Thread: The Most Brainwashed Society on Earth?

The Most Brainwashed Society on Earth?


This is experience of an intellectual from outside who had opportunity to experience a “land of freedom”

http://boog.dnsalias.org/chris/
The most brainwashed society in the world

Spending some weeks in the United States after a year and half in Venezuela, there has been one reoccuring thing that has continued to amaze me. The population is subjected to some of the most effective mind control in the world. In a repressive, dictatorial society, the population is controlled by force. Regardless of what they think, their actions are controlled, and thus the general population is marginalized from power and control of their country. However, in a free, open, and democratic society like the United States, the population must be controlled and marginalized by other means. Instead of controlling their actions, it is necessary to control their thoughts.



I was amazed to find out that one of the most popular books among my friends and aquaintances is now "The World Is Flat" by Thomas Friedman. Friedman is the famous New York Times columnist who has historically supported United States' foreign policy. He now supports the U.S. War on Terror, the U.S. unconditional support for Israel, and the corrupt poltical system in Washington. But could we expect much different from one of the most promoted "intellectuals" in the United States? Since he is promoted and featured by the New York Times, we can already be sure that his views are acceptable to the corporate business world to which the NYTimes belongs.

But the problem with "The World Is Flat" is none of the above. Friedman writes a compelling account, from a lot of personal experience and careful analysis. But what is his basic conclusion? Basically he comes to the conclusion that U.S.-led globalization, dominated by multinational corporations, is not only unavoidable, but desireable. His only criticisms of U.S. corporate-led globalization is the way in which we are doing it. Are we using our military correctly? Are we going to be competitive enough to succeed at this, or are we too complacent? Never does he consider the question, do we have any right at all to dominate the world with our form of globalization? Never does he explain how current form of coporate globalization, using the tools of the IMF and the World Bank limit democracy in poor nations, and benefit U.S. corporations.

But, its not really a surprise that one of the most promoted authors on U.S. politics comes to these conclusions. What else should we expect from the corporate-owned media that dominates in the center of the empire? The most amazing part is that this book, along with many other similar ones, are largely read by the political "left" in the United States! And this is a key factor in how U.S. thought control works. If you make people think that this is the most "left" on the spectrum, then they will automatically not be capable of going beyond that. This false "left" restricts the debate within those limits, and thus all thought is controlled within these barriers. This form of thought control has been explained in detail by Noam Chomsky in numerous books and articles.

For example, on the war in Iraq, the debate varies between two extremities. On the right the position is,"we must hold strong and we will prevail in our war on terror." On the left, the most extreme position is, "We are making mistakes in the war on terror, we are not capable of bringing democracy to Iraq, and therefore we must withdraw." The truth, that the U.S. has no right to invade a country and massacre its people, never even enters the debate. The fact that a "War on Terror" is impossible because War IS terror is not mentioned. Nor does anyone ever question whether the real motive is even terrorism, or are there hidden motives? Imagine for a second, a parallel situation. When Japan invaded China before WWII, would we ask the question, "Will the Japanese be capable of winning, or was it a mistake?" Would we have said during WWII that the Germans should withdraw from France not because they had bad intentions but because it was a mistake and they won't be capable of winning? These positions would be absolutely ludicrous. Those are the positions of the left in the United States.

The debate concerning Israel and Palestine is another very revealing example. Time Magazine, or the New York Times are seen by many Americans to be on the extreme left side. However, when reading the analysis of the middle east, both of these support Israel unconditionally. However, again, the debate is framed into a small spectrum. On the left (NYTimes, TIME) the position is, "Will Israel be able to succeed in their attack on the Palestinians and Lebanese, or will it hurt their interests?" On the right they would say , Israel must continue their invasion and occupation. On the left, they agree with Israels motives and goals, but they say they should change their strategy. Never do they ask the question "Does Israel have any right to invade, occupy, and massacre the Arab populations that surround them?" Never do they mention that Israel has engaged in an illegal military occupation of Arab territories for over 50 years, with constant condemnation by the nations of the world, except the United States. Never do they mention the fact that many many times more Arabs have been killed by Israel than the number of Israelis killed by Arab attacks.


And, again, the question that U.S. media always ask is "Should the United States get involved in the conflict and work for peace, or should we not get involved?" The spectrum of thought is already very limited, with the assumption that the U.S. is not involved. What they fail to report is that the U.S. is VERY involved in the conflict. The U.S. supplies Israel with billions of dollars of weapons and military aid, and has consitently, for decades, blocked any and all resolutions in the United Nations to stop Israel's colonization of the surrounding territory. The reality is that Israel has no military. What they have is a U.S.-equipped military, but with Israeli soldiers.

Should the U.S. be the "world police", or should we stay out of others' affairs? Should the U.S. help poor nations, or not? Are we succeeding in our goal to "bring democracy" to the world? These questions all assume that that is our intention and that we don't have other motives! Few Americans are even capable of seeing their nation as the imperial, rogue-nation that it is. Few Americans are even aware of the oppressive, colonial economic policies that maintain and worsen the conditions of the poor across the globe, and consistently prevent real democracy, to the benefit of the U.S. Few are aware of the long history the United States has of installing and supporting dictatorships around the world in order to secure U.S. business interests. So effective is the thought control, that the truth about American policy is not even conceivable for the majority of American citizens. In the belly of the empire, the notion of empire doesn't even exist!

http://boog.dnsalias.org/chris/

Originally Posted by laca

In the belly of the empire, the notion of empire doesn't even exist!

How extremely well put.

Originally Posted by laca

But, its not really a surprise that one of the most promoted authors on U.S. politics comes to these conclusions. What else should we expect from the corporate-owned media that dominates in the center of the empire? The most amazing part is that this book, along with many other similar ones, are largely read by the political "left" in the United States! And this is a key factor in how U.S. thought control works. If you make people think that this is the most "left" on the spectrum, then they will automatically not be capable of going beyond that. This false "left" restricts the debate within those limits, and thus all thought is controlled within these barriers. This form of thought control has been explained in detail by Noam Chomsky in numerous books and articles.

That is an interesting statement and I would be inclined to agree with it since there is a lot of left accusations on this board. Interesting.

You seem to have left out a few countries in the intial analysis. As to the media control in the US, yes, there is a large concentration of media with a government big business bias. I think it is hardly a secret . My only question, who did Iaca get brainwashed by?

Yes we all know that Cuba is the envy of the world.
Their media is not controlled in anyway...
Their government allows complete freedom to it's citizenry
Everyone in Cuba would stay there anyway if their borders opened
Castro is a fair-minded man, who is humble and is a servant to his beloved citizens

Originally Posted by iamwhatiseem

Yes we all know that Cuba is the envy of the world.
Their media is not controlled in anyway...
Their government allows complete freedom to it's citizenry
Everyone in Cuba would stay there anyway if their borders opened
Castro is a fair-minded man, who is humble and is a servant to his beloved citizens

Originally Posted by iamwhatiseem

Yes we all know that Cuba is the envy of the world.
Their media is not controlled in anyway...
Their government allows complete freedom to it's citizenry
Everyone in Cuba would stay there anyway if their borders opened
Castro is a fair-minded man, who is humble and is a servant to his beloved citizens

I envy them, have you seen what they can do with a 57 Chevy?

Originally Posted by bigTlilODD

I envy them, have you seen what they can do with a 57 Chevy?

LOL!!! - no really, I laughed out loud when I read this!!

Man we need a thread for "notable posts"

Good one.

Originally Posted by iamwhatiseem

Yes we all know that Cuba is the envy of the world.
Their media is not controlled in anyway...
Their government allows complete freedom to it's citizenry
Everyone in Cuba would stay there anyway if their borders opened
Castro is a fair-minded man, who is humble and is a servant to his beloved citizens

Originally Posted by Mrs. M

I don't think you understood the point. I went to the US and UK, and in both these countries the idea spectrum is extremely restrained, or at least extremely focused on a very thin fragment of the total, a fragment which is the ambient ideology. It is the case in France as well, although to a lesser degree than in the UK (I can't put a definite judgement on the US, because I've only spent a few weeks on the east coast; however, the impression I get from this site is that it isn't any better than the UK).

Most people fail to realize that there is something outside of that segment; they are blinded by the intensity of the focus on one interpretation of events.

Saying that Iaca comes from Cuba is more like a personnal attack than an answer. It is true that Cuba isn't an example on this issue, but it doesn't mean that everything's good outside of communist dictatorships.

The overall reaction is an interesting act of defense, as the thread is quickly turned into a "just for fun" one. No arguments? Just laugh at the messenger. It is too dangerous to question your most deeply established beliefs, right?


PS: because laca made a lot of bad posts doesn't mean this one should be invalidated as well, especially since it obviously is a copypaste.

Originally Posted by IIIX

I don't think you understood the point. I went to the US and UK, and in both these countries the idea spectrum is extremely restrained, or at least extremely focused on a very thin fragment of the total, a fragment which is the ambient ideology. It is the case in France as well, although to a lesser degree than in the UK (I can't put a definite judgement on the US, because I've only spent a few weeks on the east coast; however, the impression I get from this site is that it isn't any better than the UK).

Most people fail to realize that there is something outside of that segment; they are blinded by the intensity of the focus on one interpretation of events.

Saying that Iaca comes from Cuba is more like a personnal attack than an answer. It is true that Cuba isn't an example on this issue, but it doesn't mean that everything's good outside of communist dictatorships.

The overall reaction is an interesting act of defense, as the thread is quickly turned into a "just for fun" one. No arguments? Just laugh at the messenger. It is too dangerous to question your most deeply established beliefs, right?


PS: because laca made a lot of bad posts doesn't mean this one should be invalidated as well, especially since it obviously is a copypaste.

Of course it should be invalidated.
You present an argument that even though a person is wrong nearlly alll the time doesn't mean you should dismiss them - that is ridiculous..of course they should be dismissed.
This thread is just another anti-American rant and cut n' paste anti-American rant coming from one who does nothing but go on anti-American tirades...he does not deserve to be listened to.

Soon - let's all hope, that the mods are finally going to do something about posters who are "thread-whores" - people cutting and pasting articles with very little or no opinion expressed of their own (which is already against the rules and should be) - and people who post daily threads on the same damn subject, filling the thread listings with meaningless rants.

If this site is ever going to get back to the quality it once was - posters like this must be dealt with, and until then - all we can do is either ignore them or expose them for what they are.