First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Manufacturing Consent
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 1/19/10 , edited 1/19/10
I'm almost done reading Noam Chomsky's famous book, and there's a short documentary on it I found on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJuqoDvyXOk

I think it's probably this book and concept that gave Chomsky the title of most important intellectual in the world, ironically given to him by Time magazine.

It's basically about how throughout the last half of the century, I think starting around the 60s, the public has been systematically detached from politics and power over the country, therefore getting rid of any real democracy. And this is done, obviously, by a media based on propaganda and controlled ignorance. So people don't know what's going on, they're not supposed to know what's going on, and even when they do they can't do anything about it. The decisions of the country are made by a very small percentage of people with the most power that only look out for their own personal interests.

To me the general idea is common sense, but he breaks it down very specifically so we understand exactly how the system in the US works. Do you think it would ever be possible to have a country as big and wealthy as the US and for it not to have this problem? Or would the general public always be completely oblivious to their government and the rest of the world, and so easily manipulated?
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 1/19/10

Yei wrote:

I'm almost done reading Noam Chomsky's famous book, and there's a short documentary on it I found on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJuqoDvyXOk

I think it's probably this book and concept that gave Chomsky the title of most important intellectual in the world, ironically given to him by Time magazine.

It's basically about how throughout the last half of the century, I think starting around the 60s, the public has been systematically detached from politics and power over the country, therefore getting rid of any real democracy. And this is done, obviously, by a media based on propaganda and controlled ignorance. So people don't know what's going on, they're not supposed to know what's going on, and even when they do they can't do anything about it. The decisions of the country are made by a very small percentage of people with the most power that only look out for their own personal interests.

To me, the general idea is common sense, but he breaks it down very specifically so we understand exactly how the system in the US works. Do you think it would ever be possible to have a country as big and wealthy as the US and for it not to have this problem? Or would the general public always be completely oblivious to their government and the rest of the world, and so easily manipulated?



A lot of the problems would be eliminated by making government smaller. By giving the states back the power they used to have, your allowing more people to have a say, opening the door for less corruption like we have today.
Posted 1/19/10 , edited 1/20/10
"Democracy" disappeared from America ever since the government put all the power into the hands of the private corporations that head Wall Street and the Federal Reserve. They're the ones running the show and they control everything like the media, education, health care, foreign policy, etc. It's basically an invisible dictatorship you're not supposed to know about.

They keep the general public ignorant and distracted as much as possible with long working hours, many forms of entertainment, mass consumerism, patriotic propaganda, etc. so that you don't get in their way and realize what's really happening. In the meanwhile, they're running away with all the money to have for themselves.

The system was fixed for this scenario to happen. It was all rigged, folks. Too bad nobody notices, which is exactly what the real owners of America want.
Posted 1/20/10

Yei wrote:

I'm almost done reading Noam Chomsky's famous book, and there's a short documentary on it I found on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJuqoDvyXOk

I think it's probably this book and concept that gave Chomsky the title of most important intellectual in the world, ironically given to him by Time magazine.

It's basically about how throughout the last half of the century, I think starting around the 60s, the public has been systematically detached from politics and power over the country, therefore getting rid of any real democracy. And this is done, obviously, by a media based on propaganda and controlled ignorance. So people don't know what's going on, they're not supposed to know what's going on, and even when they do they can't do anything about it. The decisions of the country are made by a very small percentage of people with the most power that only look out for their own personal interests.

To me the general idea is common sense, but he breaks it down very specifically so we understand exactly how the system in the US works. Do you think it would ever be possible to have a country as big and wealthy as the US and for it not to have this problem? Or would the general public always be completely oblivious to their government and the rest of the world, and so easily manipulated?
Actually, when you look at it now, there's even more propaganda and restrictions(not control) in the mass medias of the Eastern society. In fact, we're looking at a copy-and-paste style of reporting, whereas one news gets the same article with multiple exposures on different news platforms. And in the world of entertainment business, we simply call that "advertising" not "reporting".

And when you actually look at today's metropolitan lifestyle, who honestly have the time to stop and think about the situation that we're in? Or the direction we're heading? When not all of us are born intellectuals or visionaries, whereas the rest of us by a majority, can only focus on the present because of who we are as individual persons(citation).

Therefore like the old saying goes "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink". What both Noam Chomsky and subsequently you are doing is also manufacturing consent, only this time is on a smaller scale. And at a lesser degree not as efficient as the mass medias. However, your saving grace is that unlike most controlled and/or regulated mass media platforms, you're using the internet as an alternative open-source media forum. Then again, the same problem still persist that a horse is neither an intellectual nor a visionary.

And the truth is just the same goes for the US, that every other developed nations have the same economic setup through the distribution of wealth via government taxation. Only because just like the poor individuals, the rich individuals also have the same rights and freedoms. And when you consider the fact that the rich can afford not to rely on the government to provide safety, security, and stability in a free market society. How can you therefore criticize their manipulation on the poor via manufacturing consent through mass medias?

The answer to that question is relatively simple; support our own local communities as well as local businesses via our own incentives, and not support the goods and services that the rich provided with our own money. After all, that's also within our rights and freedoms. And it's perfectly justifiable within the consent of the law, as long as there's not a legislation that forces us to must buy from the rich.
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 1/20/10 , edited 1/20/10

DomFortress wrote:

Actually, when you look at it now, there's even more propaganda and restrictions(not control) in the mass medias of the Eastern society. In fact, we're looking at a copy-and-paste style of reporting, whereas one news gets the same article with multiple exposures on different news platforms. And in the world of entertainment business, we simply call that "advertising" not "reporting".


Well we're talking about the situation in the US, which is much more important. I'm not sure about the situation in other parts of the world.



And when you actually look at today's metropolitan lifestyle, who honestly have the time to stop and think about the situation that we're in? Or the direction we're heading? When not all of us are born intellectuals or visionaries, whereas the rest of us by a majority, can only focus on the present because of who we are as individual persons(citation).

Therefore like the old saying goes "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink". What both Noam Chomsky and subsequently you are doing is also manufacturing consent, only this time is on a smaller scale. And at a lesser degree not as efficient as the mass medias. However, your saving grace is that unlike most controlled and/or regulated mass media platforms, you're using the internet as an alternative open-source media forum. Then again, the same problem still persist that a horse is neither an intellectual nor a visionary.


Who has the time to stop and think about the situation that we're in? How's that an excuse to be completely ignorant and oblivious to your government, country and the world? That mentality is part of the system that's been developed to keep people out of the elite's way. And how are we manufacturing consent? We don't need consent for anything, what are you talking about?



And the truth is just the same goes for the US, that every other developed nations have the same economic setup through the distribution of wealth via government taxation. Only because just like the poor individuals, the rich individuals also have the same rights and freedoms.




The US like all developed nations has an economic system that distributes wealth through taxation? Okay? But it's not exactly a socialist state, so the distribution of wealth is still ridiculously unfair, according to your link. And then you're saying this is because the poor and rich have the same rights and freedom? I don't understand what you're trying to say....


And when you consider the fact that the rich can afford not to rely on the government to provide safety, security, and stability in a free market society.


Yes, the rich can afford to be independent of the government.



How can you therefore criticize their manipulation on the poor via manufacturing consent through mass medias?


Again, I don't understand what you mean. How could you not criticize the system? And it's not just the poor; rich vs. poor is not a big part of the concept. Watch the short documentary, I'm not sure you understood the concept.



The answer to that question is relatively simple; support our own local communities as well as local businesses via our own incentives, and not support the goods and services that the rich provided with our own money. After all, that's also within our rights and freedoms. And it's perfectly justifiable within the consent of the law, as long as there's not a legislation that forces us to must buy from the rich.


How would that bring democracy back? Ok, people stop buying everything from corporations, and somehow create interdependent communities. I have no idea how that would be possible today. And I'm guessing the point would be to decrease the power of corporations and make the distribution of wealth more fair? Okay, but that's a very small part of the problem. Watch the short documentary.
Posted 1/20/10

Yei wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

Actually, when you look at it now, there's even more propaganda and restrictions(not control) in the mass medias of the Eastern society. In fact, we're looking at a copy-and-paste style of reporting, whereas one news gets the same article with multiple exposures on different news platforms. And in the world of entertainment business, we simply call that "advertising" not "reporting".


Well we're talking about the situation in the US, which is much more important. I'm not sure about the situation in other parts of the world.



And when you actually look at today's metropolitan lifestyle, who honestly have the time to stop and think about the situation that we're in? Or the direction we're heading? When not all of us are born intellectuals or visionaries, whereas the rest of us by a majority, can only focus on the present because of who we are as individual persons(citation).

Therefore like the old saying goes "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink". What both Noam Chomsky and subsequently you are doing is also manufacturing consent, only this time is on a smaller scale. And at a lesser degree not as efficient as the mass medias. However, your saving grace is that unlike most controlled and/or regulated mass media platforms, you're using the internet as an alternative open-source media forum. Then again, the same problem still persist that a horse is neither an intellectual nor a visionary.


Who has the time to stop and think about the situation that we're in? How's that an excuse to be completely ignorant and oblivious to your government, country and the world? That mentality is part of the system that's been developed to keep people out of the elite's way. And how are we manufacturing consent? We don't need consent for anything, what are you talking about?



And the truth is just the same goes for the US, that every other developed nations have the same economic setup through the distribution of wealth via government taxation. Only because just like the poor individuals, the rich individuals also have the same rights and freedoms.




The US like all developed nations has an economic system that distributes wealth through taxation? Okay? But it's not exactly a socialist state, so the distribution of wealth is still ridiculously unfair, according to your link. And then you're saying this is because the poor and rich have the same rights and freedom? I don't understand what you're trying to say....


And when you consider the fact that the rich can afford not to rely on the government to provide safety, security, and stability in a free market society.


Yes, the rich can afford to be independent of the government.



How can you therefore criticize their manipulation on the poor via manufacturing consent through mass medias?


Again, I don't understand what you mean. How could you not criticize the system? And it's not just the poor; rich vs. poor is not a big part of the concept. Watch the short documentary, I'm not sure you understood the concept.



The answer to that question is relatively simple; support our own local communities as well as local businesses via our own incentives, and not support the goods and services that the rich provided with our own money. After all, that's also within our rights and freedoms. And it's perfectly justifiable within the consent of the law, as long as there's not a legislation that forces us to must buy from the rich.


How would that bring democracy back? Ok, people stop buying everything from corporations, and somehow create interdependent communities. I have no idea how that would be possible today. And I'm guessing the point would be to decrease the power of corporations and make the distribution of wealth more fair? Okay, but that's a very small part of the problem. Watch the short documentary.
And just like that, you're subjected to the viewpoint of CNN. Where the US matters more than the rest of the world.

Because while you claimed that your consent(i.e care, concern) is about "government, country and the world", you're just as ready to ignore the rest of the world by you solely focusing on the US.

Otherwise, how can you agree with my view that in a free market society, the rich can afford being independent from the government? Yet you still claimed that free market based on capitalism has nothing to do with the distribution of wealth, when the socialistic Canada also has free market, and thereby has the same problem as the US.

And finally, if you still couldn't see how is it that what you're doing is manufacturing consent. Just like how the mass medias' "advertising" news. What's your thought and feeling about this "watch the short documentary" incentive of yours?

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. Therefore you can't convince me if you yourself are not an intellectually free thinker like I am, when you can only convince other "horses".
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 1/21/10 , edited 1/21/10

DomFortress wrote:

And just like that, you're subjected to the viewpoint of CNN. Where the US matters more than the rest of the world.


Because while you claimed that your consent(i.e care, concern) is about "government, country and the world", you're just as ready to ignore the rest of the world by you solely focusing on the US.


I don't watch CNN. The US is the most powerful and influential country in the world and has been carrying out an imperialistic and destructive foreign policy for decades, that's why it's important to look at.

I don't think you know what the word "consent" means; it doesn't mean 'concern' or 'care'. And I don't have or need any. Again, I don't think you fully understand the concept of manufacturing consent, watch the full documentary on Youtube. Or better yet, read Chomsky's book.


Otherwise, how can you agree with my view that in a free market society, the rich can afford being independent from the government? Yet you still claimed that free market based on capitalism has nothing to do with the distribution of wealth, when the socialistic Canada also has free market, and thereby has the same problem as the US.


I never claimed that a free market based on capitalism has nothing to do with the distribution of wealth, that's another discussion. This has very little to do with the topic.



And finally, if you still couldn't see how is it that what you're doing is manufacturing consent. Just like how the mass medias' "advertising" news. What's your thought and feeling about this "watch the short documentary" incentive of yours?


You don't know what manufacturing consent means. Watch the documentary or read the book, so you can understand what this topic is about and give a proper response to this serious issue.
4294 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
forgot where
Offline
Posted 1/21/10

Yei wrote:

I'm almost done reading Noam Chomsky's famous book, and there's a short documentary on it I found on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJuqoDvyXOk

I think it's probably this book and concept that gave Chomsky the title of most important intellectual in the world, ironically given to him by Time magazine.

It's basically about how throughout the last half of the century, I think starting around the 60s, the public has been systematically detached from politics and power over the country, therefore getting rid of any real democracy. And this is done, obviously, by a media based on propaganda and controlled ignorance. So people don't know what's going on, they're not supposed to know what's going on, and even when they do they can't do anything about it. The decisions of the country are made by a very small percentage of people with the most power that only look out for their own personal interests.

To me the general idea is common sense, but he breaks it down very specifically so we understand exactly how the system in the US works. Do you think it would ever be possible to have a country as big and wealthy as the US and for it not to have this problem? Or would the general public always be completely oblivious to their government and the rest of the world, and so easily manipulated?


ill watch the documentry later and if it changes my opinion, ill reedit my statenment. correct me if im wrong, but yur pretty much saying that the USA is ruled by a small group of powerful elitiest who hold 99.9% of USA's wealth even though they make up less then 1% of the population under the illusion of democracy?

ok then, ill buy that, it makes sense.

To me the general idea is common sense, but he breaks it down very specifically so we understand exactly how the system in the US works. Do you think it would ever be possible to have a country as big and wealthy as the US and for it not to have this problem? Or would the general public always be completely oblivious to their government and the rest of the world, and so easily manipulated?

to answer the 1st quesion, 1st we have to ask ourselves is this a problem to begin with? So what if we r being manipulated and know nothing about the goverment's inside deals? whats the issue? who do u believe should run the goverment?

Every country in the world goes through this same thing. When ever a country is made, wealth is ALWAYS concentrated in the small and elite while the rest r exponetialy poor compared to the rich. This is true even in communism. and where the weath is is where the power is.And those who have dont care about those who dont.

Since this phenonmenon seems to be natural, consistent, and ongoing, perhaps there is no solution to it, one has never been found.
Perhaps we r simply paying attention to the wrong thing.Going back to my ealier quesion, who do u want running the government?

Some elitiest who has been running it his entire life and knows what he/she is doing?

or Joe the plumber who can't even run his own job let alone a country.

Simply put, the vast majority of Americans r incapable of running the government, and if they ever succeed, they will simply do the same thing as the elitiest did b4 them. elitist r not born, they r made.They r trained and highly educated professions made for running a country. sure, they have thier issues, but who else would do a better job? who else can?The people obviously cant, our schools are not set up for training us to run a country.

As for the 2nd quesion,are we really being manipulated, or r we just overall satisfied? And how do u defined being manipulated?taught what to think? being kept to busy to think? not thinking at all?not trying to answer your quesions with quesions, just trying to showcase the other side of the story.

Sometimes the bad sounding isnt as bad as it sounds. peace over war
Posted 1/21/10 , edited 1/21/10

Yei wrote:
Do you think it would ever be possible to have a country as big and wealthy as the US and for it not to have this problem? Or would the general public always be completely oblivious to their government and the rest of the world, and so easily manipulated?


I didn't directly answer this in my first post but I do believe it's quite possible for the US to not have this problem. Before the creation of a central banking system, the circulation of money and what it was spent for was, more or less, controlled by the government. Unfortunately this power is pretty much out of their hands now, as it has gradually shifted to the central bank, namely the Federal Reserve which is consisted of powerful privately owned banks.

Congress literally created this mess. Whoever controls money has pretty much control of everything else. The government can't and won't stop them because the way the system is handled now they can pretty much spend however much they want. The Federal Reserve has been pretty much taking taxpayer money and using it to line their pockets and pay off the finances of the big businesses of Wall Street. They've been doing this for almost 100 years and will continue to worsen. These corporations are in control and the government is their puppet. They bought out America a long time ago and now they want the world.

And thus lies the reason why the general public is almost always oblivious to what important decisions are being made in the country. Education is watered down, the media is proliferated, and since the public relations industry is directly tied to the government they manage all the information we get to hear. The corporations lobby billions of dollars every year to keep this situation going and they don't want a nation full of critical thinkers. They want a dumb population incapable of knowing what's going on. They want their money pouring in and leave everyone else to fend for themselves.

I believe a country can become big and wealthy and not have this problem. Unfortunately it's a mere pipe dream, as with the case in the US. Rules and laws that favor the powerful is the same as having none. When corporations became the government that was when democracy disappeared from the US. Chomsky wasn't the only one who saw this coming. My biggest fear is when the rich and powerful in countries all over the world wish to emulate this same scenario.

Posted 1/21/10

Yei wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

And just like that, you're subjected to the viewpoint of CNN. Where the US matters more than the rest of the world.


Because while you claimed that your consent(i.e care, concern) is about "government, country and the world", you're just as ready to ignore the rest of the world by you solely focusing on the US.


I don't watch CNN. The US is the most powerful and influential country in the world and has been carrying out an imperialistic and destructive foreign policy for decades, that's why it's important to look at.

I don't think you know what the word "consent" means; it doesn't mean 'concern' or 'care'. And I don't have or need any. Again, I don't think you fully understand the concept of manufacturing consent, watch the full documentary on Youtube. Or better yet, read Chomsky's book.


Otherwise, how can you agree with my view that in a free market society, the rich can afford being independent from the government? Yet you still claimed that free market based on capitalism has nothing to do with the distribution of wealth, when the socialistic Canada also has free market, and thereby has the same problem as the US.


I never claimed that a free market based on capitalism has nothing to do with the distribution of wealth, that's another discussion. This has very little to do with the topic.



And finally, if you still couldn't see how is it that what you're doing is manufacturing consent. Just like how the mass medias' "advertising" news. What's your thought and feeling about this "watch the short documentary" incentive of yours?


You don't know what manufacturing consent means. Watch the documentary or read the book, so you can understand what this topic is about and give a proper response to this serious issue.
What's so different than your consent of "The US is the most powerful and influential country in the world" as to the CNN's own viewpoint of "the US matters more than the rest of the world"? When you sure as care and concern as much about the US just like CNN, even though you're not its viewer and yet you two shares the same subject of interest.

And if you don't want to deal with how the rich and wealthy obtained their power via free market, how are you going to prevent or even to reverse the shifting of power? With your awareness of known problems doesn't automatically mean you know how to fix anyone of them, when you don't want to face them head on.

Therefore you can't convince me with that attitude of yours, while you keep relying on other intellectual's own words in hope to convince me otherwise. What's worst, you can't even make others who are like me to make consent/agreement to watch something, that you claimed that you "don't have or need any" concern about or care for.

Or is this how your topic will simply be; a free advertisement on some 9 Youtube documentaries about a guy, who happened to be the author of this book about the US that you happened to like so much of?
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 1/22/10 , edited 1/22/10

DomFortress wrote:

What's so different than your consent of "The US is the most powerful and influential country in the world" as to the CNN's own viewpoint of "the US matters more than the rest of the world"? When you sure as care and concern as much about the US just like CNN, even though you're not its viewer and yet you two shares the same subject of interest.

And if you don't want to deal with how the rich and wealthy obtained their power via free market, how are you going to prevent or even to reverse the shifting of power? With your awareness of known problems doesn't automatically mean you know how to fix anyone of them, when you don't want to face them head on.

Therefore you can't convince me with that attitude of yours, while you keep relying on other intellectual's own words in hope to convince me otherwise. What's worst, you can't even make others who are like me to make consent/agreement to watch something, that you claimed that you "don't have or need any" concern about or care for.

Or is this how your topic will simply be; a free advertisement on some 9 Youtube documentaries about a guy, who happened to be the author of this book about the US that you happened to like so much of?


I'm gonna be really honest Dom, I think that you tend to have no idea what you're talking about and just make crude attempts to sound intelligent. You're a nice guy, but seriously, is English your second language? It's difficult to understand some of you're points, they're random, they don't make any sense and are irrelevant.

I still don't think you understand what this topic is about. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I'm asking questions on the subject of manufacturing consent. I don't think you are an expert on this topic because you don't even seem familiar with the words, so that's the purpose of the documentary or reading the book, so you can understand the topic. It's strange that I have to explain this. I tried to summarize the concept very basically, but it won't be clear enough if that's the only info you have on it. I don't have time to summarize the entire book. If you don't like Noam Chomsky, do some research from anywhere else on manufacturing consent. I don't think it's a very difficult concept.

Manufacturing = making on a massive scale, consent = approval/permission to do something

The people in power fond out they couldn't control people by force so they needed to control their mentalities and what they know. So they use the media and propaganda to manipulate people's minds and keep them ignorant, so the people let the government do what it wants, they either don't know about it or don't know the truth about it. Since it's a democracy the people's opinion should matter but it doesn't, the government does whatever it wants, completely ignores the people and just makes sure they don't know the truth. This way the US can fund genocides or start pointless wars and the people don't know what's really going on.
Posted 1/22/10

Yei wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

What's so different than your consent of "The US is the most powerful and influential country in the world" as to the CNN's own viewpoint of "the US matters more than the rest of the world"? When you sure as care and concern as much about the US just like CNN, even though you're not its viewer and yet you two shares the same subject of interest.

And if you don't want to deal with how the rich and wealthy obtained their power via free market, how are you going to prevent or even to reverse the shifting of power? With your awareness of known problems doesn't automatically mean you know how to fix anyone of them, when you don't want to face them head on.

Therefore you can't convince me with that attitude of yours, while you keep relying on other intellectual's own words in hope to convince me otherwise. What's worst, you can't even make others who are like me to make consent/agreement to watch something, that you claimed that you "don't have or need any" concern about or care for.

Or is this how your topic will simply be; a free advertisement on some 9 Youtube documentaries about a guy, who happened to be the author of this book about the US that you happened to like so much of?


I'm gonna be really honest Dom, I think that you tend to have no idea what you're talking about and just make crude attempts to sound intelligent. You're a nice guy, but seriously, is English your second language? It's difficult to understand some of you're points, they're random, they don't make any sense and are irrelevant.

I still don't think you understand what this topic is about. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I'm asking questions on the subject of manufacturing consent. I don't think you are an expert on this topic because you don't even seem familiar with the words, so that's the purpose of the documentary or reading the book, so you can understand the topic. It's strange that I have to explain this. I tried to summarize the concept very basically, but it won't be clear enough if that's the only info you have on it. I don't have time to summarize the entire book. If you don't like Noam Chomsky, do some research from anywhere else on manufacturing consent. I don't think it's a very difficult concept.
Then why are you still think that I'm a nice guy? When "nice guy finishes last". And while we're at it, just what does the fact that English is my second language has to do with you not able to understand me? While there are plenty of other English-speaking individuals who can understand me completely. Heck! My own girlfriend is an English-speaking Caucasian Canadian, and the only times that she couldn't understand me was when she's already half-asleep.

BTW, you're not the first one who came at me with this whole "English as a second language" ad hominem argument. Therefore while once again your approach lacks originality and careful planning. You still couldn't see that you're just doing the same thing like the rich manipulating the masses using mass-medias, in order to manufacture majority consent on laws that will favor the rich. By you applying the very same concept of you trying to manipulate me using the internet forum, in order to manufacture my individual consent on an issue that will favor your bias opinions about either my English language skill, or the US for that matter.

So if you think manufacturing consent is bad, then stop manipulate others. Otherwise, just keep doing the same thing, but don't deny the fact that you're no different than those who are manipulative, myself included.
Posted 1/22/10
Dom, I think you missed the point of the whole topic.
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 1/22/10

DomFortress wrote:

Then why are you still think that I'm a nice guy? When "nice guy finishes last".


This is the type of thing I'm talking about, I always have trouble understanding some of your points and I can't tell if you're being serious or not.



BTW, you're not the first one who came at me with this whole "English as a second language" ad hominem argument. Therefore while once again your approach lacks originality and careful planning.


That's not an ad hominem argument, because it isn't even an argument.

"Therefore" isn't used properly, and the sentence is incomplete. I don't understand what you're talking about, "originality" "careful planning''? This is a discussion, not a circus act.


You still couldn't see that you're just doing the same thing like the rich manipulating the masses using mass-medias, in order to manufacture majority consent on laws that will favor the rich. By you applying the very same concept of you trying to manipulate me using the internet forum, in order to manufacture my individual consent on an issue that will favor your bias opinions about either my English language skill, or the US for that matter.


No one's being manipulated. It's a discussion on manufacturing consent. Which you don't fully understand yet. I'm not manufacturing consent, I don't need you're consent.

All I ask is that you fully understand this concept before trying to respond to the topic, and not go into some random irrelevant nonsense to try to sound like you're saying something meaningful. Now there's a variety of ways for you to try to understand the concept well, you can figure out a good way for yourself. Maybe some sort of documentary or book on the subject, or do your own research starting from the 1950s until now, idk, you decide for yourself.
2633 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / New York City, NY
Offline
Posted 1/22/10
I do believe in the first concept discussed in the series: that all people are not fundamentally equal and that a specialized few should be the leaders of the majority. But this viewpoint almost always depicts the ordinary man as a complete moron, which is the complete opposite of reality. It's also ironic that the public ignorance is largely produced by the very people who criticize that ignorance. It's importance not to fool yourself into believing in conspiracies or shadow governments over this kind of stuff. It's implicit ideas in the upper echelons of powers that every politician and powerful individual accepts, many without realizing it.
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.