The Conspiracy Options

[Megil Tel-Zeke]

Now democracy is an idealism, not a reality

Ok, good point. but any government system is an ideal. IDEALLY they work, but in reality every government trying to fit into the mold will fail. This applies to Communist societies, oligarchies, monarchies, authoritarian regimes, and democracies. And also all governments are corrupt in one way or another. So There may be a "conspiracy", but personally I think thats just the waygovernments run, letting the chips fall where they may.

[Intestinal Chaos]

Ok, good point.  but any government system is an ideal.  IDEALLY they work, but in reality every government trying to fit into the mold will fail. This applies to Communist societies, oligarchies, monarchies, authoritarian regimes, and democracies.  And also all governments are corrupt in one way or another.  So There may be a "conspiracy", but personally I think thats just the waygovernments run,  letting the chips fall where they may.

Yes, mostly I just chose the title "Conspiracy" because it is more attention getting.

[DoomedOne]

Although it did grab the attention of "we didn't land on the moon" guy.

One time, in some random post in one of the many parliaments, I talked about how we don't have to accept it that way. I argue with people at this website called RevolutionaryLeft.com all the time because it seems like 85% of the people in there want a violent revolution, and I try to tell them again and again that if you want a government that does not get corrupted like they have so many times, then you can't rally behind violence. Violence requires a fiece leader who isn't afraid to cross a few lines, and that travels over to the following government. After the fierce, line-crossing leader retires (Fidel Castro is a good example of this, a guy who murdered 2 people in college who didn't agree with him) then the snake-leader of greed either directly follows, or eventually follows, and basically taints every single litte aspect of the government he can.

In this country, it took longer to taint every little piece, but now we have no more checks and balances. Checks and Balances have been overturned. Marketing and big Business has already hog-tied the population, and now politicians are reaping the rewards for being such good little tools.

[Slayer of Cliffracers]

Although it did grab the attention of "we didn't land on the moon" guy.

One time, in some random post in one of the many parliaments, I talked about how we don't have to accept it that way.  I argue with people at this website called RevolutionaryLeft.com all the time because it seems like 85% of the people in there want a violent revolution, and I try to tell them again and again that if you want a government that does not get corrupted like they have so many times, then you can't rally behind violence.  Violence requires a fiece leader who isn't afraid to cross a few lines, and that travels over to the following government.  After the fierce, line-crossing leader retires (Fidel Castro is a good example of this, a guy who murdered 2 people in college who didn't agree with him) then the snake-leader of greed either directly follows, or eventually follows, and basically taints every single litte aspect of the government he can.

In this country, it took longer to taint every little piece, but now we have no more checks and balances.  Checks and Balances have been overturned.  Marketing and big Business has already hog-tied the population, and now politicians are reaping the rewards for being such good little tools.

Sadly your entirely right.

[Intestinal Chaos]

Although it did grab the attention of "we didn't land on the moon" guy.

One time, in some random post in one of the many parliaments, I talked about how we don't have to accept it that way.  I argue with people at this website called RevolutionaryLeft.com all the time because it seems like 85% of the people in there want a violent revolution, and I try to tell them again and again that if you want a government that does not get corrupted like they have so many times, then you can't rally behind violence.  Violence requires a fiece leader who isn't afraid to cross a few lines, and that travels over to the following government.  After the fierce, line-crossing leader retires (Fidel Castro is a good example of this, a guy who murdered 2 people in college who didn't agree with him) then the snake-leader of greed either directly follows, or eventually follows, and basically taints every single litte aspect of the government he can.

In this country, it took longer to taint every little piece, but now we have no more checks and balances.  Checks and Balances have been overturned.  Marketing and big Business has already hog-tied the population, and now politicians are reaping the rewards for being such good little tools.

Indeed, it is a sad reality we live in, an unfixable. All we are able to do is sit here and complain as the piggies in officed squeal about unimportant social issues and minor budget debates while avoiding the real issues.

[Dantrag]

Indeed, it is a sad reality we live in, an unfixable. All we are able to do is sit here and complain as the piggies in officed squeal about unimportant social issues and minor budget debates while avoiding the real issues.

Well, what exactly is a "real issue" ? I mean, the social issues do have to be dealt with, and the budgets need to be done as well.

Just so you know, that first post had some truth to it, but was mostly a bunch of poop. The idea that America is on a secret mission to dominate the world and become a dictatorship is a bit sketchy to say the least.

And saying that the politicians are "selected" shows a little paranoia too. Selected by who? The media? There's too much competition in the media for them to become one entity and have enough power to select the person they want in office. The media merely pushes the one they want so that we will vote for that one. So indirectly, I guess that's right...

[DoomedOne]

Well that's not entirely true, there are plenty that try to do something. It's hard though, trust me. I was on a mock-Security Council once for a school-thing, trying to push for a reform of the way the Security Council is run. Ity was hard as Hell, we were trying to go for no veto at all, and ended up negotiating it down to a 2-man veto, and every country agreed. I worked my boat off, and I'm no softy in debating, especially negotiation, but that's all we could get because they'd veto anything else. Then, four the five p5 guys split off and wrote their own resolution which sounded good but in reality basically meant nothing was happening with the veto and they'd review it in 6 years, so of course the bulk of us that understood what their resolution really meant turned it down, they vetoed our resolution before-phand thinking they were pulling a fast one and we got nothing done. There's just no reaching somebody with that kind of power. My point is, you can't blame every politician, but in their environment they hit these huge walls and every small victory means a lot to them.

It's not hopeless either. You'll have to trust me on that, it took a really, really long essay to explain why it's not hopeless, and it makes a lot of references to a lot of political philosophers you probably haven't read.

[Dantrag]

It's not hopeless either.  You'll have to trust me on that, it took a really, really long essay to explain why it's not hopeless, and it makes a lot of references to a lot of political philosophers you probably haven't read.

So...did you write this essay, or did the political philosophers that I have never read write it?

Seriously, I'm interested.

[DoomedOne]

No see everyone thought they had the right idea but of course lacked the perception to see the problems. The idea is understanding human nature and how it works, and what will happen, what people will WANT to do no matter what, and what people will do no matter what. Drug lords are always a step ahead of the FBI, and you have to accept that. Like, for instance, Marx simply believed that every worker on the planet was being abused as badly as everyone else. Actually, most socialists weren't even the abused workers, because if you're an abused worker, you're too busy with other needs to raise your head politically, even if the political structure is your problem. Marx assumed as long as workers were doing the revolution to install a government with workers at the top of the pyramid, there could be no wrong. That's just one example, of where I picked apart the flaws of a government that never was (True socialism has never been accomplished). I also examine what went wrong in the Great Strike of 1805, and in the following revolution. It's all about looking at history very carefully and finding the Grooves.

[Intestinal Chaos]

So...did you write this essay, or did the political philosophers that I have never read write it?

Seriously, I'm interested.

My first post was a quote, I don't belive in the domination thing being said in the post, but some of it was true. As for what doomed one said it is true that not ALL are bad, but the ones that really matter mostly are. As for shadow elections (being placed) I don't think that either... it's mostly just all lies and support from former office holders that puts you in power (most the time).

[Fade2gray]

Wow 'Chaos! Its like you're my old Community College PloySci teacher come back to haunt me because I refused to see how brainwashed he said I am. :Shudder:

This post has been edited by Fade2gray: Aug 7 2005, 08:25 PM

[Aeroflux]

I think it is more important to realize that most of our population (US) won't bat an eyelash if they knew this conspiracy to be true. Ignorance is part of our social pride today. Technology that should be a main part of our population is being held back by the powers that be. We could in effect have very little pollution, a complex and efficient public transport system that spans all the states, and so much more without the internal Bureaucracy.

If it's truth you seek, then I would study the basics of human activity without a system to govern their logic. Just what is the tendency to corruption of a leader, when power is given without responsibility or reprise?

[Kindred Spirit]

I can only think of a single type of government that could be "foolproof" against conspiracies like that. It would be far from perfect, but it would be harder to corrupt. I'd have made a new thread for this, but it seems to fit into this one, since it is kind of a "partial solution" to the problem.
A large portion of this idea came from Robert Heinlein's book, For Us, THe Living. A lot of the rest is modified U.S. government.
Here is the fundamentals of the government idea.

A. Elections are held to choose leaders. These leaders do not have "power" exactly, they are charged with carrying out the wishes of the public.
B. All issues such as laws are voted upon by all citizens in the area that will be effected by the law. For example, if the city of Jamestown is trying to outlaw certain drugs inside the city boundaries, all citizens vote on the issus. It is a simple majority wins situation, and inthe case of a tie, a revore is cast.
C. A citizen is defined as anyone who has lived in the country for a certain period of time (5 years or so) who is capable of comprehending issues that will be voted upon. A test is administered every so often (once a year or whatever) to determine if a person can qualify for citizenship. To take the test, one must be able to read and speak the language the test will be administered in (varies from nation to nation) and have lived in the counrty for 5 years.
D. Leaders are voted upon by all people in the area the leader will be leading. For example, all citizens of a nation vote on national leaders, only those who live in a particular state or province or whatever will vote on those leaders, then down to county, city-area, town, ect...
E. Judicial officials are also voted for by all the citizens in the area that they will have authority in.
F. Elections occur once a year.
G. War- In the case of deciding upon intervention in another war (this is not applied in the case of someone else attacking) a vote is called for. Only people eligible for the draft but not currently serving in the military are allowed to vote.
H. Life is divided into "private sphere" and "public sphere." Private sphere is the kind of thing that can be classified as None Of Your Business. This is pretty much anything you do in your life that has no bearing on other people's lives. (Ex, love life, hobbies, ect..) This may not be included in news stories without your permission. Private sphere doesn't apply in the case of law breaking. Public sphere is the kind of thing that news reports on. This includes any laws you break, anything your company is doing, ect....
I. Once every so often (can vary as needed) voting on all issues brought before a community. (This will be most efficient if done over the internet) Anyone in the community can bring an issue before the community. If one does not vote in a certain period of time, their vote is not counted.

This will make people be more active in their communities, and will, I believe, be a much harder government to corrupt.

[DoomedOne]

See I already see a few problems with that.

For one, that's describing a true democracy, one that was more described in the Articles of Confederation which was later changed to the Constitution. Really, it seems to me like the author saw flaws in this current government and found ways to fix them.

The truth is, we have to study who it was that actually created the consititution, and who was it? Like the 40 richest guys in the Nation. Who was it that enforced a Constitution over Articles of Confederation? The guys that believed only the rich were capable of making decisions. Who was it that pushed for a bill of rights? The guys that died in duels against the people that thought only the rich should make decisions.

In my opinion, we need to think of the United States as a whole because we can accomplish a lot more that way. Another thing is I think that electing representatives is not necessarily a bad idea. Voting a majority ruling are not absolute good, democracy simply isn't a pure system. Look at Venezuela, 70% of the government votes for Hugo Chavez, but if you ask Megil, he disagrees with Hugo Chavez.

Many things in fact need to happen to achieve a government harder to corrupt.

Completely take money out of the issue. Money should not affect your ability to win a court case, your ability to get a law passed, nothing.

Multiple representatives need to be elected. it sort of wrekcs the foundation of a Republic, but I'm passed the idea of democracy as an absolute.

[Kindred Spirit]

Yeah, I guess it wouldn't work all that well.
Well, why don't we just take the government system from Heinlen's For Us, The Living completely? Have you read that? If not, I suggest you get it out from your local library. It is a novel in the sense that it has characters, but it is really more of a debate on government.

[Neela]

For me I guess the term conspiracy is difficult to define. I make no illusions about governments, ours(America) included. They are there to control the populations ultimately. They make the laws and rules by which the people are to abide, but that is not enough. They also must influence thinking. For true control of a population requires that the people themselves feel strongly and uniformily toward the same goals. Example: The Red Scare- While the possibility of a nuclear war with Russia was possible. It was to a very small degree, but the government needed everyone to believe it to be very possible. They used fear-inducing videos and incited a hatred for the Russian people and government in order to sustain the cold war efforts. Make no mistake, you have seen and will see similar tactics in order to sustain the war on terrorism. In truth this is only way the governments like democracies and republics can wage war for any duration of time. People tire of them unless their way of thinking can be manipulated.

I also make no illusions that America is a democracy. In truth it is barely a republic. When you get down to the actual electoral process, you see that a few select individuals are chose by very specific groups of people. These are offered up to be voted upon in the primaries. What percent of the population actually votes in primaries? maybe 10%? Until ultimately you have this very "dramatic" race by two candidates in which maybe 50-60% of the population choose between. Very similar in the case of Senators and Representatives.

Now heres the kicker... While I sound like I am against government, I really am not. I think the goverment is the only thing that stands between civilization and anarchy. Its not perfect.. but sort of a necessary evil. Corporations are very similar entities to governments, but instead of people they are trying to control marketshare by eliminating competition and making people believe that they NEED their product. Now if you want to label this as conspiracy because all of these things are trying to influence and control you I can see your point. My point is that they do these things because that is their way of achieving their ultimate purpose.

[drizztdourden]

"Those who manipulate the unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested largely by men we have never heard of."

Edward L. Bernays the father of spin.


For some interesting reading:

http://www.mercola.com/2001/aug/15/perception.htm