Saturday, January 12, 2008

[fragmentation] organization's major weapon

One simple statistic is that the blogosphere has grown 100 times in three years and it is fragmented, especially in the political sphere.

While that is good in some respects, it also fragments opposition to highly organized forces which can be viewed at many levels. Everyone focuses on what they see as the whole issue but more often it is a numer of fragments of the whole. I see people writing what they think are very witty reposts on other people's posts, invoking catchphrases they've learnt off by heart and yet, when you examine it, the two parties are not so far apart, except on some interpretations.

Fragmentation, splintering. Each with his own slant, each looking from one angle but decrying another.

My anonymii focus on the EU monster and rightly so, the Americans increasingly look at the SPPNA, a man I know is working to get Christians out of Masonry, Gates of Vienna focuses on Islamic Sharia, in Britain, Lionheart and others do likewise, Cassandra illustrates the evils of PoMo, most UK pundits attack Brown and his neo-fascist state but don't you see that all these right thinking people are fragmented? They doubtless consider all issues but promote one or two.

I just commented at Gates of Vienna about Political Correctness and the Baron quite rightly stated:

The celebration of oxymora is central to the politico-linguistic discipline commonly known as “political correctness”.

To disable rational opposition to the prevailing orthodoxy, the first step is to take control of the language, forbidding certain words, promoting others, and changing the meanings of words within the permissible vocabulary to align with an all-pervading political ideology.

The second step is to erode the logical framework of thought itself, eating away at the deep structure of language until the underlying mental processes are deranged, leaving the mind vulnerable to re-programming.

Under the new PC template, time-hallowed distinctions — between good and evil, moral and immoral, true and false — are discarded. The only remaining distinction allowed is between what is and is not politically acceptable. PC has but a single commandment: “Thou shalt have no other words before mine.”

Good stuff but meanwhile the nature of a more complex battle remains obscure.

Assisting in the general confusion are catch cries which do so much damage that it's debilitating - try these words - Zionist, cabals, PoMo, globalism, Political Correctness, Neocon, White Supremacist, Truther, Illuminati, conspiracy theorist, relativist, multi-culturalism, inclusionism, Christian [aaaagh!], Atheist, Right and Left, climate porn and so on and so on.

Ruthie made mention of internet idiocies:

[I]t’s particularly prominent in Internet message boards, comment threads on news articles, partisan mainstream political blogs and various other quick and anonymous fora for political “debate.” YouTube comment threads, for example, are one of the worst places for this.

I know I shouldn't even read this stuff, I shouldn't indulge my perverse fascination, but it's like watching a car accident— there's something captivating about the wreckage. The reasoning is often shallow and faulty, ad hominem attacks are plentiful, and common sense is in short supply.

It is dire. Each has his own standpoint and in his "ramblings", argues from his own perspective, pronouncing "self-evident truths" in emotive language. Millions and millions of blogs are doing this. Everyone's pushing something and trying to have it seen as the major perspective.

Christian sites resort to capitalized fonts to convince or endlessly quote scripture. Illuminati sites use garish colour and emotive adjectives incessantly, making logical jumps when they should make the single point they're safe on and leave it at that.

The conflict between people divided by labels is staggering.

Even if I beg that people look at the global implications of all policies currently being pursued and therefore all agendas, the very word "global" will turn off half the people reading this. This is madness - turning off because of a label. It's moronic to label someone a "Truther" and thereby dismiss all arguments out of hand. Where is the logic in that?

And what the hell is a truther anyway? Someone looking for the truth of what's happening? Is that a bad thing, to look for truth? What are we meant to do - follow jingoistic catch cries and wrap ourselves in a flag? And which flag? The EU's? The Union Flag?

One section of society points to Christianity v Islam, another at Christianity v Jewish Cabals, another at the West v Islam, another at Statists v Libertarians. All deny something in their focuses.

Surely local self interest is the overwhelming governing factor at the base level, followed by the national interest which derailed Doha, then we splinter into all the other divisions mentioned above. In all of this, one theme I see running throughout is people's freedom to self determine their own direction in life but even here, supposed free enterprisers call for bans on this, regulation of that.

And total deregulation is anarchy and anarchy is just the separation of the sheep so they can be picked off, one by one, by the real evil [seen through my Christian eyes], the evil which says: "It's OK to indulge whatever passion springs to mind with no cessation and with no fear of consequence." Anakin Skywalker's anger - go for it, breathes Palpatine - kill, kill, kill. Yes, it feels good, doesn't it, Anakin? Indulge youself to your heart's content.

And in the process he loses his soul, his ability to resist his base desires. Little people get in his way - he swats them. You tire of one woman - get another - there are millions out there to be exploited. The road to yahooism is broad and easy. ASBOs, Clockwork Orange - great landscape for the hedonist, isn't it?

All right, my tuppence worth. Islam of the virulent kind is making huge inroads, the western leaderships are riddled with tentacles of the well acknowledged monster called the Finance, people are fragmented and pursuing their own agendas, congratulating likeminded people and gently shunning other points of view, the destruction of values once associated with Christianity is almost complete, the move to Continental Governments proceeds apace but is running into Nationalism, local, national and regional interest rules all and allows monsters utilizing the flag to rise in Africa, Iran, Malaysia and anywhere you care to name. The Old Money sits in its sanctuary and funds the mayhem all over the globe.

Then we look at China, which gave rise to this blog's name. Oh my goodness - once we start on China!

What's the net effect? Unrest, unhappiness, a new ignorant generation of alienated ASBOs and homies, breakdown of all societal codes which served before and rampant greed of a kind never so nakedly obvious as we are seeing today, not just at the top but permeating all strata of society. The great gods Credit Debt and Never-Be-Satisfied are blighting families worldwide and now into Russia.

Hope? Is blinkering one's eyes and pretending all is well true hope? We need armour, not blind faith. I know where you can get it from but I equally know why you won't seek it. I therefore beg two other things:

1 Do one kind act for someone outside your circle each day;

2 Look at what the other says and see how far it can be reconciled with your own, even on minor points.

6 comments:

  1. Sir

    For some years I've thought Islam to be our immediate problem. I've since come to think we can do nothing about Islam until the EU is disposed of. Just my little area of thought, that's all.

    PS About your recent dispute: I had known nothing of it - I'm not a part of Blogpower, for instance - but I've read your accounts and I've read his in the past few days. My impression is that your accounts amount to a reasoned analysis, your antagonist's amount to an emotional appeal. Personally, I go with reasoned analysis. And good to see you now involving yourself elsewhere.

    You don't need the support offered by Blogpower - you and your blog are quite strong enough alone these days. CbI does need the support - both in terms of that blog itself, and in terms of the personality concerned.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm glad to see that you're back to your old blogging ways.

    Excellent post.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks, gentlemen - it's actually a relief not to be adminning and I can visit and blog more.

    RL intrudes today though but that's OK because it means money.

    ReplyDelete
  4. At one point I thought we could make the EU work for us, but now I have no doubt it needs to be gotten rid of.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well, I guess I'm one of the anons, although I post very infrequently as the discussions seem to follow my thoughts without any promptings.

    So, I followed this with interest.
    Speaking personally this has been a journey.
    Started with the discovery of Common Purpose, and moved out from there, to the EU.
    This traced back into history, as a result of various interesting quotes appearing on your blog, concerning powerful families and bankers of the US.
    And then forward again, through families, to the bildergerg, the trilateral, and the cfr.
    And then out again to major world conflicts and events.
    Then back in again to those powerful families, their corporate entities, the promotion of those corporate entities throughout the globe, which in truth, can only be labeled corporate/global/, global warfare.

    I have come to realise that the majority of "troubles" in the world result from the aggression of these families/corporates, and local/national resistance thereto.

    These families are, in the main, European in origin, western based, and in the main, but not exclusively, US based. Hence a large amount of global resistance has been aimed at the US. To a large extent this is correct, but only to the extent that the US, being the largest power base for these families, was the first to be subverted, and the government recruited, to a large extent, to their objectives. I have the feeling that the majority of US citizens, were they cognizant of the issues, would throw off their nationalism, and reject the objectives of these families/corporates.
    That said, I must say that these families are international, they seem to be waaayyy above the law of all nations, corrupting as they do, the UN, IMF, World Bank, USAID, WTO WHO.................... (fill in the gaps!) They seem to own the world.
    Controversially, perhaps, I welcome the Sovereign Wealth Funds increasing ownership of US financial institutions, as it may serve to dilute their power. I worry that the SWFs in turn will be corrupted, and in turn speed the proliferation of the power of those families which have not been too successful in the corruption of those SWF areas.

    I see China as resistant to those families, although Chinas entrance to the WTO, and the UN, gives the families a "brain-washing arena" in which they could be subverted.
    I note that China is placing restrictions on the export of grain/food products, and this is contrary to various legal constructs written by the families.
    Time will tell.
    I also note that certain books are being published exposing family activities, and some of those books have been mentioned on this blog. They should be read.
    Jamie Oliver seems to be doing his bit.

    You are correct, James.
    Fragmentation does have its strength, and that is why the entire structure of the 'sphere will be attacked.
    "The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers".
    Hence the amputation of the hand.

    It is because of the embedded nature of the families power, the proliferation of their power bases, and the proliferations of their structures for attack, their methods of personal/political corruption, intimidation, even murder, that any response worthy of the name, must first of all be organised adequately.
    That means both physically, and intellectually, in order to present a logical case. Herein, the media would be the problem, as that is highly corrupted to a significant degree, the families holding extensive corporate power in that area. Therein sits another problem, a full identification of all the "families", and their cronies/lackies/economic dependents. They have had years to organise.
    And at some point, this medium, by nature of its openness, will fail, and any worthwhile opposition will need to organise, more or less, along the lines of the families, ie, through the organisation of something similar to the cfr, for example.
    And there lies the road to gawd knows what.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sheesh, Anon 12.32 you are correct, but I see signs of dissent.
    Bernankes speech yesterday, which is a must read
    is the first to honestly realise the limitations of the Fed in the current situation, and its structural problems for the US in general

    Have you seen this article concerning the action of the people you call "families", in Iraq.
    I quote, and I make no apologies for a long quote, this article should be read by everyone:---
    "Democracy for Iraq meant erasing the "cradle of civilization" for unfettered free market capitalism. Iraq was conquered for its oil but also to make the country a giant free trade paradise. The scheme was diabolical, elaborate and ugly - blitzkrieg "shock and awe," elaborate PsyOps, fear as a weapon, repressive occupation, mass detention and torture, and the fastest, most sweeping country remake in history. It happened in weeks, Iraq no longer exists, the country is a wasteland, its people are devastated, and a blank slate was created for unrestrained corporate pillage on a near- unimaginable scale.

    Part of the scheme was for GMO agribusiness giants to have free reign over that part of the economy - to radically transform Iraq's food production system into a model for GMO seeds and plants. One hundred swiftly implemented Bremer laws mandated it, but Iraqis had no say about them as the country is now governed out of Washington and its branch office inside the heavily-fortified Green Zone in the largest US embassy in the world by far.

    Bremer laws imposed the harshest ever Chicago School-style "shock therapy" of the kind that devastated countries around the world since first introduced in Chile under Pinochet in 1973. The formula was familiar - mass firings of state employees in the hundreds of thousands; unrestricted imports with no tariffs, duties, inspections or taxes; deregulation; and the largest state liquidation sale and privatization plan since the Soviet Union collapsed.

    Corporate taxes were lowered as well from 40% to a flat 15%, and foreign investors could own 100% of Iraqi assets other than oil. They could also repatriate all their profits, had no obligation to reinvest in the country and wouldn't be taxed. They were further given 40 year leases, and the only Saddam era laws remaining were those restricting trade unions and collective bargaining. Foreign transnationals, mainly US ones, swooped in and devoured everything. Iraqis couldn't compete, and the occupation laws assured it.

    Consider Bremer Order 81. It covered patents, their duration and stated: "Farmers shall be prohibited from re-using seeds of protected varieties or any variety" the edict covered. It gave plant varieties patent holders absolute rights over farmers' using their seeds for 20 years. They'd be genetically engineered, owned by transnationals, and Iraqi farmers using them had to sign an agreement stipulating they'll pay a "technology fee" as well as an annual license fee.

    Plant Variety Protection (PVP) was the core of this order. It made seed saving and reuse illegal. Even using "similar" seeds could result in severe fines and imprisonment. GMO seeds got protection to displace 10,000 years of developed plant varieties being sacrificed.

    Iraq's fertile valley between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers is ideal for crop planting. Since 8000 BC, farmers used it to develop "rich seeds of almost every variety of wheat used in the world today." They were erased through a GMO modernization and industrialization scheme so agribusiness can get a foothold in the region and supply the world market. While Iraqis suffer and starve, GMO giants run the country's agriculture for export. Iraqi farmers are now agribusiness serfs and are forced to grow products foreign to the native diet like wheat designed for pasta.

    Bremer laws mandated it and are inviolable under Article 26 of the US-drafted constitution. It states that the Iraqi government is powerless to change laws a foreign occupier made. To assure it, US-sympathizers are in every ministry with those most trusted in key ones. Engdahl sums up the damage to agriculture: "The forced transformation of Iraq's food production into patented GMO crops is one of the clearest examples of (how) Monsanto and other GMO giants are forcing (these) crops onto an unwilling or unknowing world population." They're infesting the planet with them one country at a time so it's futile trying to undo the damage they cause".


    Anon, if you are thinking as I do, about global cabals, you realise the errors.

    The power blocks coalescing, as recognised by the media, etc, were disjointed by Bush adventure in Iraq. According to the geographical carve-up, he should not have been there. Oil, and Agriculture won, however, and that is Rockefellers baby. The US media, indeed the media of the west had not been appraised of this advance of the AGENDA, so they fought it, still are.

    George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin, in a single 70-minuted conversation on September 23,2001, eleven days after the terrorist assaults in New York and Washington, agreed on the deployment of tactical weapons. This was an epic shift in the global balance of strength.

    Putin gave the nod for US forces poised in Central Asia to jump into Afghanistan to be armed with tactical nuclear weapons, such as small neutron bombs, which emit strong radiation, nuclear mines, shells, and other nuclear ammunition suited to commando warfare in mountainous terrain.

    In return, Bush assented to Russia deploying tactical nuclear weapons units around Chechnya after Moscow’s ultimatum to the rebels, some of whom are backed by Osama Bin Laden, to surrender, went by without response. The US nuclear weapons were based in four former Soviet Central Asian bases: the military air facility at Tuzel, 15 km (10 miles) northwest of the Uzbek capital of Tashkent; at Kagady in the Termez region; in Khandabad, near the city of Karshi; and at the military air base in Dushanbe, the capital of Tajikistan.

    In addition to the nuclear weapons units, Russian bombers carrying small neutron bombs were moved to Russian military air bases around the border of the breakaway province, in Stavropol northwest of Chechnya, the Godowta base in Georgia to the south, and Mozdok in northern Osetia, northwest of Chechnya.
    The US was far from eager to actively inject a nuclear element into the war against terrorism and would not have been the first to do so. The US planned to hold those tactical nuclear weapons in reserve, unleashing them in the campaign against bin Laden only in certain extreme circumstances:

    1. To counter a move by Bin Laden’s men if they first bring out nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against the US force fighting inside Afghanistan.

    2. If a chemical or biological assault by the Taliban against Pakistan appears.

    3. Should groups of bin Laden’s Al Qaeda network – either in Central Asia or the Balkans – wield these weapons of mass destruction against US military targets or US nuclear arms in other parts of the world.

    4. If using them is the only way to save heavy American combat casualties.

    This was a significant move by Putin, and one of the last that I can distinguish.

    It would seem that since that time Putin has consistently opposed US involvement in what the grand plan set out as not being the US area of influence.

    Interesting times, as someone said, reading the runes correctly is difficult.

    ReplyDelete

Comments need a moniker of your choosing before or after ... no moniker, not posted, sorry.