How to Enjoy Your Servitude!
Why get bummed out about the increasing crackdown on our basic natural freedoms when you can learn to love your servitude? Join James in this week’s subscriber newsletter for an outside-the-box exploration of how a society can be manipulated into going along with the most outrageous nonsense.
For free access to this, and all of James’ subscriber editorials, please go to www.theinternationalforecaster.com
This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register here.
Filed in: Newsletter
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
Again, please address Youtube’s posting/pulling policy.
Excellent and creatively written article. This should be read by all the millenial hipsters who are so ensnared in the technocratic “sustainable development” surveillance state zombie ‘revolution’.
Granted, the way it’s implemented is crucial but what is wrong with sustainable development?
I suppose nothing is wrong with “sustainable development” per se, because we all want to conserve resources, not waste things, not pollute, etc. That is not what is being packaged into that loaded phrase which is a UN marketing gimmick for Agenda 21 for “public private partnership” (aka fascism). It imposes a top-down system of control of what THEY deem to be sustainable development through use of their technologies. It supplants human free will and the individual, with an ideology and system of a very, very sophisticated and subtle sort. And, in the process, it makes the slaves willingly and wantonly demand their own servitude. This is why most of the millenial hipster crowd(at least in my neck of the woods) are all spouting these programmed languages like zombies from “sustainable development” to “eco-friendly” to “carbon footprint” to “sustainable fashion” and other idioms of inanity.
You’re right, i didn’t register the quotation marks so i wasn’t aware that you were talking about the UN plan. My mistake.
Sustainable Development is a bad idea and an impossibility no matter how you go about implementing it.
Development could refer to many activities such as building sand castles on the beach however in this context in means economic developments or developments that result in economic benefits.
There are lots of different ways you can measure the health of an economy however ultimately you end up with a number – the goal being to make that number as big as possible, preferably infinite!
Even if you reduce resource usage required for each economic activity to near zero, you will still require a near infinite number of activities to produce a near infinite economic benefit, requiring a near infinite amount of resources.
Near infinite resource usage is not sustainable on a planet with finite resources.
We would be better off if we set our goal as self sufficiency. You are self sufficient when the amount you produce equals the amount you need to survive. There is a natural finite limit built in there.
Of course, self sufficiency does not suit the NWO agenda. If you don’t need anything from them, then how can they control you?
Sure, nothing that will come from the people running the system we currently live in will give us the answers so let’s forget about the UN plan. I agree that self sufficiency could be one of the answers to the question of how we can develop humanity a sustainable way so i find it kind of contradictory that you say that we should preferably have an infinite number showing the health of our economie. Maybe i’m misreading it but why should that number be so high? Sustainable development is ofcours about economics but i think it’s mostly about social justice. In countries and in the world as a whole.
T.T. I am naturally skeptical of the phrase “social justice.” That vague phrase is bandied about so much that it can mean anything its proponents deem it to mean. Part of the reason why I believe in natural law and voluntaryism, is that there is no way to fudge with it. When you have clear ideas of that which is just and unjust, you have clear rules of demarcation and what is prescribed and proscribed – e.g., the non-aggression principle. “Social justice” is usually premised on politics of envy and social control of one group by another based on some perceived inequality. In the process, to achieve their ends, said group of social justice warriors will usually resort to coercion and utilize institutions manifested by the State to subjugate said other said group who is perceived as the ‘problem’ and source of ‘injustice.’
I meant that we live in a system that’s created by and for the top while the rest of us are consuming debt slaves. In a system like that we can never have sustainable development.
I’m all in favor of natural law because it’s all about equality but voluntaryism…i’m not so sure. Maybe if we have some revolution of consciousness but if we look at the self-regulation after the de-regulations. It’s kind of a disaster. Furthermore i think that voluntaryism is mostly about ‘wants’ instead of ‘needs’. So i’m kind of sad to hear that you say that social justice is(also)premised on politics of envy. That sounds to me like a very capitalistic way of looking at things. For people who are poor or even starving it’s not about the money, it’s about having a decent life.
My personal preference would be to have no number at all (IE no economy!)
But if we create an economy and rate it by attaching a number to it, people naturally want it to be as large as possible or continuously growing (To infinity if that were practical)
Lets say I have shares in a car factory that has been paying a good dividend (or work there as an employee and have been earning a good wage)
One day management announces that the company has been very successful, they have now sold a car to everyone in the world who wants one and there is no longer a need to make new cars! (Apart from producing a few spares to replace ones in accidents)
In the interests of environmental sustainability the management decides to shut the factory down, fire all the employees and de-register the company.
Well no one is going to be happy. The employees are not going to be happy, the shareholders are not going to be happy, the takeaway store over the road who sold lunches to the factory workers is not going to be happy.
In practice management is not going to make a decision like that unless they have to. They will try whatever that can to maintain growth. For example, introduce planned obsolescence into the product so consumers are forced to buy new cars as the old ones break down prematurely or to move the factory overseas to a region with low paid workers so that they can lower the price of cars to encourage people to buy more cars than they need.
We are not producing cars because we need more cars, we are doing it to make this magic economy number grow!
After reading the above it sure seems as though those who wield covert influence over the public are unlikely to be seriously hampered in their long term objectives.
The conditioning and psychological control mechanisms have been refined over generations to a degree which now seems nigh impossible to overcome.
Have we, the globally connected and awakened minority, shown up to the party late?
I strive to remain positive and engaged in educating myself and others, but boy can it seem hopeless when viewed over a long enough time line…
And I had to be online to read this. ugh.
Yes this conversation is disconcertingly familiar…
However, I’ve come to realize that most of my students are deeply allergic to any form of doom and gloom conspiracy theory because they’ve grown up submerged in dark clouds:
The WTC went up in smoke when they were 5 or 6 years old. The ubiquitous war on terror was officially kicked off, and shortly thereafter, the austerity paradigm, global warming, Facebook spying…
their number one fear is not big brother or Isis or police states or cyberzombyism or even climate disasters (though all of these demons are lurking in their dark, overworked subconcious minds)
their greatest fear is of course the biggest of all uber-boogeymen: Unemployment.
They’ve been shock-doctrined into a chronic state of “blasé” and will do almost anything to secure employment. And they’re not interested in any nebulous phenomenon beyond that immediate goal. They’re suffering from an acute case of Maslow’s hierarchy.
So not only have the means of escape been forced into their baby fist in the form of (love your expression:) “fondleslabs” and joysticks and yes even sex toys while we’re at it,
but the inescapeable NEED to escape has also been carefully crafted, programmed into them from day one…
Not to mention the fact that they’ve never known “privacy”, only ambient threats;
So how can they prefer privacy over so-called security?
Generation gaps can be very, very handy not only in the careful confection of spontaneous-looking countercultures but also in reinforcing collective amnesia such as that concerning privacy or the potentially creative, instructive and innovative forces of boredom that have long-since been candy-crushed.
Nice article! Amongst all the drama we certainly can use a little humor now and then.
Regular conversation while I was growing up in the 70s, “Grandpa, I hate when you mute at commercials!” “Nonsense, they’re screaming, and brainwashing, just look at you!” “Huh? Wait, wait, just this one, turn it up, quick, this is my FAVORITE one!” Incrementality indeed. Great stuff James, you will be a well-received novelist someday too I suspect. 🙂
We’ve always been at war with Al-Qaeda, Al-Qaeda has always been our ally. A gram is better than a damn, so light it up! Before the world burns, and burns all our pot along with it. And we can post the pictures on Reddit.
On a serious note. Do you guys remember about 6 years or so ago, I believe it was Pepsi that did some mass bio-metric data gathering social experiment? They had people post pictures of their faces and align it to a mesh. They said it was to find your doppelganger. And I’m sure there were plenty that gladly played along.
http://mashable.com/2009/10/07/coke-zero-facial-profiler/#c9AOCpC9pZqi
sorry, it was Coke. COMPLETELY different.
It’s been ever so long since I’ve read 1984. What really sticks with me is the concept of “The Big Lie.” Sure, incrementalism is a definite problem. Mind creep. The BIG LIE, however is as much with us today as it was with our fascist superstars of yesteryear.
What the “Big Lie” means is that you can tell a general whopper and people generally acknowledge it as a whopper. But tell a truly monumental MEGA WHOPPER, repeat it 100 times from 10 different sources and the overwhelming majority of people tend to swallow it whole.
Look at the so called “Double Speak” of today:
1) Citizen’s United (Gee, citizens all agree / or : how about Fascist Corporations United?)
2) PATRIOT Act (Gee, it’s a time for all patriots to pull together / or was that quislings pulling down any patriot who dares speak out?)
3) War on Drugs (How about occupy Afghanistan in a 1.2 Trillion Dollar a year Government Enterprise to fund black ops, failing banks etc… while the DEA and local law enforcement jail average citizens, housekeepers and even school kids.)
4) War on Terror (How about War OF Terror on all who would dare oppose US Interests)
5) Land of the Free (Snort! How can anyone say that with corporatized jails with business booming to the tune of 25% US market share of all incarcerated persons. Who says the US is falling down on the job of infrastructure? We are perfectly positioned now with massive institutional facilities for future US domestic terrorist dissidents… all those ANTI-PATRIOTS out there.)
6) Home of the Brave (Uh huh… brave enough to send drone fleets into foreign schools and marketplaces.)
But hey…
Uncle Scam wants YOU!
Politicians stink and grow rich using the “Big Lie.” It’s a true classic, an all-time winner.