I’m not intending to get too political on this blog, but I decided to post this video at this time due to some conversations I have been having in online mediums. One that triggered this in particular was a fellow Englishman (I presume) who, in response to a discussion about Nigel Farage of UKIP stated that –
‘…its no good being “right”, you have to be successful.’
This is the kind of apologist nonsense that makes me frustrated. I gave a reply to this person along the lines of the fact that it’s people who are ‘right’ who are precisely what we need right now across the world, regardless of whether they are ‘successful’. Many of the ‘successful’ in the world (in this context) are currently there, not by merit but by favour. Consequently, they are only successful in one misleading sense of the word.
It’s the other types of success that count. If everyone gave up on telling the truth in order to grease the wheels and gain a dishonourable kind of success, where would that leave the disenfranchised masses? Where would that take us? We already have too many people talking from the side of their mouths in this manner.
I have no idea if Mr. Farage is purely a shill, placed there to placate those disenfranchised masses. It’s only wise to consider this possibility but I would rather have a possible shill speaking the truth than no-one at all fighting my corner. Mr. Farage is a modern day David who is taking on Goliath. Those who would criticise him in this way, for not being ‘successful’ are possibly shills themselves.
There are three quotes from Ayn Rand’s great book Atlas Shrugged that really strike a chord with me currently, because I feel that they accurately sum up the state of the world and how this affects self-starters with entrepreneurial intentions – you know, ExRats.
‘When a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law, men who use force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims, then money becomes its creators’ avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they’ve passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.’
‘When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion- When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing- when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors- when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you- when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice- you may know that your society is doomed.’
‘When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, ‘Who is destroying the world?’ You are.’
In this video Stefan Molyneux talks with Gerald Celente. Gerald talks about a probable QE3 in the USA and other Ponzi schemes. Stefan adds that the money-printing by governments/central banks around the Western world is like a default by proxy. Gerald agrees and follows up by pointing out that ‘when all else fails they take you to war.’
This is grim stuff, but try arguing with the logic that they are presenting. It’s history repeating itself – this has been played out before.
I always enjoy listening to Stefan Molyneux and always learn something from him, but I was really impressed with Gerald Celente too. He’s a likeable character with a very clear and direct point of view. I recommend taking the 23 minutes to watch this video. There are a lot of people suggesting that things are coming to a head. Tomorrow the EU meets up to try and save itself from it’s inevitable demise. The USA has 10 days to raise it’s debt ceiling.
When people like Stefan and Gerald start telling us that we’re right on the edge of the precipice, my ears prick up. Gerald proposes the solution of direct democracy (although his new site is not up and running yet).
I don’t know if that could be part of the solution or the solution itself, but we need a solution quickly and it sounds a lot better than what we currently have.
I didn’t find the first fifteen minutes of this Keiser report particularly special (unusually), but I was interested in the interview in the second half (you can fast forward to roughly halfway to watch this with the video slider.)
In this interview, Max talks to Guy McPherson (a Professor Emeritus) about peak oil, anthropogenic climate change and American debt. These are subjects that I am trying to learn more about because I am not sure where I stand on some of these issues. I have seen many discussions that appear to be completely polarised into one camp or the other, when it comes to the first two subjects.
For example, reading what British politicians have to say about renewable energy sources and carbon taxes only convinces me that they are operating a huge scam and are keen to jump on the gravy-train, not least because –
a) various family members of British politicians at the highest level, as well as Royal family members and many other significant people are known to be ‘earning’ money in the form of rebates for operating wind farms
b) they continually talk long term (to be expected in some obvious ways) on this issue, but not on others. For example, politicans talk about how we will all be burnt to a cinder or drowned by rising seas by 2050 if we don’t all panic right now and pay 20% more tax, but on every other issue they only ever openly think short term (IE they make sure that all large bills are due just after the next election, so that the political party merry-go-round passes all of the payments for the current incumbents’ profligacy onto the next bunch from the current opposition)
c) in the same manner as b) above, they conveniently ignore the fact that every single day we are financially indebting our children, grandchildren and many generations more into the future, as if it doesn’t matter one iota or isn’t actually occurring, yet when it comes to climate change, all of a sudden they are really concerned about future generations and the consequences of our current actions – (ExRat note – you either care or you don’t, you can’t have it both ways and care selectively about future generations, depending on the particular issue)
d) their speeches and articles are often full of bad science, fuzzy logic and complete and utter BS
e) scamming and manufacturing pocket-lining gravy-trains are what politicians do best
So I was interested in some of the things that Guy discussed. In a slightly depressing and pessimistic tone (common with this subject, for obvious reasons) he explains how a decade ago he decided to finish his primary investigations into climate change as he had already deduced that as a species we were heading for extinction.
After taking six months off to feel depressed and listen to Leonard Cohen records (I made that last bit up), he then considered that because the ‘titanic of peak oil was about to hit the iceberg of climate change’ all might not be lost, because the former could solve the latter by reducing emissions.
It was interesting to note Guy’s comments about why he gave up his work at university in Tucson, Arizona to move to New Mexico in order to live a different, more sustainable lifestyle. He describes Tucson as a city which is the classic apex of empire because Tucson must take it’s resources from outside of it’s boundaries just to survive.
He mentions a phrase that resonates with me and my thoughts on some of the hidden benefits of adopting an attitude that some ignorance is bliss, when he says, “once you see it, you can’t un-see it.”
He explains how it became difficult for him on a moral level to talk about the costs and consequences of industrialisation in his job, while living in a city that is the apex of empire. As someone who fled the city to the coast myself for somewhat similar reasons I can identify with this, although my reasons were more to do with feeling uncomfortable with the vibes given off by my fellow ‘industrialised’ city dwellers, as well as a desire for general change, some personal space and a longing to be close to the ocean – amongst some other things.
For example, I have developed a deep connection with the ocean as a kind of living, breathing entity which I enjoy connecting with every time I get close to it, or in it. I have a gut feeling that some of the ‘well of universal knowledge’ (that people like Napoleon Hill refer to in their books) can be accessed via the ocean. I don’t really know why, I just kind of believe it.
This interview presents a type of dilemma that I have run into many times myself when trying to find truth and educate myself about what is really going on in the world and the dilemma is that it is easy to find myself utterly deflated, frustrated, depressed (insert relevant adjectives here) when hearing intelligent and knowledgeable people explain how screwed we all are.
There can be an underlying feeling of helplessness and that things are out of control and that those with any sort of control are unfortunately psychopaths who ignore the consequences of their nest-feathering activities in terms of how it affects everyone else and the future of the planet and our species and due to this scenario, it’s self-perpetuating because the only people likely to join those psychopaths at the top are more psychopaths. But regardless of this, the dilemma is that I still want the truth and I still want to know what’s really going on.
It’s also plainly obvious how this affects other people, for example when you try and have a conversation with them about these issues. In my experience, the average person will violently oppose anyone else who appears to be in danger of ruining their ‘ignorance is bliss’ approach to day-to-day life. I understand this reaction, because there is not much worse than an unwanted ‘chicken little’ character who brings down everyones mood by repeatedly trying to make them understand that ‘the sky is falling.’
Due to this, I am careful not to ram these subjects down peoples throats and make a point of warning them and probing for acceptance along with the desire to learn more before presenting this kind of information to them and striking up a conversation about it. This is a difficult balance, because at the same time the most effective way to make a difference for someone like myself is to try and gently nudge people down the same road of self education, because it is my opinion that increased knowledge, when gained in a carefully managed way, is likely to lead to a better quality of life and that although the ‘ignorance is bliss’ approach has it’s merits in certaincarefully selected areas, it does not as a general, or blanket philosophy.
I hope that you find my thoughts and explanation interesting or useful, along with Max’s video. Keep calm and carry on. 😉
This film is all about the financial/banking crisis of 2008.
This is a Sony distribution and is narrated by Matt Damon. It was released in 2010 and is directed by Charles H. Ferguson. You can read a more detailed review on the Inside Job movie wikipedia page.
There are some revealing interviews in this film with people who were heavily involved at the higher levels of the crisis. It might not be anything close to justice, but for now it’s still good to see these people squirm.
This film comprises of four sections (within the one film). The first two sections present two problems and the second two present solutions. It is directed by Peter Joseph and is a quality production.
Part one gives a helpful and enlightening insight into the monetary system and fractional reserve banking, with helpful animations that assist in making a complex subject easier to understand – in other words, even dummies like me can learn something from it 😉
Part two features John Perkins, the author of ‘Confessions Of An Economic Hitman.’ I’ve just bought this book and will be reviewing it on this blog shortly, although I’ve already read many extracts from it already. It’s disturbing, but informative.
Part three presents The Venus Project and discusses their alternative to the capitalist system which we currently employ.
Part four discusses the idea that wide scale ignorance is responsible for most of our social problems and how this ignorance is maintained, by whom and why.
This film is just over two hours long, but I’ve watched it twice myself and it’s better than almost anything I’ve ever seen on TV – back in the days when I used to indulge in such activities. If you read much of this blog, you will probably notice that giving up watching broadcasted mainstream TV was one of my lifestyle experiments that I decided to stick with for the long term.
I strongly recommend at least giving this experiment a trial for a while, because learning the habit of exercising as much choice as possible is a liberating experience and over time it’s difficult not to come to the conclusion that mainstream TV is dumbed-down, insidious, manipulative and dangerous and that social engineers are having a field day with it, pumping out it’s tawdry subliminal subversion on a daily basis in the majority of homes.