Hidden Influence: The Rise of Collectivism
To some extent, we are all capable of becoming slaves to the ideologies of others. But what if the world's elite could successfully infiltrate our educational system and other sources of information, and use their seemingly unlimited power and influence to indoctrinate us to their ideological agendas? Would we be savvy enough to recognize and fight against this thinly veiled form of brainwashing?
That's just one of the tantalizing questions set forth by the new documentary titled Hidden Influence: The Rise of Collectivism, an intriguing expose on the perils of conformity, the means by which we are taught to view the world through the prism of propaganda, and the importance of reclaiming individual thought and identity.
According to the film, powerful social influencers have mastered the art of spreading their ideologies through our politics, economic systems, and various forms of media. Inundated with these manufactured realities, the public too often fails to consider the true source of the information they're being fed, and they allow themselves to become mere pawns in a series of skillfully manipulative games. These tactics are nothing new. In fact, they were revealed to the public as early as 1928, when Edward Bernays, long considered the father of public relations, published a book titled Propaganda. In it, Bernays expressed the reality that, "we are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of."
Perhaps the most insidious of these tactics involves the global education system, an arena by which the majority can be controlled into accepting revolutionary and radical ideologies. The film accuses the world's major conglomerates of pushing their economic and social agendas by infiltrating schools and universities under the protective cloak of philanthropic foundations. These charges are supported by one of the film's most impressive interview subjects, Charlotte Iserbyt, a former senior policy advisor for the United States Department of Education.
Throughout history, we can point to various instances when the spread of social ideologies has inspired catastrophic and demoralizing results. By exposing the machinery responsible for many of these movements, Hidden Influence: The Rise of Collectivism provides the blueprint for a more informed public and a demand for increased transparency.
A cut and paste collage of other people's ideas grafted together to create a boring story with a dreary narration.
Just want to point out that Charlotte Thompson founded the Maine Conservative Union, an affiliate of the national American Conservative Union. They are very much about the privatization of education.
I literally saw the title alone and thought, "I bet it has a poor rating." I'm sorry, but it seems that any film on this site that even slightly conflicts with left-wing ideology is dismissed as propaganda.
Funny how its getting a bad rating but the content is well done. Remember people sharing ideas doesn't make it bad. "It don't agree so I'm gonna give it a bad rating"
The liberal are all triggered^^^^ "no one can disagree with me I'm a righteous liberal"
Ok all was great up to his "white guilt theory" rant and claiming social justice has no place in topics such as criminology. Clearly has no idea why these theories transect. Sounds like an angry bitter white man at this point, and frankly its insulting. Upset that he wasn't invited to the rich boys club that used to dominated society and more angry that he cant be part of the newest trends.
Goes on to nit pick and labels all feminists within his bitter gaze. "busy-bodied professional victims" - coming from a man who educated himself highly yet clearly feels unaccomplished. So lets blame it on others, because I can't just get a great job and be whatever I want, it must be "wild eyed feminist bloggers" fault. Completely ignoring facts of why these theories are necessary or the fact that crime, the commitment of a crime has many reasons and roots.
Further goes on to criticize others for their use of words but completely lack self reflection on his own or his condescending tone.
This is an insult to feminists, his behaviour is an insult to those highly educated white men who aren't bitter like this one clearly is.
Regarding the quick discussion of the highly complex topic of language: YES THERE IS NEGATIVE ASSOCIATIONS WITH COLOUR. Watch Disney movies or current children cartoons. They serve to indoctrinate the next generation to convince them of who is dangerous. The initial fear of darkness very likely does originate from night versus day, but history and human behavior has molded it as a tool to be used to separate and control.
This guy basically rants that those who face issues should just pull up their boot straps and build your own wealth. COMPLETELY ignoring context of reality. Women still make 76 cents to the same dollar that men make for the same job and qualifications, white people still are employed in better paying and secure jobs over their coloured counterparts - despite having better qualifications - all these are backed up by routine studies. White people also get apartments before people of colour. This is reality. Not the result of 'professional victims' because no one chooses to be a victim.
This feels like a pro-white, anti womens (and human) issues, rant about how collectivism is making us face reality of the world and i dont like it. *crosses arms, pouts* Also i would like to point out that his history is based solely on the western versions and ignores the recorded and available histories of other cultures. So his idea of individualism and self ownership is shaped heavily by his very narrow view of society, family, individual, identity and community.
Steven you obviously arent American and the fact that you dismiss this fine fine film and push a globalist anti US agenda makes your comments irrelevant. This is exactly what is occurring in the usa at this time and this film exposed it weather you like it or not. You disgust me. You are a leftist commie racist and an anti semite no doubt.
Ask any self-aware high school teacher or college professor and you'll find they all feel they need to stick to accepted dogma, whether it's in the interpretation of history, ideologies, religion, etc, or lose their jobs. This is especially so today when there is far less tenure, more just contract positions. Freedom of speech is just a myth. And this includes BBC, ABC, NBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, etc. All media is scripted according to very narrow perspectives with their particular political agendas. Education is brainwashing, and has always been so. And it's a hard slug to free yourself from it.
I really think I want to keep watching but this kids voice is agonizing. I will try to push on, but I don't know if I can take it much longer.
Thanks for the warning. I don't subscribe to the Ayn Rand view of the world. The only conspiracy is the one where rich and powerful brainwash other idiots to fight their wars and buy their worthless merchandise.
Bernie Sanders' popularity is a prime example of this brainwashing in action. No society on Earth has had more leisure time , better health & security, availability of cheap food, social welfare, & abundance then we do in the West, all because of Capitalism, yet thousands of brainwashed & close-minded youth have been led to believe that Capitalism & basically our entire way of life is evil, selfish, and must be destroyed. They've turned to Socialist Bernie Sanders for answers when true Socialism has failed every time it's been tried. Not including the billions the US government gives in aid to foreign countries, Americans themselves donate more to world causes then all other people on Earth combined, yet this assistance would all but vanish if we became a Socialist country. What's the incentive to work hard if you get the same amount of money as your neighbor who plays video games all day? Greed is good- it makes us work harder, achieve more, and has created the most prosperous society the world's ever know, BY FAR. The problem is, the youth have never had to experience hardship to any real degree, so they don't know how terribly difficult and painful life can be and so they think a family who doesn't have Satellite TV is poverty stricken. I was born in a somewhat socialist country where if we even posted one comment online against the government, we'd be arrested and probably never see the light of day. Most Americans are spoiled and have no idea how lucky they are. When we would see Americans protesting on TV in my old country, all we'd feel is disgust- "they have everything and yet protest & complain like they're living in a 3rd world country like ours". Then we'd shake our heads in disbelief.
One of the reasons communism failed had to do with its inability to generate wealth but if wealth is generated then communism is an excellent system to distribute it. Why should the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. How did the rich get their money in the first place - on the backs of the poor. The earth belongs to everyone not just the privileged few we all need to share earth's resources. There need to be equal opportunity for all people.
I don't agree that capitalism is good and the other political systems are evil. Case in point capitalism decimated south america in the destruction of the Incas and other civilization there. Not to mention the millions of blacks taken from Africa to grease the wheels of capitalism in the United States and the Caribbean. The economy of the England and the US is built on the evils of capitalism.
...this documentary was not very compelling at all, in my view...almost regret I watched it...I gave it three stars – also, technically it was so poor as to be almost unwatchable for that reason...
Yes, that was a harsh judgement, but there are so many superb documentaries to see, that one gets "miffed" when wasting time on an "unworthy product" so to speak...
An eye opening documentary that does not influence your position but highlights the misconception of hard work. We need to think about our everyday existence and that's what this doc does. If you can get past the narrator's voice then you're in for an amazing documentary.
1933, year of Federal Reserve Act, IRS and birth certificates
traitor from within
From exterior sources as well as interior fools, bought off for instant gratifacation-esk motive. Absolute evil destruction will be the tipping point of no return, due to the shear masses of idiot's lack of study of history. Simply non human powers have overwhelmed those that believe all the implied goals, and fraudulent rewards being promised. Mindless Obedience that leads to self destruction is non human. The simple question of "WHY", delineates between Humanity, and Non Thinking Capacities of Beasts.
yes we the people baboon let it happened ! I m canadian and the same is coming here ! My (brain programmed tube) as been in the garbage for the last 5 years . (where it should have been since my youth
This is another confirmation that there is not running from the Marxist tyranny. The morally corrupt dictators who want to control people with the propaganda think that they have won the battle but the are wrong because you cannot control the human spirit. Keep oppressing people and keep them with their back against the wall long enough and you will be surprised......history can recall. This control freaks make Hitler look like a choirboy......
Poorly argued documentary. Instead of exploring the the evidence and coming to a conclusion, it seems the film maker came to a conclusion then searched for evidence to support it.
Much better around on the subject.
Ok, so let me get this straight: People are stupid and manipulable enough to be convinced by the propaganda put out by these evil, Marxist puppeteers but would somehow be smart enough to manage to figure out what's best for them and how not be total dicks to people, if left to their own devices. I think I'm missing something...
Apart from their ignorant support for "government" violators, the vast majority of people already "manage to figure out what's best for them and how not be total dicks to people" in their daily lives. So, yes, you are missing something---the fact that most people interact respectfully with each other; they don't steal, kidnap, assault, rape others throughout their entire lives. And all that without authorities watching their every move!!
...and the name of THAT planet you apparently dwell upon is...lol
Are you claiming (in opposition to my comment) that
"most people [don't] interact respectfully with each other; [most people do] steal,
kidnap, assault, rape others...."?
You have got to move to a better neighborhood
...I hate to, but must agree...BUT ! It would only require a very small amount of CONSCIOUS People to become active, and Effectively Appose this presently well developed "Tyranny of Stupid" that has Controlled these Domesticated Herd of Non Thought Possessing Morons. Zombies are overwhelming this once Society. Cut out the Cause of this Diseased Tissue, (those that are implementing the destruction), and in short time the problem will be corrected.
The only thing you are missing is that this process have been incremental over almost a century. We are almost 5 generations deep in fundamental and systemic manipulation. People aren't s*upid, it's all they know, that is why it seems like each generation seems a little more extreme than the last. It's a very large web that casts an even larger shadow.
Okay, everything with the word social in it isn't anti-capitalism. There's a huge difference in "distributing wealth and all resources equally" and treating people fairly. If we are to be a free nation, that means we are ALL allowed to be free. Free to be different colors or religions or sexual orientations...To keep certain groups of people from killing other groups of people, the words social justice refer, for the most part - having equal freedom to be ourselves, drink from whatever water fountain we wish, sit where we may, be attracted to whomever we like, earn fair wages for fair pay - share those freedoms, not necessarily share the wealth, that's not what everyone means when they say social justice or social programs. Just as wanting the government to mind their own business and stay out of our parent-child relationships, our right to bear arms, not try to force us to go against our core beliefs to provide wedding services, when we're not the exclusive holder of all wedding services - doesn't make a person an abusive parent in a cult about to go on a gay bashing shooting spree -
There are absolutely facts to back up this film, most of it anyway. It is about collectivism, but for some reason almost everyone misuses the word, just as communism, socialism and capitalism are misused. Besides people not being able to read the definition for the words socialism, communism, etc. the only part of this film that I haven't seen any prof to support is John Dewey being named as having this huge influence over public schools and his ties to Carnegie, etc. It wasn't John Dewey, it was Horace Mann. John Dewey fought tooth and nail against Mann and Everett and the rest of them. Horace Mann's sister, as a matter of fact, was Elizabeth Peabody. Dewey advocated against top-down authoritative instruction in school and for the lines, rows of desks, raising your hand to speak, being told what to learn, how to do, and when to stop and move to the next subject. Dewey believed that kids would learn instinctively w/teacher guidance, if we let them learn what interested them. The practices that Maria Montessori advocated and implemented into her schools, which are private schools still using those techniques. I have heard this mistake over Dewey and Mann man other times from so many people actually, that I'm pretty sure the Peabody's, Carnegie's, and Rockefeller's meant for it to be made. Everett being Mann's close friend and Peabody his sister isn't mentioned very often either. And I'm I find it mind numbing that with all the information in the world at everyone's fingertips, night and day, as it is, this whole thing is being called crazy liberalism propaganda ... That's how this conspiracy has gone on as it did and still is, people are brainwashed by the media and school system. These elitists would start calling someone a socialist or liberal and illiterate's without the ability to read, and to dumb to think for themselves, I guess, were none the wiser. All of this information can be found in thousands of places written by professors, philosophers, historians....most of it has been published many times over by PBS, The History Channel, and hundreds of congressmen and women, Senators, etc. Learn to read people. And for the makers of this film, I applaud you, but research my claims about Dewey and Mann, and edit the film.
Well done documentary and a must watch!
Too long, rambling and wavering as it fights to find its own thesis. I thought it was about collectivism, suddenly it's an anti-feminist rant, now its onto political correctness, now another mention about big banking. Also, terrible narrator that speaks so slow I lose interest waiting for his next word.
This film is just pure irrational misinformation. There are no facts - Only bias opinions. Unless you want to feel confused and supid do not watch this.It basically says that corporate greed and American foreign politics is actually some sort of left wing assault on American "individualism"....my brain actually hurts after watching this garbage.
My brain hurts after reading your ridiculous comment... ya lousy BS artist. Created an account just to post this one comment? Kinda weird buddy
Read a book from a proper authority on the subject like noam chomsky, slavoj zizek, chris hedges. Not some random dude with a camera interviewing select people. Half way through the doc he completely viers off topic and confuses 2 very different things for is own agenda. Please do question what i write here and find out for yourself...but also question the videos you choose to watch on the internet..
If you know anything about Chomsky or have read even ONE of his books or have heard even ONE of his lectures; you wouldn't have made such a ridiculous statement as you did several posts up about this doc presenting false info, and then bringing up Chomsky to justify your thoughts?! I think not. Huge fail.
seriously? if thats all you got out of this doc, either you have some severe comprehension problems, or you just choose to deny, deflect, and remain blind and/or dumb. Wake up.
I've studied enough of the subjects spoken about to know when real facts are being twisted into liberal propoganda. ive chosen to dismiss this garbage documentary because im already awake. Feel free to believe it all you want but my suggestion would be to pick up a book or two and see if the information in the doc still adds up.
real facts being twisted into what? Lies? Half facts? Exactly what was said that you think was an outright lie? And back it up; prove it was a lie and not just that you THINK it was a lie; enlighten us.
instead of trying to fight me on an online message board why dont you do your own research? Why are you blindly following what this one documentary has to say? Besides, Nothing i say will convince you..and thats not my goal. Plus i see no reason why i need to justify my own personal views to you just because your demanding it like a child. Find out for yourself friend.
fight you? Your response of "i see no reason why i need to justify my own personal views to you" tells me that either you do not understand the difference between a personal opinion (which there are many) and factual truths (which there can only be one), or you simply can't explain yourself; because you have othing to base your "opinion" on in the first place! YOU are the one who made the statements about this doc being a bunch of twisted left wing untruths; I'm simply asking you to point out to me what exactly was said in the doc that is not true! Thats not a childish demand; its the beginning of a debate. I have done much research on the subject at hand, and the doc is factual. Since you are the one not in agreement; its up to YOU to prove what the doc says and what I know to be facts to be wrong. If you can't back up your statements, then you have no business disputing anything.
well how about this then since you are so adamant at being right. You show me the facts within this documentary...? You're the one claiming its factually correct...so why dont you back it up?
Mr. Bell, obviously someone can point out some factual information and back it up (there are hundreds of factual items in the doc). What is one example that you question the validity of?
Well, again, i'd like to point out you haven't brought any facts to the table? But il bite anyway, from my view - as soon as it starts to advocate laissez fair capitalism huge red flags went up. Honestly? Unregulated markets? Thats pure insanity. thats giving corporations what they want. Then he claims that the reason for the rise in corp power in america is due to "communist spies" and then starts to claim that social justice is just a communist ploy? This is beyond laughable. its pure right wing liberal propoganda. The same stuff thst got america there in the first place.
What are the specious FACTS? You have only presented 3 broad paraphrases of what you think the doc-maker is asserting, and offered your opinion that his assertions are objectionable to you. In the first 5 minutes, he presents Bernays' work Propaganda. Fact: Bernays did write a work called "Propaganda". The quotes are in fact from Bernays' work. Life Magazine did present Bernays as one of the 100 most influential Americans of the 20th century (provides evidence that Bernays was influential in processes of American propaganda). That's the first few minutes. I can proceed minute by minute, likewise, demonstrating fact after fact. You don't like his thesis, or theses. A thesis is generally not a "fact". Factual information is presented to support a thesis.
Thats fine...im not contesting that bernays wrote a book that was extremely influential on how the media work...or was on the cover of Time magazine. These are 2 tiny simple facts. But how about you give facts to back up his claims that collectovism is taking over schools, or that social justice is just a communist ploy. You cant, because its purely fictional. Also, a thesis is an original idea by definition which none of this is, its just the same old liberal propaganda wrapped up in new bow. Anyway, believe what you want Mr.Wilson, its your life.
"According to Dewey, the fundamental concepts of instruction and
education are summed up in the one word
"socialization." The school and school organization,
including curriculum, methods, discipline, and ideals, should be
socialized because "the moral responsibility of the school and of
those who conduct it is to society."[24] So that "apart from
participation in social life, the school has no moral end or
aim."[25] In religious terminology, "the moral trinity
of the school [is] the demand for social intelligence, social
power, and social interests."---Rev. John Hardon.
Quotations are John Dewey of course. I won't argue that Dewey was influential in American education. Just look him up. Soviet educators praised him and invited him to Russia. Trotsky praised him as a great American.
I'm not interested in beliefs. While Russia and China are moving toward economic freedom, the USA is moving toward greater totalitarian control. Whether one thinks that is good or bad, I simply want to be aware of the trend, so I can make wise decisions concerning my family, my friends and community members.
i too think america is becoming totalitarian so regardless of what we think of the documentary, we both have the same ideas and values which means more at the end of the day. Its not worth the effort to write another reply. as a suggestion, watch "manufacturing consent" featuring noam chomsky. That puts this doc to shame.take care man
Seen it. Noam Chomsky is a great communicator of world-wide injustices. Keep exploring Brother, and I'll do the same.
If "laissez fair capitalism" is a red flag it means you are in favor of the fascist-communist state America has become plain and simple....
I like the way you think
well thank you ! :)
This is a great film by a great film maker, I can see why the social justice lemmings hate this film. I think it's a must watch.
fantastic documentary, really enjoyed it. Libertarian philosophy is truly the only idea that can save society from the corporate elite. Highly recommend this film to everyone. If you cant be open minded enough to even consider the possibilities presented then their is not much hope for you personally.
Ironically, you make a very close-minded statement about being open-minded.
Do not waste time watching this documentary. It is very distorted.
It turns into this idea of a pure past that America once possessed and that people are responsible enough to even utilize free markets to benefit society.
Clearly, every age is the same. Sociopaths and Psychopaths are always drawn to power. They will never use it to benefit society as a whole. Nations and states are corrals. The US political parties are the same voice. Western powers have consistently "ran over" so many tribes of people to even obtain their "markets".
The true crisis for humanity is one of that of consciousness.
This documentary is a bunch of naive political cr*p that offers no solutions accept anger; while grounded in the realm of man separate from nature.
Whenever I see people posts comments like this, I always think they didn't watch the film till the end. The end of the film does pose a solution, which is libertarianism! It frustrates me because I see this comment time, Watch the last 10 minutes.
You can remain frustrated, the entire documentary was watched and regretted. Libertarianism is yet another form of the same control structure.
The clear problems we encounter time and time again are the borders that "thought" creates and the markets that imply ownership. If you use borders and ownership to solve the problems of borders and ownership, you always arrive in the same situation. Until we as humans realize this, we are dog chasing our own tail, and every age remains the same. Libertarianism is a naive solution.
So what's your solution then? Since you watched the film, I am intrigued.
leftOrRightLobe has a "sophisticated" solution (as opposed to our naive solution). Apparently no members of the populace shall be recognized to have rights to exclusively control anything. No-one shall be recognized as having the right to exclusively control a bordered-off boundary of anything.
Given those "rules", I am also very interested in knowing leftOrRightLobe's proposal for a just and thriving community of humans. I wonder if people will have the right to exclusively control their own bodies. What an interesting world it will be when no-one is recognized to have the right to claim ownership of anything.
Everyone I know is quite interested in maintaining ownership control of their bodies and homes, and it will take some doing to get every one of them to let go of that silly desire, but I'm interested to know how this may be achieved.
Libertarianism never works because people are naturally selfish, exploit others for their own benefit, and quite frankly are not very intelligent and fail to see beyond their own little sphere.
Equitable taxation, the way it was in the USA in the 50s, where the top marginal tax rate was about 90%, would be one way of helping to put the world back on course to a sane and just society. Because the course we are on at this point, where income disparity has reached obscene proportions, (with the banksters, using Mafiosi-style methods to extort astronomical bonuses for failing) is bound to end in a global catastrophe of unimaginable proportions. The rate at which the 0.01% are sucking up the world's wealth is neither tenable nor unsustainable. We must wake up, stop watching TV and start thinking independently and ctritically if we want to give our children and grandchildren a chance to grow up in a decent world.
To get angry about something, you first have to care about something,,, Lefties don't care, they are too busy trying to figure out how to rip you off and feed you more bull ... but then, courageous individuals say, "I'm going to print the truth even if I lose every single reader or viewer.
Ridiculous statement of yours: "lefties don't care, they are too busy trying to figure out how to rip you off...". How are you defining lefty? I'm called a lefty because I care about conservation of endangered species. How do you think that means I don't care? How am I ripping anyone off with my underpaid position trying to use my PhD to maintain biodiversity?
ya right, I'm sure your Marxist nonsense will get everyone on board, not!!!!
lefties don't care? who is it that is always questioning what the gov says and does? You think its the conservatives ? Are you serious? NO conservative right wing republican goes against their government; much less questions what they do, or why they do it, and the thought that they would ever do anything immoral, criminal, or for the betterment of themselves instead of us is so outrageous to them that whoever does do it- us lefties; how DARE we??!!! Damn CONSPIRACY THEORISTS ! Better to trust than to question or disobey, right? Cause "they" are holier than thou, smarter than all, and their only goal in life is making decisions that are based on nothing more than their pure desire to make life better for us. And apparently they shyt golden bricks too. Doubting these sainted leaders in charge never gets to the point of having the courage to do anything; hell for a conservative republican to even consider questioning their supreme leaders is incomprehensible.In their minds Its TREASONOUS AND HERETICAL. You better thank your lucky stars that for all of us LEFTIE's who try to make sure THEY do what is best for ALL OF US. Cause if left to their own devices...they would kill us all if they could get away with it and make a profit . Lefties care.
you're welcome.
And there is nothing we can do as American citizens to change this mess!
That's what Maggie Thatcher and Ronnie Raegan wanted us to believe: TINA, remember?
Well, there are alternatives. But I suppose the system must collapse before a new one can be created.
Whats amazing about right wing populist propaganda is their ability to twist their own strategies and tactics and tell a tale about it being the deceptive ways of their opposition. This used to be called projection amongst the plebes. When someone claimed someone else exhibited their own shortcomings and negative behaviour.
But the projector has brought "projection" to a whole new level with free internet distribution. Libertarianism has been hijacked by Birchers and oiled by the likes of the Koch brothers. They have created an alternative reality that would make Bernay's blush and Freud scratch his head.... and order more lines.
Not only does the right co-opt and hijack popular figures of the left and their ideas but they easily assimilate their issues and twist them to fit their rhetoric and propaganda while bombarding the internet with "truthiness" drivel like this hogwash documentary.
very good comment....an extra 'like/thumbs-up' besides the one already given.
You're doing the very thing right now in that comment, you're claiming these film makers are doing. Good job?
I like the sinister background music and the narrators' echo chambered voice-of-doom commentary. As to the content: a hodgepodge of truths, half-truths and half-baked assertions, overspiced with McCarthy era rhetoric. Although one can feel and commiserate with the author's yearning for that era of nascent, vigorous capitalism that we are as likely to see again as a dotard morphing back into a young man.
An incentive to welcome death - power hungry greedy narcissistic demons.
collectivism is the future but only decentralized collectivism....removing the head of the hydra.
one planet with its inhabitants working together as one , but with each person expressing their individual preferences without ridicule or disrespect.
WARNING: THE VIDEO ABOVE MAY CONTAIN LIBERTARIAN PROPAGANDA
Thank you Janeen Clark for being being a voice of reason in this tsunami of misinformation given to us to by a guy you starts his story of american business in 1934 ignoring the fact that monopolies were formed during a time period when this country was the the least regulated it could have been. Monopolies are an entrepreneur's quintessential goal and the hopeful results of competition in a free market because in a free market you have only two options; compete with the other business by lowering prices or increasing quality, which will eventually push one of you out of the market leaving the victor that much stronger and more eager to push the next opponent out of the way so they may grow once again; or you decide to work with one another secretly so you can both make the profits you want to make without the risk of competition. These principles of profit are what lead business to fund revolutions, wars, genocides and insurgencies so that they can guarantee that not only will these conflicts open new markets to exploit but that the weapons, vehicles and fuel used in these conflicts will also generate revenue in the mean time. Thats why a good businessman always exploits both sides of a conflict.
All I have to say about the second half can't be said better than
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." -Voltaire
Well, strictly speaking, monopolies have existed since the year dot, as they are part and parcel of the primitive state of mankind, the most basic monopoly of all being that of land itself, and it is the monopoly of the unimproved value of land that underpins the most damaging aspect of the neoclassical economic scourge that blights our modern world.
Furthermore, it's quite clear that we cannot find an instance of a monopoly being a good thing in an economic model, however, I do feel that there is a general misconception being bandied about here, as most so called “Libertarians” are actually libertines who can't spell, and the current system of capitalism is in effect faux capitalism, as it amounts to little more than fascism. In fact, I would go one step further and propose that Marxism, also leads to the same place, as controlling the means of production necessitates a degree of centralisation of power.
At the end of the day, we are probably all on the side of the angels here and really looking towards a decentralisation of government and a responsible population, that being the ideal, but I would have to say that most people are not ready for such a drastic change, and, if forced upon them, then all the disastrous consequences (on a humanitarian level) of such revolutionary activity would ensue. For this reason, I feel we need to be respectful of our place in history and strive towards a gradual reform (reformation as opposed to revolution), working within the constraints of the monetary system, and gently reintroducing the value difference between land and capital, by sensibly taxing the great monopolies into submission (by this point you may have guessed I am a Georgist). I do understand people's frustration and need for rapid change, and personally I would embrace a resource based economy, as I do subsist alone with my children without even a bank account to my name, but as I look around me, I don't imagine most of the people I see would be ready for such a thing in their, or their children's lifetime, but what do I know, I am just an old camera... man :-)
Bolshevism certainly led to centralization of power, but only by doing the complete opposite of what Marx had suggested. In orthodox Marxism, the means of production were to be controlled by the people who worked there. They were supposed to form workplace committees which were to be the supreme political force - a decentralized, populist form of governance (carrying many of the same promises as libertarianism such as the elimination of the nation-state). Marx attacked things like public education, spoke out in favour of free trade, and evinced much scorn for the lowest classes of society (which he called the lumpenproletariat). He was not really so distant from the libertarians.
But of course, in the process of implementing these kinds of ideas, it becomes necessary to organize centrally, in order to meet critical challenges rapidly and in a coordinated fashion (eg military crises, food shortages etc). The same would be true of a libertarian revolution.
Sure, some centralisation is inevitable in almost any form of society, but it's not inconceivable to achieve a reasonable degree of fairness by ensuring that all common wealth is taxed back and redistributed by way of a citizen's income? By “common wealth”, I mean the economic rent derived from the land (I.e. that which existed before mankind, which is logically the property of all). This could be brought about painlessly by a gradual rolling up of the existing tax system and its gradual replacement with a Land Value Tax.
In fact, on a global scale, a geo-federalist solution could be the way forward. Nation states could be as small or large as they determined themselves to be, just so long as their membership of the federation be contingent on their adoption of this tax policy and, I would have said, a blanket ban on political lobbying might be a prudent clause to include too. This way, you tax the parasitical monopolists out of power and at the same time relieve the pressure on the genuinely productive sector.
Maybe one day, when society has reached a sufficiently stable and enlightened state of existence, then we might be in a position to explore such utopian ideas as a move away from a monetary system altogether, but that isn't going to happen in our lifetime. So, if I were a Marxist, I would definitely ere towards menshevism, as the impetuous rush for broad-sweeping change is invariably a recipe for disaster.
The first phase of Marxist society (as outlined in Critique of the Gotha Plan) was to do away with all redistribution, especially taxation. Marx's aim wasn't equality (in the same piece, he specifically mentions a right of inequality that belongs to whoever can produce more).
The Marxist ideal was, instead, an outgrowth of Adam Smith's Labour Theory of Value. All wealth being created by the workers, Marxism insisted that all wealth belonged to the workers.
The very poor were not considered to be members of the proletariat, but of a group Marx called the lumpenproletariat. These were defined as class enemies of the proletariat, to be targetted by class warfare and abolished.
Can I ask whether you don't find Marx a bit clunky in this respect compared to George?
After all, if you employ a classical model, then capital is the result of the other two factors (land and labour), so its value is a combination of man hours and the commonwealth (land and resources) consumed. A Georgist would argue that the former is private wealth (after all, you should get to own the fruits of your labour) and the latter is the property of all, so you can fairly tax the commonwealth back to the public coffers. By taxing the unimproved value of land, you are effectively taxing all commonwealth consumption at source, which would be easy to implement (Tolley's Tax guide in the UK would go from thousands of pages to about three) and there would be no means of avoidance or evasion and no dead weight costs on the admin front. Furthermore, once the social bills have been covered, by using a citizen's income system, the redistribution side of things could also be dramatically simplified, as everyone would get exactly the same, irrespective of their personal wealth, or how many jobs they were doing, so benefit fraud wouldn't exist (no opportunity to demonise the poor), and again some colossal dead weight costs could be avoided (no DWP etc). Now, compared to Marx, this is surely a simpler way of tackling wealth disparity within the framework of a monetary system?
Please don't get me wrong, I don't see classical economics as the be all and end all, but I believe it is the only peaceful and sane way of getting out of the current situation. It should be seen as a means to an end, but that end is probably a few generations away and, at this stage, we can but theorise what it will be.
The important point being, that a peaceful and gradual solution is the only way to finally defeat fascism and effectively close the chapter on the abolition of slavery (unfinished business in my opinion), for the simple reason that once you get into armed conflict with fascists, your only option is to quickly adopt their principles and organise yourselves accordingly, since you can't fight a war by committee (this was the tragic dilemma facing the anarcho syndicalists, liberals and communists in Catalunya during the Spanish civil war).
However, despite the fascists having the drop on you in this respect, even if you do manage to prevail against them, then you have a bigger problem to deal with in dismantling the temporary fascist structure that just got you through the conflict, which was pretty much what Eisenhower was probably getting at in his final presidential address.
I think the best policy to adopt would be to not get into a shooting war in the first place, but instead simply tax the power base of the fascist monopolists from under their feet and effectively disincentivise their activities, hopefully without a shot being fired.
It's surely simpler and more practical to implement than Marx?
Good post. Strategies that work on a small scale don't necessarily translate to national or global scales. Marxism/communism DOES work, in small communes, but centralization was necessary for implementation within such large nations such as the USSR and China. Unfortunately, the narrative has now become "Marxism doesn't work", when it is not so simple.
thank you for your kind words. i always wondered how people could use the words "free market" while referring to nothing being free, and "voluntary exchange" when referring to a system in which it is mandatory to exchange. this is the most disrespectful choice imaginable as far as language goes and mind boggling , what are your thoughts with how these particular people end up at this particular use of language and set of ideas so de-coupled from the harsh reality an inch away from all our faces?
You can attain more meaningful insights by discussing ideas in good faith. Just as your last name can refer to you or a candy bar, the word "free" can mean "unhindered" or "no monetary cost". And "voluntaryists" do not typically advocate "mandatory exchange". An eco-village could use permaculture methods that provide for the community needs without exchanging with others. Individual homesteaders could do the same. What "free-market" "voluntaryists" object to such non-exchangers?
That should help your mind get unboggled. I should have helped sooner.
While there are some valuable points raised in this program, there are no appreciable alternatives rendered for consideration. As John Lennon so eloquently put it, "there are no problems, only solutions".
Thus, when we are reduced from limitless options to none, or should I say one, but you can't speak of it,(political correctness) for fear of labialization, or persecution, than what is the point?
I for one have no white guilt simply because I was never a slave owner, nor have I thought less of other people because they look, or think differently than me. (stupidity being the only exception) It also helps that I am not the 1%, but part of the 99% who acknowledge my servitude through no fault of my own. It is not my responsibility to save humanity from itself, but to save myself from humanity. To do this requires critical thinking, while ignoring indoctrination via brainwashing.
Simply put, never forget the golden rule. How would I feel if I was in someone else's shoes? As long as I can do this, (empathy) than I am safe from being reduced to the idiocy of the societal puppet. That is their responsibility, and they like the rest of their immoral clan, (greed, sloth, gluttony, envy, pride, lust, and wrath) they can live by the sword, and they will die by it.
Since none of us are perfect, and all of us are a work in progress, than enlightenment must rule the day. (moderation, and variety)
P.S: I have no desire to control others, (immoral control freak) only to have control over myself, and my own life. (moral control freak) I even like the idea of working with others for everyone's benefit. If this is unacceptable to the powers that be, than the only problems I have are the ones they create. (temporary, and insignificant)
there so many misconceptions here in the film ,its easier to say they got a couple things right out of the whole lot.
the truth is the systems are not corrupt at all they have always worked this way and only could work this way when you look at government and money systems for the last 3000 years its as we see today the richest men control government and society, competition is you have to lose for me to win, that means monopolies ARE copetition. it is only from a mindset of you have to lose for me to win that could ever form a monopoly the only alternative to competition is co-operation which is for me to win you win also, this makes monopoly impossible. government and money systems are built from the framework of domination they always have and always will work this way, a co-operation based society is human beings and earth and life is number one not profit. competition is profit number one, monopolies are profit number one, capitalism, fascism communism and all other -isms are profit number one. a free market with voluntary exchange means no price tags no barter no trade no reward or punishment no domination. so do not use those terms when you mean "no government restrictions ", no human can voluntarily choose not to use money in a money system they are forced to use money so shame on you for pretending anything is free in what you call a free market. what you mean is "no government restrictions in the money system"
I see the documentary is quickly being voted down in rating.
It is put together extremely well, with some very credible history and information to back it up. Ignore the bots trying to keep people from opening their minds. Open yours and watch.
The watching is not the problem, it's the listening. The narrator is extremely tedious to listen to nonobstant what he is saying.
Fabien, I actually find it 'tedious' to read such negative and trifling comments about your dislike of the narrators voice. A voice he happened to born with. Btw- I have no problem with the narrators voice. Period.
Good for you, It was so monocord and depressing to me, I gave up after 1 minute.
Just 1 minute? I didn't like it either but the point of a documentary isn't to entertain you. By the way, if you keep going, his narration is a small fraction of the film.
Ok thanks, I'll watch it at some point when I am done watching other docs with topics I find more interesting.
1 minute? At the rate he spoke you only would have heard 4 or 5 words!
lol, you figured why I labelled it depressing and monotone.
He has a terrible narrator's voice which distracts from the words he is saying. For that reason they should have hired a different person for the job. I don't have a good voice for narration either, and so if I made a documentary I too would hire someone else to do the speaking.
Sorry, I can't do it. I can't watch this. 10 seconds in and this guy's voice is so irritating, I want to punch him on principle. He sounds like a paranoid caricature for tinfoil hats and alien abductions. I can't take anything he says seriousl when he sounds so sleep-deprived, wired, and monotonous. Shoulda found a better voiceover.
Atta boy ! You tell em! You could be listening to a documentary given by 'Mahatma Gandhi' himself, and 10 seconds later turn it off because you 'didn't like' the sound of the voice he was born with! Yeah I can just hear ya go on and on how you really would like to punch Gandhi in his face because he didn't have enough self awareness to realize he needed to hire a voiceover! (Phiffft)
And here's the problem with our society - the most up votes from being irritated! The problem being, others who may come to watch this doc, may see this and think no point, having been persuaded by a negative view - I would suggest, think it by all means but think again before such a post without watching in full (it gets better) - I am guilty myself though of leaping without thinking sometimes too, quite inevitable in our culture - but I do now always reflect afterwards.
Whilst I agree it did spoil the doc somewhat, it's about the message and content.
If you want a more comical view form a very good speaker then I suggest the culture in decline series by Peter Joseph, I think they're all here on SeeUat Videos - there are 6 of them.
We all need to look past our first impressions and judge or merit not on ignorance - easier said than done I know so not having a go at you, just to be clear.
Good doc, would say eye opening but I've been way too aware of this for some time.
They subtlety tell us what to believe, what to do, what to learn, how to submit our lives to
the everyday grind of mostly irrelevant jobs and not to question what or how we're taught, make us believe the suffering and horrors we see is just the way it is, and to be thankful we haven't got it any worse.
The funny thing is the more power and domination these people have the more people seem to be blind of it with more dumbing down all over the world. We have the wool pulled over our eyes when deep down most of us know this isn't right!
In the words of Jacque Fresco "we have the technology, the know how and the feasibility to create an entirely new civilisation, without war, without poverty - where human suffering is not only avoidable but totally unacceptable"
In the words of Carl Sagan "The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot"
George Carlin put it nice and simply "they fu**ing own us..."
We need an awakening people to end this madness - what are we going to do about it?
I know an answer, which so many doubt and many more are not aware at all!
Once again, I fear we are all falling into the same old trap of lending these people too much credence by supposing that there is a clever and concerted conspiracy, when the truth I suspect is of a more fragmented and dismally banal nature. Granted the methods of Edward Bernays are still much in evidence in the actions of those who would seek to control the great unwashed, but it is rash to assume that they are all pulling together in some fiendish master plan.
The age we live in, once you strip away the technological trappings and air of sophistication, has changed little since the middle ages, for feudalism is still rife, though today we know it by a different name as corporate fascism.
Amongst the so called “elite” there are just the same rivalries/allegiances and betrayal is equally as rife. Furthermore, the vast majority of those involved in such practices are as ignorant of the bigger picture as the corrupt churchmen of old.
To understand what is happening, we need to grudgingly accept that money is the true world religion, and the language of economics has been deliberately obfuscated to make the words of our revered, Nobel prize winning economists as incomprehensible as a sermon in Latin to the common man.
The truth as I find it, can be seen if you study the history of humanity and follow the advancement of reason, for it becomes apparent that the progressive initiative was lost to mankind over 100 years ago, and we are currently locked in a period of regression, sliding back towards our primitive past. You can actually put a time, a place, a man's name, and even a sum of money to this great reversal. The time was 1898, the place: Chicago, Illinois, the man: a Mr John D Rockefeller and the astronomical sum involved: well if I wrote it here, you would scarcely believe me, so it's best to look it up for yourself.
My point being, that a single, poorly thought out act of selfish greed has had far reaching, barely foreseen consequences, and those of us who have come to realise this, have become like the Lollards of old, as we tend to move from place to place out here on the internet and elsewhere, shunned and ridiculed by the established order (though it bears mentioning, never once refuted by reasoned argument), whispering enlightenment to those who will hear it. For where the PR people will always fall down, is when they come up against a cynical generation X, as you cannot unlearn things. Once you have learned the truth about our current economic model, then everything you do and see in your day to day life takes on a different significance, and the root of all that uncertainty and disquiet you may have been experiencing is uncovered, where it has always been hiding, in plain sight.
I really enjoyed reading your thoughts Zeisslkon, and agree with much of what you said. The only thought I would offer is while we must never give the elite more credit than they deserve, it would be foolish to dismiss the new found tools at their disposal. (industrial revolution, and technological advances) While the struggle for power, and greed progresses forward between a relatively small number of players, we would be remiss if we did not realize that it is in their best interests to work together, or fall to depths of the 99.99% of us.
The real 'organized crime' has the courts, the politicians, and the military at their disposal, and nothing scares them more than the idea that someday the general public will wake up, and realize that everything is a scam. (losing power) The idea of democracy is in conflict with corporate fascism, and is about as real as the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, and yes, freedom 55!
It is our responsibility to keep them in check, and the second we don't, than we should dismiss the idea of an enjoyable future for humanity, which in turn means, don't save humanity, but save yourself from humanity, and quit having 9 digit future slaves for them to feed off of. (yes, I am referring to children)
Since they want 6.5 billion of us gone already because we are using up all of 'their resources', (they think they own it) never ignore the lengths they will go to feed their addiction to greed! Take care, and best wishes Zeisslkon!
Yes, there certainly are plenty of cases of the super rich banding together in alliances to further their own interests at the expense of everyone else, which is usually manifested in the form of political lobbying groups. Also, the appalling rise of astroturfing across the internet is another prime example, and one that forum and review site moderators have to face on a daily basis. So yes, the corporate fascists are definitely fighting back after being slightly wrong footed by the arrival of the internet, as they had it pretty much all their own way prior to that in the days of terrestrial TV and had been caught napping, but they're catching up now and it seems that that this is where the battle will be fought.
You see, the only effective way of triumphing over fascism is by a grass roots campaign of education, and I suspect the smarter fascists out there have long known this. It's easy to get twitchy, but I feel it safe to say that there are astroturfers on every forum (I've certainly seen a number of dubious posters on here before now), but we'll just have to deal with them as and when they crop up. The main thing to realise is that they get paid for every post the moderators fail to flag, and they generally don't get much for an individual posting, so they tend to be short in length and rarely resort to any form of reasoned argument. The important thing being that, to combat this, we need to ignore insults, defamation and all attempts at cheap sophistry, by sticking rigidly to a dialectic approach. Sadly however there seems little anyone can do about corporate shills voting down films and books that they haven't even watched/read, so we do have to take rating systems with a pinch of salt.
None of this is really surprising though, as to draw an old analogy, the internet is our Gutenberg press, the religion we fight over is that of money, the established church has been caught off guard by an advancement of technology and now they too are using that technology to repress dissent. However, if we stick to reasoned argument, they don't have a leg to stand on, and in the long run their position is doomed. The only question I suppose being, how long?
Best wishes dude.
Pete, please share your answer with us.
Firstly, I'll apologise for not replying sooner but can explain, which is very relevant to the way we're forced to spend our lives - I do ramble a bit so be warned - but sod it, I'm in that sort of mood.
My mind has been distracted through work, been on a computer all damn day and not felt like even logging on after, let alone going into the sorry state of things in this world although I nearly always think about it (sad huh). When I wasn't working, after getting used to having no money my mind was stimulated and working very well in between the stress of looking for work (for another conversation about the need for money and effects of work), but will add, my new job, would be considered really good by many (I've had worse) but the pure nonsense is unbelievable, so with my eyes being very open is hard to accept this nonsense or control we are forced to submit ourselves to - this alone along with many other experiences and what I witness everyday leads me to the 'only answer'.
It's an answer though that requires a huge awakening first with as much worldwide support as is possible - an awakening that I don't truly believe can or will happen by the way so sucked in by dominance, nonsense & slavery acceptance our societies are - with people more interested in the latest bs on tv than talking about anything deep (they have total control over the mainstream or most of what we get to see and with so much dis-info or confusion on so many matters online)!
But very hypothetically if people realised what we were truly capable of and really opened their eyes to question 'why', then demanded in mass protest across the world - those who hold all the cards along with the mainstream would be forced to take notice!
The answer quite simply is the resource based economy idea suggested by the venus project & the zeitgeist movement. Before anyone comes back with the usual concerns, I've heard them all before and have covered with Janeen in comments on The Choice is Ours, here on SeeUat Videos. It's about realising the concept, demanding it and then things, I believe would 'eventually' fall into place so life for many could be so much better.
Quite simple really, we apply science, do away with nonsense, work together, help all reach their full potential and put our primitive thinking behind us - or we carry on with this pathetic game...
It would seem you have reached the same conclusion as Gene Roddenberry. (visionary - Star Trek)
Sadly, we will carry on with the same 'pathetic game' because it has been my experience that too many people really don't care. (apathy, indoctrination, brainwashing, and worst of all, polarized binary thinking - A or Z, nothing in between)
Since the majority of people are like electricity, (path of least resistance) I do not know if it is at all possible, even through awareness, and education, to change the present paradigm, and that is precisely what the elite are counting on. (embracing human nature)
I completely agree with you regarding the solution, but perhaps that is what makes us idealists; we are capable of seeing what could be, instead of what is, yet we cannot fathom why everyone else does not see it.
Ultimately, necessity is the mother of invention, and when all hell breaks loose, only then will the opportunity arise, and by then, it will probably be too late! Take care, and best wishes Pete!
How refreshing to read your comment. I run into so much negativity and the usual concerns all the time, as if people like us have all the answers!
As you said, we are able to see the reality of what is and envisage the possibility of what should be - idealists (or utopian as some would say!)
Damn right - it is so hard to fathom why people would question this!
Let me share this, I read your comment before I left for work yesterday, thanks by the way as it helped get me thinking more positively - I had to attend a second interview for job I already passed one interview and started as temp last month. It's a decent job but the worry and stress, I could have done without - went well I think. I bring this up as is just one example of how this world embraces so much bs - as if it's natural! Tried explaining to people that depending on how I say something on the day, will depend on judgement made on me that will effect my life in one way or another. People just say it will be fine, don't worry, etc with no consideration to reality! To be honest I'm passed caring what the outcome will be - my point is, this is just 1 example of how we run the world and how people think.
People where I work are nice and very intelligent but mainly very 'middle class' and have so little grip on what it's like to struggle I assume.
Hell, I can't even get people who do struggle to see what I'm talking about!
The main thing that I think may have swung the interview was I wouldn't push salary, just said set a figure I'll agree and review later as money is not my incentive, it's about having responsibility and having my heart in something - that impressed I think.
If only this world would adopt a way of thinking without money being the ONLY real initiator of anything!
As for Star Trek, I believe if we had grown up long ago we would already be there...
The best to you too - thanks.
Hey Pete, I couldn't agree more with what you said. I appreciate that you did not perceive my comments as negative, because that was not my intention; only to acknowledge the limitations of human nature.
Ironically, people may be inspired by those who appear to have all the answers, (even when they don't) yet tend to ignore their advice even if it is obviously correct. I surely don't have all the answers, but I have no desire to repeat the same mistakes because of an apathy to apply critical thinking. (not to be confused with being judgemental)
Best of luck on your job prospects, and if it means anything to you, intent (substance) is what matters most, so any apprehension you may have regarding your interview is a waste of good energy. I sat on the hiring committee for a lady that has worked in my department for seven years now, and while several other prospective employees had better interviews, fate would have it that we chose the best of them, even though she had a few questionable responses. (have faith that the universe will unfold as it should)
I can't imagine how many times I was fortunate that things did not work out as planned, especially since they never do!
You seem like a caring, thoughtful individual Pete, so above all else, never let them grind you down. In my humble opinion, enlightenment, and contentment come from accepting that even evil serves a purpose. (Without evil, we would never learn to acquire to tools to combat it) Of course the alternative is to join them. (Yoda - quicker, easier, more seductive) Since this is not an option for myself, I quit worrying long ago about fitting in with a greed driven pyramid scheme, and focus instead on being a good person, work hard, and play hard, (in that order) and above all else, never confuse needs with wants.
Best wishes Pete, and take care.
social engineering??-- dumbed down education - significant numbers of kids coming out schools illiterate. Orwellian future?
But what if the world's elite could successfully infiltrate our educational system and other sources of information, and use their seemingly unlimited power and influence to indoctrinate us to their ideological agendas?
You mean like in Texas?
You correctly point to Texas as very visible and vocal example of why this documentary deserves more consideration.
The 0.1% already have infiltrated the education system, the media and (in the USA) the political system as a whole (ever hear of "Citizens United" -- the ultimate weapon destroying even the last vestiges of democracy in the USA?)