and managed by the medical doctors (or then
possible students) Lollo Makdessi and Märit Halmin and was published in
the Swedish medical journal Läkartidningen, owned by the Swedish Medical
Association / Sveriges Läkarförbund, under the headline “Petition by
Medical professionals for a better healthcare/ Läkarupprop för en bättre sjukvård”, Läkartidningen, 19 June 2013.
So, the background, arguments and the organisation of the petition was for sure well founded.
The
rejection by the minister was the end of a promising process. And of
course all major Swedish news media presented the Minister’s perspective
without any direct or concrete questions.
The demands of the
political élite in this affair become the only possible official truth
and the petition was accordingly regarded as an unnecessary disturbance
of the only correct order.
And from here is it somewhat simple to
grasp that the citizens are not able to get in a concrete or systematic
manner how they are fooled.
Because the Westerners whole
Understanding of Life and the World are sabotaged so they cannot grasp
HOW they are fooled in a concrete or systematic manner.
And the area that is all about how to Understand Life and the World is of course called Science.
Here
is must be underlined that the real role of the massmedia is also
exposed here; to show the citizens what they must Accept and Obey.
Or like this. The message to the citizens was: Do not make any petitions as we will condemn you!
How So Called Science Creates the Illusion of Democracy
A
fast, simple and accurate explanation of what is called Science in the
current Western culture is that it is according to this false Science;
that the perspective of the Ruler or the political élite is the same as
the truth or what is called Objective.
Whereas the perspectives
of the citizens are called Subjective and is in a formal aspect
worthless compared to the perspective of the Ruler.
This means
when the victims are trained to take for granted that this false Science
is the true perspective of Life and the World are there no concrete
possibilities to say anything against the decisions of the Ruler; than
perhaps to complain in vain.
Consequently could the minister
reject the petition in full accordance with the current accepted
traditions of so called Science and so called Democracy.
Where Democracy
in practice means to choose between preselected candidates in
general elections.
So, it is this usually Hidden relation between
the formal perspectives of Objective and Subjective that makes it
possible for the political class to command and control their victims as
they want.
In practice this means that propaganda about, for
example, Science, Democracy and Freedom are directed to the Subjective
perspective.
And when the victims wants or needs to use what is
promised in the propaganda; it is always possible for the Ruler or the
political élite to restrict and condemn the perspective of the citizens.
To
comprehend and Dissolve the tradition of Objective and Subjective you
need to at first go one level up in order to study the tradition of
Dualism that guarantees that the Ruler is always Right.
And then
you need to take one more step upwards to grasp the whole tradition of
Platonism, that is the formal name of this restricted worldview, and
then you will be able to Dissolve the tyranny.
And for sure, as
The Hidden Slave Rules are protected by to be called Science it is also
possible for the political class to reject any form of protest against
the terror of Platonism.
But please remember the problem is not the politicians; the problem is the false Science that legitimises the ongoing terror.
In
the upcoming Section Two are all the main relations regarding Objective
and Subjective as well as Dualism presented as the fourth Slave Rule in
Key № 6 The Hidden Six Slave Rules Called Science.
Check the Teaser with lot of usually Hidden relations.
And in Section One are all relations as a kind of exploration.
Section
Two will be a platform to FIGHT, DEFEAT and DISSOLVE the Academic cult
that fool the Westerners with corrupt Science in order to suppress and
exploit the People.
A major pattern in the current Western culture of Platonism and the teachings of the Academic cult is that the People must not be able to grasp the fundamentals of Dictatorships.
Or like this. In Platonism must Dictatorships as well as Democracy be mystical as Platonism is based on to trick the People that Open or Hidden Dictatorships is the Natural order of the society or human organisations.
Or like this. In Platonism are The People trained to worship political Authority in order to reject real Science or that what can be proved to be true must rule.
It is simply so that there is a hypnotic attraction to be allowed to Openly worship political Authority or a Dictator for people that are trained to worship political Authority in a Hidden manner.
At least this is a valid description of the results of The Third Wave experiment when you have some insights of Platonism.
... many of the kind of aspirations, the ideas that are encouraged at business schools, are essentially about obedience rather than creativity and insolence.
The quote above by Martin Parker as well as the headline of this post are from the BBC show presented below.
The core of Parker's critique against business schools is identical with what I say about the whole Academic cult.
Or to be precise. The effects of the Hidden worldview of Platonism, promoted by the Academics, that I demonstrate in Section One are identical with Parker's distinct perspective regarding the business schools.
It is simply so that any systematic and truly independent study of any Academic topic will result in the same kind of critique.
Parker in BBC's Business Matters
The Long Read in The Guardian
Parker's Book
My Comments
Closely Related Posts
Parker in BBC's Business Matters
Here follows a condensed part of the BBC show Business Matters 18 May 2018 where Parker is interviewed by the host Fergus Nicoll (Wikipedia/Twitter).
Parker:
I don’t think business schools are helping at all; largely because they are not addressing the huge challenges that face the human race on this planet.
Business schools are largely complicit in reproducing the kind of economic system that we have a present and that means they're not really attending to questions of, for example, carbon emission, climate change and so on let alone ideas about social justice and equality and so on.
This effectively means I think that Business schools are actually quite dangerous institutions that preventing us from making the kind of social economic changes that we needs to in order to survive as a species on this planet.
Nicoll:
Dangerous that's a pretty strong word. We will come back to that in a second Martin. What to undergraduates, what to post graduates say when they come to the faculty? What are the reasons they give for signing up for business? Signing up maybe for an MBA?
Parker:
… It's fairly clear that they've would rather have done physics or the history of art or something like that. They're really picking business and management because they think it's a safe choice and nothing more.
Nicoll:
Can you teach entrepreneurship, for example, I'm willing to bet a lot of the world's most successful start-ups; their protagonist did not go to business school?
Parker:
… Indeed I think you can argue that schools of business and management are really much better at teaching people to be corporate drones than they ought to be entrepreneurs.
Because many of the kind of aspirations, the ideas that are encouraged at business schools, are essentially about obedience rather than creativity and insolence.
So I don't think that, say you know, the idea of an entrepreneur sits very easily with the rather regimented attitude within the business school.
Nicoll:
Conversely, Martin, would it be fair to bet that most of the boardrooms in the banks and companies that precipitated the global financial crisis was stuffed with business qualifications?
Parker:
Yeah, I think that is really true. There is certainly a great deal of evidence that many MBA qualified individuals go out and do enormous harm.
That's not to say that everybody with an MBA is necessarily immoral, corrupt or stupid or anything.
But certainly doing business qualifications doesn't seem to prevent people from doing that doing daft things.
And we know about corporate scandals and so on. Enron, for example, is a classic example of somewhere that was being celebrated as a fantastic organization run by highly qualified managers and then proved to be nothing more than a tissue of lies and corruption; this is not an unusual story.
Listen to the full interview and the following short discussion with
26:39 in the online version that includes the news
25:25 in the podversion
The Long Read in The Guardian
Why we should bulldoze the business school, There are 13,000 business schools on Earth. That’s 13,000 too many. And I should know – I’ve taught in them for 20 years. Martin Parker, The long read, The Guardian, 27 April 2018.
This is one of Parker's best formulations in The long read.
… the assumption that human behaviour – of employees, customers, managers and so on – is best understood as if we are all rational egoists. This provides a set of background assumptions that allow for the development of models of how human beings might be managed in the interests of the business organisation. Motivating employees, correcting market failures, designing lean management systems or persuading consumers to spend money are all instances of the same sort of problem. ...
Parker’s Book
Martin Parker’s book, Shut Down the Business School!: An insider’s account of what’s wrong with management education, was published earlier in 2018.
On the publishers site you can read the beginning of the first chapter.
Here is the contents.
Introduction
1. What Goes on In Business Schools?
2. Teaching Capitalism
3. What's Wrong with Management?
4. What's Wrong with the Business School?
5. The Business School and the University
6. What is 'Management' Anyway?
7. The School for Organising
8. The Politics of Organising
9. What Do Students Want?
10. The Business School of Tomorrow
This review that is written from the perspective of cooperative organisation.
From my perspective it is possible to transfer the core of Parker's Excellent critique to the Dimension of Platonism or to a critique against the whole Academic cult.
Business schools are of course a branch of the Academic cult and Platonism.
Accordingly it is the whole Academic field that is dangerous not just the business schools. Or it is not just the business schools that produce “corporate drones”; the main objective of the Academic cult is to produce citizen drones.
So to scrap or remake only the business schools will not have any effect whatsoever.
What is needed is to dissolve Platonism and the Academic cult.
However, to reach to the point where many realise what Platonism is all about there is a need of the kind of specific critique that Parker delivers.
Or like this. In the spring of 2018 have the major promoters of Platonism the BBC and The Guardian been forced to at least accept that there is a need to talk about that a large part of the Academic terror is not acceptable.
This means hopefully that the unconditional surrender of the Academic cult is not so far away.
I will soon publish the first chapters of Section Two, Promo, of my book.
I have had reflections from many perspectives of what is the very best thing to say before.
Because this section can be a burden if you do not follow what I try to say and especially for them that has not read the first section.
So, my answer is: Listen, read and reflect on Steve Jobs commencement speech from 2005.
About Jobs' Speech
In a way are Jobs' messages not just directed to the graduates that day in 2005; as his words can be understood as a prelude to our new culture.
For sure this is not an especially original conclusion.
Jobs' words are essential as he is recognised as successful in today’s Western culture; a culture he, more or less, openly disliked.
The undeniable and brutal fact is that Jobs rejected the Academic perspective to be able to establish his own path.
It must be observed that Jobs had no clear understanding of Dynamic relations, for example, he says.
...
Again, you can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backward. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something — your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life.
...
These relations are simply not true as, for example, to be able to write depends on the Dynamic capacity to know in advance HOW TO MAKE the connections.
That Dynamic relations are not acknowledged to be real, concrete or systematic depends only on the Static ideals of the Academic cult.
Accordingly Jobs was forced, like all other Western victims, to replace the Hidden Dynamic relations with Spirituality.
Observe I have nothing against Spirituality; but the confusion that makes it impossible to grasp simple Dynamic relations as concrete.
Jobs Was a Flip-Flopper
Here is short and amusing video where Tim Cook gives ample proof of that Jobs had a somewhat concrete understanding of Dynamic relations.
Cook says.
… he was the best person in the world about doing this. He would flip on something so fast that you would forget that he was the person that was taking the 180 degree polar position on it the day before. … It was an art. You could never know that he thought the opposite. … I saw it daily. I saw it daily. This is a gift. This is a gift, because things do change, and it takes courage to change and courage to say, ‘I am now wrong. Maybe I was right before. But maybe not. Maybe I was never right”. It takes courage to do that and I think he had that.
The Hidden Static Demands
The correct judgement, according to the current Western culture, of Steve Jobs without the slimy Propaganda must be like this.
Jobs was a sloppy daydreamer as he did not care about Logic and always changed his mind.
He was confined to a fantasy world, that consisted of un-real things; things that don't yet exist.
Therefore he could not handle to study or a real job where he had to obey correct Static facts and superiors.
Such bastards like Jobs must accordingly be taken out by a responsible Authorities before they create an unruly disorder.
Thankfully are most of these un-humans suppressed by teachers in the schools and driven to be outcasts by responsible citizens.
But we must be better. That Jobs created several businesses are sad evidences of moral decline.
They who go against the Static order of the Nature and believe that they are creators – like gods – must be eliminated in order to save the Academic cult and the Western system of total suppression and exploitation of every citizen.
Everyone must feel the hopelessness of to exist in their bones!
But, Arcade Fire says it much better from the other side of the compact terror.
... God, make me famous
If you can't just make it painless
Just make it painless
It goes on and on, I don't know what I want
…
Born in a diamond mine
It's all around you but you can't see it
...
The white lie of American prosperity
We wanna dance but we can't feel the beat
...
If sanity and insanity exist, how shall we know them? …
Regrettably did he not ask this question a strict systematic manner as he was a part of the Academic tradition where fundamental questions cannot be asked, or answered, in a strict systematic or concrete manner (as Dynamic relations must be mystical).
And of course Rosenhan's basic question remains unanswered and the idea of "insanity" is still one of the core ideas of the Academic cult that continues to control your life in every aspect.
Nearly half a century after its publication, the Rosenhan experiment has left a lasting impression on psychiatry.
...
So, it is perhaps time to put the question, What is Insanity?, in a strict systematic manner.
Because then will this concrete question be used to dissolve the Academic cult as well as the current Western culture of total terror; as the answer has of course nothing to do with real Science or to help the individual citizen.
Italian artist Maurizio Cattelan (b.1960) is known as the art world’s agent provocateur, using what seem to be stunts to address universal
themes around the nature of dogma, power and death. ...
These two recent events highlight that the final step - to openly talk about that our understanding of Life and the World is restricted by hidden religious taboos - is probably immanent.
Because real Art is about to Demonstrate what we not yet are able to define or demonstrate; even if this Dynamic relation cannot be concrete in the current Western culture.
So, when Art highlights, in a striking manner what usually is hidden; is the next step to openly talk about what is on the other side and the restrictions to get there.
The brilliant animation of the Propaganda model, that demonstrates how the political élite and their massmedia keep the people in a false reality where the People can only Accept how it is and Obey, is published by Al Jazeera English’s media analysis show The Listening Post.
This is the first post in a series about the perspectives and work of the linguist and political activist Noam Chomsky.
Chomsky can easily be said to be the most prominent radical critic of the current Western culture.
I will give the basics, present the best videos that I have found and I will also try to explain Chomsky's arguments from the perspective of Platonism.
This post will be changed/updated as some of the material will be placed in later posts.
Contents of this Post
The Decisive Difference Between Chomsky and Me
Propaganda and Platonism
Public Opinion by Walter Lippmann
Manufacturing Consent by Chomsky and Herman
The Propaganda Model
Communism in the USA and the Concept Flak
Noam Chomsky on Manufacturing Consent – Video
More Links
The Decisive Difference Between Chomsky and Me
I demonstrate how the People of the West are forced into servitude by Platonism that in practice are hidden religious dogmas; proclaimed to be, for example, Reason or Science.
Chomsky says that the People are forced to servitude and does not, what I know of so far, present any main reason or method, except the passion of total power and money, for how this suppression is accomplished.
The People can be fooled by Propaganda because they have been trained to take for granted that to understand is the same as to Accept and Obey or to Worship authority.
Accordingly can the People not ask for Cause, Effect and Context as concrete understanding is outside of to Worship authority.
Or like this.
The study of Propaganda as well as the Propaganda model is at first concrete and systematic when you know the basics of Platonism and the Dualistic ideal that is integrated in Platonism.
Here is a brief explanation.
The current Western culture is based on the ideal or worldview that is formally called Platonism.
Platonism means in practice that only what the Ruler or the ruling elite demands is concrete or real; whereas the perspectives of the people is unreal or mystical.
The desired effect is, of course, that whatever you say that is not according to the official perspective can be rejected.
The formal definition of this function is that the current Western culture is based on the Dualistic principle or Dualism where the demands of the Ruler is in the Positive position whereas the perspective of the people is the Negative position.
This means that Propaganda is to actively use the Negative position where the Peoples hopes and fears can be manipulated (without any connection to what actually can be proved or demonstrated).
Accordingly can, for example, the Propaganda promotes Diversity when the formal rules, at the same time, demand Conformity. The result is that the victims are forced to believe that Conformity is the same as Diversity; as the hard or concrete demands of the Positive position decides in the real world.
All in all. Propaganda, in the current Western culture, can promise whatever as there are no concrete relations between the propaganda and what they force you to think and do.
It can also be said that the very existence of Propaganda is a powerful evidence of the importance of Imagination; and the reason why you are forbidden to understand the concrete functions of Imagination.
Public Opinion by Walter Lippmann
The concept “the manufacture of consent” was coined by Walter Lippmann (1889–1974) in his book Public Opinion published in 1922.
Herman and Chomsky say the following in the Preface of Manufacturing Consent.
...
The social importance of propaganda in what Walter Lippmann referred to as the "manufacture of consent" has long been recognized by writers on public opinion, propaganda, and the political requirements of social order. ...
Here follows a part of the text, of Public Opinion, where “the manufacture of consent” is mentioned the first time and that is at the end of Chapter XV – Leaders and the Rank and File (Rank and File is the workers not the leaders).
I have broken up the text in more paragraphs here to make it easier to read.
…
The established leaders of any organization have great natural advantages. They are believed to have better sources of information. The books and papers are in their offices. They took part in the important conferences. They met the important people. They have responsibility.
It is, therefore, easier for them to secure attention and to speak in a convincing tone. But also they have a very great deal of control over the access to the facts. Every official is in some degree a censor. And since no one can suppress information, either by concealing it or forgetting to mention it, without some notion of what he wishes the public to know, every leader is in some degree a propagandist.
Strategically placed, and compelled often to choose even at the best between the equally cogent though conflicting ideals of safety for the institution, and candor to his public, the official finds himself deciding more and more consciously what facts, in what setting, in what guise he shall permit the public to know.
That the manufacture of consent is capable of great refinements no one, I think, denies. The process by which public opinions arise is certainly no less intricate than it has appeared in these pages, and the opportunities for manipulation open to anyone who understands the process are plain enough.
The creation of consent is not a new art. It is a very old one which was supposed to have died out with the appearance of democracy. But it has not died out. It has, in fact, improved enormously in technic, because it is now based on analysis rather than on rule of thumb.
And so, as a result of psychological research, coupled with the modern means of communication, the practice of democracy has turned a corner. A revolution is taking place, infinitely more significant than any shifting of economic power.
Within the life of the generation now in control of affairs, persuasion has become a self-conscious art and a regular organ of popular government. None of us begins to understand the consequences, but it is no daring prophecy to say that the knowledge of how to create consent will alter every political calculation and modify every political premise.
Under the impact of propaganda, not necessarily in the sinister meaning of the word alone, the old constants of our thinking have become variables. It is no longer possible, for example, to believe in the original dogma of democracy; that the knowledge needed for the management of human affairs comes up spontaneously from the human heart.
Where we act on that theory we expose ourselves to self-deception, and to forms of persuasion that we cannot verify. It has been demonstrated that we cannot rely upon intuition, conscience, or the accidents of casual opinion if we are to deal with the world beyond our reach.
Read Public Opinion as this book is simply the best overview of how the victims of the West are fooled.
Or like this. Lippmann understood that the big thing is that they fool or force you to take for granted that the perspective of the Ruler or the ruling élite is the same as the only possible reality.
And observe, Lippman begins, his masterpiece, with to describe how the People are trapped in Plato's Cave that is the very foundations of Platonism. And then is the first chapter named: “I. The World Outside and the Pictures in Our Heads”.
The Introduction of Manufacturing Consent released in 2011 includes the effects of the Internet.
Here follows some of the first sentences of the Introduction; that makes it clear that the book is about the Propaganda model and that the manufacturing of consent is done with smooth procedures.
This book centers in what we call a "propaganda model," an analytical framework that attempts to explain the performance of the U.S. media in terms of the basic institutional structures and relationships within which they operate. It is our view that, among their other functions, the media serve, and propagandize on behalf of, the powerful societal interests that control and finance them.
The representatives of these interests have important agendas and principles that they want to advance, and they are well positioned to shape and constrain media policy. This is normally not accomplished by crude intervention, but by the selection of right-thinking personnel and by the editors' and working journalists' internalization of priorities and definitions of news-worthiness that conform to the institution's policy.
Under the headline Updating The Propaganda Model is the following.
…
… The Internet is not an instrument of mass communication for those lacking brand names, an already existing large audience, and/or large re-sources. Only sizable commercial organizations have been able to make large numbers aware of the existence of their Internet offerings. The privatization of the Internet's hardware, the rapid commercialization and concentration of Internet portals and servers and their integration into non-Internet conglomerates the AOL- Time Warner merger was a giant step in that direction-and the private and concentrated control of the new broadband technology, together threaten to limit any future prospects of the Internet as a democratic media vehicle.
...
… Former New York Times editor Max Frankel says that the more newspapers pursue Internet audiences, "the more will sex, sports, violence, and comedy appear on their menus, slighting, if not altogether ignoring, the news of foreign wars or welfare reform."
...
… But entertainment has the merit not only of being better suited to helping sell goods; it is an effective vehicle for hidden ideological messages. Furthermore, in a system of high and growing inequality, entertainment is the contemporary equivalent of the Roman "games of the circus" that diverts the public from politics and generates a political apathy that is helpful to preservation of the status quo.
...
Even if Facebook and other Social media has changed the big picture a bit is the main relations today in 2018 the same as before the Internet in many aspects the same; as the absolute majority of the citizens are trained to be passive consumers.
Their Concluding Note begins.
The propaganda model remains a useful framework for analyzing and understanding the workings of the mainstream media-perhaps even more so than in 1988. ...
Here is the core of Chapter 1 - A Propaganda Model. The chapter begins.
The mass media serve as a system for communicating messages and symbols to the general populace. It is their function to amuse, entertain, and inform, and to inculcate individuals with the values, beliefs, and codes of behavior that will integrate them into the institutional structures of the larger society. In a world of concentrated wealth and major conflicts of class interest, to fulfil this role requires systematic propaganda.
...
… The essential ingredients of our propaganda model, or set of news "filters,"fall under the following headings:
(1) the size, concentrated ownership, owner wealth, and profit orientation of the dominant mass-media firms;
(2) advertising as the primary income source of the mass media;
(3) the reliance of the media on information provided by government, business,and "experts" funded and approved by these primary sources and agents of power;
(4) "flak" as a means of disciplining the media; and
(5) "anticommunism" as a national religion and control mechanism.
These elements interact with and
reinforce one another. The raw material of news must pass through
successive filters, leaving only the cleansed residue fit to print. They
fix the premises of discourse and interpretation, and the definition of
what is newsworthy in the first place, and they explain the basis and
operations of what amount to propaganda campaigns.
It must be noted that in the USA there is a tradition to say that everything that is not according to
the established Static ideals of total obedience is
Communistic.
The concept Flak, used in the Propaganda model, is a bit strange without an explanation.
Flak means literally anti-aircraft artillery as it refers to the German abbreviation of Flugabwehrkanone, Flugzeugabwehrkanone or Fliegerabwehrkanone where “abwehr” is the same as repelling, defense, resistance or rebuff.
Here is the best interview that covers the main ideas of Chomsky that I have found so far. The Interview is made by Andrew Marr, BBC and was probably sent in 1996.
And check out this post and the documentary about the man that formulated the concept Propaganda as it was used by, for example, the Nazi Germany: Edward Berneys Perfected The Hidden Obedience, 7 April 2017
To be able to accuse and get rid of opposition without concrete evidence is the whole point of the core of the current Western culture of total terror; that is guaranteed by the Academic cult.
Academics are used to benefit from to praise the gospel of Static Logic and – then when the students use this pattern of how to reject concrete Dynamic relations – is the result of course that the Academics complains when they become the victims.
Here is a perfect example of the current Western terror.
Today anyone can be accused of anything, without basis in fact or evidence, and that accusation can be instantly trumpeted over the airwaves unchecked by any journalistic standard. That is the painful lesson I have had to learn this year.
...
Here it is essential to remember that the core of the journalistic standard of the Guardian is to defend exactly what Palumbo-Liu complains about, that Faith or Trust must rule in order to eliminate concrete relations: The Guardian Demands Officially that the People Must be Ruled by Mysticism, 1 November 2017.
Read his story and the basics of the current Western terror before it is too late, in this phase of the Western civilisation, to dissolve the Academic cult.
The New York Times is one of the most influential media organisations in the Western world. Accordingly are the perspectives, explanations and the words used by The New York Times essential.
The only possible answer is consequently: Yes, it is Managed by Platonism!
Here follows most of the introduction to the animation/video.
After 200 years of expansion, democracy’s growth in the world has stalled. A handful of democracies like Venezuela and Hungary are backsliding into authoritarianism. And even in established Western democracies, voters are losing faith in democratic institutions and norms.
That has left us and scholars who study democracy obsessed with a set of questions. Is this all just a blip, or is democracy in real trouble? Are the oldest and sturdiest democracies, like those of Europe and the United States, really as safe as they seem? And why would people voluntarily dismantle their own democracy from within?
No one knows the answers for sure. …
Already here is the usually hidden worldview exposed.
Because real Democracy has of course; absolutely nothing to do with FAITH.
Real Democracy as well as real Education and real Science are based on concrete UNDERSTANDING.
The ongoing terror of the Western world is simply based on to force or trick the People to take for granted that Faith or Trust is the same as to Understand.
The formal name of this trick is Platonism and can also be called Hidden Might Is Right as it is all about to force or trick the people to believe that to worship Authority is the same as to be free.
Or like this. The Platonist's trick the People that to be free is the same as to not be punished.
Today are more and more people convinced that they live in a system that they hate; as it becomes more and more obvious that the system or the Western culture is based on to fool them.
It becomes more and more obvious as the Static Western world encounter more and more problems in a more and more Dynamic world.
As the victims are tricked to not be able to understand HOW they are fooled it is accordingly impossible to articulate or formulate concrete critique.
The tragic result is, of course, that the victims rush to worship openly Authoritarian ideals.
One more time.
As the false Democracy, based on Faith and Worship, is not especially popular today will more and more victims find comfort into worship open Dictatorships.
And observe this process is supported by The New York Times and others that promote Platonism; especially as Platonism includes self-censorship/censorship to protect the “Faith”.
This means also what The New York Times calls “Polarisation”, in the video, cannot occur within a culture or a system that is based on concrete Understanding.
Because concrete Understanding makes is it possible to understand different perspectives and to create concrete solutions.
In Platonism, that is based on Faith, is there only what is Right or Wrong according to the Ruler or the ruling élite.
All in all. The New York Times, as well as every individual and organisation in the current Western terror have the concrete choice between:
- to continue to support Platonism and the false Democracy as well as the false Science that the stupidity is based on and fall even deeper into the disaster
OR
- to expose the trick of Platonism and be a concrete help to dissolve the core of the stupidity, the Academic cult and be helpful in the demand to set up a new form of organisations for real Education and real Science that will result in a real Democracy.
So, what will The New York Times do?
And to everyone that are the slightest interested in propaganda and the ongoing collapse of the current Western culture: read the undisputed classic Public Opinion (1922) by Walter Lippmann (1889–1974).
Lippman begins, of necessity, with to describe Plato's Cave.
And therefore is the first chapter:
I. The World Outside and the Pictures in Our Heads.
For the very core of Platonism is based on to have any concrete idea or picture, in your head, must be rejected as mystical, in order to fool you; that the only real is outside of the mind.
And then is it possible to fool you that the demands of the Ruler or the ruling élite and their propaganda is real whereas anything else is mystical.
Or like this. Platonism is to put you into a cave where you are forced to reject what you actually are able to understand so you are forced to Accept how it is and to Obey, for example, that the total terror is the same as Democracy.
With so much accumulated and credible evidence of war
crimes in Yemen, is it possible to determine suspected war criminals
that are currently unidentified and unpunished?
The
belligerent and supporting countries and actors external to the
Yemen civil war are extensive. They include Saudi Arabia, United Arab
Emirates, United States of America, United Kingdom, Australia, Iran,
Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Academi.
Obviously the international entities involved and profiting from the
Yemen civil war include many of the big
defense contractors, but surprisingly the tentacles of this
lucrative business extends all the way down to suppliers
of logistics who are not
normally identified as providers of military products and
services.
Starvation of a civilian population is in
direct violation of International Humanitarian Law Rule
53 which states the use of starvation of the civilian population
as a method of warfare is prohibited, and Rule
54 which states that attacking, destroying, removing or rendering
useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian
population is prohibited.
(1) A Principal person or entity committed a
war crime;
(2) Another actor committed an act that had a substantial
effect upon the commission of the underlying offence; and
(3)
Required mental state: The other actor knew that that such an act
would assist, or had the substantial likelihood of assisting, the
commission of the underlying offense.”
Multiple personnel in the U.S. Congress have been actively
investigating U.S.
Foreign Military Sales of training provided to the naval forces
of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia that could serve as a crucial link
clearly tying the U.S. to the naval blockade and resultant starvation
of the civilian population of Yemen.
When considering the topic of suspected
international war criminals we should also take a moment to consider
the inevitability of future war crime trials. Reviewing the
identities of already convicted war criminals it might be
possible to conclude that it is impossible for some to ever be
identified as a war criminal as long as they are not Nazi Germans,
Slavs, Arabs, Asians, and Africans.
However, using a more objective
standard of a peer reviewed
academic resource on just war theory does not assume any such
limitations: “In asserting the need to find universalisable
principles, the just war theorist is usually keen to insist that any
war crimes trials are held in neutral states and presided over by
neutral parties, rather than the victors whose partiality in
proceedings must be presumed: after all, in the Nuremberg and Tokyo
trials, no allied generals or politicians were held accountable for
the atrocities created by bombing civilian centers in Germany and
Japan and the dropping of nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”
Given the overwhelming volume and detail of information already
available, is it possible at this point in time to outline a list of
those who run the risk of eventually being identified as violating
international humanitarian law or failing to fulfill their basic
human responsibilities?
Is it reasonable to expect that some
individuals from the belligerent and supporting countries and actors
who have been in the positions listed below are likely to someday be
identified as responsible for facilitating war crimes in Yemen?
Current and former heads of governments or organizations
Current and former legislators who authorized military action or failed to curb military action
Current and former Secretaries of Defense, Ministers of Defense or senior military leaders
Current and former government intelligence, military training and defense acquisition officials
Board members, Chief Officers, and Directors of major and minor defense contractors
Board members, Chief Officers, and Directors of financing entities
The public and citizenry for turning a blind eye and remaining silent
Who could or should be added to this list or called out by name?
Theodore McIntire
The author was a 1984 graduate of the United States Air Force Academy, was a Major (Retired) of the U.S. Air Force and is currently a worldwide advocate and promoter of Human Security.
To grasp what goes on today. Or even better. To get what NOT goes on or the massive contemporary confusion, it is helpful to study quite recent ideas and arguments about the future.
The true masterminds of to understand the next steps from the epoch of simple manufacturing were Alvin (1928–2016) and Heidi Toffler (1930–2019).
Alvin and Heidi Toffler wrote their books together, at least that is the information in the later interviews of Alvin, even if most of the books are presented as Alvin is the sole author.
Read all the books by the Tofflers as their message is all about the absolute need of to reach a Dynamic culture; a need that so far has been sabotaged by the Static ideals of the Academic cult.
It can in fact be said that absolutely nothing vital has happened since the Tofflers began to write.
The huge difference between the middle of the 1960s and now are more stuff and more problems. More than fifty years of extra concentrated stupidity.
Especially the books Future Shock and The Third Wave were at the time highly influential bestsellers.
The Tofflers defines the historic background, at least a part of it, as well as what drives change in different forms or Dimensions in relation to the historic context.
And therefore could the Tofflers predict the need of and the innovation of services and products rather well.
As I understand it, is the main message of the Tofflers that real Change or development cannot take place if vital parts or Dimensions (of the society) resist change or is Static; as then will the result be the Social conflicts we experience today.
Here is the first sentence in the Future Shock (1970).
This is a book about what happens to people when they are overwhelmed by change.
And just taste headlines, from the same book, like for example;
The Collapse of Hierarchy
Beyond Bureaucracy
The Industrial Era School
The New Educational Revolution
The Organizational Attack
The final sentences in the Power Shift (1990) are:
For it is now indisputable that knowledge, the source of the highest-quality power of all, is gaining importance with every fleeting nanosecond.
The most important Powershift of all, therefore, is not from one person, party, institution, or nation to another. It is the hidden shift in the relationships between violence, wealth, and knowledge as societies speed toward their collision with tomorrow.
This is the dangerous, exhilarating secret of the Powershift Era.
One more time.
For it is now indisputable that knowledge, the source of the highest-quality power of all, is gaining importance with every fleeting nanosecond.
The documentary Future Shock (1972), hosted by Orson Welles (1915–1985), is a definitive must-see even if the quality of this version on YouTube is poor.
In the upcoming chapters I write a lot about the book Soldaten: On Fighting, Killing and Dying; The Secret Second World War Tapes of German POWs (2012), Google Books, by Sönke Neitzel and Harald Welzer.
This book is a very well crafted Academic work and became also a bestseller.
The book is based on Neitzel's discovery of transcripts of conversations between German prisoners of war during WW II, and tells many otherwise hidden relations of the current Western culture that demonstrates how the ideals of the citizen is transformed to the ideals of the soldier.
Here follows more links, a documentary that is based on the same material and an interview with Neitzel.
