The global elite: a (hopefully) sober discussion

[nosos]

Im also puzzled when some people dismiss the idea of 'people with money and power getting together to form a strategy of some sort, as being 'no big deal'.

True its not

but this summarial dismissal seems to undercut all the possible effects that they have and reduce it down to the ordinary

No it doesn't - it just objects to its mythologisation as obscuring the actual political and economic realities at play.

Re: the NWO or however you chose to phrase the 'idea' - I am fascinated by how far their ideas and methods reach.

Then you're very much in the conspiratorial mindset: you're reducing a complex system to the scheming agency of a small group.

 

[8den]

It probably needs its own discussion. In the teaching of writing one can do genre analysis. Such an action reveals certain kinds of language being used and being organised in certain kinds of ways according to the text type. Eg, you could recognise a romance novel against a sun newspaper report against an encyclopedia entry, and so on. By analysing each genre, the writing student is better able to learn how to write in good English.

Write English well.

Oh fuck me, you mean you need to study this to figure out the difference between Mills and Boon and the Sun's writing styles.

Clarice felt her corset tighten and bussom heave. But it was not the high seas that effected her so. The steal eyes of the Captain, pouring over her affected her in hitherto unimagined ways

Watch sexy Clarice get her buns out for the boys! Only in Phorah! The Sun!

In general we have to write according to the genre of text. You can see how language is to an extent restricted to the writer.

Now, i've only heard of this being applied to written language. But if one were to do a similar analysis over spoken language i feel similar findings would occur.

Ah so we're back to making shit up now are we.

To now suddenly leap a few steps forward, i think that people in society are not as free as they think they are, and that we shape our language according to our work situation (and during play time too, but to a less extent).

So if I have this clear you think I speak differently when speaking to clients and co workers.

Fuck me Fela do you think this counts as insight?

Of courseI use different language when speaking to co workers than to mates down the pub.

I find it difficult to visualise an inner cabal of people deliberately plotting how to run the world to their benefit, but i do find it credible to believe that those who find themselves with immense power find a certain lexicon of language that they must fit in with. And i think that language dictates behaviour.

I tried to keep it short!

Jesus fucking christ. One needs only to look at the incident where Blair and Bush accidently remained miked up at a summit. "Yo Blair" "Syria needs to sort this shit out" Statesmen when speaking informally to each use different language than when they are making formal statements.

Yet again Fela, I am yet again forced to ask. What the fuck are you on about?

 

[ymu]

I find it difficult to visualise an inner cabal of people deliberately plotting how to run the world to their benefit, but i do find it credible to believe that those who find themselves with immense power find a certain lexicon of language that they must fit in with. And i think that language dictates behaviour.

I think there's a lot in that Fela. Expectation/assumption from your immediate social group shapes your behaviour and to an extent your beliefs about the acceptability of that behaviour.

A mate of mine splits his time between a bunch of activist lefties and some pretty rough sexist homophobic wankers at work. He auto-adjusts his attitudes and behaviour (only occasionally getting mixed up).

Behaviour has a lot to do with expectation and pragmatism, and personal ambition and greed an' all that too.

 

[warren]

Ok, loads of sense there, but "New World Order" was a phrased coined by the likes of HG Wells and used by the likes of Bush Snr who are part of that pupported group, so it aint unreasonable really.

"truisms or nonsense"

Ok, we could try to discuss the bits between, which there are sure to be regardless of the name(s) we call this group.

Mass biometric databased populations?
Cashless society?
Microchipped populations?
Sterilisation through vaccination?
Poisoining populations through industrial flouridide in water?
CIA bringing crack to LA?
Assinations and coups like Kennedy or the attempt in Venezuala?

Some of these may be bunk, some are demonstrable fact. Loose affiliations of the ruling class or result or fairly tightly planned strategy?

Surely sterilising the proletariat is good as it relieves the burden on the wealthy.

 

[fela fan]

I think there's a lot in that Fela. Expectation/assumption from your immediate social group shapes your behaviour and to an extent your beliefs about the acceptability of that behaviour.

A mate of mine splits his time between a bunch of activist lefties and some pretty rough sexist homophobic wankers at work. He auto-adjusts his attitudes and behaviour (only occasionally getting mixed up).

Behaviour has a lot to do with expectation and pragmatism, and personal ambition and greed an' all that too.

That's exactly the sort of thing i'm talking about. Your mate is a good example of it. At what point though can he actually be himself and think and speak for himself? We are all individuals, ourselves, and we are all another identity that exerts itself in society.

I'd love to hear about some of his occasional mix ups!!

I feel that those with huge wealth and with the related upbringing that one is all powerful will most certainly act and speak in certain ways according to their situation in life. Humility for example would be nowhere to be found.

When we start a new job, we are pretty quick at tuning in as to what we can or can't say, and how we ought to behave. Group belonging innit!

The wise people of course don't give a stuff what others think and just say and do what they please. But those aren't the people that are the subject of this thread.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Simultanuous plans are now in place to biometrically database large populations, is this mere coincidence or do people get together and talk abuot it?.

Remind me: why do the Bilderbergs want to biometrically database large populations?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Ok, loads of sense there, but "New World Order" was a phrased coined by the likes of HG Wells and used by the likes of Bush Snr who are part of that pupported group, so it aint unreasonable really.

I think Bush talked about new world order because, with the collapse of the USSR, there was about to be one.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Ok, loads of sense there, but "New World Order" was a phrased coined by the likes of HG Wells and used by the likes of Bush Snr who are part of that pupported group, so it aint unreasonable really.

"truisms or nonsense"

Ok, we could try to discuss the bits between, which there are sure to be regardless of the name(s) we call this group.

Mass biometric databased populations?
Cashless society?
Microchipped populations?
Sterilisation through vaccination?
Poisoining populations through industrial flouridide in water?
CIA bringing crack to LA?
Assinations and coups like Kennedy or the attempt in Venezuala?

Some of these may be bunk, some are demonstrable fact. Loose affiliations of the ruling class or result or fairly tightly planned strategy?

Yes, I can see how bringing crack to LA and the cashless society, are part of a tightly planned strategy...

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Mass biometric databased populations: Fact. NIR, Real ID - both very likely to be extended beyond original populations in US and UK. Schools now have permission to fingerprint kids. Nice.

Microchipped populations? Ditto, though technology is more available than many would like to think. again, being presented as "trendy" in some circles.

Sterilisation through vaccination? Possible.

Poisoning populations through industrial flouridide in water? fact, though it is not called "poisoning" obviously.

.

So they want to chip us, and database us, but also kill us with flouride at the same time?

Why not just up the flouride dosage, kill us now, and save money on microchips?

But a dead consumer is a bad consumer, so why was it again that they're killing us?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Well I obviously know what "genre" means and what "analysis" means and have heard the two put together. What are you thinking of in this context?

While you're at it, you can bone up on rhetorical structure theory.

 

[Barking_Mad]

No it doesn't - it just objects to its mythologisation as obscuring the actual political and economic realities at play.


Then you're very much in the conspiratorial mindset: you're reducing a complex system to the scheming agency of a small group.

Small groups like Governments? Just because I suggested it's interesting to see where one thing starts and another stops doesn't make me of a 'conspiratorial mindset'. It makes me curious.

 

[fela fan]

It makes me curious.

Then that makes you a conspiracy theorist, didn't you know mate?!