URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Renewable Revolution
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Who CAN you trust? 
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 4159--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda
       By: AGelbert Date: December 6, 2015, 4:15 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Eddie link=topic=6090.msg92823#msg92823
       date=1449437888]
       Top Ten List of Big Lies perpetuated by America's Corporate
       Masters and their Mass Media.
       1. America is the land of opportunity where anyone who works
       hard and makes good decisions can get ahead and have a better
       life.
       False. In the energy-rich years after WWII Americans got used to
       a life where anybody who was willing to punch a clock and show
       up for work could make a middle class income. Now all the jobs
       that pay well require brains, technical expertise, and more
       hours for less pay. People who grew up here are so lazy, most of
       those jobs are being claimed by immigrants and their children,
       who are still hungry and willing.
       2. America is involved in geopolitics to promote democracy
       everywhere and help developing nations improve their standard of
       living.
       False. America has a long tradition of corporate imperialism,
       based on same the extractive models of earlier systems, like the
       Dutch East India Company and the British Raj. We have a long
       history of meddling in the sovereign affairs of other countries
       to set up weak vassal states that are controlled by dictators
       like Manuel Noriega and Saddam Hussein.
       3. Bigger is better. Big Business, Big Agriculture, Big Cities,
       Big Cars and Big Box Stores make our lives better, by making
       goods and services more affordable and of higher quality than
       why they would be otherwise.
       False. The trade-off is for quantity over quality, in food, and
       for uniformity and homogenization in goods and services. Now we
       have cheap food that poisons us, and every town in the country
       has an identical mall selling the identical items of every other
       mall in the nation. It didn't used to be that way. Meanwhile,
       the loss of local business has killed our small towns and
       communities.
       4. The key to success in life is to get a college education.
       False. Colleges and universities have morphed from academically
       centered institutions run by teachers and run for students, into
       profit making businesses dominated by a parasitic layer of
       mid-level executive management that drains off the money, making
       college cost more each and every year and delivering less and
       less, in terms of classical education,technical training, and
       critical thinking skills.
       5. Characters on television shows are an accurate representation
       of real life.
       False.  TV teaches our kids to think the world is full of Dr.
       Huxtables, but the reality is more like the world is full of
       Bill Cosbys. War is not like MASH. Life in the Great Depression
       wasn't like The Waltons. Since I don't watch TV anymore, forgive
       me if all my examples are a bit dated. I've never seen the
       Kardashians.
       6. You can be happier if you just manage to buy a new car every
       three years and use the right deodorant.
       False.  Now car loans are for six years, and your deodorant
       probably causes swelling in your axillary lymph nodes.
       7. America's experiments in social engineering can solve issues
       of race and gender inequality and create a tolerant diverse
       society.
       False.  After fifty years of court ordered social justice, we
       have a bigger racial divide than ever, and every possible class
       of people who can claim minority status is clamoring for more
       consideration from the rest of us. Those who point out that the
       current strategy isn't working are labeled racist, sexist
       bastards who need to be sent to re-indoctrination camps.
       8. Free market capitalism is the American business model.
       False. Crony capitalism, corporate control of government, and
       laws made by the rich and for the rich are what we have. All our
       markets are rigged.
       9. Globalization and so-called Free Trade has made life better
       for Americans.
       False.  The only jobs left in this country are at Burger King,
       Starbucks, and Home Depot. The days of union pay scale and
       employer paid health benefits are a distant memory. The
       corporates have gotten so greedy they have forgotten what Henry
       Ford knew...that the best customers are your own decently paid
       employees.
       10. Patriotism can be measured by how many yellow ribbon
       stickers you have on your car and how much you support the
       troops and thank our military veterans for their "sacrifice".
       False. This egregious behavior is promoted by the Deep State,
       who want us to be good sheep who wrap ourselves in the flag and
       send our children off to get maimed in the interest of Big Oil
       and the perpetuation of foreign child labor. If we don't
       "Support the Troops"[sup]tm[/sup] we must not be loyal
       Americans. Bullshit.
       [/quote]
       [center]
  HTML http://media.giphy.com/media/HjPbLbmep2aJO/giphy.gif[/center]
       #Post#: 4336--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda
       By: AGelbert Date: January 14, 2016, 6:44 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=agelbert link=topic=6331.msg95242#msg95242
       date=1452738333]
       [quote author=Eddie link=topic=6331.msg95223#msg95223
       date=1452719980]
       It has always been my contention that the reason northern
       European countries have been willing to be so heavily taxed is
       because they perceive that they get what they're paying
       for...that the government has, for most of the last half
       century, lived up to its promises, and a workable, fair social
       contract has existed.
       I have also believed that this has come about, or has been
       possible largely because the population of those countries is
       ethnically homogeneous, or has been until fairly recent years.
       I contrast that with the way we in the US have not done so well
       with universal health care, old age pensions, and disability
       benefits. A lot of that is a real or perceived unfairness that
       some people pay more than their share and others, who may not
       pay anything receive more from the social welfare system.
       I predicted that this would happen in Sweden and Norway and
       Finland if they allowed immigration to create a permanent
       underclass with a different language and different values from
       the mainstream.
       Guess what? I was right. I can't help but feel the slightest bit
       of schadenfreude, since those Nordic countries have always been
       so adamant about their lack of racial discrimination and their
       PC stance on diversity.
       Welcome to our world, y'all.
  HTML http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-11-30/sweden-no-apartments-no-jobs-no-shopping-without-gun
  HTML http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-11-30/sweden-no-apartments-no-jobs-no-shopping-without-gun
       [/quote]
       No you weren't right. The TRUE welfare queen caused expenses
       that are undermining the economies of the Western world are NOT
       the social costs you have been propagandized to believe (along
       with the cleverly disguised racist notion that only ethnically
       homogenous populations can "support" a social safety net).
       If you ever bother to compute the visible and INVISIBLE (but
       easily quantifiable) SUBSIDIES to VARIOUS industries (NOT just
       the fossil fuel industry, though they are one of the BIGGEST
       recipients of WELFARE from the BIGGEST welfare queen system -
       the USA corporate giveaways - in the world ), you would then
       start to see that the social safety net cost numbers are PEANUTS
       compared with the corporate welfare.
       People like you REFUSE to see how ALL government research on
       almost EVERY invention out there, and the R & D needed to make
       them technologically and financially SUCCESSFUL, have been
       HANDED OFF to connected elite corporations for a song, ALWAYS
       bypassing we-the-people, who paid for all of this, when the time
       to sell the product to us arrives.
  HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-devil19.gif
       Frankly, your ideological blinders are fascinating in their
       sturdiness and amazing ability to discount and discard real
       expenses that we-the-people are charged for.
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/fly.gif
       Good luck with your "real world".  Now I understand why MKing
       frequently tries to ingratiate himself with you. Scratch the
       surface, and under your apparently Guru inspired sympathy for
       the downtrodden of the world, you agree with MKing's "real
       world" Predators 'R' US world view.
       AND, you are always looking for material to "fix the facts" in
       support of your ideology.
       I'm going to be prick here, Eddie. I think, though I may be
       wrong  ;D, that I have finally figured out how you tick. You, at
       some point in your education, were convinced of the efficacy of
       game theory in human relations.
       Game Theory, as you know, is what the Defense Department AND
       Wall Street uses to justify excluding absolutely any altruistic
       behavior in competitive strategies. It was created by an
       autistic mathematical genius IDIOT who worshipped Spencer and
       did not understand Darwin.
       The problem with game theory in the REAL real world is that it
       fails to model it properly. By totally excluding altruistic
       behavior (except as a ploy to sucker the opponent into a
       position of weakness
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp),<br
       />it is doomed to, not just fail miserably, but to degrade the
       [i]sine qua non conditions the species engaging in it requires
       for perpetuation.[/i]
       YOU DO NOT understand that, Eddie. YOU are sold on Game Theory,
       as are most Capitalists, Libertarians, Wall Streeters and, of
       course, the Military Industrial complex.
       You ALL are WRONG. But you talk a good game (theory).  ;)
       Every time you fine fellows try to finger social safety nets as
       "welfare queenery" or "someone else's money" (Thatcher greed is
       good idiocy) OR "bad for the economy", while WILLFULLY ignoring
       the MASSIVE corporate welfare queenery, you just want
       brainwashed average Americans to act against their best
       interests, AND BE HAPPY ABOUT IT (see below).
       [center][img
       width=300]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300416161529.png[/img][/center]
       Darwin would not be amused with Game Theory.
       Forget Survival of the Fittest: It Is Kindness That Counts
       A psychologist probes how altruism, Darwinism and neurobiology
       mean that we can succeed by not being cutthroat.
  HTML http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/kindness-emotions-psychology/
  HTML http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/kindness-emotions-psychology/
       The FACT is that we, as a species, WILL NOT SUCCEED
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/mog.gif
       if we CONTINUE to exclude
       altruism (involving ALL LIFE, not just our family!) from our
       modus vivendi.
       Have a nice day.
       [/quote]
       [quote author=Eddie link=topic=6331.msg95244#msg95244
       date=1452740028]
       Yeah, AG. You have me all figured out. Not.
       I actually agree with almost everything you said. I understand
       that we could have a much better safety net here if we didn't
       **** away all the money on wars and corporate welfare. But,
       strictly speaking, that doesn't bear here.
       I am skeptical about social engineering. I have watched it fail
       for my whole lifetime here, Now it is failing in Europe. Fact.
       I have no interest in game theory. I'm not into competition. I'm
       not a racist or an elitist. I'm a realist. You, on the other
       hand, are a dreamer. Nothing wrong with that, other than it
       seems to be related to your penchant for making personal attacks
       on me, occasionally.
       Because I say that widely disparate cultures have difficulty
       living together in harmony, no matter what "programs" the
       statist central planners try to force us to participate in,
       pisses you off.  I can live with that. Don't get so steamed up.
       I get along with MKing to some degree because I understand who
       he is, what his roots are, and what his values are. I've known a
       lot of guys like him. I'm not exactly that type, though.
       [/quote]
       [quote author=RE link=topic=6331.msg95246#msg95246
       date=1452741454]
       I'm gong to walk a tightrope here and offend both of you.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp<br
       />
       Far as AG's arguments, he always looks at the very worst that a
       Diner offers up, and then attacks that without recognizing the
       good parts of that Diner.  We are all mixed bags with some good
       aspects and some bad ones, with some Diners having more good
       than bad, others more bad than good.
       Far as Eddie's arguments, although he has great sympathy for the
       downtrodden of the world, he does hold similar feelings to
       Moriarty that if you just have enough gumption and intelligence
       you can bootstrap yourself up, and socialism/communism is
       anaethema to him.  He certainly doesn't like anything socialist
       in the world of medicine or dentistry, that is for sure!
       Eddie is similar to Moriarty in his class and income, the type
       of vacations he takes, cars he buys and so forth.  Much in
       common there.  They differ in that Eddie has a conscience and
       understands the problems the majority of the population has,
       Moriarty willfully ignores it and further belittles those who
       suffer these problems.
       It is unfortunate IMHO that AG will go on the ATTACK on so
       little provocation on some Diners, I don't think either Eddie or
       Roamer deserve some of the opprobrium that AG has heaped out on
       them here.  It is unfortunate also that Eddie buys the portion
       of Moriarty's arguments that he does, and doesn't hammer down on
       him harder than he does periodically, but this is a function of
       class and belief and not too surprising overall.
       I write analysis like this so that I am certain to be hated by
       everybody.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp<br
       />
       RE
       [/quote]
       [quote author=Surly1 link=topic=6331.msg95257#msg95257
       date=1452768261]
       It seems to me that a factor often overlooked in discussions of
       "overextended welfare systems" is the matter of priorities. That
       is apparently why God made lobbyists: to instruct Congress on
       what their priorities should be, and to whom to direct the
       boodle extracted from us "tax donkeys and debt serfs."  AG makes
       it quite clear with his graphs about subsidies. Doesn't seem
       that we need a great deal of further instruction on how the
       agencies charged with regulating industry have been captured by
       those industries via lobbying and the subsequent revolving door.
       The most successful lobbying has been done by
       military-industrial complex, who've elevated the notion of
       military spending to a sanctified level of received wisdom, in
       service to that elusive chimera, "national security."
       Underwriting the success of the European social welfare state
       has been the fact that, in the 60 years after the end of World
       War II,  defense costs for Europe have been born by the American
       taxpayer. And for the Pacific rim as well, especially Japan.
       And our client states get churlish when we ask them to open
       their wallets and take on more of the burden.  Given the fact
       that American "military" priorities have been given over to
       execute political aims concocted in the fever-dreams of neocons,
       I would expect more rather than fewer conflicts with our vassals
       in the future along these lines. Israel, of course, is a special
       case. But then the Zionist apartheid state is always a special
       case. Lobbyists see to that.
       But lets talk about priorities.
  HTML http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_spending
  HTML http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_spending
       [quote]In peace time, the US government used to spend very
       little on defense, about one percent of GDP. But that changed
       after World War II when the United States found itself in a
       global contest against Communism. Ever since, defense spending
       has never been less than 3.6 percent of GDP. In wartime, of
       course, the United States spends as much as it can command. In
       World War II defense spending exceeded 41 percent of GDP in
       1945.
       At the start of the 20th century, defense spending averaged
       about one percent of GDP. Then it spiked to 22 percent at the
       end of World War I. Defense spending in the 1920s ran at about 1
       to 2 percent of GDP and in the 1930s, 2 to 3 percent of GDP.
       In World War II defense spending peaked at 41 percent of GDP,
       and then declined to about 10 percent during the height of the
       Cold War.
       [/quote]
       Currently, the FSoA spends more on military expenditures than
       the next 13 countries combined. Such are the costs of empire,
       and maintaining 1000-plus overseas bases, black sites, etc.
       [img
       width=600]
  HTML https://images.washingtonpost.com/?url=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2013/01/4A8078449E794DFB8CC33ADD00A6F1AF.gif&op=noop[/img]
       [And none of this counts the so-called "black budget," the
       off-the-books rathole that finances the Deep State.]
       [quote]Defense spending declined in the 1990s after the end of
       the Cold War and increased in the 2000s during the War on
       Terror.[/quote]
       Of course it did.
       [img
       width=600]
  HTML https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/08/csbachartmon.png&w=1484[/img]
       Here's a broad overview:
       [img
       width=300]
  HTML http://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/policybasics-wheretaxdollarsgo-f1.png[/img]
       site:
  HTML http://www.cbpp.org/research/policy-basics-where-do-our-federal-tax-dollars-go
  HTML http://www.cbpp.org/research/policy-basics-where-do-our-federal-tax-dollars-go
       Here's another way to look at priorities. The U.S. Treasury
       divides all federal spending into three groups: mandatory
       spending, discretionary spending and interest on debt. Mandatory
       and discretionary spending account for more than ninety percent
       of all federal spending, and pay for all of the government
       services and programs on which we rely. Debt payment is
       self-evident. A snapshot:
       [img
       width=600]
  HTML https://media.nationalpriorities.org/uploads/dis%2C_mand%2C_int_pie_2015_enacted.png[/img]
       Here's how military spending dominates all discretionary
       spending:
       [img
       width=600]
  HTML https://media.nationalpriorities.org/uploads/discretionary_spending_pie%2C_2015_enacted.png[/img]
       By far, the biggest category of discretionary spending is
       spending on the Pentagon and related military programs.
  HTML https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/
  HTML https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/
       And a roll-up:
       [img
       width=600]
  HTML https://static.nationalpriorities.org/images/charts/2015-charts/total-desk.svg[/img]
       Since the great majority of federal spending is "mandatory
       spending," the privatizers and other thieves of the commonweal
       have set their sights on Social Security, Medicare and the like,
       and are licking their chops to get their hands on that big wad
       of expenditure. IMO, the charts reveal that we can actually
       afford to do any damn thing we want if we can summon the will to
       reorder our priorities. A prospect about which I am not
       optimistic.
       Now I'm going to wrap this up before RE pastes a "Captain
       Obvious" sticker on me.
       [/quote]
       Interesting thread.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp
       Nobody wants to talk about Game Theory's OBVIOUS failings. I
       wonder why.  ;)
       Excellent points by Surly AND RE.
       Howevah, I am just a bit tired of RE always wanting to
       categorize my rants as "attacks", while deliberately ignoring
       the passive aggressive style used by Eddie in defending the
       indefensible. Eddie is GOING ON THE ATTACK every single time he
       throws out a quote from Thatcher or makes a context free post
       like he did at the start of this thread.
       Normally, I just play dead because I do not possess Surly's
       wordsmith skills or his patience for putting data together or a
       rebuttal presentation. But, I'm only human. Selective blindness,
       for the purpose of defending a 'greed is good' ideology
       disguised as fiscally responsible practicality, pis ses me off,
       PERIOD.
       When someone want to crow about "BEING RIGHT", it is customary
       for an educated gentleman or lady to clearly present all sides
       of the issue. I did not see that here so I stepped in with,
       granted
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp,<br
       />about as much finesse as YOU, RE, use when you disagree with
       something or somebody.
       RE, I understand your message. I will endeavor to play dead more
       often when I read fecal coliform filled, greed is good
       propaganda. Whether you wish to admit it or not, any attack on
       the, already too threadbare, social safety nets in the countries
       of the world in general, and the USA in particular, is a frontal
       attack on common decency and a defense of empathy deficit
       disordered, predatory elitism/capitalism/fascism, fu ck you
       buddy-ISM.
       Simon and Garfunkel once said something about Christianity in
       one of their songs. Although that was not their intent, that
       phrase PEFECTLY fits in regard to a 'greed is good' ideology
       disguised as fiscally responsible practicality.
       [move]
       Laugh about it, Shout about it, When you've got to choose, Every
       way you look at it you lose.[/move]
       They were wrong to mock Christ and Christianity. Heaven DOES
       hold a place for those who pray.
       Howevah, they were right to mock the hypocritical "Christians"
       who are anything but Christian in thought, word and deed.
       The common ground between 'greed is good' ideology disguised as
       fiscally responsible practicality and fake Christianity is
       HYPOCRISY used to manipulate, fool, dominate and disingenuously
       profit from your fellow man.
       IOW, it is a VICIOUS AND HARMFUL REJECTON OF THE FOLLOWING!!!!
       [center][img
       width=200]
  HTML http://franklinchurchofchrist.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/brothers-keeper-banner.jpg[/img][/center]
       Have a nice day.
       #Post#: 4353--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda
       By: AGelbert Date: January 16, 2016, 6:21 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]Can you give me a list of common psychological biases?
  HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1730.gif[/center]
       Milan de Reede
       Alexander van Hattem, Human, Doctor, Mental Health Professional
       Oh man, so many of those. If you are really interested in the
       subject I can recommend you some good books.
       First of all there's the 6 "biases" that Cialdini identified in
       his book.
       •Reciprocity: We are bound to return favors, even if the favor
       was unsollicited. Someone hands you a rose, you feel obliged to
       give them something back, even if you do not want the rose at
       all.
       •Consistency: People always want to look consistent. Simply put,
       offer people $50 if they will try to use less electricity, then
       after a few days take away the original incentive, and people
       will still try to be consistent with their new self-image of
       "energy saver".
       •Social proof: The simplest one, really. Enter an elevator where
       everyone has their backs turned to the door and you're likely to
       turn your back to the door as well. When given incomplete
       information people tend to just go with the group.
       •Liking: We are more likely to be influenced by people that we
       like. This makes sense, however this means we are more likely to
       agree with or buy from people that share superficial
       similarities with us, regardless of their relevance to the
       situation. Your grandmother's name is also Jessica?! Great, I
       should buy your car!
       •Authority: We are likely to agree to do something simply
       because an authority (doctor, professor) asks us to do it. This
       can be easily exploited by people pretending to be an authority
       (think actors playing a doctor in a series advertising for a new
       drug) or by even just looking like an authority (white
       lab-coat). For an interesting experiment on authority, google
       Milgram experiments.
       •Scarcity: This is what's in play everytime you see "Only 2 of
       this shirt left!". In our minds something scarce has more value.
       If there is one jar with 2 cookies left and one with 20 cookies
       left, the one with 2 cookies will not only be more tempting but
       we'll say the cookie tasted better (simplified).
       Those are, I believe, the biggest ones. There's however a whole
       sling of other biases we have.
       •Even by mentioning something as odd as dwarves or by mentioning
       how lucky you are, biases come into play. For example, think of
       a number now. Was it 7? Mentioning dwarves (seven dwarves) and
       lucky (lucky number) made you more likely to pick 7, which I see
       as a bias. This is called priming. Priming someone by having
       them mention their gender before a maths test makes women
       perform worse than men, even if these women do not believe in
       the stereotype. Priming someone by having them unscramble words
       related to elderly people makes them want slower afterwards.
       Priming someone by showing them the Apple logo for a few seconds
       makes them more creative afterwards. There really are countless
       examples here, google priming.
       •Anchoring bias. Do you think that when he died Abraham Lincoln
       was older or younger than 120 years? 120 years is a ridiculous
       number, but after reading this and answering the question you
       are likely to give a higher answer than you would if I had asked
       whether he was older or younger than 17 years when he died.
       •Availability heuristic. If people just saw a news item on
       murders, they believe the murder rate is higher even though this
       is only 1 data point.
       •Perceptual contrast. Seeing a "regular" woman after seeing a
       picture of a model will make that "regular" woman less
       attractive. This can also be used with prices.
       •Gam bler's fallacy. When you're playing roulette and the ball
       keeps landing on red, you're bound to think the odds that it
       must now land on black are bigger. They aren't, they are the
       same everytime. People are terrible at statistics.
       •Loss aversion. When given the chance to win $1000 or lose
       $1000, we should see this as a neutral possibility. People
       however are very averse to (potential) losses, meaning the loss
       looms larger than the gain. Some studies have shown losses loom
       twice as large as gains, meaning even a 50/50 bet to win $1500
       or lose $1000 wouldn't be taken.
       That's just a quick selection. If you really are interested in
       the subject, there are a lot of interesting books on this
       subject. Influence by Cialdini would be a good start.
       Thanks for the A2A.
  HTML https://www.quora.com/Can-you-give-me-a-list-of-common-psychological-biases
       Agelbert NOTE: AS you can see, normal humans are inherently
       caring and cooperative. These are good traits that, rather than
       being labeled as "biases", should be celebrated as evidence of
       our inherently social, not individualistic, nature.
  HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-103.gif
       
       [img width=100]
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif[/img]
       HOWEVER, Game theorists, who eschew altruistic behavior or
       reciprocal kindness, except as a ploy to lower the guard of a
       competitor
  HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-devil19.gif,
       study all
       the above in order to manipulate, make suckers of, and profit
       from, humans outside their circle of Welfare Queen "Apex
       Predators 'R' US".
       Game Theory is and always was, a cheap rationalization for
       conscience free "might is right" STUPIDITY.
       "Might is right" is the cornerstone of Capitalism.
       [quote]
       The 'greed is good' worshipping advocates of this evil ISM have
       a complete vocabulary of terms and phrases coined for the
       express purpose of demonizing egalitarian social systems that
       protect, care for and preserve the people and the environment on
       behalf of present and future generations.  [/quote]
       In fact, all those disingenuous terms and phrases (wasteful
       bureaucracies, unsound social engineering, irresponsible
       spending of other people's money, coerced and undemocratic
       taxation, etc.) apply 100% to the capitalist corruption of the
       tax system and the government in this country (and others).
       Some hair splitters will claim that's PREDATORY Capitalism, not
       good old patriotic American Capitalism.  "Predatory" (is a
       redundant adjective because [i]there really isn't any other kind
       of Capitalism, regardless of what you have heard from
       Capitalists  ;)).
       [center][img
       width=300]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-160116191142.png[/img][/center]
       [center][img
       width=200]
  HTML https://collapseofindustrialcivilization.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/capitalism-good-business-sense-leila-la-tres-sage.png[/img][/center]
       [move]THE PATH that this empathy deficit disordered, 'greed is
       good', 'might is right' ISM is pushing human civilization along
       will, if not stopped, lead to the following future. See
       Below.[/move]
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PTo-8AIrRHY/VlScp-JipgI/AAAAAAABL1Q/JR2j7BDE_30/s1600/11-24-2015x.jpg[/img][/center]
       Whether they admit it or not, people are brainwashed to believe
       that a "successful predator" is one that NEVER engages in
       altruistic behavior.
       This is wrong and it is stupid. But that's what people are
       brainwashed with in our "educational" system and in our business
       community.
       Consequently, if a person is not directly being threatened, they
       are made to believe that the "normal" behavior of an "apex
       predator" (like us) is to NOT help the downtrodden, but to seek
       to PROFIT from their misery..
       Game Theory is what the Defense Department AND Wall Street use
       to justify excluding absolutely any altruistic behavior in
       competitive strategies. It was created by an autistic
       mathematical genius IDIOT who worshipped Spencer and did not
       understand Darwin.
       The problem with game theory in the REAL real world is that it
       fails to model it properly. By totally excluding altruistic
       behavior (except as a ploy to sucker the opponent into a
       position of weakness), it is doomed to, not just fail miserably,
       but to degrade the [i]sine qua non conditions the species
       engaging in it requires for perpetuation.[/i]
       The brainwashed DO NOT understand that. They therefore DO NOT
       lift a finger to help the minorities in this, or any other,
       country. THEY, (particularly the "conservatives") are sold on
       Game Theory, as are most Capitalists, Libertarians, Wall
       Streeters and, of course, the Military Industrial complex.
       THEY ALL are WRONG. But they talk a good game (theory).
       Every time those fine fellows claim they "aren't racist", even
       as they try to finger social safety nets as "welfare queenery"
       or "someone else's money" (see: Thatcher 'greed is good' idiocy)
       OR "bad for the economy", while WILLFULLY ignoring the MASSIVE
       corporate welfare queenery, they just want brainwashed average
       Americans to act against their best interests, AND BE HAPPY
       ABOUT IT (see below).
       [center]
       [img
       width=200]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130116135729.gif[/img][/center]
       Game Theory is the cornerstone of racism AND our degraded
       democracy and biosphere.
       Forget Survival of the Fittest: It Is Kindness That Counts
  HTML http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/kindness-emotions-psychology/
       A psychologist probes how altruism, Darwinism and neurobiology
       mean that we can succeed by not being cutthroat.[/I]
  HTML http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/kindness-emotions-psychology/
       The FACT is that we, as a species, WILL NOT SUCCEED if we
       CONTINUE to exclude altruism (involving ALL LIFE, not just our
       family!) from our [i]modus vivendi.[img
       width=100]
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/mog.gif[/img]
       We ARE our brother's keeper. Our species will not survive if we
       don't learn AND LIVE that, not as religious principle, but as a
       basic tenet of Biosphere Math Successful Species Perpetuation.
       [center]
       [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://franklinchurchofchrist.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/brothers-keeper-banner.jpg[/img][/center]
       Have a nice day.
       
       #Post#: 4393--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda
       By: AGelbert Date: January 25, 2016, 6:51 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Surly1 link=topic=238.msg96126#msg96126
       date=1453762051]
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://scontent-dfw1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtp1/v/t1.0-9/12647185_1315295021832687_6086347958587586711_n.jpg?oh=8dc8eb5690d9a521d50fd9a7913037df&oe=572C1819[/img][/center]
       Uh,oh, indeed.
       [/quote]
       Uh, oh is right.
       [center][img
       width=400]
  HTML http://memecrunch.com/meme/5L3XX/spiderman-bullshit-detector/image.jpg?w=544&c=1[/img]
       [/center]
       It seems that hip boots will no longer suffice.
       [center][img
       width=300]
  HTML http://leatheroaks.org/Rubber/AqualaLayers/IMG_2760.JPG[/img][/center]
       #Post#: 4461--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda
       By: AGelbert Date: February 5, 2016, 9:46 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]VIDEO: Is Hillary Clinton a Progressive?
  HTML http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TzWpwHzCvCI/T_sBEnhCCpI/AAAAAAAAME8/IsLpuU8HYxc/s1600/nooo-way-smiley.gif<br
       /> Not According to Her Policy Record [/center]
       Posted on Feb 4, 2016
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/bg4pHCKAQoA[/center]
       EXCELLENT video that tells the TRUTH!    [img
       width=20]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080515182559.png[/img]
  HTML http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/video_journalists_are_failing_to_challenge_hillary_clintons_20160204
       #Post#: 4529--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda
       By: AGelbert Date: February 18, 2016, 3:07 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]VIDEO: Constitution Alert [/center]
  HTML http://www.truthdig.com/cartoon/item/video_constitution_alert_20160218
       [move]
       Rovian trick, claim the opponent's strengths, and accuse him of
       your own weaknesses.  :evil4:[/move]
       #Post#: 4626--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda
       By: AGelbert Date: March 3, 2016, 2:00 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]Don’t Cry About Super Tuesday—Bernie Sanders Is Winning
       the Future
  HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_0293.gif[/center]
       Posted on Mar 2, 2016
       MONEY QUOTES:
       [quote]“Judging from Super Tuesday’s results, Sen. Bernie
       Sanders has a long row to hoe if he is going to overtake Hillary
       Clinton and become the Democratic nominee,” Bleifuss began. “By
       and large, the margins of her victories were larger than the
       margins of his. And as In These Times Deputy Publisher
       Christopher Hass reported last week, it is in the size of these
       margins that the Democratic standard bearer will be determined.
       “But the race for the Democratic nomination is not only a
       contest between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. It is also
       the venue for competing ideas about how social change is made,
       in which two visions for the future have been offered.”
       Look at how the debate over healthcare has played out. Sanders
       is an unabashed supporter of getting insurance corporations out
       of the healthcare business and establishing a single-payer,
       Medicare-for-all system. Clinton has campaigned to defend the
       Obamacare status quo, and tinker about the edges. Ditto with
       banking. Sanders promises he will break up banks that are too
       big to fail. Clinton wants to—well, she says she will hold Wall
       Street accountable and reduce risks, but we don’t exactly know
       what her agenda is, since she has refused to release the texts
       of speeches she gave to the bankers who have funded her. As for
       making college affordable, Sanders wants to provide free tuition
       for students who attend state institutions. Clinton wants to
       make community colleges free and reduce costs at public
       universities. The list goes on, but you get the picture. The
       choice is between radical change and incremental reform.
       And that’s reform that 26 million Americans who still lack
       reliable access to health care six years after the passage of
       President Obama’s landmark health insurance law would be
       justified in seeing as no reform at all.
       “Again and again,” Bleifuss continued, we get the same “measured
       caution” from Clinton. “Dreams are for the future. ... Enjoy the
       feast. Half a loaf is better than none.”
       True to the interests of his constituents, Sanders “is having no
       truck with such a meager meal.” As the senator put it in a
       speech in Fort Collins, Colo., on Sunday:
       I believe that if you start your campaign and run on a platform
       calling for a full loaf, at worst you’re gonna get a half loaf.
       If you start your campaign talking about a need for a half loaf,
       you’re going to get crumbs. And the American people today do not
       want, do not need crumbs. They need the whole loaf.
       With Clinton measurably closer to the nomination, “it looks like
       we’re sitting down to a pretty lean victors banquet,” Bleifuss
       continued. But if Sanders does lose the nomination, he asks, “In
       the long-term, who is the real winner? Who has put ideas on the
       table that herald a future that transcends the status quo? As he
       has done before, on Super Tuesday, in state after state, Sanders
       won a majority of Democratic voters under the age of 30. Clinton
       may yet win the nomination, but the future of the party belongs
       to Sanders.”
       The young people who make up a significant portion of Sanders’
       movement “are not clueless dreamers. The harsh realities of
       employment precarity, debt, low wages, inequality, climate
       change, etc., have forced young Americans to reassess their
       circumstances in a cold, harsh light.”
       If life in America is basically peachy keen, then the small-bore
       reforms proposed by Clinton and the neoliberal technocrats who
       helm the Democratic Party make a lot of sense.
       If, on the other hand, the status quo is intolerable—as it is
       for millions of Americans—then what Sanders calls “political
       revolution” becomes a moral imperative.
       Clinton and Sanders offered America’s millennials two futures.
       They made their choice.
       [/quote]
  HTML http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/hillary_clinton_may_won_super_tuesday_but_bernie_sanders_20160302
       [center]
  HTML http://media.giphy.com/media/HjPbLbmep2aJO/giphy.gif[/center]
       #Post#: 4705--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda
       By: AGelbert Date: March 16, 2016, 8:09 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center][font=georgia]HUGE Victory: Senate Rejects the DARK Act
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/za4.gif[/font][/center]
       Wenonah Hauter | March 16, 2016 1:03 pm |
       Today, the Senate did the right thing and did not advance a bill
       from Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) that can best be described as the
       Denying Americans the Right to Know
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013201314.png<br
       />(DARK) Act. The bill would have prevented states from requirin
       g
       labeling of genetically engineered (GMO) foods and stopped
       pending state laws that require labeling to go into effect.
  HTML http://ecowatch.com/2016/03/16/senate-rejects-dark-act-gmo-labeling/
       [center]
  HTML http://i.imgur.com/siGMkUI.gif[/center]
       [center]
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/looksmiley.gif
       [/center]
       #Post#: 4885--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda
       By: AGelbert Date: April 13, 2016, 8:49 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [move] Krugman Maliciously Attacks Senator Bernie Sanders
       >:([/move]
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/YEcD6At9Ytk[/center]
       #Post#: 5014--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda
       By: AGelbert Date: April 30, 2016, 3:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=RE link=topic=7064.msg102602#msg102602
       date=1462022600]
       [quote author=roamer link=topic=7064.msg102584#msg102584
       date=1461994834]
       I'll level with you I'm not really that sad about my engineering
       career not working out, I frankly hated the corporate
       environment.  Just wish I had a little security and a place to
       call home.  I'm all but selling my soul out to the frackers to
       get a shot at buying some land and a cabin but its not exactly
       panning out that great either.  Not only has the pay gone to S H
       I T it's just goddammn boring and monotonous. MKing thinks way
       too highly of the drilling world.  Maybe it was different in his
       day but punching holes in the bakken is la cookie cutter
       process. Im going brain dead mwding there is not an iota of
       technical challenge left to the job, I'm getting paid for sleep
       deprivation and the ability to be a trained yes sir monkey.  The
       next rung up as directional driller isn't too much better either
       from a technical perspective.   Maybe my cabin will have to just
       be a cheap cube van and a tent lol..
       [/quote]
       99% of all jobs are boring and monotonous.  The nature of a
       "job" is that you do the same thing, day in and day out.
       Neurosurgery is boring.  Spinal fusions, every day, that is the
       meat of the practice.  Milking cows is boring.  Driving a truck
       is boring.
       Artists have slightly less boring jobs, but even art is
       monotonous.  If you're a painter, every day you paint.  What you
       are painting may be different one day to the next, but you're
       still dipping a brush in paint, over and over.
       Why do people do these boring and monotonous jobs?  To make
       MONEY of course.  B&M jobs are somewhat more tolerable the more
       money you make, although not always.  Beyond the problem of B&M,
       unless you are the CEO you always have some "boss" you have to
       please, and who also more often than not is an ass hole.
       All of this serves to make the world of work quite unpleasant,
       and even though I did work I mostly enjoyed,  I just about
       always had ass hole bosses.  So I definitely do not miss the
       world of work, and sure am glad I got my opportunity to retire
       on Mailbox Money!  :icon_sunny:
       However, you are quite a few years away from this unless you
       become disabled, which of course is not much fun itself, but on
       balance it is better than working!  lol.
       So, let's assume you can get your college loans paid off and you
       put together enough money to buy a cabin, or some land you can
       build one on.  You didn't particularly like milking cows over
       the last winter, you didn't like working as an engineer, you
       don't like poking holes in the ground for the fracking
       industry...so what are you going to do for money once you do buy
       said cabin?  ???
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191404.bmp<br
       /> If you go on the cheap with a Stealth Van, what are you going
       to do for money to buy gas, assuming as you do that gas will be
       available and cheap for some time to come?
       RE
       [/quote]
       [center]
       Roamer,
       Selling out your soul is a bad plan.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp
       But I admit anyone that does that has lots of company in
       Amerika. [/center]
       [center][img
       width=240]
  HTML http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Screen-Shot-2015-09-11-at-10.03.46-AM.jpg[/img][/center]
       The routine selling of one's soul for the MYTH of  "personal
       freedom of choice" is what made Amerika a BANANA Republic run by
       those corporations you abhor.
       Ka figured this out. I'm sure you can figure it out too.
       [center]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-210315154750.jpeg[/center]
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page