Mind Control

Looking back at projects like MK Ultra and the regiems in Japan, mind control seems to be a recurring aim for governments.
I'm wondering to what extent it could feasibly exist, and if it does exist, to what extent is it being used.

its called capatilism my friend

its called capatilism my friend

capitalism is nothing more then an economic system. How is it "mind control" anymore then any other economic system?

All power to the Hypno Toad.

Looking back at projects like MK Ultra and the regiems in Japan, mind control seems to be a recurring aim for governments.
I'm wondering to what extent it could feasibly exist, and if it does exist, to what extent is it being used.

It seems that some references and comment (however incomplete and inadequate) pertaining to this have to some extent been provided:

Mind Control and Manipulation

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Spiritism, Theosophy & Demonic Manifestations

'The Spiritist Fallacy' by Rene Guenon
www.sophiaperennis.com/guenon_spiritistfallacy.html
www.sophiaperennis.com/guenon_spiritistfallacy_toc.html


International Theosophical Network

'Theosophy: History of a Pseudo-Religion' by Rene Guenon
www.sophiaperennis.com/guenon_theosophy.html
www.sophiaperennis.com/guenon_theosophy_toc.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sigmund Freud and Occult Judaism (1856-1939)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freud

Zohar Kabbalah the Centrepeice of Modern Psychiatry
www.cyberummah.org/english/index.htm

Many writers (from varied backgrounds such as Rene Guenon and Dave Breese) have noted that most of the founders and leading persons of modern disciplines are Jewish. The truth of the matter is this is not an accident. The fact that the founder of modern psychiatry was Jewish is due to the fact that he was given this position by a Jewish secret society which effectively controls most of the modern world. The most authoritative biography of Sigmund Freud is 'Sigmund Freud and the Jewish Mystical Tradition' by David Bakan. In addition to significant biographical information about Freud such as his zionist philosophy and activism, agnosticism, and cocaine addiction, the thesis of this detailed and informative book is the solidly documented case that Freud did not invent modern psychoanalysis, but modeled it as a practical extension of the Kabbalah of esoteric judaism, the zohar in particular. As Freud was jewish and familiar with the kabbalah from his own education these facts of the origin of psychiatry should surprise no one:
http://store.yahoo.com/doverpublications/0486437671.html
The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times by Rene Guenon (1945)
Chapter 34 - The Misdeeds of Psychoanalysis
www.sophiaperennis.com/guenon_reign_toc.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Carl Jung and Pagan Occultism (1875-1961)

Carl Jung and Nazi Eugenics

Jung and Occult Sex Rituals

As with the founders of the Bolshevik government of Russia (including Lenin), the founders of modern psychiatry were overwhelmingy Jewish. Carl Gustav Jung was chosen as a public figure to present psychiatry to the world in order to obscure the thoroughly Jewish origin of modern psychiatry. Sigmund Freud actually verbalised this purpose. 'The Aryan Christ' by psychiatrist Richard Noll is the defintive account of Carl Jung, and the book exposes in great detail the occult origins and nature of modern psychiatry. Professor Noll is an atheist which gives him credibility against any accusation that the book would be written with a religious motive. The following link is a detailed description of 'The Aryan Christ' by Richard Noll and contains a great deal of unseemly information concerning Carl Jung:
www.dhushara.com/book/jung/archr.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

International Congress on Mental Health (1944-1948)

Toxic Psychiatry

Psychiatrist Professor Peter Breggin's excellent books are so well established they can be obtained from book dealers like Barnes & Noble and Borders. 'Toxic Psychiatry' is perhaps his best book, but he has authored and collaborated on many (including one book on psychiatry's historical association with National Socialist Germany and a number of other dictatorships). The book has references to much other useful information on the subject, by Breggin and others. The following link to a dealer of autographed books by Peter Breggin:
www.breggin.com/prbbooks.html
www.breggin.com/Toxicpsych.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mind Control
www.mindcontrolforums.com/project-paperclip4.htm

Central Intelligence Agency and Mind Control
www.wanttoknow.info/mindcontrol

CIA's Project MK-ULTRA
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~alb/misc/mindControlDenial.html
http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/ckln-hm.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MK-ULTRA
http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/CIA_MK-ULTRA_experiments_on_children.htm

'History of MK-ULTRA' by Eric Jewell
www.wintersteel.com/files/ShanaArticles/MKULTRA.htm

MK-ULTRA and Manchurian Candidates
http://spychiatrists.cyberummah.org/eir_british_psychiatry_eugenics.htm

NASA and CIA Mind Control Research Facilities
www.trance-formation.com

The CIA's MK- ULTRA mind control program was functioning before NASA was founded as a surrogate of the CIA. NASA and the CIA brainwashed certain men from the United States military as mind control subjects. The weak mindedness of many of these "astronauts" is apparent in their lives. Buzz Aldrin's fragile mentality and his time spent in mental institutions is a case in point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buzz_Aldrin
Also noteworthy in this respect is Neil Armstrong's reclusiveness.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Armstrong

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disinformation and Propaganda

İnformation Control
War Propaganda
Zionist Propaganda - Holocaust Claims & Other Disinformation
Founts of Propaganda: Churches

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conduits of Mind Control - Universities and Government Education Systems

The university system throughout the World is a social and mind control mechanism of the CIA and allied organizations. Universities were used for this purpose throughout the renaissance as well. The policies of Oxford and Cambridge during the reign of Queen Elizabeh I were subject to approval and influence by Francis Walsingham, William Cecil's chief agent and the founder of the British secret service. Modern universities were first created by papist scholastics (who were in turn modeled on Saracen schools of learning) who were distinguished by virtue of the fact that they separated Theology from reason - creating a new way of thinking and philosophy unknown to early Christians.

Universities are the scabs western europe has imposed on the modern World. Universities were initially imposed throughout the world by way of colonialism. Colonialism continues through the conquest of the mind and soul as when most of the countries of the World were freed from the shackles of European colonialism during the latter twentieth century, most of them received neocolonial dictatorships in its palce as the leaders of the new governments were first trained and indoctrinated in european and american universities.

The CIA On Campus
www.cia-on-campus.org

The CIA Off Campus
www.southendpress.org/2005/items/CIAcl

Unitarian Universalists, perhaps the most anti-Christian form of protestantism, has controlled government schools in the United States since the mid-nineteenth century to such an extent that american schools are effectively Unitarian parochial schools.
National Education Association and Unitarianism
www.sntp.net/education/education_mafia.htm

Is Public Education Necessary?
www.howtotutor.com/sam-bks.htm

Through control of education, secret societies exercise great control of the minds of most people - particularly the so-called educated. The upper crust - the top 20% - of a modern society like america's are the most thoroughly brainwashed in order that the principle levers of power and influence are in the hands of persons who will not be an obstacle to the sect which directs the whole.

Masonic Control of Universities

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

'Necessary Illusions: Thought Control and Democratic Societies' by Noam Chomsky:
www.zmag.org/Chomsky/ni/ni-overview.html

capatilism is mind control to keep the masses subdued, this is done through alientaion, mythology and mass media

we are all guided by our commodity fetishsim for things we dont need, made by people that dont need them and often cant afford them

viva la revolution

capitalism is mind control to keep the masses subdued, this is done through alientaion, mythology and mass media

we are all guided by our commodity fetishsim for things we dont need, made by people that dont need them and often cant afford them

viva la revolution

In accordance with the above, you may find that the following study of mass mind control and manipulation confirms your assertions about its use by powers allied with capitalist regimes:
www.zmag.org/Chomsky/ni/ni-contents.html

  Other studies give evidence of horrible mind control projects such as MK-ULTRA performed on unfortunate persons by organizations like NASA, the CIA, and the US military (all organizations funded by a capitalist regime).

Um, everybody uses mind control -- it's just a question of degree.  It goes under different names when it happens on different scales: "marketing" and "language" for example.  I don't think it's capitalism per sé that's more likely to employ "mind control", but rather, big governments and big corporations.  It's concentration of resources, plus a need to get people to do things that you want, that encourages "mind control".

Thanks Erasmus*, for pointing out something that I would like to extrapolate.

1.) The United States (and therefore NASA, CIA, et al.) is a mixed economy.  We are not pure capitalist, and every day (especially with a liberal congress) we are progressing towards a socialism.

2.) Saying that

we are all guided by our commodity fetishsim for things we dont need, made by people that dont need them and often cant afford them

is retarded.

Of course you don't need things.  If we only bought what we needed, you know what we would be?  Poor.  Those things that we 'don't need' are the signs of a productive, powerful, healthy society.  

Don't think that it is righteous or holy to deny the human aspect of want.  We want things, it is natural, not something that needs to be overcome.  Those who see it as such (and I do mean to be pointing fingers here**) are going to destroy themselves and (more than likely, although highly unfortunate) the rest of us as well.  If you don't like that I am good at what I do, and am rewarded justly for it, then perhaps you would prefer to live in a communist state, such as  North Korea, where their government recently spent 14 years of GNP on a nuclear test.  Hmm?  Would you like to see your work and sweat and life go to a government project from which you will see no benefit?  Do you want to be taken advantage of?  Do you seek to give yourself over to slavery?  Do you think that then, when you are the poor, desolate, lonely slave to a government that you put in power, that you advocated, and that you helped to put the fetters on your ankles that you will be happy?

Is it not better to be free?

(*I do not mean that Erasmus supports the entirety of my post, just that he helped to solidify my answer, especially the point numbered 1.)
(**This inludes most religions, especially Buddhists; liberals, communists, socialists, those who support the expansion of welfare and government run research projects such as NASA; those who support the breach of Civil Liberties that run under the guise of 'security;' and those who are not willing to work for their sustenance.  Oh, and BobBones. viva la revolution my ass.)

Astantia,

  It is not my intention to enter into an argument against you as it appears that we are in agreement on a couple of issues aside from the fact that it would waste our time.

Bob Bones,

  Never the less, as I am impressed more with your arguments overall, I suggest the following book which I came across several years ago by a traditional roman catholic (I am not catholic) - 'The Servile State' by Hilaire Belloc first published back in 1911.  The thesis of this well researched and argued book is that capitalism is leading to the reestablishment of slavery.  Significantly, the author is anti-socialist as well.  He often wrote against George Bernard Shaw, his famous socialist contemporary who founded (along with the Webbs) the Fabian Society as well as the Labour Party:

http://www.distributism.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilaire_Belloc

A brief review of 'The Servile State':

  "In this liberty classic, the Catholic intellectual Hilaire Belloc writes that the present system of capitalism is likely to give rise to something new, the servile state, because of inherent instabilities within it. Belloc defines this state as, "That arrangement of society in which so considerable a number of the families and individuals are constrained by positive law to labor for the advantage of other families and individuals as to stamp the whole community with the mark of such labor we call the servile state." This servile state is a return to the form of pagan slavery that existed in Europe before the advent of Christianity abolished it. Belloc contends that from the original pagan form of slavery, Christianity brought about a new system of society, the distributivist society. In this system, every individual was an owner of property and belonged to guilds which allowed for him to own the means of production. However, the distributivist system failed with the breakdown of the Christian faith. For example, the Reformation allowed for the Crown to confiscate monastic lands. Thus, a small group of indiviudals, the capitalists, came to own the means of production and the property. Belloc does not blame the existence of capitalism on the Industrial Revolution like most other thinkers have. Rather, he sees the problem in society as existing before the Industrial Revolution. Belloc contends that had distributivism not broken down, the Industrial Revolution would have been beneficial to all concerned. The current system of the capitalist state is unstable however, and may give rise to one of two separate things. Reformers have tried to create from the capitalist system a collectivist (or socialist) state. In the collectivist state, private property would be abolished and a group of managers would control all property for the proletariat in trust. Belloc contends that this form of collectivism is likely to give rise to a third thing, the servile state. One way reformers have tried to accomplish this goal is through "buying out" capitalism. Since the state is an older institution than the capitalist owners, it has been considered possible that the state can "buy out" the capitalists. Belloc finds such an idea problematic and shows how this is not possible to occur. Alternatively, the other possibility is for society to return to a distributivist system in which all individuals own property and the means of production. Belloc finds this alternative to be the best, however, he notes that it is unlikely to happen given the current direction in which society is taking and amounts to "swimming upstream". So, while the socialist alternative works within the capitalist system, it will ultimately lead to servitude. Belloc points out examples of how legislation designed to benefit the proletariat has actually increased the development of the servile state. Examples of this include regulation such as employee compensation and minimum wage laws, which were in the initial stages of being enacted in Belloc's England. The future for freedom looks grim because the proletariat is willing to give up its political freedom in exchange for security and guarantee of subsistence standards. For example, Belloc points out that minimum wage laws actually benefit capitalists because they guarantee that there will not be unruliness among the workers. Also, such laws and regulations involve the creation of a class distinction between proletariat and employer. Given the direction the welfare state has taken contrary to liberty and towards further regulation, these cogent writings of Belloc from near the beginning of this last century serve as an important warning and prophecy for the future. We have indeed headed in the direction of servitude, and Belloc's distributivist ideal seems less and less likely."

In concurence with one of Astantia's statements about the United States not being completely capitalist, Hilaire Belloc does assert that "the effect of socialist doctrines upon capitalist states is to produce neither a capitalist state nor a socialist state, but a third thing - a servile state."

As far as mind control, I do partly concur with Erasmus about "everybody" using mind control in that the Soviet Union as well as the United States have both used mind control programs.

Thank you for that post Dionysus.

I wasn't going to respond, but I really can't hold my tongue against it.

My reaction:
Check out the chart on http://www.distributism.com/compare.htm

Seems pretty good, bar 2 things.

1. The capital'isms' that they put out there are not rational capitalism.  A rational capitalist knows that wages are not: 'just another expense to be cut or minimized as much as possible. A rational capitalist knows that wages are a value, to be equally traded to others in exchange for a product of equal value, such as labor, (which they ascribe to the capitalist as: 'a necessary liability or expense of doing business') Labor is the inherent ability of a man to produce something by a set process.  It is a viable product to be traded.  But only if you want to trade it.  If you don't want to work, nobody will make you.  Taking that a step further, if you don't want to work for a particular wage, you don't have to work.

2. Their view of Distributism is idealogical at best and a down-right lie at worst.  They say that wages are: 'of great value, because they relate directly to human dignity,' yet check out this link from the same site:

http://www.distributism.com/How.htm

Let me quote you the important parts:
'No man shall be allowed to own real estate in excess of a fixed number of acres (e.g. 160 rurally; 5, otherwise) or capital value.  Any man found to possess real estate or capital improvements value in excess of this limit shall have the excess sold, the proceeds going into the aforesaid central fund.'

'A maximum figure shall be set for the amount of money owned by any single man.  This figure may be increased, depending on the number of children he has.'

Let me ask you this.  If wages are related directly to human dignity, then why do they take them away?  Because they care about your dignity?  The system is bullshit, it is communism, without a government.  It is slavery, where the master is anybody who wants to skate by in life, and the slave is the man who wishes to produce.

Not only this, but property in a distributist system is redistributed.  So.  I work my entire life and estrablish a business.  I create let's say, a company that produces car alternators, car alternators that work better than any alternator ever invented.

Under a distributist system this company is too large to be managed by one man, and is thus turned over to an 'alternator guild' this guild is comprised of anyone wishing to sell alternators.  From the lowest to the highest.  Now, when my alternators are removed from shelves and shops because nobody else in the guild can sell theirs, who benefits?  Does the populace benefit?  Absolutely not, they are paying the same price for a shitty alternator.


Just another note:
'Sledge your television and any other intrinsically evil devices that invade your imagination and stunt your ambition.  Replace it with what it replaced:  the liturgical calendar (feasts and fasts), parlor games, chamber or folk music, sacred art production, etc.'

What happens when they decide that 'chamber or folk music' and 'sacred art' stunt your imagination and ambition?  When the entire focus of life is religion, there is no time for creation.  Isn't creation what we are supposed to do?  Isn't creating a better world a natural human response to life?

'Marry and have a large family, if possible, interesting them in the beauties of a future Christian culture that you never knew, except through books, and may yourself never know.'

Hope for a dream world that will never be?  I will never return to my Christian 'roots' as I disagree with their sacrificial morality.  As long as I am alive, I will not let this country return to the suspiscion and murder associated with the witch burnings of the middle ages.  Man cannot live in fear, for if he does, he is no longer a man, but a beast, with no hope for any future.

http://www.distributism.com/human.htm

I would like to address points 2 and 3, in which the site asserts the infallibility of Christian Leaders, and asks us to return to a theologic monarchy.  However, the main tenet of Christianity is that all men are sinners, and thus fallible.

Point 5 is a direct lie.  A man working for a corporation has a choice NOT to work for that corporation.  No man is a slave except to himself.

Point 8 does not logically follow.  Virtue has no basis on the slave.  He is a slave whether he is just or not.  He is a slave whether he is gentle or not.  Virtue has to be in the master of the slaves, and in any owner of slaves there can be no virtue.
And where do they get the distribution of wealth as being just?  It is god only to those who have not created wealth.  To those who work, it is a disadvantage, and insult, a mugging.  But it is never just to take from a man.

From 'A New Christendom' http://www.distributism.com/objectives.htm

Technology shall be encouraged, but viewed routinely with suspicion. No new technology shall be permitted that has not been closely examined to affirm that the overall real potential benefits to society greatly outweigh any perceived risks.

By whom?  There is no overall government in a distributism... unless you mean the pope / monarch.  What makes this monarch an expert on a. technology, and b. human beings?

Usury shall be criminalized. Being viewed as a Violence against Nature and Neighbor, Dante placed usurers in the 7th ring of hell, deeper even than murderers. This is because traditionally, an attack upon a man's ability to sustain himself and his family is seen as equal to an attack upon his life.

They have their facts mixed up.  Making a 'capital investment' is not a loan, it is a CAPITAL INVESTMENT.  Loaning is always usury, as long as interest is collected.  But why shouldn't it be?  A bank needs to make money, otherwise, there would be no bankers, as they couldn't survive without a profit to benefit themselves and their families.  Then there wouldn't be any bank employees.  I should like to point out that banks also pay interest when you loan THEM money, in the form of savings accounts.  Usury is not EVIL.  Nobody can FORCE you to take a loan that exceeds your income, nobody can FORCE you to lose a large part of your income to a mortgage.  That is, nobody except you.

Corporations shall be abolished. Men will no longer be able to find protection for their criminal acts under the shield of the 'corporate entity'. All men will be directly responsible for their acts, good and bad. Greed shall be curbed by disallowing 'chains' or multiple business locations; every man (even those of limited ability) will have a chance to be an owner of their own business.

Even the incompetent?  Why should I let them take my business?

Property tax shall be abolished. "If you pay property tax," says Belloc, "then you do not really own the land; you merely lease it from the government." Traditionally, the local government may laim a tithe share of the produce of the land, but only in the form of the produce, not cash. If your land has no produce, or the produce is only subsistent for you, no government may levy you. Higher government has no claim to your land, but can only levy local government.

Wow, a bit of sense, but I think that Government should not have ANY claim to ANYTHING, and that any money given to it should be willfully given as a charity.

A man's home property and business property shall be immune from any seizure by any party, including debt and taxes.

Except from those who wish to redistribute it?  Except for from the Distributist?  Meaning that if you go into a contract with me, I have no collateral, as I cannot claim your house for payment?  So, you can do whatever you want with a contract?  Do you not see where this will lead?

Advertising shall be prohibited. Products will compete exclusively by word-of-mouth and personal reputation, preventing a consumerist, materialist mentality to the culture and marketplace.

Which helps small business how?  Just a note* be careful of any group who says they want to prohibit something.  Usually this thing is what will break their system.  And in this case it is, that thing is the human want.  Humans want the best, and they want it justly.  There is nothing wrong with wanting to better yourself or society.

Lawsuits shall be limited in duration to one day, awards limited to a portion of a man's discretionary resources. The failed party in a lawsuit shall pay all court costs. Lawyers may work by fixed fee only, not percentage.

Eh?  Murder cases are tried in one day?  Who is the jury?  It takes time to get juror's assembled.  It takes time to present evidence.  And then, when all is said and done, the only punishment possible is payment?  So, I could PAY to have someone killed LEGALLY?  Brilliant system here.

All utilities, especially roads, shall be re-designed with the principal end of serving and safeguarding families and children. Roads shall be designed principally for pedestrians and non-engine driven vehicles. With the exception of limited access highways, automotive vehicle access shall be restricted, and shall yield to other traffic needs, rather than the vice versa. Roads shall be redesigned to remove residences from direct contact with public roads.

What if I need to get somewhere quickly?  Do we abandon the technology of the car because children aren't taught by their parents not to stay out of the street?  That is retarded.


Funny.  Next is a page of quotes.  I think that adding in some Marx or Lenin would be perfect.

There is one quote that stands out 'To a Capitalist, everything that is not Capitalism is Socialism'  and I think that is true.

I'm sorry if I got a little scathing, but this sort of thing is really scary for me.  I have a job.  I have a future.  I have assets.  I do not want anyone taking them from me, and you should know that if such a situation were to arrise, I would fight to the death to defend my right to own what I have created.

I understand about marketing and advertising and the like. I accept that it is technically a form of mind control. But what do you think about the more coercive forms of mind control, as oposed to simply psycology.

Like what?  All mind control is is suggestion.  Even subliminal messaging is just suggestion.

If it's not suggestion, it isn't mind control, it's body control, and that is slavery.

I mean like what was being attempted in MK-ULTRA. Whereby a drug could bea administered and someone could be completely controlled. all "covert" control is suggestion. but the more overt stuff doesnt have to be. we're in alternative science after all.

I mean like what was being attempted in MK-ULTRA. Whereby a drug could bea administered and someone could be completely controlled. all "covert" control is suggestion. but the more overt stuff doesnt have to be. we're in alternative science after all.

But again, that would be slavery.

Is it possible?  Probably.
Is it likely?  Possibly.
Is it happening?  No.

If we are being mind controlled, why would you be asking about it?
Why would I be responding to it?
In order to make us believe that we are not being mind-controlled?  If we need to be convinced of something, then we are not being controlled, we are being influenced, and our minds are still free.

Maybe you are saying this (and I am responding) in order to make the other people who aren't being mindcontrolled think that nobody is being mind controlled.  But then, why bring it up at all?  And even then, if we are being mind controlled, and we are posting about it in order to delude the others into thinking there is no mind control, so what?
Do you do anything for the government?  
Or do you do the things that are normal parts of life?  We can say that we are not being deluded into thinking this is normal, because other people must not be being mindcontrolled (we covered this before) therefore, their lives must be 'normal,' therefore, our lives must be 'normal.'  (Unless you live differently than me.)

Finally, couldn't this ALL be an instance of mind control, and we are locked away somewhere, slowly dying, but think that we are living well?
Sure it could, but would it matter if that was true?  Would it matter that our 'physical' bodies were locked away somewhere, so long as our 'mind' is capable of being free in this world?

OK, iv got another question. Assuming for a moment that full and complete mind control is possible. Obviously, it isnt moral to enslave someone like that. But, if you mind controlled someone to WANT to be enslaved, they would be happier being a slave. Is that moral?

If I may respond for Dionysious on a few points...

1. The capital'isms' that they put out there are not rational capitalism...taking that a step further, if you don't want to work for a particular wage, you don't have to work.

As long as the government pays you enough to live, then you have a choice. However, choosing between working for a particular wage and dying is not a choice at all.

Quote

Corporations shall be abolished. Men will no longer be able to find protection for their criminal acts under the shield of the 'corporate entity'. All men will be directly responsible for their acts, good and bad. Greed shall be curbed by disallowing 'chains' or multiple business locations; every man (even those of limited ability) will have a chance to be an owner of their own business.

Even the incompetent?  Why should I let them take my business?

Justice. Corrupt companies would not exist, as "all men will be directly responsible for their acts". Corrupt businessmen will be arrested, leaving only honest traders.

Which helps small business how?  Just a note* be careful of any group who says they want to prohibit something.  Usually this thing is what will break their system.  And in this case it is, that thing is the human want.  Humans want the best, and they want it justly.  There is nothing wrong with wanting to better yourself or society.

If everyone has a business of the same size, and land is distributed fairly there would be no small businesses.

Eh?  Murder cases are tried in one day?  Who is the jury?  It takes time to get juror's assembled.  It takes time to present evidence.  And then, when all is said and done, the only punishment possible is payment?  So, I could PAY to have someone killed LEGALLY?  Brilliant system here.

I think the British legal system is different from the U.S system. Here there there is no need for a lawsuit to be filed for a murder case. But I'm no lawyer (otherwise I wouldn't be on the FES )


Note that I don't support distributism, I'm just giving defending Dionysius.

If everyone has a business of the same size, and land is distributed fairly there would be no small businesses.

= communism. i cant belive there are still communist countries. they should make themselfs democracies and rig the elections.

Wasn't it the communists that rigged the elections?

Communism and democracy anrt necesarily mutually exclusive anyway.

Communism and democracy anrt necesarily mutually exclusive anyway.

Trotskyism is Communism + Democracy.

Communism didnt work during the Cold War as it wasnt implemented properly.

And, to be fair, most communisms are brought into place by a revolution, and most revolutions lead to dictatorship. SO it isnt inherently communism that has lead to dictatorships in Russia and Cuba and China

Hmmm ok first of all Slavery does not work, it is uneconomical, the Romans realised it, the British realised it and the Americans realised it.


First of all if you have slavery it takes jobs away from "free" men, secondly slaves are generally demotivated, and finally, the most important reason, is that with slaves you have a duty of care to feed and house them. With an employee you pay them pittance and they have to fight for whatever scraps they can.


Don't let anyone tell you that Lincoln abolished slavery because he was a good man, he did it for economical and political reasons (economical that i listed above, and politcally he wanted to weaken the south).

So thinking that Capitilism will end in a return to slavery is naive.

Middle Ages Europe

Most of Middle Earth

err middle earth? what/when is middle earth? i assume he is not talking about Tolkien.

anyway in the Middle ages he with the biggest sword and the most friends was the one who was the "owner" and he simply divided out his "property" amongst those that fought for him. that would be the feudal system.


but enough talk about this Distributism which in my eyes seem pretty Marxist but with religion (i believe the term is a Theocracy?)


this topic is about Mind Control, not on political beliefs which there are hunderds of posts in this forum about already.

If I may respond for Dionysious on a few points...

Quote from: "Astantia"

1. The capital'isms' that they put out there are not rational capitalism...taking that a step further, if you don't want to work for a particular wage, you don't have to work.

As long as the government pays you enough to live, then you have a choice. However, choosing between working for a particular wage and dying is not a choice at all.

Quote from: "Astantia"

Quote

Corporations shall be abolished. Men will no longer be able to find protection for their criminal acts under the shield of the 'corporate entity'. All men will be directly responsible for their acts, good and bad. Greed shall be curbed by disallowing 'chains' or multiple business locations; every man (even those of limited ability) will have a chance to be an owner of their own business.

Even the incompetent?  Why should I let them take my business?

Justice. Corrupt companies would not exist, as "all men will be directly responsible for their acts". Corrupt businessmen will be arrested, leaving only honest traders.

Quote

Which helps small business how?  Just a note* be careful of any group who says they want to prohibit something.  Usually this thing is what will break their system.  And in this case it is, that thing is the human want.  Humans want the best, and they want it justly.  There is nothing wrong with wanting to better yourself or society.

If everyone has a business of the same size, and land is distributed fairly there would be no small businesses.

Quote

Eh?  Murder cases are tried in one day?  Who is the jury?  It takes time to get juror's assembled.  It takes time to present evidence.  And then, when all is said and done, the only punishment possible is payment?  So, I could PAY to have someone killed LEGALLY?  Brilliant system here.

I think the British legal system is different from the U.S system. Here there there is no need for a lawsuit to be filed for a murder case. But I'm no lawyer (otherwise I wouldn't be on the FES )


Note that I don't support distributism, I'm just giving defending Dionysius.

1.  Think about it.  Not working for a particular wage does not equal death, it means that employer is not getting his job done, meaning he will be forced to compromise.

2.  That is not justice, it is not even equality, it is robbery.  I am not giving up my $10 wage because someone else wants it.  I earned, and I continue to earn it every day that I do a good job.

3. Meaning what?  Big corporations mean BIG discounts to the average consumer.  Buying and selling in bulk is what makes these big companies both profitable and competitive.  Big discounts means a stimulated economy, which means more money moving, which (in a capitalist society) means money is being made, which grows the economy, which raises standard of living, and which makes men civilised.

4. There is no need for a suit in the U.S., but a case still must be tried.  If the only available punishment in this system is payment, then I can legally pay to have someone killed and suffer no other reprimand.


As far as this thread being about mind control, these socio-theists are attempting just that by propogating this as a legitimate form of economics.

Hmmm ok first of all Slavery does not work, it is uneconomical, the Romans realised it, the British realised it and the Americans realised it.


First of all if you have slavery it takes jobs away from "free" men, secondly slaves are generally demotivated, and finally, the most important reason, is that with slaves you have a duty of care to feed and house them. With an employee you pay them pittance and they have to fight for whatever scraps they can.

Im talking about a mind controlled slave though. Someone happy to be a slave would work hard because they dont want to NOT be a slave.
Motivated slaves would be economic as well, becuase they could eat whatever they were given, even if it was foul tasting.
Also, when they died, their organs could be harvested since they had no rights.

all the same, totalitarian governments like that crush invention and creativity, it would stagnate the world, never mind that mind control would also crush invention and creativity.... unless the worlds power is concentrated into one man this would not work, because if it were two men, they are both going to be afraid of the other taking his power, therefore he will need bigger and better weaponary, etc.


Also the economic cost of keeping a significant part of the world under "mind control" would probably be very large. Which is probably why the world powers opt for a more general passive mind control as they do now via propaganda and the media.

....unless the worlds power is concentrated into one man this would not work....

to me that comes across like you reckon, in this proposed scenario of worldwide slavery mind-control, a dictatorship would work quite well.  lol, am i reading you wrong?

well first of all it depends on how you define "work". If there were a single man in control of the world then this "slavery mind-control" would "work" for him, since, if everyone is his slave, no one can stand up to him.


But then he would need the people to mind control the slaves, and then subsidary people to control the flow of goods to and from construction, so that people working in the factories get there food, this is after all too much of a job for one man to do, and it is questionable if a drone would be able to manage something that complex. Any sort of mind control on this level must make someone little more than a vegetable.


but anyway there must be people who aren't under mind control, and who would have tangible control on the minons... these people would probably quite like to be top of the stack....

then of course how do you round up everyone in the world? i mean surely somewhere through the process people are going to realise, and will go underground and start a guerilla war.... those are very hard to put down. complicates things a lot.


so really what i'm going for is it really wouldn't work very well, i doubt it would bring any long term stability, and would only have a short term benefit to a set number of people.


Personally i just don't see the point of enslaving the world.... too much effort for too little gain.

it'd be good for a laugh, and it'd look good on your résumé