Bcc: FYI
rkm website: http://cyberjournal.org
___________________________________
re-2/ climate & carbon
Marc Bombois wrote:
Hi Richard,I find your ideas about Thrive/Zeitgeist interesting and believe me, I really appreciate a suspicious mind since I actively cultivate my own. The one criterion I apply to any new message is, does it include the facts about the money/banking scam. The first Zeitgeist movie did an admirable job of this and Thrive is pretty good. So I consider these efforts to be genuine and I hope they are.I’d be interested to hear what you think of these folks: http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/So Richard, if you made a video to try and wake people up, what would it look like?Cheers!Marc
You seem to be doing exactly what I said in my posting: you are caught by the ‘frame’, the part they know you will agree with. From that you conclude the effort is ‘genuine’. That makes you an easy target for propaganda: you’re likely to review something critically, if starts off with a good money-system exposé. It is you that Zeitgeist & Thrive are targeting, not those who need to be woken up.
Neither film is about waking anybody up. Those who are prepared to believe 9/11 is an inside job, and the New World Order is coming, have come to those conclusions long ago, from the many years of Internet discussion of such topics. Those who have rejected these ‘conspiracy theories’ would not be converted by Thrive or Zeitgeist. Indeed, those films are both so over the top, with their denial of Jesus, their UFOs, crop circles, and magic symbols, that the films would reaffirm to the ‘unawoken’ that all conspiracy theories are a load of rubbish. The films encourage people to stay asleep, rather than waking them up, in your sense of ‘awake’.
To you I issue the same plea that I issued to Omas Schaefer: forget how much those folks are ‘one of us’, and think instead seriously about what their proposed new world would really be like, and whether it is at all realistic. And as I said to Omas, I’d be curious as to the outcome if you do re-view that part of the films.
You ask how I would wake people up? As regards waking people up to ‘the evils of the system’, my approach is demonstrated in my first viral article back in 2000, ‘Escaping the Matrix‘. I go very gently into the world of the ‘red pill’, and I help the reader ‘see it for himself’, by re-examinging familiar historical episodes. And I keep it to a minimum, dealing just with the political and economic areas that are important to the thesis of the article. I even soft-peddle on 9/11. I try to bring along as many ‘unawake’ people as possible, not alienate as many as possible. And my article was very successful at waking people up, among those it reached. Much more so than Zeitgeist or Thrive, whose frames are aimed at the already converted.
The article was so successful, that I used pretty much the same material as the first chapter of the book, Escaping the Matrix. I used it as a ‘frame’, to help get the reader into a state of mind where he is willing to consider ideas that are ‘outside the box’. But the real ‘wakeup message’ of the book is not about the evils of the system, but about our responsibility as members of our species, and our potential as an empowered people, to do something to change the system.
As regards a ‘waking up’ film, in 2012, I’d want to start with a segment that makes it clear there is no hope of stopping the collapse of the global economy, as it is now structured. I’d want to say something about the move toward a one world government, and a new kind of micromanaged economy, but I wouldn’t want to dwell on that.
I’d want to move soon into a positive presentation, about how sustainability and prosperity can be achieved through a reassertion of national sovereignty, brought about by inclusive popular movements, whose aim is to build resilient, sustainable, national economies. I’d want to bring in examples like Argentina, who benefitted by defaulting on its debts, and Cuba, who rebuilt their economy successfully after outside aid was cutoff, when the Soviet Union collapsed. It is a wakeup call to empowerment that we need most.
You ask what I think of the positivemoney video.You know I already agree with it. I suppose you’re asking if I think it’s good as a ‘wake up’ message. It’s not bad. It’s certainly not ‘best of genre’, but it’s genuine and it makes one point well. If that is what you want wake people up about, the money scam, then I’d stick with the positivemoney video rather than Zeitgeist or Thrive, which are working against you.
—–
Omas Schaefer wrote:
Not to worry, I’m not a member of the “Thrive” Movement. I concur with your analysis 100%. I do find the film to be a good source of information, something I cannot say about “Zeitgeist.”
Let us not forget the temperature graph of the 1950’s into the 70’s. Human-produced CO2 was being introduced at a record pace in the post WW2 industrial era, yet temperatures took a major dive. Whose fault was it? Humans of course… another Ice Age was coming and we were to blame! In the 90’s, Club of Rome needed to tweak the formula because the short-term cooling pattern had reversed into a short-term warming pattern. The propaganda had to fit the trend, otherwise it would not have been credible. As with any bureaucracy, by the time they got the “warming” wheels into motion, the short-term pattern upon which it was based had already played itself out. Yet to this day, the belief in and FEAR of global warming continue in spite of supporting evidence. This is a testimony of television and its power to create pseudo reality.The CO2 scam makes all of us sinners… just by the mere act of breathing. Carbon taxes appear to be a stunningly accurate re-creation of the indulgences of the Medieval Roman Catholic Church. Nothing new under the sun… if guilt worked then, why not use it now?Another child-like observation/question: How is it possible to come out of a Little Ice Age without global warming? Most of your outraged readers are probably not aware that we had a Little Ice Age not long ago. I submit that the dishonest and discredited “Hockey Stick” graph is the reason why they never knew. This is another example of television and the creation of false reality. Once the impression was made on television programs that the Hockey Stick was reality, it BECAME reality in people’s minds. Just try to introduce a TRUE reality to someone who has succumbed to a FALSE reality on TV. Good luck!Do you notice the recurrence of people who have bought into the notion that carbon dioxide is pollution? The Club of Rome campaign has been so successful that one of the four primary ingredients necessary for life is now widely considered to be a toxic substance. Must be true because after all, it was on television! Meanwhile, as you have mentioned, the planet is being ravaged by REAL pollution such as depleted uranium and GMO. Not to worry though, let’s just keep bickering about ways to reduce the harmless gaseous substance that is required for the survival of trees and plants. In American football, the technique is called a “misdirection play.”
The ‘stop global warming’ movement has become a fundamentalist cult. The cult leader is Jim Hansen. He preaches to the cult members, repeating the orthodox creed in each sermon, and promising fire and brimstone if we don’t stop sinning. Those outside the cult are in the clutches of Satan – the oil companies and their propagandists. Cult members have the same attitude toward anti-warming arguments that a religious fundamentalist has toward Satanic literature. They don’t just disagree with it; they would like to see it banned. Fundamentalist cults are perhaps the most effective of all social-control mechanisms. Time tested since the year zero, and well before.
—–
Vera Gottlieb wrote:
Global warming not real? Then how come that since 2000, we have had 9 of the hottest years?But referring to one of your readers’ comments…I am a born skeptical and from young on have always questioned everything. Rather annoying to many people, but now – being a senior – I seriously question when an ‘expert’ makes a statement on any subject. My first question to myself…’yeah, who is paying you to say what you are telling me?’ I think it is called ‘thinking outside the box’, an ‘art’ that is going lost more and more. With today’s capabilities of accessing news/information all over the world, there just simply is no excuse – assuming one is open-minded enough, not to look for ‘the other side of the coin’. Too many rather just sit back and let the TV/radio brainwash them. Ignorance is not bliss, in today’s world it is outright dangerous.
Good questions, Vera, about ‘hottest years’. Your questions are based on two assumptions, however. First of all, you are taking as fact that they have been the hottest years. It turns out that they only seem like the hottest years, if you average them in with the past 11 years, which is what Jim Hansen proudly says he does. In fact temperatures have declined in recent years, and Hansen’s averages are intended to ‘hide the decline’.
The second assumption is that being a hot year, in the context of ‘since records have been kept’, is something to be alarmed about. Whenever Jim talks about ‘hottest’, he always emphasizes it by saying ‘since records have been kept’. Records started being kept in the 1800s, and 1800 was a very cold time. As Omas pointed out above, we are very fortunate it has warmed up so much. Our current temperature, although hot compared to 1800, is still quite a bit below temperatures we have experienced already during this interglacial period.
I hope that answers your questions.
—–
Robert Gregory wrote:
The Australian:“HIMALAYAN glaciers are back on the frontline of climate change controversy, with new research showing the world’s greatest snowcapped peaks lost no ice at all over the past 10 years.”Related articles:
This is very unlikely to shake the faith of cult members. They’ll be eagerly awaiting a response from Hansen, who will explain why this is irrelevant anecdotal evidence, or that the sources are all suspect.
__________
In pursuit of memes to mobilize Ireland…
Peter Koenig wrote:
Thanks for the insider background information. I always love it when folks send in first-hand accounts of ‘revealing events’. And it’s interesting that both of us identified cycles and patterns as the first thing to be considered, if you want to understand climate change. I suppose there are some people who glaze over when they see a graph, and so they wouldn’t think that way. But it is bloody obvious when you think about it.
You say “We the People, can stop this fraud right now.” Please, please tell me how!
… by asking our pension fund investors, our brokers, our bankers, to abstain from investing in carbon bonds – funds, or anything linked to them. They come in all forms and shapes so as not to appear what they are. They are purely speculative and are made to burst.
Also, by publishing as much as we can and giving interviews about what carbon funds actually are and what they do.
cheers,
peter
Boycotting carbon funds, and informing people about them are of course a good things, as are recycling and driving less. But such things are certainly not going to ‘stop this fraud right now’, nor will they ‘save the environment’. They are marginal, almost symbolic gestures, that are actually counterproductive – if they give us the feeling we have ‘done our bit’.
We cannot stop some of the fraud unless we put an end to all of the fraud, beginning with our fraudulent governments.
—–
Dave Patterson wrote:
Richard – sounds, in tone, much like one of my first attempts to express my thoughts of what ‘we the people’ might do to improve our lot in our new feudal society – written on another small island 20 years ago – Prince Edward Island Revival Plan http://www.rudemacedon.ca/fhtt/peirevival2.html (no internet then, I printed a small booklet and sent it out to about 100 people, politicians, media people, other activist types and, as I recall, did not get a single word of interest. It appears most people just want more of the same or something (aside from those actively and knowingly ushering in the NWO, the Benedict Arnolds of our time, occupying all positions of authority and influence around us these days) – someday there will be an interesting analysis of why and/or how so many people were so intentionally passive when such huge problems were unfolding around them, problems to which the solutions were not that difficult to see, but for some reason nobody wanted to go there (aside, of course, from we few trying to get people to wake up). I am sure there is nothing new here for you, but perhaps others you are trying to encourage to see things a new way might find it of interest.dave
You sent me a copy of your booklet. I liked the vision, and sorry if I didn’t show a lot of interest at the time. I like the online summary you gave us a link to, and I’ve shared it on one of my facebook pages, the one associated with the forum we’re organizing here in Ireland.
I don’t think people want more of the same. But people tire of idle talk of utopias as well – unless they have reason to believe they are achievable. That’s the ‘hard sell’ – the notion that we the people can bring about change. The technical parts, about sustainability, sound money systems, etc, are actually rather obvious and straightforward, if we as a society put our mind to them. And fortunately, you and many others have already compiled roadmaps, that we can use as conversation starters.
—–
Ed Goertzen wrote:
Hi Richard;The Tweeters and Face bookers, and You tubers still need an organizational structure if they are not going to be mobilized by a dictator. All they (middle class) would need is a pervasive crisis. The poor have no energy and few skills, if you pinch a middle class person they grab a sign.I quote, Noam Chomsky; “There is not a single non-partisan NGO that is organized on the same geographic basis as that upon which we elect our so called ‘representatives'”“All politics is LOCAL”When you ask a question, you open a mind.WHY?RegardsEd G
One must be very careful about organizational structures. Would-be dictators want a structure to be in place, so they can take it over. We need a structure that is immune to a takeover. Politics now is not all local, but it needs to be, as you say, to achieve that immunity. To the extent online communications takes us away from the local it is not a good thing. And any kind of large-scale ‘organizational structure’ using online media would be a perfect recipe for a centralized takeover. Running lists for so many years, I’m well aware of the ‘power of the moderator’.
—–
Peggy Conroy wrote:
You are certainly correct in this business. The biggest warning my Dad gave to all of us was to never, never take anything from the big banks by mortaging the farm as that is the way they took so many folks livelehood in the ’30’s. We are one of the few original (since 1860) small farms, 300 acres, left in upstate NY but did have to diversify, selling the dairy and going w/grass fed beef and vegetables.Hate the butchering but not easy to pay the taxes, especially school taxes for all the deadbeats!
Good luck in your fight. My great grandfather came from Co.Cork when he was 5 yrs old…..
Wow, operating since 1860 as a family farm. You are holding the torch for a return to sanity. Hang in there until we can get those taxed eliminated, and take away all those anti-good-food farming regulations.
______________
Share: