I disagree on the intentional harm. You see, they do need the slave class. Without the slave class they cannot exist as elites. In order to create a slave class they need to sell the idea of equity whilst practising something else. Every version of this is socialism, but with different coloured bows. I do understand that is confronting f…
I disagree on the intentional harm. You see, they do need the slave class. Without the slave class they cannot exist as elites. In order to create a slave class they need to sell the idea of equity whilst practising something else. Every version of this is socialism, but with different coloured bows. I do understand that is confronting for those who think that socialist ideas are benevolent, but they are not and they never were. There are in history also "benevolent" dictators (Pinochet, Gaddafi) but it's all relative I suppose! To have a system that relies on the benevolence of the leader is always suspect to corruption and the people often don't help being lured with the promise of free stuff. The snake's apple. Is an age old story....
Culling doesn’t mean there will be no slave class, just fewer. There are many slow-cull mechanisms at work in the world. Slow motion by no means disproves intentional harm.
As for the benevolence or systems, I think you may be overly focused on socialism. Any system can be bent toward exploitation and enslavement, no matter the dogma and popular imagination, and socialism is not alone here. There are no systems good in and of themselves—it always comes down to the people, good and bad. And when you refer to Pinochet as a benevolent dictator (even in quotes) you’re standing on quicksand. Authoritarian brutality, even guided by ‘principles’, is still brutality.
Sure. It's a matter of scale though. Socialist regimes - 110m deaths, Pinochet and Gaddafi by comparison?
And in regards to the culling what I mean is that there is a difference between an intentional cull of the population (difficult to achieve by these methods) and a callous disregard of the consequences of the plan to impose medical tyranny/social credit... No doubt calculating that as long as 20% of the young population survive they can still achieve their aims, whilst forgetting that in that process they will produce many disabled dependents and the system will totally collapse.
I see what you are implying. That’s a bit too loose with the language for my taste. Small scale evil, Larger scale evil = still evil.
The culling, from what I see, is quite observable at this point. Because it is operating somewhat in slow-motion, effects are delayed, which serves the agenda of some serviceable amount of slaves at any time. I’m not sure these people are operating cleanly from a perspective of logic and reason. And if nothing changes, the system is already on the trajectory of collapse.
I disagree on the intentional harm. You see, they do need the slave class. Without the slave class they cannot exist as elites. In order to create a slave class they need to sell the idea of equity whilst practising something else. Every version of this is socialism, but with different coloured bows. I do understand that is confronting for those who think that socialist ideas are benevolent, but they are not and they never were. There are in history also "benevolent" dictators (Pinochet, Gaddafi) but it's all relative I suppose! To have a system that relies on the benevolence of the leader is always suspect to corruption and the people often don't help being lured with the promise of free stuff. The snake's apple. Is an age old story....
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/adam-eve-and-the-serpent_b_3967406
Ah, I see. I think your logic is somewhat flawed.
Culling doesn’t mean there will be no slave class, just fewer. There are many slow-cull mechanisms at work in the world. Slow motion by no means disproves intentional harm.
As for the benevolence or systems, I think you may be overly focused on socialism. Any system can be bent toward exploitation and enslavement, no matter the dogma and popular imagination, and socialism is not alone here. There are no systems good in and of themselves—it always comes down to the people, good and bad. And when you refer to Pinochet as a benevolent dictator (even in quotes) you’re standing on quicksand. Authoritarian brutality, even guided by ‘principles’, is still brutality.
Sure. It's a matter of scale though. Socialist regimes - 110m deaths, Pinochet and Gaddafi by comparison?
And in regards to the culling what I mean is that there is a difference between an intentional cull of the population (difficult to achieve by these methods) and a callous disregard of the consequences of the plan to impose medical tyranny/social credit... No doubt calculating that as long as 20% of the young population survive they can still achieve their aims, whilst forgetting that in that process they will produce many disabled dependents and the system will totally collapse.
I see what you are implying. That’s a bit too loose with the language for my taste. Small scale evil, Larger scale evil = still evil.
The culling, from what I see, is quite observable at this point. Because it is operating somewhat in slow-motion, effects are delayed, which serves the agenda of some serviceable amount of slaves at any time. I’m not sure these people are operating cleanly from a perspective of logic and reason. And if nothing changes, the system is already on the trajectory of collapse.
Quite possibly. In some ways I agree with you about scale. And that would make Obama one of the worst culprits.
Obama is no angel. He deceived a great many people and is a tool of the oligarchy. No one should have illusions about that guy.
Yes. His hope and change was complete and utter bullshit. He was a huge drone bomber.