Understanding The True Nature Of Politics And Its Finality (852)
Paldi5: DialecticFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How does one have a dialectic discussion about something (a collusion of a small elite seeking world domination) that is suspected but well hidden, unprovable and controversial? Seems to me to be a topic better suited to debate or emotional oration.
How does one have a dialectic discussion about something (a collusion of a small elite seeking world domination) that is suspected but well hidden, unprovable and controversial? Seems to me to be a topic better suited to debate or emotional oration.
yeah i was kinda curious about that myself.
I think the hidden powers that be just give orders to people and let them dialect the manipulation. it all brings it back to the shell game. its never the right answer, but they always continue working the game in their favor.
now the question is, how do we secretly trip up their game in our favor
------ This thread is Archived ------
Looking_Heart: yeah i was kinda curious about that myself.
I think the hidden powers that be just give orders to people and let them dialect the manipulation. it all brings it back to the shell game. its never the right answer, but they always continue working the game in their favor.now the question is, how do we secretly trip up their game in our favor
I think the hidden powers that be just give orders to people and let them dialect the manipulation. it all brings it back to the shell game. its never the right answer, but they always continue working the game in their favor.now the question is, how do we secretly trip up their game in our favor
It's nice to see someone reads Fred's posts!!
------ This thread is Archived ------
I finally went back and toughed it all the way through the OP's video.
The guy in the video rambles from point to point, some of them interesting, but he falls far short of ever connecting them together in any way that would justify the many statements of "fact" that he claims to make.
He over-estimates his own understanding and insight. The viewer is expected to just take his word for most things.
He's essentially a fairly well-informed man giving his opinions.
The only point that I found truly informative was his mention of this event that I had never heard about before.
The guy in the video rambles from point to point, some of them interesting, but he falls far short of ever connecting them together in any way that would justify the many statements of "fact" that he claims to make.
He over-estimates his own understanding and insight. The viewer is expected to just take his word for most things.
He's essentially a fairly well-informed man giving his opinions.
The only point that I found truly informative was his mention of this event that I had never heard about before.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Conrad73: Think the first one is Obama?
You may be right, I hope so.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Somewhere back up the thread I saw some posts that suggested that the dialectic process was not bad in itself, that it is just a means of organizing and integrating change into the existing status quo. That may be true at a theoretical level, a way of looking at things. But when someone sets out to purposely use the dialectic process to bypass the will of the people and effect particular changes it is deception and manipulation. Hegel was just a more skilled version of Machiavelli, and his expertise was in the mechanisms of deception.
And that's what goes on big-time in the political realm today. Deception and events that produce reactive emotional responses in order to impose changes which almost always involve a loss of freedom or material wealth by the public.
And that's what goes on big-time in the political realm today. Deception and events that produce reactive emotional responses in order to impose changes which almost always involve a loss of freedom or material wealth by the public.
------ This thread is Archived ------
RayfromUSA: Somewhere back up the thread I saw some posts that suggested that the dialectic process was not bad in itself, that it is just a means of organizing and integrating change into the existing status quo. That may be true at a theoretical level, a way of looking at things. But when someone sets out to purposely use the dialectic process to bypass the will of the people and effect particular changes it is deception and manipulation. Hegel was just a more skilled version of Machiavelli, and his expertise was in the mechanisms of deception.
And that's what goes on big-time in the political realm today. Deception and events that produce reactive emotional responses in order to impose changes which almost always involve a loss of freedom or material wealth by the public.
And that's what goes on big-time in the political realm today. Deception and events that produce reactive emotional responses in order to impose changes which almost always involve a loss of freedom or material wealth by the public.
yeah that was the whole discussion behind the video
------ This thread is Archived ------
RayfromUSA: I finally went back and toughed it all the way through the OP's video.
The guy in the video rambles from point to point, some of them interesting, but he falls far short of ever connecting them together in any way that would justify the many statements of "fact" that he claims to make.
He over-estimates his own understanding and insight. The viewer is expected to just take his word for most things.
He's essentially a fairly well-informed man giving his opinions.
The only point that I found truly informative was his mention of this event that I had never heard about before.
The guy in the video rambles from point to point, some of them interesting, but he falls far short of ever connecting them together in any way that would justify the many statements of "fact" that he claims to make.
He over-estimates his own understanding and insight. The viewer is expected to just take his word for most things.
He's essentially a fairly well-informed man giving his opinions.
The only point that I found truly informative was his mention of this event that I had never heard about before.
I heard this one Ray. It's documented in a book called 'Other losses.'
A few problems with the conspiracy theory are that too many bodies and nothing has to date showed up. Another is the massive cover up that would have had to have been kept secret and yet another still is the chain of command that this event would have had to have been kept from as well as Montgomery.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Albertaghost: I heard this one Ray. It's documented in a book called 'Other losses.'
A few problems with the conspiracy theory are that too many bodies and nothing has to date showed up. Another is the massive cover up that would have had to have been kept secret and yet another still is the chain of command that this event would have had to have been kept from as well as Montgomery.
A few problems with the conspiracy theory are that too many bodies and nothing has to date showed up. Another is the massive cover up that would have had to have been kept secret and yet another still is the chain of command that this event would have had to have been kept from as well as Montgomery.
Stalin did certainly kill millions of Russians who had been prisoners of the Germans. And the US knowingly shipped those prisoners back to Russia. So another few hundred mass graves in Poland or other Eastern European countries wouldn't necessarily have drawn any attention. Who's going to accuse Eisenhower of mass murder and live to tell the tale?
------ This thread is Archived ------
Paldi5: DialecticFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dialectic (also called dialectics or the dialectical method) is a method of argument, which has been central to both Indic and European philosophy since ancient times.
Dialectic is based on a dialogue between two or more people who may hold differing views, yet wish to seek the truth of the matter through the exchange of their viewpoints while applying reason.
This differs from a debate, in which both sides are committed to their viewpoint and only wish to win the debate by persuading or proving themselves right (or the other side wrong) – and thus a jury or judge is often needed to decide the matter.
=================================
How does one have a dialectic discussion about something (a collusion of a small elite seeking world domination) that is suspected but well hidden, unprovable and controversial? Seems to me to be a topic better suited to debate or emotional oration.
Back to the funny farm...
Dialectic (also called dialectics or the dialectical method) is a method of argument, which has been central to both Indic and European philosophy since ancient times.
Dialectic is based on a dialogue between two or more people who may hold differing views, yet wish to seek the truth of the matter through the exchange of their viewpoints while applying reason.
This differs from a debate, in which both sides are committed to their viewpoint and only wish to win the debate by persuading or proving themselves right (or the other side wrong) – and thus a jury or judge is often needed to decide the matter.
=================================
How does one have a dialectic discussion about something (a collusion of a small elite seeking world domination) that is suspected but well hidden, unprovable and controversial? Seems to me to be a topic better suited to debate or emotional oration.
Back to the funny farm...
the proof is everywhere fred. no need for papertrails
------ This thread is Archived ------
Albertaghost: You get a vote, that is how leaders are picked. I can't even count how many leaders campaign on 'cleaning up' Washington, the system, their constituency etc. As for 'corporatized entities' your system allows for this to occur as do all other systems either legally or illegally. Various non corporate entities also effect your system such as blocks of people gathered for a political purpose such as Muslims, Christians, gun owners, liberals, Republicans etc but when the day is done, it comes down to individual votes.
i believe it comes down to individual awareness of how things are really run.
ban all lobbyists would be an idea
------ This thread is Archived ------
Expose them on forums like these. Get the word out. 
------ This thread is Archived ------
Elliott Abrams-----National Security Council Advisor. He previously worked at Washington-based "Think Tank" Ethics and Public Policy Center. During the Reagan Adminstration, Abrams was the Assistant Secretary of State, handling, for the most part, Latin American affairs. He played an important role in the Iran-Contra Scandal, which involved illegally selling U.S. weapons to Iran to fight Iraq, and illegally funding the contra rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua's Sandinista government. He also actively deceived three congressional committees about his involvement and thereby faced felony charges based on his testimony. Abrams pled guilty in 1991 to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to a year's probation and 100 hours of community service. A year later, former President Bush (Senior) granted Abrams a full pardon. He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Reagan Administration's State Department.
------ This thread is Archived ------
RayfromUSA: Stalin did certainly kill millions of Russians who had been prisoners of the Germans. And the US knowingly shipped those prisoners back to Russia. So another few hundred mass graves in Poland or other Eastern European countries wouldn't necessarily have drawn any attention.
Poland was bordered with the Russian zone, not the US and, it was a long long way from the US controlled Germany. Unless of course you are going to have us believe Ike managed somehow to move a million rotting corpses from all over his area by cover of while the country was patrolled by international observers, Red Cross people as well as foreign military attaches and send them five hundred miles into Czechoslovakia without being seen or heard.
RayfromUSA: Who's going to accuse Eisenhower of mass murder and live to tell the tale?
Montgomery, the Red Cross, Degaulle, the Russians, his presidential opponent Stevenson.
Not a peep though.
------ This thread is Archived ------
emmaline: i believe it comes down to individual awareness of how things are really run.
ban all lobbyists would be an idea
ban all lobbyists would be an idea
I agree.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Albertaghost: I agree.
knew you would come around one day
in all seriousness, i think forums like this one are great for making people really think about these issues, even if you have to wade through some mud...
------ This thread is Archived ------
emmaline: knew you would come around one day
in all seriousness, i think forums like this one are great for making people really think about these issues, even if you have to wade through some mud...
in all seriousness, i think forums like this one are great for making people really think about these issues, even if you have to wade through some mud...
Actually, I haven't changed my stance at all. I don't believe there is any vast conspiracy where there is some entity controlling us. As I stated, and, we both agree, it is we who control.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Albertaghost: Actually, I haven't changed my stance at all. I don't believe there is any vast conspiracy where there is some entity controlling us. As I stated, and, we both agree, it is we who control.
i completely agree, but with informed decisions
------ This thread is Archived ------
emmaline: i completely agree, but with informed decisions
I RECENTLY saw a new world order conspiracy on TV similar to this starring............ LYNDON LAROUCHE!!!!!! Can you believe that evil goof ball is still active?!!!
------ This thread is Archived ------
raphael118: I RECENTLY saw a new world order conspiracy on TV similar to this starring............ LYNDON LAROUCHE!!!!!! Can you believe that evil goof ball is still active?!!!
I'm trying to recall his party affiliation?
Seemed like it started w/a "D".
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
1830's Music
everything is changing
rarotonga
Nature
Don Shits-In-Pants!!!
Reality Check
Salami, Salami, Baloney
Icebergs Still Around
How far is too far?
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Wonder where they're all headed in such a hurry.
Yes, they're off for the shores of Tripoli.