wow, I just searched the net and it is NOWHERE to be found. A 70 page paper and a bunch of (pretty bad) perl code. But I do have the code and data at home. Someone perl coder named clarkson fixed the code for me, but I think my own code worked better.
yes, over a limited time, it did seem to work, at least to some degree. I used to have a webpage up on geocities that had a java display of my data. Doubt it is still around.
One thing that would need to be done is collect a set of the most important words. I never had time to do that (this was a senior project for my comp sci degree).
I just came up with a set of critical words on my own (probably 30 words or so, of negative, positive and neutral connotational value).
But if you had completed a collection and study of words and then tracked the appearance and occurence of those words to the financial index values, THEN you could build the program from there.
I wrote a project in perl some years ago that would download online financial news stories and count the critical words and weigh their connotational weight, and compare that to the direction of the stock market. For example, if the words "stocks" and "down" started showing up a lot in sentences in online news stories, you might expect a downward trend.
I posted the preliminary code online in the perl newsgroup.
if you give livestock the power to roam freely, they might get free and run away. Good fences make good neighbors, etc. Adjoining ranches cooperate to keep their cattle under control.
The American elite and the Chinese elite are just putting up fences to keep their livestock safe. Don't you feel safer now?
baaa baaa baaa
short sellers are bribing corpwhorate media?
on
Can We Trust Google?
·
· Score: 0, Troll
looks like the short sellers are planning to make a fortune on google's slide. Live by the corpwhorate media bribe, die by the corpwhorate media bribe....
Cryofan, every once in a while I read one of your posts with the same open-minded defocusing to try to see the image that you appear to be looking at so intently: "Surely," I think, "all that passion has to have some purpose."
I live to point out the elephants standing in the corner. I am in some ways an outsider in society, and so therefore I love to point out society's hypocrisies.
And BTW this world is a blizzard of forces. I have merely chosen a selected subset of forces that are deliberately ignored by those at the helm of society. I analyze this subset of forces and present my opinions.
Gaze upon my words, ye sheeple, and bleat out programs....
... not that I've been able to determine, unfortunately. I just can't envision the benefits of living in the world you seem to focus on. Sure, the world we're currently in could use a lot of improvements; and for some things, I'd maybe move in your direction. Taken as a whole, though, your utopia looks (to me) like a Bizzarro-world where the greatest producers in the society would be ground under the heels of the largely-mediocre masses.
As far as I can tell, the best nations that have ever existed are the nations of northwest europe. You know, like Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, etc. where they make cars and furniture, etc? Is that a utopic bizarro world to you? You are really quite lost in the corpwhorate propaganda, then.
You follow your masters's programming and accuse me of utopianistic dreaming. My "utopia" would consist of little more than Sweden.
For example, I've noted in two separate articles today on Slashdot where you've railed against hierarchies... are you saying that hierarchies are a problem?
Yes, animal behavior is a problem when you have the top of the heap glorifying aspects of it in order to validate themselves and retain their money.
You are animals and you pretend otherwise. I am the needle that pops your ballon.
Nothing more.
I am the cock that scrambles to the top of the ideological dung heap, gazes across the landscape and crows of your hypocrisy.
Nothing more.
Are you saying that it's bad to have strong, successful, intelligent people move into positions of power and leadership; then reap rewards for their ascension?
Qualifiedly, yes.
Are you saying that rewards are bad? Are you saying that it's bad to allow people to enjoy success?
Maybe you can clear up some misunderstanding of your position that I may have.
Maybe I could, but I have other things to do just now....
from the script for my documentary, Homo Sapiens Americanus: Madison said "Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority."
Opulent means RICH. And the rich definitely are a minority anywhere you go. Who was the minority of the opulent? Why, madison himself, and his friends, the Founding Fathers (FFs), the elite of America.
So Madison wanted the government of America to be able to protect the wealth of the rich from the rest of us. Those FFs didn't want us to be able to get our grubby hands on their riches.
James Madison, in the debates on the constitutional convention in 1787-- "in England at this day, if elections were opened to all classes of people, the property of landed proprietors would be insecure, and agrarian law would soon take place." Agrarian reform means the working people using the power of government to take some of land from the rich people and giving it to some poor people.
Madison saw a future America where the poor people might get tired of being poor, and demand that the wealth be shared. Madison said this: An increase of population will of necessity increase the proportion of those who will labor under all the hardships of life, and secretly sigh for a more equal distribution of its blessings. These may in time outnumber those who are placed above the feelings of indigence. According to the equal laws of suffrage, the power will slide into the hands of the former."
So what kind of constitution do madison and the other FOunding Fathers write to put the minority of the opulent?
Welll, madison and the other founding fathers wanted to keep things as they were--with the founding fathers owning most of the wealth in America. As Madison said, the new American government "would have to secure the permanent interests of the country against INNOVATION" to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority"
So they designed a constitution that made the government deliberately inefficient. A government that would in madison's own words prevent the majority from discovering their own strength and from "acting in union with each other.
They wanted a govt that APPEARED democratic but that really stifled democracy. Remember that democracy is a greek word meaning people rule. demo== people kratia == rule
Madison and Jefferson and the other founding fathers did not want a democracy, like the Pennsylvania constitution of 1776 created. They wanted a republic. What is a republic?
Well, let's let the FFs talk about what a republic is, and let's see what they thought about democracy.
Jefferson, in a December 20, 1787 letter to Madison he writes that a house chosen by [the people] will be very ill qualified to legislate for the Union
Jefferson was speaking of the House of Representatives. He thought that the representives should not be elected directly by the people. Jefferson and most other founding fathers did not want politicians to be elected by the people.
As for what a republic is, Madison --the father of the constitution -said that a republic is "the delegation of the government to a small number of citizens elected by the rest."...the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves,"
So it looks as if Madison did not trust us. He wanted the top level decisions to be made by other slaveowners and the other rich FFs.
Madison was not in favor of a democracy for America, saying that "Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property."
So The founding fathers did not want Democracy for America, but the people wanted it, So the FFs had to let at least some of the people vote, but they had to crea
The people who designed the American constitution said they did not want democracy for America because democracy was not good for stability and the interests of the wealthy. James madison, hamilton, Jay and Jefferson all wanted something less than democracy--they wanted a REPUBLIC.
James Madison, the father of our constitution, said this: "Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property"
So China is now putting property over people. And that has ALWAYS been A-OK with those at the top in America!
the human animals at the top of the dominance hierarchy like it there. They are satisfied. So therefore they act as an ideological filter. They control the mass media and popular entertainment, and so any idea that makes it through their ideological filter, that idea gets disseminated.
Ideas that get disseminated are those that AFFIRM in a good way the dominance hierarchy now in existence. Meaning of course the "status quo."
Funny thing is that by definition any hierarchy must have only a few at the top.
However, Americans have ideologically been domesticated because the elite have evolved a culture that affirms power and the dominance hierarchy.
All societies do this to some degree, but the American culture used to be MUCH MORE critical of the dominance hierarchy. In part, this change is due to the mass media propaganda cultural evolution that the elite has worked upon America. But part is also due to the benefits from technology and the steady accumulation of knowledge (which grows at an exponential rate). This technology advance makes us more comfortable than 100 years ago. So we put up with more of the dominance hierarchy.
The Ameican Revolution for example was really a revolution of the people against the elite, but the elite subverted it with the Declaration of Independence propaganda and other dirty tricks.
Believing in a rigid class structure is simply an incorrect mindset that feeds itself the poison you've spewed in your comment.
The poison I've spewed into my comment?
Your poor command of the language and rhetorical logic betrays the relative feebleness of your mind right from the git-go.
Watch out, folks! I'm gonna have to spill this kid's blood. Keep an eye out for splatter...
It would certainly help to achieve your aims, because a leftist society requires a rigid class structure to keep the workers in line, but what you're talking about is wishful thinking, not a valid observation.
Research bears me out. A hierarchy BY DEFINITION means that only a relative few make it to the upper levels. NO MATTER WHAT CRITERIA YOU ESTABLISH FOR SUCH LEVEL MOBILITY, you ALWAYS come back to that fundamental fact-->a hierarchy BY DEFINITION MEANS THAT ONLY A RELATIVE FEW ARE AT THE TOP.
ALWAYS.
This is only in a society where there is enforced stratification, which isn't the case at all. Anyone, with proper application of willpower, can bring themselves into the level of the so-called elite. No one has a magic barrier preventing this. Only people who refuse to raise themselves up are stuck.
Just because you could do that does not mean that everyone can. Once again, you resort to "turtles all the way down" logic.
BY DEFINITION ONLY A RELATIVE FEW CAN MAKE IT TO THE TOP OF ANY HIERARCHY.
that is the IMMUTABLE, TIMELESS, definition of hierarchy.
And anyway, if you thinks American culture is driven by a so-called elite you obviously haven't noticed any popular entertainment over the last fifteen years.
Popular entertainment is a product of HUGE AMOUNTS of money. You think the elite DO NOT control that amonnt of money.
The system works like natural selection evolution in an ecosystem. The elite control mass media and popular entertainment production. All ideas pass through their filter. Just as in the ecosytem, the animal species are molded and evolved by the environmental forces of that ecosytem, which shapes them (e.g., the giraffe evolves a long neck due to environmental forces upon it), so too does the american culture evolve to suit the elite, because the elite control the ideology that becomes part of the culture.
Yes, the question is why do so many americans fail to act in their own best interests? Why do our domesticated cattle walk into our slaughterhouses, whereas their wild cousins will run from us?
Two major factors: 1. Our American culture is an evolved organism, evolved by elite propaganda to serve the elite.
This deals with the idea that a major part of what is inside the human brain is learned after birth. A large part of this learning is culture. Culture is therefore a large part of each human.
Culture is a set of ideas about what the world is supposed to be and how we are supposed to behave, among other things.
Culture is not necessarily a product of random chance. In fact, culture is like an animal in an ecosystem. Over generations, that species is shaped by environmental forces. Jsut as domesticated animals are evolved by humans over generations.
Hypothesis: American culture is a species of domesticated culture shaped and evolved by elite forces. Elite forces are force vectors in the form of ideas that are inserted into our culture by those entities and persons who are rich and powerful. The elite might be politicians, large corporations, political lobbies and interest groups, rich people, think tanks, large nonprofit foudnations, and mass media figures.
These elite shape our culture over decades to make it suit them. They are capital. We are labor. Our interests are for the most part, directly opposed.
So our culture has been domesticated by them to suit them, to be friendly to them.
The wolf would bite you or me. But your pet dog Rover will not.
This domestication of the american culture has mainly been effected though tv and radio.
And you see on this thread that Americans are on the side of the elite now. They are OWNED by the elite, ideologically.
Also, two other factors that help the elite control AMericans, mostly white Americans, is White Hating Identity Politics (WHIP) and Mass Immigration of Third Worlders (MIOTW).
The political left in america is controlled by the elite. It has been domesticated by them. It has been used by the elite to drive the largest bloc in America (the white lower middle class in general) away from leftism. They did this by foundation grant to liberal activists and writers etc that focus on identity politics, especially of a type that sees white people as irredeemably racist, and sees racism as something that is only associated with whites. Thus, whites, esp. lower middle class whites, are, by the tenets of WHIP, evil.
WHIP antagonizes whites against the Left, and drives them into the arms of the Right, which is the main tool of the elite.
Also, the Left in Ameica (actually the FAUXleft) has operated in conjunction with the Right to bring in large numbers of immigrants from third world nations with who look very different from white Americans. This is causing rapid change in America.
Rapid change causes people to react.
White Americans feel as if they are under siege. THey are circling the wagons. And thus they are more vulnerable to seduction by elite ideology.
That is why America has moved to the right.
I am making a documentary on this general subject. See my sig for more....
This also means that the universe will last forever in steady state, so that mankind has a chance to be immortal. And if mankind can be immortal, you or I can be immortal.
But ya gotta make it to a future where medicine can keep you alive forever. And that aint the case now.
Oh, this 911 wtc pretext incident is only the latest of a long history of the America elite using/allowing/manufacturing "pretext incidents" in order to start wars and grab power. See this page on HOW TO START A WAR.
However, I think this War On Terror has opened the elite up to the future possibility, should there ever be an anti-elite grassroots political movement, that our current laws might be used against the elite in order to try them for treason. Historically, treason could only be used if someone worked for/aided a foreign govt which was an American enemy. Obviously, the War on Terror is not a war against a foreign govt.
Thus, we can start a War On The Elite. They are really, of course, the real enemy of all Americans. Always have been, always will be. That realization is what seperates Europeans from Americans, at least in part. They realize it is TOP against BOTTOM. We do not.
So try the elite in court for treason. We now have the legal precedent. Perhaps.
Who are the elite? Higg level politicians, CEOs of megacorps, prominent leaders large think tanks and nonprofit foundations, rich people, lobbyists, etc.
Look on this thread for a lot of naysaying, negative posts from supposed slashdotters, who would theoretically by anything but tech-luddites. But software radio could hurt a lot of established wealthy quasi-monopolies. So, they likely already have astroturfers posting on most big forums, setting up these issues.
I read a metafilter post this week from someone who interviewed for such a job. THey were expected to post multiple times a day, and this marketing company had dozens of such astroturfers. I will try to come up with a link to that post.
But I doubt that sort of astroturfing is all that effective--most slashdotters never seem to read many of the posts.
A black slave cost 200-800 dollars at a time when the media annual income for a white family was $150. That means a black slave cost $100K-200K in today's dollars. No credit to buy slaves. So ONLY THE UPPER CLASS COULD BUY SLAVES.
The vast majority of whites never owned black slaves. In fact, most Americans from 1600-1870 were the descendants of indentured servants, most of whom were in actuality defacto WHITE SLAVES.
before ANY black slaves were here in America, there were WHITE slaves here from the british isles.
THey were often called "indentured servants," but that was a social fiction designed to cover up the truth. There is much evidence on this. I am making a documentary/book dealing with elite influence on American culture, and I cover some of this topic. See my sig url for more...
good post! parties are not the answer. The answer lies in changing the way we understand the world and our culture and mankind.
We need to base our politcal awareness on more fundamental issues and ideas, and not the superficial issues and talking points disseminated by the media.
We need to understand the societal forces in play--dominance hierarchies, and behavioral/social/evolutionary psyschology. This should be the real meat of politics, not abortion, right to bear arms, religion, etc.
Also, we need to understand the REAL American history. We understand history as interpreted from the elite viewpoint and from the viewpoint of minorities. But we now need to understand american history from the viewpoint of the white working lower class person, as this is the largest bloc in America. Unless the white lower class history is understood, we cannot proceed.
the facts don't lie. Since 1970, wages for the bottom half have significantly declined. Both dems and GOP have been in control in those years.
What we need is to apply to our government the same darwinistic principles that theoretically underlie capitalism. For example, we need to apply "creative destruction" to our government. Trash it all and start again. Within the confines of the legal system of course.
But Madison, Hamilton and the other founding fathers designed the government and constitution so as to prevent innovation in government, the better to preserve the status quo, thereby "protecting" the "opulent minority" from the "majority" (Madison' words).
The LEAST able of American citizens to help us change our govt are the so-called "political activists" and "poltically aware" Americans. These people, ardent voters, most of them, and supposedly aware of the issues, are actually sort of brainwashed with elite propaganda. If you hear someone talking about GOP or Dem political "talking points" and "issues,: you should recognize that this person is a domesticated creature owned by those at the top.
Slashdot Mirror
wow, I just searched the net and it is NOWHERE to be found. A 70 page paper and a bunch of (pretty bad) perl code. But I do have the code and data at home. Someone perl coder named clarkson fixed the code for me, but I think my own code worked better.
But here was the url:
http://www.geocities.com/uhdseniorproject
now gone, and no cache.
But I still think the idea is a great one...
hmm. can't find any trace of my project on the net anywhere. I know I have the code and data and my paper at home, though...
yes, over a limited time, it did seem to work, at least to some degree. I used to have a webpage up on geocities that had a java display of my data. Doubt it is still around.
One thing that would need to be done is collect a set of the most important words. I never had time to do that (this was a senior project for my comp sci degree).
I just came up with a set of critical words on my own (probably 30 words or so, of negative, positive and neutral connotational value).
But if you had completed a collection and study of words and then tracked the appearance and occurence of those words to the financial index values, THEN you could build the program from there.
I wrote a project in perl some years ago that would download online financial news stories and count the critical words and weigh their connotational weight, and compare that to the direction of the stock market. For example, if the words "stocks" and "down" started showing up a lot in sentences in online news stories, you might expect a downward trend.
I posted the preliminary code online in the perl newsgroup.
google "data mining" "news" "perl" etc
....hmm. They have had magnetic amplifiers in navy nuclear power plants (for purposes of controlling the core rods) for upwards of 40 years.
Nothing new under the sun?
if you give livestock the power to roam freely, they might get free and run away. Good fences make good neighbors, etc. Adjoining ranches cooperate to keep their cattle under control.
The American elite and the Chinese elite are just putting up fences to keep their livestock safe.
Don't you feel safer now?
baaa baaa baaa
looks like the short sellers are planning to make a fortune on google's slide. Live by the corpwhorate media bribe, die by the corpwhorate media bribe....
Cryofan, every once in a while I read one of your posts with the same open-minded defocusing to try to see the image that you appear to be looking at so intently: "Surely," I think, "all that passion has to have some purpose."
I live to point out the elephants standing in the corner. I am in some ways an outsider in society, and so therefore I love to point out society's hypocrisies.
And BTW this world is a blizzard of forces. I have merely chosen a selected subset of forces that are deliberately ignored by those at the helm of society. I analyze this subset of forces and present my opinions.
Gaze upon my words, ye sheeple, and bleat out programs
As far as I can tell, the best nations that have ever existed are the nations of northwest europe. You know, like Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, etc. where they make cars and furniture, etc? Is that a utopic bizarro world to you? You are really quite lost in the corpwhorate propaganda, then.
You follow your masters's programming and accuse me of utopianistic dreaming. My "utopia" would consist of little more than Sweden.
For example, I've noted in two separate articles today on Slashdot where you've railed against hierarchies... are you saying that hierarchies are a problem?
Yes, animal behavior is a problem when you have the top of the heap glorifying aspects of it in order to validate themselves and retain their money.
You are animals and you pretend otherwise. I am the needle that pops your ballon.
Nothing more.
I am the cock that scrambles to the top of the ideological dung heap, gazes across the landscape and crows of your hypocrisy.
Nothing more.
Are you saying that it's bad to have strong, successful, intelligent people move into positions of power and leadership; then reap rewards for their ascension?
Qualifiedly, yes.
Are you saying that rewards are bad? Are you saying that it's bad to allow people to enjoy success?
Maybe you can clear up some misunderstanding of your position that I may have.
Maybe I could, but I have other things to do just now....
from the script for my documentary, Homo Sapiens Americanus:
...the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves,"
Madison said "Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority."
Opulent means RICH. And the rich definitely are a minority anywhere you go. Who was the minority of the opulent? Why, madison himself, and his friends, the Founding Fathers (FFs), the elite of America.
So Madison wanted the government of America to be able to protect the wealth of the rich from the rest of us. Those FFs didn't want us to be able to get our grubby hands on their riches.
James Madison, in the debates on the constitutional convention in 1787-- "in England at this day, if elections were opened to all classes of people, the property of landed proprietors would be insecure, and agrarian law would soon take place."
Agrarian reform means the working people using the power of government to take some of land from the rich people and giving it to some poor people.
Madison saw a future America where the poor people might get tired of being poor, and demand that the wealth be shared. Madison said this: An increase of population will of necessity increase the proportion of those who will labor under all the hardships of life, and secretly sigh for a more equal distribution of its blessings. These may in time outnumber those who are placed above the feelings of indigence. According to the equal laws of suffrage, the power will slide into the hands of the former."
So what kind of constitution do madison and the other FOunding Fathers write to put the minority of the opulent?
Welll, madison and the other founding fathers wanted to keep things as they were--with the founding fathers owning most of the wealth in America. As Madison said, the new American government "would have to secure the permanent interests of the country against INNOVATION" to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority"
So they designed a constitution that made the government deliberately inefficient. A government that would in madison's own words prevent the majority from discovering their own strength and from "acting in union with each other.
They wanted a govt that APPEARED democratic but that really stifled democracy. Remember that democracy is a greek word meaning people rule.
demo== people
kratia == rule
Madison and Jefferson and the other founding fathers did not want a democracy, like the Pennsylvania constitution of 1776 created. They wanted a republic. What is a republic?
Well, let's let the FFs talk about what a republic is, and let's see what they thought about democracy.
Jefferson, in a December 20, 1787 letter to Madison he writes that a house chosen by [the people] will be very ill qualified to legislate for the Union
Jefferson was speaking of the House of Representatives. He thought that the representives should not be elected directly by the people. Jefferson and most other founding fathers did not want politicians to be elected by the people.
As for what a republic is, Madison --the father of the constitution -said that a republic is "the delegation of the government to a small number of citizens elected by the rest."
So it looks as if Madison did not trust us. He wanted the top level decisions to be made by other slaveowners and the other rich FFs.
Madison was not in favor of a democracy for America, saying that "Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property."
So The founding fathers did not want Democracy for America, but the people wanted it, So the FFs had to let at least some of the people vote, but they had to crea
The people who designed the American constitution said they did not want democracy for America because democracy was not good for stability and the interests of the wealthy. James madison, hamilton, Jay and Jefferson all wanted something less than democracy--they wanted a REPUBLIC.
James Madison, the father of our constitution, said this:
"Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property"
So China is now putting property over people. And that has ALWAYS been A-OK with those at the top in America!
Let's spread "freedom" to the entire world!
the human animals at the top of the dominance hierarchy like it there. They are satisfied. So therefore they act as an ideological filter. They control the mass media and popular entertainment, and so any idea that makes it through their ideological filter, that idea gets disseminated.
Ideas that get disseminated are those that AFFIRM in a good way the dominance hierarchy now in existence. Meaning of course the "status quo."
Funny thing is that by definition any hierarchy must have only a few at the top.
However, Americans have ideologically been domesticated because the elite have evolved a culture that affirms power and the dominance hierarchy.
All societies do this to some degree, but the American culture used to be MUCH MORE critical of the dominance hierarchy. In part, this change is due to the mass media propaganda cultural evolution that the elite has worked upon America.
But part is also due to the benefits from technology and the steady accumulation of knowledge (which grows at an exponential rate). This technology advance makes us more comfortable than 100 years ago. So we put up with more of the dominance hierarchy.
The Ameican Revolution for example was really a revolution of the people against the elite, but the elite subverted it with the Declaration of Independence propaganda and other dirty tricks.
Anywho...
Believing in a rigid class structure is simply an incorrect mindset that feeds itself the poison you've spewed in your comment.
The poison I've spewed into my comment?
Your poor command of the language and rhetorical logic betrays the relative feebleness of your mind right from the git-go.
Watch out, folks! I'm gonna have to spill this kid's blood. Keep an eye out for splatter...
It would certainly help to achieve your aims, because a leftist society requires a rigid class structure to keep the workers in line, but what you're talking about is wishful thinking, not a valid observation.
Research bears me out. A hierarchy BY DEFINITION means that only a relative few make it to the upper levels. NO MATTER WHAT CRITERIA YOU ESTABLISH FOR SUCH LEVEL MOBILITY, you ALWAYS come back to that fundamental fact-->a hierarchy BY DEFINITION MEANS THAT ONLY A RELATIVE FEW ARE AT THE TOP.
ALWAYS.
This is only in a society where there is enforced stratification, which isn't the case at all. Anyone, with proper application of willpower, can bring themselves into the level of the so-called elite. No one has a magic barrier preventing this. Only people who refuse to raise themselves up are stuck.
Just because you could do that does not mean that everyone can. Once again, you resort to "turtles all the way down" logic.
BY DEFINITION ONLY A RELATIVE FEW CAN MAKE IT TO THE TOP OF ANY HIERARCHY.
that is the IMMUTABLE, TIMELESS, definition of hierarchy.
And anyway, if you thinks American culture is driven by a so-called elite you obviously haven't noticed any popular entertainment over the last fifteen years.
Popular entertainment is a product of HUGE AMOUNTS of money. You think the elite DO NOT control that amonnt of money.
The system works like natural selection evolution in an ecosystem. The elite control mass media and popular entertainment production. All ideas pass through their filter. Just as in the ecosytem, the animal species are molded and evolved by the environmental forces of that ecosytem, which shapes them (e.g., the giraffe evolves a long neck due to environmental forces upon it), so too does the american culture evolve to suit the elite, because the elite control the ideology that becomes part of the culture.
Yes, the question is why do so many americans fail to act in their own best interests?
Why do our domesticated cattle walk into our slaughterhouses, whereas their wild cousins will run from us?
Two major factors:
1. Our American culture is an evolved organism, evolved by elite propaganda to serve the elite.
This deals with the idea that a major part of what is inside the human brain is learned after birth. A large part of this learning is culture. Culture is therefore a large part of each human.
Culture is a set of ideas about what the world is supposed to be and how we are supposed to behave, among other things.
Culture is not necessarily a product of random chance. In fact, culture is like an animal in an ecosystem. Over generations, that species is shaped by environmental forces. Jsut as domesticated animals are evolved by humans over generations.
Hypothesis: American culture is a species of domesticated culture shaped and evolved by elite forces. Elite forces are force vectors in the form of ideas that are inserted into our culture by those entities and persons who are rich and powerful. The elite might be politicians, large corporations, political lobbies and interest groups, rich people, think tanks, large nonprofit foudnations, and mass media figures.
These elite shape our culture over decades to make it suit them. They are capital. We are labor. Our interests are for the most part, directly opposed.
So our culture has been domesticated by them to suit them, to be friendly to them.
The wolf would bite you or me. But your pet dog Rover will not.
This domestication of the american culture has mainly been effected though tv and radio.
And you see on this thread that Americans are on the side of the elite now. They are OWNED by the elite, ideologically.
Also, two other factors that help the elite control AMericans, mostly white Americans, is White Hating Identity Politics (WHIP) and Mass Immigration of Third Worlders (MIOTW).
The political left in america is controlled by the elite. It has been domesticated by them. It has been used by the elite to drive the largest bloc in America (the white lower middle class in general) away from leftism. They did this by foundation grant to liberal activists and writers etc that focus on identity politics, especially of a type that sees white people as irredeemably racist, and sees racism as something that is only associated with whites. Thus, whites, esp. lower middle class whites, are, by the tenets of WHIP, evil.
WHIP antagonizes whites against the Left, and drives them into the arms of the Right, which is the main tool of the elite.
Also, the Left in Ameica (actually the FAUXleft) has operated in conjunction with the Right to bring in large numbers of immigrants from third world nations with who look very different from white Americans. This is causing rapid change in America.
Rapid change causes people to react.
White Americans feel as if they are under siege. THey are circling the wagons. And thus they are more vulnerable to seduction by elite ideology.
That is why America has moved to the right.
I am making a documentary on this general subject.
See my sig for more....
This also means that the universe will last forever in steady state, so that mankind has a chance to be immortal. And if mankind can be immortal, you or I can be immortal.
But ya gotta make it to a future where medicine can keep you alive forever. And that aint the case now.
May I suggest cryonics?
How do you try criminals in court NOW? The elite are criminals. We have a procedure to TRY criminals. We use that procedure to try the elite.
actually, I meant to say "HIGH level" politicians. Also included in the elite would be the major media outlet managers, editors, TV talking heads,etc.
All these people are members of the elite and/or aid/abet the elite in their war against the people.
Try 'am all for treason, I say.
Oh, this 911 wtc pretext incident is only the latest of a long history of the America elite using/allowing/manufacturing "pretext incidents" in order to start wars and grab power. See this page on HOW TO START A WAR.
However, I think this War On Terror has opened the elite up to the future possibility, should there ever be an anti-elite grassroots political movement, that our current laws might be used against the elite in order to try them for treason. Historically, treason could only be used if someone worked for/aided a foreign govt which was an American enemy.
Obviously, the War on Terror is not a war against a foreign govt.
Thus, we can start a War On The Elite. They are really, of course, the real enemy of all Americans. Always have been, always will be. That realization is what seperates Europeans from Americans, at least in part. They realize it is TOP against BOTTOM. We do not.
So try the elite in court for treason. We now have the legal precedent. Perhaps.
Who are the elite? Higg level politicians, CEOs of megacorps, prominent leaders large think tanks and nonprofit foundations, rich people, lobbyists, etc.
don't lecture me, son. I had forgotten more about history by the time you were in diapers that you will EVER know.
Now go look up the etymology of the word sabotage, and then get back to me....
Look on this thread for a lot of naysaying, negative posts from supposed slashdotters, who would theoretically by anything but tech-luddites. But software radio could hurt a lot of established wealthy quasi-monopolies. So, they likely already have astroturfers posting on most big forums, setting up these issues.
I read a metafilter post this week from someone who interviewed for such a job. THey were expected to post multiple times a day, and this marketing company had dozens of such astroturfers. I will try to come up with a link to that post.
But I doubt that sort of astroturfing is all that effective--most slashdotters never seem to read many of the posts.
But what do I know...
A black slave cost 200-800 dollars at a time when the media annual income for a white family was $150. That means a black slave cost $100K-200K in today's dollars. No credit to buy slaves. So ONLY THE UPPER CLASS COULD BUY SLAVES.
The vast majority of whites never owned black slaves. In fact, most Americans from 1600-1870 were the descendants of indentured servants, most of whom were in actuality defacto WHITE SLAVES.
See my sig url for more
before ANY black slaves were here in America, there were WHITE slaves here from the british isles.
THey were often called "indentured servants," but that was a social fiction designed to cover up the truth. There is much evidence on this. I am making a documentary/book dealing with elite influence on American culture, and I cover some of this topic. See my sig url for more...
Ah, America, obsessed with caffeine, meth and energy drinks, while Europeans bask on the beach for at least a month every year.....
welcome to the wonderful world of the programmed neoslave...welcome to America.
if true, what would this mean for the possibility of an Infinite Universe, where mankind might go on forever?
good post!
parties are not the answer. The answer lies in changing the way we understand the world and our culture and mankind.
We need to base our politcal awareness on more fundamental issues and ideas, and not the superficial issues and talking points disseminated by the media.
We need to understand the societal forces in play--dominance hierarchies, and behavioral/social/evolutionary psyschology. This should be the real meat of politics, not abortion, right to bear arms, religion, etc.
Also, we need to understand the REAL American history. We understand history as interpreted from the elite viewpoint and from the viewpoint of minorities. But we now need to understand american history from the viewpoint of the white working lower class person, as this is the largest bloc in America. Unless the white lower class history is understood, we cannot proceed.
the facts don't lie. Since 1970, wages for the bottom half have significantly declined. Both dems and GOP have been in control in those years.
What we need is to apply to our government the same darwinistic principles that theoretically underlie capitalism. For example, we need to apply "creative destruction" to our government. Trash it all and start again. Within the confines of the legal system of course.
But Madison, Hamilton and the other founding fathers designed the government and constitution so as to prevent innovation in government, the better to preserve the status quo, thereby "protecting" the "opulent minority" from the "majority" (Madison' words).
The LEAST able of American citizens to help us change our govt are the so-called "political activists" and "poltically aware" Americans. These people, ardent voters, most of them, and supposedly aware of the issues, are actually sort of brainwashed with elite propaganda. If you hear someone talking about GOP or Dem political "talking points" and "issues,: you should recognize that this person is a domesticated creature owned by those at the top.