Derideo_Te
Je Suis Charlie
- Mar 2, 2013
- 20,461
- 7,961
- 360
CDZ Social Engineering & Propaganda
- Thread starter Bonzi
- Start date
- Status
Derideo_Te
Je Suis Charlie
- Mar 2, 2013
- 20,461
- 7,961
- 360
Agreed, and it was set up that way on purpose because they form part of the concept of an informed electorate holding the government of the people accountable to We the People.
This nation was founded on a new concept of Social Engineering that was all about equality and fairness. If you look at the history of the nation you see a steady progression of granting rights to more and more groups who deserve them.
As to whether everyone agrees at any point in time goes it is a given that not everyone will do so. But ask yourself if anyone still believes that women should be denied the right to vote? And yes, that only happened less than a century ago because it wasn't there to begin with nor for the entire first century of this nation.
So we are a living experiment in social engineering and not everything is going to work out but that is part of the learning experience. What worked, what didn't, what can do next to fix what failed?
Josf
Active Member
- Apr 20, 2015
- 379
- 22
- 26
quote:____________________________
The only beneficiaries of your Libertarian Propaganda are the wealthy. Everyone else is left to suffer alone in a "society" that has more in common with "dog eat dog" than civilization.
Now feel free to post your Libertarian propaganda in this thread or return to your original thread where they won't be exposed for what they really are.
Your choice.
______________________________
False labels are commonly used when an individual sets out to reach the goal of "Social Engineering" as the example above proves. This is all part of the "Social Engineering" tactic of creating a man of straw, or a legal fiction, whereby the individual employing this tactic to reach the goal of "Social Engineering" targets individuals based upon a common attribute common to the targeted individuals, such as this example where the common attribute of the target individuals is knowledge concerning political economy in history, in the present, and in the future. The "Social Engineer" creates a false version of these individuals whereby the false version of these individuals is said to be (libel) opposite of what these individuals actually are in demonstrable fact. Then the "Social Engineer" seeks to convince gullible people, who are ignorant, and who are careless, that the false version of the targeted individuals is an accurate account of the targeted individuals.
The "Social Engineer" usually targets innocent young people because often the parents of innocent young people have already been convinced of many false accounts and so the innocent young people are thereby rendered defenseless on two counts.
1. They were born innocent and defenseless.
2. They grow up indoctrinated into "Social Engineering" where they remain defenseless to a point where their children are no longer defended naturally by their parents.
The concept of "dog eat dog" is found in many historical accounts including a very elaborate version I found in the work of Carl Menger here:
"Here human self-interest finds an incentive to make itself felt, and where the available quantity does not suffice for all, every individual will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others."
And here:
"We saw that economic goods are goods whose available quantities are smaller than the requirements for them. Wealth can therefore also be defined as the entire sum of goods at an economizing individual’s command, the quantities of which are smaller than the requirements for them. Hence, if there were a society where all goods were available in amounts exceeding the requirements for them, there would be no economic goods nor any “wealth.”
That can also be called the "zero sum game," or "rat race," or "anarchy," or merely crime.
If the crime is merely libel, merely fraud, then the victims, by definition, must be ignorant, since the crime involves only the use of deception. If the crime involves the use of threat of aggressive violence, or aggressive violence in combination with deception, then the concept of innocence (ignorance) is less clear and present.
In this case, this "Social Engineering" being done to a group known as "libertarians" the "Social Engineer" creating the Man of Straw is engaged in what is known as libel. Simple libel. So long as the intended targets are well informed the names will never hurt anyone.
The only beneficiaries of your Libertarian Propaganda are the wealthy. Everyone else is left to suffer alone in a "society" that has more in common with "dog eat dog" than civilization.
Now feel free to post your Libertarian propaganda in this thread or return to your original thread where they won't be exposed for what they really are.
Your choice.
______________________________
False labels are commonly used when an individual sets out to reach the goal of "Social Engineering" as the example above proves. This is all part of the "Social Engineering" tactic of creating a man of straw, or a legal fiction, whereby the individual employing this tactic to reach the goal of "Social Engineering" targets individuals based upon a common attribute common to the targeted individuals, such as this example where the common attribute of the target individuals is knowledge concerning political economy in history, in the present, and in the future. The "Social Engineer" creates a false version of these individuals whereby the false version of these individuals is said to be (libel) opposite of what these individuals actually are in demonstrable fact. Then the "Social Engineer" seeks to convince gullible people, who are ignorant, and who are careless, that the false version of the targeted individuals is an accurate account of the targeted individuals.
The "Social Engineer" usually targets innocent young people because often the parents of innocent young people have already been convinced of many false accounts and so the innocent young people are thereby rendered defenseless on two counts.
1. They were born innocent and defenseless.
2. They grow up indoctrinated into "Social Engineering" where they remain defenseless to a point where their children are no longer defended naturally by their parents.
The concept of "dog eat dog" is found in many historical accounts including a very elaborate version I found in the work of Carl Menger here:
"Here human self-interest finds an incentive to make itself felt, and where the available quantity does not suffice for all, every individual will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others."
And here:
"We saw that economic goods are goods whose available quantities are smaller than the requirements for them. Wealth can therefore also be defined as the entire sum of goods at an economizing individual’s command, the quantities of which are smaller than the requirements for them. Hence, if there were a society where all goods were available in amounts exceeding the requirements for them, there would be no economic goods nor any “wealth.”
That can also be called the "zero sum game," or "rat race," or "anarchy," or merely crime.
If the crime is merely libel, merely fraud, then the victims, by definition, must be ignorant, since the crime involves only the use of deception. If the crime involves the use of threat of aggressive violence, or aggressive violence in combination with deception, then the concept of innocence (ignorance) is less clear and present.
In this case, this "Social Engineering" being done to a group known as "libertarians" the "Social Engineer" creating the Man of Straw is engaged in what is known as libel. Simple libel. So long as the intended targets are well informed the names will never hurt anyone.
Christophera
Evidence & Reason Rule
It doesn't matter where it is explained, it still explains covert, false groups pretending they are sincere Americans.
It could easily be proven to be only a theory by the covert entities simply agreeing with and accepting a fact.
The fact that free speech has the ultimate purpose of enabling unity adequate to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights.
However that is counter to the agenda of the covert groups, so they won't. They simply continue to label the explanation for the subterfuge, "theory".
Josf
Active Member
- Apr 20, 2015
- 379
- 22
- 26
"The fact that free speech has the ultimate purpose of enabling unity adequate to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights."
Social Engineering can be repeated in History.
Judge Rules Administrative Court System Illegal After 81 Years Armstrong Economics
If those in power punish people who offer accurate information then clearly those in power are criminals seeking to maintain their false authority as the good guys.
Propaganda does not automatically equate to false accounts as the word Propaganda can be used to describe the intent to transfer accurate accounts from one individual to any number of other individuals.
Quote:___________________________________________
The Miranda v Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966) decision of the Supreme Court came only after decades of abuse by American police against citizens, not unlike what we are watching today. The Miranda decision is hated by police, prosecutors, right-wing judges, politicians, and citizens. The decision is based upon the history of the right not to be coerced that began with the famous trial of John Lilburn before the English court of the Star Chamber in 1637 where he stood tall and objected to the King’s torture. Lilburn’s crime was handing out pamphlets against the king. John Lilburne (1615–1657) was a leader in the Leveller Movement of the 1640s and was a prolific pamphleteer who defended religious and individual liberty of the people. He was imprisoned many times for his views and was active in the army of the New Parliament rising to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. In October 1649, he was arrested and tried for High Treason for printing and circulating books and pamphlets critical of the government but was acquitted of all charges by a jury of his peers.
_______________________________________
If some individual seeks to reach the goal of informing other people of clear and present dangers to all people, and the information is demonstrably factual, that can fall under the category of Propagandizing; depending upon whichever meaning of the word Propaganda is employed by the one employing the word.
If someone does equate the word Propaganda with a crime such as willful deception, with malice aforethought, whereby groups of individual people are targeted for exploitation through those deceptions in written form, then the word Propaganda is a synonym for the word fraud, or simple libel.
Why use the word Propaganda if YOU (any one) intended to speak about a crime in progress?
Whose idea (in your mind) was it to cover up the word fraud with a less obviously criminal word such as Propaganda, if your idea is that Propaganda is always meant to be a criminal act of deception for profit whereby the criminal deceiver profits when the targeted victims are soundly deceived by the criminal deceptions employed by the criminal deceivers you call Propagandists?
Social Engineering can be repeated in History.
Judge Rules Administrative Court System Illegal After 81 Years Armstrong Economics
If those in power punish people who offer accurate information then clearly those in power are criminals seeking to maintain their false authority as the good guys.
Propaganda does not automatically equate to false accounts as the word Propaganda can be used to describe the intent to transfer accurate accounts from one individual to any number of other individuals.
Quote:___________________________________________
The Miranda v Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966) decision of the Supreme Court came only after decades of abuse by American police against citizens, not unlike what we are watching today. The Miranda decision is hated by police, prosecutors, right-wing judges, politicians, and citizens. The decision is based upon the history of the right not to be coerced that began with the famous trial of John Lilburn before the English court of the Star Chamber in 1637 where he stood tall and objected to the King’s torture. Lilburn’s crime was handing out pamphlets against the king. John Lilburne (1615–1657) was a leader in the Leveller Movement of the 1640s and was a prolific pamphleteer who defended religious and individual liberty of the people. He was imprisoned many times for his views and was active in the army of the New Parliament rising to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. In October 1649, he was arrested and tried for High Treason for printing and circulating books and pamphlets critical of the government but was acquitted of all charges by a jury of his peers.
_______________________________________
If some individual seeks to reach the goal of informing other people of clear and present dangers to all people, and the information is demonstrably factual, that can fall under the category of Propagandizing; depending upon whichever meaning of the word Propaganda is employed by the one employing the word.
If someone does equate the word Propaganda with a crime such as willful deception, with malice aforethought, whereby groups of individual people are targeted for exploitation through those deceptions in written form, then the word Propaganda is a synonym for the word fraud, or simple libel.
Why use the word Propaganda if YOU (any one) intended to speak about a crime in progress?
Whose idea (in your mind) was it to cover up the word fraud with a less obviously criminal word such as Propaganda, if your idea is that Propaganda is always meant to be a criminal act of deception for profit whereby the criminal deceiver profits when the targeted victims are soundly deceived by the criminal deceptions employed by the criminal deceivers you call Propagandists?
Christophera
Evidence & Reason Rule
Actually, I think it does. It does in the same way as the similar differences found when considering the word "corporatism".
The word first described government always preferring to interact with corporations. Lately I see people who use that word that way with disdain, yet they prefer drinking corporate beer and smoking corporate cigarettes while watching corporate football after listening to corporately produced music on corporately manufactured CD's and players.
They do this while putting down government collusion with corporations and discussing anarchy.
Pretty hard to argue with the assertion that we are largely controlled by our unconscious mind.
Last edited:
Derideo_Te
Je Suis Charlie
- Mar 2, 2013
- 20,461
- 7,961
- 360
/unsubscribing from derailed thread
Christophera
Evidence & Reason Rule
Not implied it is science, but science actually does not properly exist. Improperly, yes. Improper because it will not consider the first tool of science while there are two hemispheres, one cognitive the other intuitive, with the intuitive also adjacent to phylogenetic DNA.
Social engineering is a fact, and the pseudo science of psychology will not evaluate meaningfully the social engineering of corporate media using semiotics to engineer perceptions with attitudes that are unconsciously generated and reinforced by multiple media sources.
Socialism is a logical place to compel a society to go after being exploited by corporations abusing the concept of capitalism by governmental collusion.
Last edited:
Josf
Active Member
- Apr 20, 2015
- 379
- 22
- 26
If the idea is to employ something similar to the scientific method when defining the original meanings of words then the following links may help anyone, or may not help anyone, discover useful information concerning the idea of socialism and the idea of anarchism.
ANARCHISM.net The Science of Society by Stephen Pearl Andrews
A lost book (one I have not yet found) titled The History of Socialism by Stephen Pearl Andrews may also help.
From the Science of Society is the following competitive history of the idea of socialism before the word was corrupted into meaning the opposite of the original meaning (a common phenomenon):
"In what great feature are Protestantism, Democracy, and Socialism identical? I will answer this interrogatory first, and demonstrate the answer afterward. Protestantism, Democracy, and Socialism are identical in the assertion of the Supremacy of the Individual,--a dogma essentially contumacious, revolutionary, and antagonistic to the basic principles of all the older institutions of society, which make the Individual subordinate and subject to the Church, to the State, and to Society respectively. Not only is this supremacy or SOVEREIGNTY OF THE INDIVIDUAL, a common element of all three of these great modern movements, but I will make the still more sweeping assertion that it is substantially the whole of those movements. It is not merely a feature, as I have just denominated it, but the living soul itself, the vital energy, the integral essence or being of them all."
In that context the idea of socialism is the opposite of rule by criminals whose rules (no matter how immoral) must be obeyed without question. Therefore that also turns the meaning of social engineering decidedly back into a moral idea of defense of innocent people from guilty criminals.
Another word often bantered around haphazardly by some is the word anarchy.
The Index ... A Weekly Paper - Google Books
"Another of Proudhon's startling paradoxes, seemingly so at least, and I think we shall see really so, is the use of the term anarchy, to denote not chaos and confusion, but the basis of order in the freedom of the individual from the control of others. Etymologically, this use of the term has a show of reason as it merely means absence of government, and a writer has the right, if he choose so to revert to etymological origins; and frequently there is a great advantage in so doing. There is a loss it is true in the temporary obfuscation of the mind of the reader, but, it may be, a more than compensating advantage in arousing deeper thought, or in furnishing a securer technicality. But in this ease the disadvantage is certainly incurred; and neither advantage is secured. There are two very different things covered by the term government: personal government by arbitrium, and the government of inherent laws and principles. Proudhon is denying the rightfulness of the former, and affirming the latter. Now the Greek arche meant both of these things; but if either more peculiarly than the other, it meant the government of laws and principles, whence the negation of such rule by the prefix an has meant, and rightly means, chaos. Proudhon undertakes to make the Greek word mean exclusively the other idea, whereby he spoils one excellent technicality without getting for his other purpose a secure and good one in place of it."
Claiming that there is something wrong or right about Social Engineering or Propaganda without naming someone wronged in time and place may be a wild goose chase for reasons that may not be very clear to those who are inspired to be led down a false path.
ANARCHISM.net The Science of Society by Stephen Pearl Andrews
A lost book (one I have not yet found) titled The History of Socialism by Stephen Pearl Andrews may also help.
From the Science of Society is the following competitive history of the idea of socialism before the word was corrupted into meaning the opposite of the original meaning (a common phenomenon):
"In what great feature are Protestantism, Democracy, and Socialism identical? I will answer this interrogatory first, and demonstrate the answer afterward. Protestantism, Democracy, and Socialism are identical in the assertion of the Supremacy of the Individual,--a dogma essentially contumacious, revolutionary, and antagonistic to the basic principles of all the older institutions of society, which make the Individual subordinate and subject to the Church, to the State, and to Society respectively. Not only is this supremacy or SOVEREIGNTY OF THE INDIVIDUAL, a common element of all three of these great modern movements, but I will make the still more sweeping assertion that it is substantially the whole of those movements. It is not merely a feature, as I have just denominated it, but the living soul itself, the vital energy, the integral essence or being of them all."
In that context the idea of socialism is the opposite of rule by criminals whose rules (no matter how immoral) must be obeyed without question. Therefore that also turns the meaning of social engineering decidedly back into a moral idea of defense of innocent people from guilty criminals.
Another word often bantered around haphazardly by some is the word anarchy.
The Index ... A Weekly Paper - Google Books
"Another of Proudhon's startling paradoxes, seemingly so at least, and I think we shall see really so, is the use of the term anarchy, to denote not chaos and confusion, but the basis of order in the freedom of the individual from the control of others. Etymologically, this use of the term has a show of reason as it merely means absence of government, and a writer has the right, if he choose so to revert to etymological origins; and frequently there is a great advantage in so doing. There is a loss it is true in the temporary obfuscation of the mind of the reader, but, it may be, a more than compensating advantage in arousing deeper thought, or in furnishing a securer technicality. But in this ease the disadvantage is certainly incurred; and neither advantage is secured. There are two very different things covered by the term government: personal government by arbitrium, and the government of inherent laws and principles. Proudhon is denying the rightfulness of the former, and affirming the latter. Now the Greek arche meant both of these things; but if either more peculiarly than the other, it meant the government of laws and principles, whence the negation of such rule by the prefix an has meant, and rightly means, chaos. Proudhon undertakes to make the Greek word mean exclusively the other idea, whereby he spoils one excellent technicality without getting for his other purpose a secure and good one in place of it."
Claiming that there is something wrong or right about Social Engineering or Propaganda without naming someone wronged in time and place may be a wild goose chase for reasons that may not be very clear to those who are inspired to be led down a false path.
Liffy
Active Member
- Jun 15, 2015
- 602
- 41
- 33
Social engineering is moving the masses towards a specific kind of disposition and maintaining it. Imo at least. So yeah that's a way we can move towards socialism
Liffy
Active Member
- Jun 15, 2015
- 602
- 41
- 33
Is what okay social engineering in general? Depends what direction the masses will be led.
Liffy
Active Member
- Jun 15, 2015
- 602
- 41
- 33
'Right' way... Well I can say this much. Anyone who wouldn't agree with this is something else and i may never understand them but any social engineering towards an end that I agree with is okay with me. Social engineering is extremely prevalent these days with the technology we have. It's a common part of life that I think millions of unwitting people go through. It's gonna produce a new era as technology progresses and we as a people consume even larger amounts of information. The masses will be moved in any which way they can be moved and the momentum that social engineering has now with technology convinces me it won't stop. And quite honestly makes me happy too.
Last edited:
Josf
Active Member
- Apr 20, 2015
- 379
- 22
- 26
Quote:_________________________________________
'Right' way... Well I can say this much. Anyone who wouldn't agree with this is something else and i may never understand them but any social engineering towards an end that I agree with is okay with me. Social engineering is extremely prevalent these days with the technology we have. It's a common part of life they I think millions of unwitting people through. It's gonna produce a new era as technology progresses and we as a people consume even larger amounts of information. The masses will be moved in any which way they can be moved and the momentum that social engineering has now with technology convinces me it won't stop. And quite honestly makes me happy too.
______________________________________________
That sure is a refreshing bit of social engineering. I am happy to confirm that said example of social engineering is fine by me.
'Right' way... Well I can say this much. Anyone who wouldn't agree with this is something else and i may never understand them but any social engineering towards an end that I agree with is okay with me. Social engineering is extremely prevalent these days with the technology we have. It's a common part of life they I think millions of unwitting people through. It's gonna produce a new era as technology progresses and we as a people consume even larger amounts of information. The masses will be moved in any which way they can be moved and the momentum that social engineering has now with technology convinces me it won't stop. And quite honestly makes me happy too.
______________________________________________
That sure is a refreshing bit of social engineering. I am happy to confirm that said example of social engineering is fine by me.
cereal_killer
Platinum Member
Closed at OP request
- Status
New Topics
-
-
-
-
AOC’s district sees 70% crime surge — more than double NYC average- Started by Mack The Finger
- Replies: 2
-
