Topic awaiting preservation: Where Does America Learn its Lessons?

I was thinking today about the American perspective on not just Iraq but all wars. Even further, I've been thinking about why American and European foreign politics are so different. Take these only as thoughts, because I am an American still intrigued and ignorant of European ideas. Please don't take any of this as offense, I am only trying to observe objectively.

Apart from concrete historical items, it seems like European nations are held accountable for their mistakes. I do not mean in the simplistic manner of plaques placed in Germany that recite historical events of World War II. Rather, I mean to say that Europeans in general hold a more conscious view of how their nation's leaders are repeating past mistakes.
It seems though that Americans are quick to forget and also quick to feel righteous. During the first world war, France lost more than one and a half million men. This is more than all of the deaths of all American wars combined. Great Britain lost 750,000 men in WWI, 300,000 more than America lost in World War II. Yet often, I hear the American aid in Europe (WWII) should be regarded as a ticket to eternal thanks. The loss of one life is tragic, but European nations have paid very, very dearly for wars.
There is one very, very, similar situation. In terms of American history, it is more important. During the American Revolution, 1/3 of Americans support the war, 1/3 opposed, and a final 1/3 really didn't care. Had France not reinforced the Colonial Army, I would have a funny accent.
Without France's aid (regardless of political motive) our constitution would never have been conceived and this "great free nation" would be quite different. The problem is that American public school history books paint a portrair of the American Revolution where we fought for our freedom and won it with a little aid from France. That's just not how it was, and probably never could have been. This seems on equal footing (or more) with what France did with us... but rarely is it spoken of. Perhaps we are not as strongly influenced by the nationalism of the 20th century.


This brings me to see why much of the people in Europe (so I have been lead to believe) are generally opposed to war. And with that, please tell me what you think. Please keep in mind, though, that I am not attempting to assert this post as fact. I am only looking to hear what others think of the matter.

(Edited by Nada`King on 03-29-2005 21:22)

I don't much see a point to this topic.

Which nation(s) lost more lives? Which is better because of it? Which has more warmongers?

Who cares - war is stupid.

(Edited by reisio on 03-29-2005 22:08)

Regardless of any figures of war casualty, it still seems as if Americans anticipate respect from the French for having helped during the second world war. However, Americans are often not even aware of the French aid in our own revolution. Take this to the abstract, and we can discuss possible reasons why Americans are different from Europeans in their view of international relations.
You may also see war as stupid (in a moral sense), but it affects our world, so understanding its effects are important.

I may be wasting my time with this, though. Rarely am I ever able to get a full response out of an American and only the foreign exchange students here take any interest in the matter.

The sort of US citizens that care about French respect like that should not be regarded (except perhaps comically).

From my experience, the same concept exists in the european mindset. It's a very human condition...expeting gratitude for your actions while showing none for someone else's.

America has a lot more people. The stupidity tends to shout a little louder.

In my experience that's about the extent of it.

As for the war issue itself - the scars of WWII are far more prominent in europe, the memories more visible. The war was right there. That drives home a far more concrete message than sending your troops to another continent does.

It's also noteworthy that the french army itself was not as significant an aid as you make it sound during the revolution. The French fleet was the key help - their mere presence cast grave doubt on Britain's absolute hold on the sea, and kept them on land when they might otherwise have boarded ship and sailed south.

No doubt the french contribution was important. But the continental army, considering its resources and military experience made astounding accomplishments, and was no insignificant force itself. FWIW.








(Edited by DL-44 on 03-29-2005 23:52)

The victor re-writes the history.

Look at you own movie industry. I can't recall one WW 2, or Vietnam or Korean war epic in which the US didn't singlehandedly win the event. The presence of British, Polish, Russian, Canadian and other national troops, air-forces and navies is given grudging acknowldgement if any at all.

The US government does nothing I have ever seen to dissuade this point of view.

As Americans generally have a tendency to drink a lot of their own bathwater in that regard and little tendency to learn anything in depth about history, it is small wonder the attitude is so prevalent.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

I think the fact that Europe has a much deeper and scarred history as compared to the US is part of the reason their people, in my perception, are a little more peaceful, humble even. A little more wary of goverment, at least ours.

One other thing, in my perception, that I do not agree with, at least regarding many Europeans here, is that they give a little too much trust to the U.N. which I not only see as a threat to national sovereignty but personal sovereignty. It is like, in my perspective, getting rid of wolves and replacing them with dragons. And also in my perspective, smokescreens like oil-for-food aside, our national government actively works toward this global government. That to me is a dark road. I want small, regional governments with severely limited powers.

That aside, perhaps they have learned the lessons of war which we really have not, more of their families have also been directly affected by the ravages of war. Since the Civil War we have not had any major battles fought on our soil, and thus our nightmares of bloody war on the homefront, where more than soldiers experience the ravages first-hand, with the exception of Pearl Harbor and 9/11 (both having evidence of previous government knowledge), are many generations removed, all but forgotten.

I cannot speak for Europe, but perhaps our overly violent entertainment serves as a sort of brainwashing, conditioning toward more violent activity. If you turn on 24 or any of those other police shows, and you are likely to see some type of torture, light (NYPD Blue) and heavy (24). We are desensitized towards these things, and at the same time our government is relelasing all kinds of documentation detailing their torture methods. The uproar is quelled by the politics of race hate and desensitization campaigns. Is it no wonder that a large portion of high schools students polled were all for government censoring of the news. We already have corporate sensoring and unmarked government sponsored stories, which Bush admotted to and even endorsed a couple weeks back, and now there is a bill out there to censor cable and XM radio as well.

You brought up a good point about our history books, or public schools in general, which give us a much more narrow view of history, one view, no alternate possibilities, and thus we truly do not to learn or think until college level or take the initiative to explore the past for ourselves. We are taught fragments, but not given a whole lot to go on in connecting dots.

The internet is helping here. I have learned more about the world and many other things on the Internet in 1.5 years of study, most of it in the last six months, than I did in all my 12 years of public schooling, but then the problem is getting people who don't need a whole lot to think of anything but their lives and focus narrowly on their careers, paying the bills, the latest episode of the despisable American Idol, and having fun on the weekends. We live a consumption based life, generally, and are quite ignorant of anything else.

It was not always like this, for a period after WW2 America was very free, we made progress toward more freedom, but when government took over the schools in the fifties, I am not positive that we were at #1 in education in the world, but definately up there. Now we are 59th in literacy, but yet we spend 7% of our GDP on education making us #1 there. We also are #1 in tertiary education. So what is wrong there? What went wrong between then and now.

To me, it shows our schools are not making people who think, but drones, non-thinkers, small-talkers. Or perhaps kids need a good smack on the ass once in a while, but instead their parents fear having the government come to take their kids away. Another factor is that our society has shifted from homes with one working parent to two over the last half-century, that was a culture shock. Not that women should not have the right to work if they want, but it would be nice if we could have more parental supervision and training and less training by TV and video games. Who knows, but our decline in education shows an inevetible decline in our country unless change is made. Countries made up primarily of non-thinking, content and well fed drones obsessed with materialism are good for only one thing. We have, in large part a Corporatocracy, and we bend to their will willingly and in many cases unknowingly.

That covers my opinion of American culture and my preceptions of European culture. Perhaps one of them thar' euro folks could enlighten us with their perceptions of America and opinions of their culture.

Reisio, I think you misunderstood his intentions, or I did, but it was not about who lost more lives to war, but in coming to an understanding of the division cultures and how perceptions play a large part.

Interesting conversaion you started here.

Ramasax

Ramasax, very insightful and quite thoughtful.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

The US government does nothing I have ever seen to dissuade this point of view.

---

So the US government is supposed to tell the movie industry how to make movies? Does that happen in your country, which you won't even divulge?

quote:

---

I want small, regional governments with severely limited powers.

---

Greek City-States, anyone?

I feel that one thing should be spoken of, that very rarely gets mentioned - the Colonization War. The war against the native peoples of all the Americas. Millions of native americans died, through sicknesses brought from Europe, from war, from hunger, etc. Their culture was trampled on, and the remanants were forced into slave labor, and had to reside in Reservations.

These native americans in the US have repeatedly supported the American government in it's wars, against enemies foreign and domestic, despite everything done to them.

I don't see a lot of thanks for that.

I feel that DL is right - people tend to be egocentric. I personally tend to think maybe it has its roots in the "tribal mentality" somewhere in the distant past. We just don't view "other peoples" as being as important as we are. If an Aboriginal dies on a public street somewhere in a city in Australia, do Americans feel that something needs to be done about it? In fact, it will probably be an event that will not make the news, and never come to the attentions of Americans in the first place.

But should it be an American woman being held captive in the middle east, then it is news-worthy, and Americans are up in arms.

As explained already, the WWs were fought on European turf. That is bound to leave scars on the inhabitants of the regions fought in. One often forgets, that civilians are the main casualties in a war. Nobody seems all that interested in waging wars in unpopulated regions. This of course does have an effect on the mind-set of those who were affected. War then has a real meaning, and has had real effects, other than "Johnny is not coming home". It means that people will lose their livelyhoods, their sons, daughters, animals, lands, dwellings, lives, etc.

When it is happening to you, it takes on a whole different light. War really is hell, for all involved, and those who were unlucky enought to be involved, despite the fact that they may be civilians, are normally those who suffer the most. One doesn't tend to forget this soon. This, in turn, gets past on to the next generation. Though it will get diluted in time, with each generation, the signs of such being all around and the history of what happened being taught in schools does tend to keep this mentality alive in the generations that come after.

I suspect as those who were alive during the conflicts in WWII die, that there will be a lessening of fear against war.

In any regards, except for the native americans, Americans have not been subject to a real turf war at home. There was the Civil war, but that pitted American against American. There was some small wars with the French, and with Mexico, but they could hardly be considered large scale. The Revolutionary War was really a conflict of revolution - America as we know it know didn't exist back then.

No other foreign enemy has really attempted to take a large scale shot at America since the Revolutionary War. One could mention Pearl Harbor, but the Japanese never really did try to conquer American, nor did we have to face them on our own soil.

Thus, Americans have never really had to face the effects of a conflict from foriegn enemies on their own soil in recent times. There are no living Americans that can remember such. There are no "lingering scars" of such a conflict (apart from maybe the Civil War in some southern States, but that was not based on foreign enemies).

I suspect it is this, combined with how humans tend to de-value others that are not considered "related" to themselves, that leads up to the mentality that Americans have concerning war, and tends to seperate them from their European counterparts.

Americans are a very war like people, we just don't seem to go on without it.

Revolutionary War
War of 1812
Mexican American War
Civil War
Spanish American War
World War I
World War II
Korean War
Vietnam War
Desert Storm
Operation Enduring Freedom
Iraqi Freedom

That is 12 wars in 227 years. We are simply a warlike people. We may try and claim we are above this, and that it is for the good of the world, but it boils down to us liking war. If you read the history books, the ones written by Americans, you will constantly read reference to the War Hawks. For all of our right to life rhetoric we sure like to kill people.

Dan @ Code Town

More thoughtfull insight.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

WarMage: I hardly think we, as in the common people, like war. We have been desensitized to war over time, sure, but how much say do 'we the people' really have when it comes to matters such as this? I mean look at the past election, what choice did we have? A guy for war, and a guy for war, a guy for big brother policies, and a guy for big brother policies, etc etc. Two sides of the same coin spewing meaningless political rhetoric and small smokescreen issues to split the people. And it works well.

The other choices were hardly given any notice by the media, Badnarik (L) and Cobb (G) were actually arrested for trying to get into one of the "debates." Although I do not agree with Cobb, I think either of those guys would have torn Bush and Kerry apart, and if given equal attention in the media, would have garnered many more votes. Had I the chance to hear Badnarik's mesage, I believe I would have been awoken earlier. We the people simply have to pull back another layer of the political onion and realize what is going on.

Our government likes war, or chooses to fight war for financial gain, I mean, we have to pay our debts somehow right? They drag the people along, using propaganda and false ideologies (ala Left/Right) when in the end, the Democrats and Republicans, if we can call them that anymore, both are equally disgusting vermin, masters of manipulation. Does not matter who you elect within the current 2 party system, they are pretty much on the same level.

In the beginning of WWII 'we the people' were overwhelmingly against joining the fight, nearly on the verge of isolationism. It was not until Roosevelt ordered the entire fleet into Pearl Harbor with preknowledge of the Japanese attack that we were swayed, manipulated into war through fear and anger. Thus the MI complex was born, and never went away, thanks to another war perpetrated by fear and propaganda, and one you left out, the Cold War. Defense is a big industry, lots of money and power and jobs involved. Who is in control?

We are also manipulated and shown selective information regarding war, and thus it loses its impact on us and becomes more like reality TV. It is all manipulation of the masses on a grand and carefully planned scale, and I have to disagree with you in that the masses like war. They may think it necessary because of what they are led to believe, but we are not warlike people, we just have warlike leaders.

Also to be fair, Europeans have had their share of wars as well, more than we have had, albeit over a longer period of time. Their wars were also largely wars of the powerful using the common people as pawns, motivated by fear, on the battlefield of war, assets in strategy.

In short:

quote:

---

Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
-- Hermann Goering

---

Ramasax

(Edited by Ramasax on 03-30-2005 07:55)

Ram,

are you suggesting that there is a conspiracy, by the government, to control the populance for its own gain?

I'm curious to see where you are going with this "big, bad government" thing. And when did this "conspiracy" start in America, according to you?

The manipulation of the masses is a tried and proven tool, used by institutions, governments, Kings, Religious leaders, etc since time immorial.

That is one of the reasons the American system is based on a checks-and-balances system. It is also one of the reasons why there are term limits for politicians.

What gets missed when pointing out America's legacy of war is......well....every other major nation's legacy of war.

What major nation has had any less violent a history?

None of them.

Again I must reiterate: it's a human problem. It's been a problem for thousands of years. It's not a "modern american society" problem.

It can be summed up like this:

people suck.

=)

DL I agree completely with that last statement. And you are correct about other countrys and their wars. I am sure England has been in a whole lot more wars that America has but that is because they have been around for a whole lot longer, but for a country that has only been around for a little over 200 year we sure have gotten into a bunch of scuffles. But as you said people suck.

Ram, were the common people really not to like war we wouldn't have wars here. I think that your idea that our government in big brother mode is able to do what it wants with no checks on itself is just foolish. It is plain and simple that were the people not to want war we would rise up and overthrow any government that tried to place us in this situations. Pockets of discenters (like what you see now) is not an accurate depiction of the common people. The counter to this arguement always has to do with the impossibility of overthowing the common government, or that people are to content with their stuff to really do anything. The thing is, if people really cared they would be up in arms and off their sofas in protest. But they really don't care.

The truth is, we do have people with a lot of energy in this country, but they would rather put their political energy into protesting in front of abortion clinics, or protesting in front of the halls of justice so that they might continue to pirate music. Protesting a war and railing against it is just not something that Americans care about.

quote:

---

Especially if your country is full of brown people. Oh, we like that, don't we? That's our hobby now. But it's also our new job in the world: bombing brown people. Iraq, Panama, Grenada, Libya. You got some brown people in your country? Tell 'em to watch the fuck out, or we'll goddamn bomb them!

- George Carlin
http://forums.ratedesi.com/archive/index.php/t-9730.html

---

I am going to stick to my guns on this one, by and large Americans like war. And finish with people suck.

Dan @ Code Town

quote:

---

WebShaman: are you suggesting that there is a conspiracy, by the government, to control the populance for its own gain?

---

Yes, I suppose I am, but that would label me a conspiracy nut, wouldn't it? Let us not tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories.

But let me clarify, certain factions of government and forces without, not the government. I understand you probably see these ideas as fringe or radical, especially because you argued with me for months where I was shoveling shit for Republicans, which I am not ashamed to admit I was wrong about but just ashamed that I fell for it, I only hope you and others here can redefine your perception of me, but just ask yourself why they are fringe and who controls this perception. I don't know how long it has been since you have lived in the states for an extended period, but there are tens of millions of people out there right now stuck to this left/right paradigm, like I was, who simply, if they knew what was at stake and sought the information freely available, would be awakened.

I have drawn the conclusion that left and the right are not real to politicians, just another manipulation tool, one of many. Would you not agree? Why would democrats try to repeal the 22nd amendment? Why would GWB black out Clinton docs, released under the FOIA, regarding his pardon of convicted criminals? Why would GWB pretend to be a fiscal conservative and then spend more than any president since Roosevelt, who was clearly a socialist? There is talk of raising taxes as well, like father like son. Why would John Kerry, a yale educated man, purvey himself as anti-war in one minute and pro-war the next? It is normal for a young and ignorant person like myself to bounce around in a quest for some sort of truth or revelation, but a man with 20 years senate experience and a premium education not able to state a position clearly? Up front, we are given this perception that these people hate eachother, but when you look under the covers, they are in bed all the way. Divide and conquer is their tactic to keep us in the dark. The left seeks to control the property, and the right seeks to control thought and action. Put them together in all the legislation they pass, in a largely bipartisan fashion, and where we are going, barring change, looks pretty dark.

I call that conspiracy. Is there a grand master plan being followed, some dark sinister chamber where these super elite people meet? I haven't the slightest, and I doubt it. All I know is that there is no accountability anymore for our politicians because they, along with our schools, media, and other purveyors of perception, have lulled the American public into a deep and mindless sleep trapped into the branded name of USA. Meanwhile they pass callous legislation like the PAUSA and tell us it is all for our own good and protection, and we believe them. They seek to revoke aspects of state sovereignty totally going against the 10th Amendment with the Real ID Act of 2005, proposing it as immigration reform. They pass the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 the same weekend they captured Saddam in a hole. They told us they captured him in a hole, and even that was allegedly staged. They told us a plane crashed into the Pentagon, although not a scrap of wreckage could be seen, collected all the videos of the crash and released 5 low quality frames with the wrong date on them and no sign of a plane, just a smoke trail which planes do not even emit. They told us that the WTC towers collapsed from fire, first time in history, IIRC, any steel buildings came down like that. You get the idea. Nothing but lies and distortions, everyday, all the time. When this government was created, we the people were supposed to be above government, the original 10 bill of rights were rights of the people. It was not until the 14th amendment was passed that we all became "subjects" of the Feds and totally lost state and personal sovereignty. The 14th was not even necessary for the other purposes, because all we had to do was follow the existing law. They changed rights to privelages, and freedom to slavery.

I love my country and always will, that has not changed. I fear and despise my government. I started out despising government in my teens, became Liberal Democrat in my early 20s, then went Conservative (you know that one), and now I hate them both equally again. Full circle, only this time I have a much greater understanding of why I despise and fear them. I took the time to read the, for the most part, very dry Patriot Act, and it shook me. I went back to the beginning and read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers, along with the Articles of Confederation, Constitution, and Bill of Rights, and it shook me that we are so off track. I took your advice and have studied and continue to study history in much greater depth, from varying and often contradicting viewpoints, and it widened my eyes. I studied parts of the tax code, and it angered me. I am currently studying the Federal Reserve and fractional reserve banking, and although I am still learning in this regard and have a lot of information and views to cover, but that shook me. With every piece of the puzzle I assemble, I am shaken and enraged. I used the onion analogy in an earlier post, because in my perception, that is what it feels like.

In short, I am a pissed off American, tired of being lied to, tired of having my rights stripped, tired of checkpoints and being asked for my "papers" having done nothing wrong, tired of being spied on with cameras in our traffic lights and on our highways and everywhere else we go, tired of strip searches at airports, tired of having the government dictate to us what we can and cannot do when harming noone, creating crimes so they have purpose, interfering in even the most miniscule aspects of our life, tired of being protected with laws upon laws to thwart "terrorism" meanwhile the borders and ports are wide open, tired of being illegally taxed so they can misplace 9billion in Iraq and maintain 25,000 nuclear weapons, tired of reading stories of police brutality, excessive force, five year olds being arrested for temper tantrums, taser deaths, free speech zones, just plain tired. Enough is enough! I have drawn my line in the sand, and will no longer submit. That, of course, makes me a terrorist by law. So be it. I will not and can not, in good conscience, stand idly by while this country is destroyed from within and destroys others from without. Even if nobody listens to me I will stand from the hilltop and scream treason at the top of my lungs until they come and haul my one man rebellion ass off to jail.

We call ourselves a free nation and yet we have more people imprisoned than any other nation on the face of the earth and now we are pushing this brand of freedom to others; that is the height of hypocrisy.

quote:

---

WebShaman: I'm curious to see where you are going with this "big, bad government" thing. And when did this "conspiracy" start in America, according to you?

---

Hell if I know. Where are you going with this question?

quote:

---

WebShaman: The manipulation of the masses is a tried and proven tool, used by institutions, governments, Kings, Religious leaders, etc since time immorial.

---

Exactly, and manipulation of the masses, in itself, requires conspiracy. Knowingly misleading constituents in order to achieve a goal.

quote:

---

WebShaman: That is one of the reasons the American system is based on a checks-and-balances system. It is also one of the reasons why there are term limits for politicians.

---

Was based on a checks and balances system. Over time they have systematically dismantled many of those checks and balances. We are a Republic, call ourselves a Democracy, and are neither.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe we have term limits for senators on a federal level. Only 15 states, to my knowledge, impose any kinds of terms on their lawmakers. Supreme Court judges, on good behavior, serve for life. And now there are two separate bills out there to repeal the 22nd amendment, which would allow Bush to run again. Or maybe Clinton can run again, that is of course if he does not take up the head of the UN in '06. (yeah, go ahead and chuckle, but remember my words )

Sorry for the lengthy rant. Perhaps I need some other information to balance this view and perhaps I am wrong on some things, in which case a nudge in the right direction is always appreciated. Ramasax is reborn and will not fight a change in his perceptions any longer. Fire away.

quote:

---

WarMage: Ram, were the common people really not to like war we wouldn't have wars here. I think that your idea that our government in big brother mode is able to do what it wants with no checks on itself is just foolish.

---

That's the problem, and it is not foolish to fear your government and realize the power they wield through legislation they pass in silence and the control they have over media. The alternate voices are not heard, the bills they pass are not reviewed, and all that is left is newspeak, meaningless rhetoric. They set the parameters of the debate and set us at eachother like dogs.

If you don't think we have big brother, I'm sorry, but I have to disagree.

If I was a talk show host and I got signed on with ABC, a large corporation which the government has power over, and is also funded through advertisment, I would not want to piss of neither the government nor the advertisers. Thus, I, the talk host, am selectively told what to say and how to say it. Say something they don't like, and I will be out the door on my ass. If I am a conservative and suddenly start Bush bashing, even if it totally goes against my message (immigration for instance) well golly, there goes part of the listenership and advertising revenue, can't have that can we? The same principle applies to all media, and it is split into two views. These views are the dividing factor, left/liberal/democrat vs. right/conservative/republican, and many Americans who do pay attention are caught up into these predefined parameters and thus do not get the whole story.

quote:

---

WarMage: It is plain and simple that were the people not to want war we would rise up and overthrow any government that tried to place us in this situations.

---

If, again, we were told the truth or sought the one would assume there would be a lot more dissent.

quote:

---

WarMage: Pockets of discenters (like what you see now) is not an accurate depiction of the common people. The counter to this arguement always has to do with the impossibility of overthowing the common government, or that people are to content with their stuff to really do anything. The thing is, if people really cared they would be up in arms and off their sofas in protest. But they really don't care.

---

Have we all become good Germans?

They don't care for one reason: They are not being told the truth. And this nation has been dumbed down so damn much that many fail to come to this realization.

I will totally concur that people suck, but I cannot agree that people like war, ignorance simply prevails.

I think I have wasted enough of everyones time now, so I'll end my rant here.

edit: forgot to add this link concerning emergency powers:

Emergency Powers Statutes (Senate Report 93-549)

Ramasax

(Edited by Ramasax on 03-31-2005 09:06)

Here an interesting link for Term Limits - U.S. Term Limits

Ram, though some of your points are indeed worthy, and of consideration, you need to consider a few things.

First, you are standing on the outside, looking in. That is always going to give you a skewed view of how things work. I do not know if you will be able to get to a position on the inside, looking out.

But it would be helpful.

Is there a "conspiracy"? Well, there are certainly interest groups, that support both sides of the fence, in attempts to get their concerns and political interests addressed. These tend to run across both party lines (in fact, one could go so far as to say, that irregardless of elected candidate, such groups supported them).

These interest groups however do have conflicting agendas and interests with other interest groups. They fight for access against one another. Some succeed, and some fail.

I however know of no real "conspiracy" across the board to "dupe" the American public, with the exception of Media manipulation.

The manipulation of media has been a centerpoint in most of the US foreign relations jobs. Especially during the Cold War, where it got raised to practically an art form. Basically, one arranges the "buying" of either one or all (if possible) of any Major Media/News distributor of a country, and through a "third person" (normally the buyer, that is really just a front for a government propaganda project) such propaganda and agendas are delivered unto the unknowing masses.

This "control of information" is a very effective tool for dealing with populations. It also has its uses for de-stabilizing certain politicians, companies, etc.

I am starting to see signs of this type of Media Manipulation in the US. The Washington Post is a good place to start. It meets all the criteria for such a project.

It is owned by a "third party" person - and that person has deep contacts in government.

There are other Media Sources that seem suspicious, but I haven't seen any evidence of such a system yet.

Gee, I have to agree with Rama on this one and not only in Amurica.

Here, there is an obvious program underweigh.

Thing is, in both countries, it is a long established practice.

It is only the advent of things like e-mail and the internet, which is finally allowing we of the sweating classes to be in on the latest developlments.

Anarchy...from the point of view of the ruling (read politicians) classes.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

WS: Thanks for the link on term limits.

I think it is obviously worrisome to realize that a small handful of corporations, and continuously shrinking, have the reigns on the perception of the people. Investigative journalism is going the way of the dinosaurs and is being replaced with "surface" stories which do not delve very deeply into reality in order to protect certain interests and, I'll still argue, perpetrating the left/right brainjob. All part of our "dumbing down."

Lucky for us there is this Internet thing. How long before they come after it, to regulate the flow of information? The UN was trying to get control, but luckily failed. I say leave it be, leave it outside political influence. Unfortunately, all good things...

With regard to standing on the inside, that is not likely, so I suppose I will have to make due with my limited perceptions and resources.

Here is a list of who owns what with regards to American media.
Columbia Journalism Review - Who Owns What

And here is information on the 10 biggest specifically.

Thanks for the links, Ram.

Check this out - Archive - Dark Side of Rev. Moon

Rev. Moon is the owner of the Washington Times. One only needs to dig under the surface a bit, to see an example of Media Manipulation here (although hard to actually directly connect it to an intelligence service, there are deep ties with members of Government and Rev. Moon).

Please think about this - Mr. Bush, sr. was the Head of the CIA, before he became President. I served in the Military and some intelligence operations during Mr. Bush's term - we did some incredibly interesting "information campaigns" before, during, and after the First Gulf War.

I find this especially interesting (check the date)

quote:

---

Moon's latest reach into South America had the helping hand of former U.S. President George Bush. But the Moon-Bush alliance dates back years and could reach into the future, as Bush lines up conservative backing for the expected White House bid of his eldest son. (7/28/97)

---

quote:

---

Investigative journalism is going the way of the dinosaurs and is being replaced with "surface" stories which do not delve very deeply into reality in order to protect certain interests and, I'll still argue, perpetrating the left/right brainjob. All part of our "dumbing down."

---

This is another area where I will maintain that this is *not* a modern or recent development...and in fact has always been the case.

We have a view of american history that makes us think people were more in the know in the past, but the more we know about the past, the more we see this is just not true (your own post in regard to the prelude to the great depression illustrates that...).

The propaganda machines in the US (and elsewhere, oobviosuly) were out in full force during world war I and II - in a far more invasive and patronizing manner than we've seen since.

I think we're seeing people who are desensitized in regard to scandal and conspiracy. In the past it was actually hidden better, and thus more shocking when exposed. But most people still accepted blindly the scapegoats who've always been thrust out for them...

Actually DL, though manipulation of the masses has been a thing of the ages, that which we are seeing now is somewhat new (in America).

I know this through experience. That which we practiced during the cold war in other lands (Media Manipulation) has apparently been turned against our own nation. The real question is, how far does it go, and to what extent (and purpose) is it being used?

I can also say, that the information that I have been comparing (CNN, NBC, and other newspaper sources from the US, like the NYT) and that which is being done locally in Germany differ, often wildly, in the type, accuracy, and subject matter. I have waited a long time, and have done a lot of comparisons, before coming to these conclusions.

The American Media, almost across the board, is just not doing its job. At least, it is not reporting unbaised information. In fact, the information presented is nowhere near unbaised. That stories like those about prisoner abuse actually got out, and was aired, is very amazing. And the Pentagon, and the Bush administration moved very quickly with "damage control" measures. Most of the stuff has been swept under the rug now. Not one high-standing official anywhere paid a price for what has happened, and what is continuing to happen.

I'm not saying that the American Media was unbiased before. That would be idealistic, and naive. But many top reporters have been slammed down hard for trying to break top stories, and much of what I would consider "good" journalism, has been replaced by something else.

I am aware of the "media blitz" during the WWs. I agree that they were pretty unparalled in our history. But we are really talking about two different things here. Adolf Hitler, and the Axis powers really were a threat to the world. Of that, there can be no doubt.

But Iraq?

We fooled the world the first time, with the first Gulf War. Mr. Bush, sr, and the American Intelligence agencies did a very good job on that. But many of the countries that we manipulated learned from that - and resisted it a second time.

Just the American people didn't seem to learn from it.

I find you analysis WS to be dead on.

I spent 20 years as a new reporter and what I see and hear on the air today I find apalling.

In Canada most of the media is owned by a few big companies, all of whom will kiss the kester of whoever the current government is in the most unabashed manner.

We have exactly the problems here you describe. There are two first rate investigative reporters in Ottawa today who are larglely ostracized because they dared to reveal the truth about one of our past prime ministers.

In a book published some years ago his criminal activities were clearly laid out and yet almost none of the major media picked up the story and facts and ran with it.

The bum himself threatened a lawsuit, but didn't have the balls to carry through because, of course, the absolute defense to slander is truth.

Today, legislative and parliamentary reporters in particular and scared stiff of reporting anything which may make the government look bad. The reasons are several, first; if you do, you get left off the invitation list for all those nice tax-payer funded booze-ups. Secondly, there is little liklihood your boss is going to let you publish it.

Occasionally some stuff slips out and must be reported on, but nowhere near what is going on.

There is no more free press, with the exception of a few which carry that as their name, but not their practice.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

WebShaman: Rev. Moon is the owner of the Washington Times. One only needs to dig under the surface a bit, to see an example of Media Manipulation here (although hard to actually directly connect it to an intelligence service, there are deep ties with members of Government and Rev. Moon).

---

You learn something new everyday. Doesn't Father own UPI as well? And a gun company? Need more knowledge before further comment, thanks for the link.

I knew about Bush and the CIA, and all the little gems of information out there with regard to his role. It is hard to know what to take as truth though as that rabbit hole is deep. Zappatta Oil, Cuba, JFK assassination, drug-running, discredation and murder of Hoover, Nazi connections of the father, Skull and Bones; German Death Cult. There is a theory for everything, even his involvement in the attempted assassination of Reagan. Problem is, while it is all interesting, none of it can truly be proven with what we know. And if proven, you'd probably just wind up missing...

A Bush-Moon connection is both interesting and frightening. I feel like my head is going to explode.

quote:

---

DL-44: We have a view of american history that makes us think people were more in the know in the past, but the more we know about the past, the more we see this is just not true (your own post in regard to the prelude to the great depression illustrates that...).

---

Well, we do have access to more information, but we also have access to a greater amount of disinformation. For every good reporter out there, there are two or three who are shilling for one side or another, part of the corporate mindset.

It was easier to keep things in the dark back then I suppose because of technological restraints, but the soup of lies and distortion was not as thick and the interests were not as condensed. You did not have to lick the tootsie pop as much to get to the center. I seem to be thinking in cliches tonight, forgive me.

The news of yesteryear often times served as a way to unite the people, like during the wars; today we have something else entirely, the fruit of a cultivated divide that began in the 60s. We have the divide and conquer technique being used on us, in my belief, intentionally, to institute a near police state. This time, the gun is turned on us, more blatantly than ever. They are on the 10 yard line and rushing in for the touchdown.

I see the left and the right as both half right and half wrong, more or less. If you combine the right ingredients of both platforms you get the original intentions of our founding fathers. That is my hypothesis anyway. For instance the right portrays their belief in a free market, property rights, gun rights, religious freedom etc. The left portrays Civil Rights, equality, states rights. In acts though, most politicians sell us out in both directions, one need only look at some of the legislation to see that. The few good guys out there are powerless to do anything and for the most part, afraid to speak up for fear of the inevitable backlash.

The left has one very special trait that needs to be used to the advantage of everyone though, grass roots. It all starts locally. Well, now that we have electronic voting that tactic may be null and void...

quote:

---

DL-44: I think we're seeing people who are desensitized in regard to scandal and conspiracy. In the past it was actually hidden better, and thus more shocking when exposed. But most people still accepted blindly the scapegoats who've always been thrust out for them...

---

I agree with the first statement partially. We are desensitized yes, but in the same respect, we are confused, which serves its purpose just as well hiding. The lines between reality and fiction have blurred. I and many other who are or were caught up in the group-think mindset, because of the desensitization, are more likely to discard information on the basis that it doesn't support our views than in the past. I'll not comment on the scapegoats, can't really disagree with it.

quote:

---

WebShaman: That stories like those about prisoner abuse actually got out, and was aired, is very amazing.

---

I see this as part of the plan as well. Desensitization. And they did not cover the worst of the abuses, just the surface abuses, enough to raise the hackles of the left and make Limbaugh talk about "fraternity hazing." No harm done to the agenda. The divide remains. Now if the people would actually read the military reports... or better yet, if people would only read. How people trained in military discipline performed those acts is another thing that makes no sense to me. I tend to believe those photos got out for a reason. Some type of op.

When Bush goes around saying there is no torture though, he is not really lying, legally. It all falls on the definition thereof, which is how he gets away with it. See U.S. Code, Title 18, Sect. 2340 and look at the lack of clarity. They use the word "severe" numerous times throughout, but who defines severe? What constitutes severe? Lawyers suck.

So, the big question is, are we doomed if people don't start doing their part in policing government? Is it too late even if we do wake up? We have this Homeland Security, condensation of power, military on our streets, cops armed with automatic weapons, and anyone, American citizens included, who opposes them is a terrorist by law, up against the strongest force in the world. Rebellion is an impossibility in the system which they have set up, so is a fall necessary for change? And after the fall, will the blue helmets be among us to take over, thus bringing us one step closer to the new world order?

Ignorance was bliss, plug me back in. *sigh*

Ramasax

(Edited by Ramasax on 04-04-2005 06:27)