The term "New World Order" sounds like something out of George Orwell's epic novel, 1984. However, a new academic paper comes close to proposing just that. Social engineering is discussed in the study to be published in BioScience in March 2013 titled "Social Norms and Global Environmental Challenges." The focus is how scientists can work with governments to manipulate the great unwashed into accepting unpopular environmental policies for their own good. The American authors uses "New World Ordery" phrases like "thought leader" and "choice architecture."
The report is not yet published, but is available ahead of print. The very first sentence in the abstract gives a clear indication of where these scientists are heading, "Government policies are needed when people's behaviors fail to deliver the public good." The writers suggest that scientists should conduct "targeted research on the emergence of social norms," in other words, scientists should figure out methods how to best manipulate populations to accept a government's agenda.
The government, after all, is "uniquely obligated to locate the common good and formulate its policies accordingly." It is unclear who among this crazy team made the decision that the role of the government was something other than to support those populations in which they serve; but it is good to know that these scholars have determined that they, and governments, know best.
They cite former Obama Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein's work on "choice architecture" (or "nudge") in order to "alter the architecture of decisionmaking ...to move people in great numbers toward better...behaviors."
The paper recommends using "support teams of scholars and policymakers to evaluate the potential impacts of different policy interventions on behaviors, social norms, and intended outcomes," potentially supported by the United Nations.
They acknowledge that some people have adapted already to the desired behaviors that will reduce such pressing concerns as "controlling fertility, reducing material consumption, biking to work..." but in order to make relevant environmental changes, they assert with typical academic arrogance, "Substantial numbers of people will have to alter their existing behaviors to address this new class of global environmental problems." This, they argue, will "ensure that the burdens of proenvironment behavior are widely shared, which increases the probability of measurable positive outcomes." It seems that these academics have determined that they alone know what masses need to do (for their own good), and as scholars, the authors of this study recommend that smart people like them should help the governments figure out how to control people. Sickening, but not unusual.
Manipulating the Masses
Take for example, the authors' interest in "controlling fertility." Consider renowned bioethicist Daniel Callahan, who founded the premiere bioethics think tank in the world, the Hastings Center. He was given a grant to study abortion in 1968 from the Ford Foundation and the Population Council (abortion was never about "women's health"), and in an article from last year, the prominent scholar speaks of euphemisms, a tool used by academics to justify abortion. He says:
"Clearly, many of my fellow advocates sought euphemisms for the actual procedure, any phrase or word that would avoid acknowledging that abortion is the outright killing of fetuses, often by chopping them up, crushing their skulls, and otherwise destroying them. Better to talk about 'emptying the uterine content' or 'terminating pregnancy.' A recent and notable addition to the list is to speak not of infanticide but of 'post-birth abortion.'"
The cleansing of language is how abortion came to be accepted, just as it is currently being used to discuss rationing (i.e. "death panels"), which will inevitably come from President Obama's Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) recommendations. Thankfully, legislation has been proposed that would repeal the IPAB.
Hopefully, this "academic study" will be roundly dismissed and the authors, instead of creating a New World Order, can find something productive to do with their time.
Image Source (Cass Sunstein): Nadav Kander for The New York Times
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 235
They're interesting phrases. Can you copy and paste them in their relevant contexts? When I searched the document they weren't there.
"Governments can alter people’s behaviors by changing the conditions (often called choice architecture) influencing those behaviors."
and
"Thought leaders in the academy need to draw on what we know from the research summarized above—including the roles of incentives and regulations, the interplay between behaviors and values, and the appeal to standards in communities outside of the academy with which academics may identify—to begin questioning and potentially changing existing academic norms (Ehrlich et al. 2012)."
Yep. STILL creepy, even in context.
The rest of us should focus on writing honest and interesting content.
I said,
"It seems that these academics have determined that they alone know what masses need to do (for their own good), and as scholars, the authors of this study recommend that smart people like them should help the governments figure out how to control people."
And here is the abstract: I would like you to tell me, specifically, how I misrepresented it (did you read the "study"?):
"Government policies are needed when people’s behaviors fail to deliver the public good. Those policies will be most effective if they can stimulate long-term changes in beliefs and norms, creating and reinforcing the behaviors needed to solidify and extend the public good. It is often the short term acceptability of potential policies, rather than their longer-term efficacy, that determines their scope and deployment. The policy process should include a consideration of both timescales. The academy, however, has provided insufficient insight on the coevolution of social norms and different policy instruments, thus compromising the ability of decision makers to craft effective solutions to the society’s most intractable environmental problems. Life scientists could make fundamental contributions to this agenda through targeted research on the emergence of social norms."
Feel free to self-provide even more examples of how you twist to create your desired Glenn Beckish misrepresentations of reality. Since virtually every thought statement you offer does so you should not find a shortage of examples. Feel free to continue pandering to your paranoid ideologues.
The rest of us will focus on providing honest content.
Goodbye.
People trying to communicate eschew NewSpeak...
Plain English is a lost art...
Amazing the same old folk come out to disparage, yet offer no real comment.
The simple fact that they do not see how creepy the whole idea is, and how dangerous it is - speaks volumes about their mental abilities to reason, discern, and assimilate basic fact into some semblance of logic, or morality.
In short - the grain of their brain is 3 peck shy of a bushel!
Jo Jo thinks the former...he has the air of th zealot...
This is what I "hear" when I read something like the paragraph you quoted above;
"[I think] Government policies are needed when people’s behaviors fail to deliver [what I think of as] the public good. Those policies will be most effective if they can stimulate long-term changes in beliefs and norms [to conform with mine], creating and reinforcing the behaviors needed to solidify and extend [what I think of as] the public good . . .
The writer is simply a narcissistic imbecile to me, who does not realize his imagination is not an oracle of ultimate truth and justice, but just one man's imagination. They speak like that because they really don't know that's what they are looking at in their head. The narcissist cannot see their mind as just one man's mind, that basic fact of life is simply not available to them, it seems to me. So they become control freaks . .
Or as we say in the UK one sandwich short of a picnic basket
All this to expand into outer space with free enterprise leading the way.
President Obama wise choice to give approval of a manned landing on a near earth orbiting asteroid is two fold.
One is to allow scientist to develop ways to avoid near earth collision and number two for conducting mining explorations, searching for commercial raw materials.
That is why a private enterprise company Space X was allowed to launch from Florida.
But you go ahead on living in the past if you want too, the future is what we make it and it is knocking at the door. Fear and doomsday in not on the table.
lol
What? You don't know what this means, Vic:
"All this to expand into outer space with free enterprise leading the way.
President Obama wise choice to give approval of a manned landing on a near earth orbiting asteroid is two fold."
And I thought it was soooo obvious.
How and why do you think we have the problems that exist in the middle-east. Have you ever read about Lawrence of Arabia, the history not the movie. Map lines on a piece of parchment have and can be easily change as do nations or civilizations.
Everything changes, all the time.
The system of governance will be as we determine it to be, the free enterprise system will soon demand it.
wikipeda
An artificial uterus (or womb) is a theoretical device that would allow for extracorporeal pregnancy or extrauterine fetal incubation (EUFI)[1] by growing an embryo or fetus outside of the body of a female organism that would normally internally carry the embryo or fetus to term.
Interface (artificial placenta)
An interface between the supplier and the embryo or fetus may be entirely artificial, e.g. by using one or more semipermeable membranes such as is used in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).[2]
There is also potential to grow a placenta using human endometrial cells. In 2002, it was announced that tissue samples from cultured endometrial cells removed from a human donor had successfully grown.[6][7] The tissue sample was then engineered to form the shape of a natural uterus, and human embryos were then implanted into the tissue. The embryos correctly implanted into the artificial uterus' lining and started to grow. However, the experiments were halted after six days to stay within the permitted legal limits of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) legislation in the United States.[1]
Also, a human placenta may theoretically be transplanted to inside an artificial uterus, but the passage of nutrients across this artificial uterus remains an unsolved issue.[1]
But then a non-believer like yourself Renee who works in medicine my understand the near future possibilities.
Just so you know the United Nation is not a country it only existence is dependent on the the contributing members that support it.
Me and Gen. Colin Powell and now Secretary of Defense Sen. Chuck Hagel will implement F.E.M.A. plan no problemo. Oh yeah, love it!
Having two Vietnam experience Veterans should be patriotic enough. I'll take them any day over Rush Limburger, Glen"the westler" Beck and Sean Hannity all who served their country in uniform, oh wait, naw that's not true. Sorry about that, just Powell and Hagel are the true Veterans. So go ahead build your bunker and pile up your weapons it's O.K. with me.
However, Vic the loner cowboy that you are, and don't need no F.E.M.A. around here and stay off my land. I got it, I won't step on Mr. Gilmore lawn no more, not me. But make sure you pay your taxes you don't want to bring to much attention to yourself.
First of all, you know nothing about me, so keep me out of your psychosis. If you wish to give up the power of America to an outside entity, which will dissolve the Constitution and deem it obsolete, that is your problem, but don't think for a moment that my stance is anti-American. I am speaking daily in defense of the very foundation of this nation; you are speaking of destroying that foundation. The sad part is that you are clueless that you are even taking that road. Again, I cannot help your deficiencies.
Don't play your Internet mind games with me. They don't work. Once you cross that line and make your words personal toward me, your real agenda is revealed. You have your own problems with what is before you, especially since you do not even see them.
Not the 18 to 25 years old reservist and those in the regular services who where born and raised in every part of this beautiful country. Those young folks will just suit up and follow their orders.
Just think that maybe one or two, even 20 of them will be deploy back to their local area to tell Aunt and Uncle or their moms and dads and friend to get on the truck or else I'll shoot ya! It's not going to happen Vic.
Two scenarios that might cause major movement of a mass population.
A catastrophic natural disaster and or an infectious pandemic. Both are possible.
But Vic my man, just stay in your bunker that's well camouflage and hide there until it's all over.
Internet mind games, seriously personal. Buddy don't know never want to meet ya. My real agenda is reveal, oh really and just what must that be?
Bite me...That was unnecessary.
May I suggest you go back and read your full comment you sent to me. It literally is worded in a manner that simply does not make sense. You are on your own. I have no time for your lack of understanding of what you are pretending to understand. Your personal attack is an obvious indication that you have nothing substantial to say. You just keep praising Obama and watch what happens in the next four years.
Vic all you have to do is stop responding on this thread, I mean really it's easy.
One of the reasonable arguments that I think can be made, but that I would not necessarily argue for strongly, more hypothetical is to back up the militaristic rhetoric of what the US is doing in the world to specific measurements and goals involved in redoing some of the world offending countries one by one. With appropriate support and buy in this would give direction to the world and polarize good and bad actors.
Funny that the actions of the US in the world community have been to ruin the brand and sour people on the very thought of this, and even though we have an all volunteer army.
Now, getting really byzantine, is it possible that this could be done on purpose to remove the US as an effective police force in order to "reduce government/governance" on the global level for those nice corporations.
Just a hypothetical.
As Fear and madness abounds and it is relentless but I will remain as cool as a cucumber. Until then, I'll be working on my bracket and I'll beat President Obama's bracket this year for sure.
Oh my goodness Richard don't you know what problems we are having in Europe? First what they do is take away most of your home grown laws and and then they make laws that every country has to abide with, they can veto any new law that you make It does not matter if the law is good for the country thats making it you are told that its against the rules or the law to make such a law.
Your borders are inundated with people that can come in from any country in that Union. This means that the people that are born in that country stand a good chance of not getting a job because the people that are allowed to come into your country get first pickings and if they don't they go crying to the law courts saying that they are being discriminated against.
If your people are entitled to any of your country's benefits they are first in line in the queue and again if they don't get those benefits then their first stop is at a lawyers office to again say they are being discriminated against.
When they get those benefits most of the money goes right out of the country and back home into bank accounts of the family's that they have left there taking valuable money out of your country.
Many but not all will be criminals who will see your country as a soft touch and your crime rate will escalate (if you think its bad now you aint seen nothing yet)
If you have like we have where you will see yourselves bailing out country's such as Argentina and all the rest of the South American country's who are losing money hand over fist, it wont matter that your own country is in dire straits your richer than those South American country's so your told to bail them out and all the while you are doing this your own country is getting worse and worse and then you will find that all those country's that you have bailed out will stab you in the back.
You wont have the $ they will come up with a new currency one that sounds so good that most country's will run towards with open arms and then after a few years reality sets in and you find yourselves wishing you still had your own currency one that you can control if things get bad and believe me it will I just thank god that my country saw a little sense and did not go down that road and our Government at the time fought tooth and nail to opt out a Government that believed in just one currency would not have done.
It all sounds nice and rosy when they draw you into what we have in Europe but I can tell you from experience its far from rosy, Oh and did I tell you how much your country will pay to be in this big club? my small country pays £20 billion a year with a £3 billion rebate that we are now fighting very hard to hang on to and look like losing.
For goodness sake hang onto your own destiny or like my country 40 years down the line you will find yourselves fighting to get out and if that ever happens you will find that its an uphill battle that you may win but more than likely lose because all Governments yours and mine love this idea of putting all the country's together as one and once in you will find its like the Mafia easy to get in far harder to get out of.
I wont mention the outright corruption other than to say if any one thinks you have Government corruption now just wait until you get what we have.
I wont mention the outright corruption other than to say if any one thinks you have Government corruption now just wait until you get what we have.
Brilliant. Thank you, Graham
I thought it was in worse shape than we are???
I guess, like Rick in Casablanca, "I was misinformed".
Richard P. Feb 27, 2013, 12:28am EST
I'm all for it, to the next frontier, Space and Beyond. Nations of the earth will be passe in the next 50 years. The world maps of countries will be broken up into regional grids, like the current United Europe model.
Richard P. Feb 27, 2013, 1:06am EST
Europe use to be several distinct countries and now many are in the E.U. with common boarders and currency. This did exist before. Wake up!
No mention of my Queen on this post from you. That was on another post and another thread. And I believe I answered that quip when I said $1.4 billion for your Head of State and all the people who hang about with him and £35 million for my Head of State who actually works for a living 7 days a week and is highly respected throughout the world perhaps not by you but people that actually matter in the world. Maybe its your head of State that might like to get of the dole after all not many people outside of your circle actually respect him or her his wife for that matter.
How tacky can a wife of the head of a Country get?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/02/25/why-was-michelle-obama-at-the-oscars/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/25/michelle-obama-oscars-dress-iran
I said I think the Queen and the Royals need to get off the dole.
They pay their freight. Millions hop on British Airways to check out their homes, buy a souvenir. They pay tax.
Economically, they're a boon to their nation.
Socio-politically, regarded but unobtrusive. Heads of state could be worse. They are , here. Expensive, too.
Historically at a low ebb, powerwise. Though Elizabeths' daddy did switch up Chamberlain for Churchill when the chips were down and saved the world.
From a "New World order", no less. What a hateful term. Liz should have fired Blair the second it came from his mouth. Any leader endorsing it should be shown the door.
The idea is facist to the bone, that liberty be overridden for some given cause. Nothing good ever needed to be channeled at gunpoint. Protected, yes.
5 woofs...kinda syncopated...I thought you were black...
At our last election when we did not have one party that won a majority vote to run my country and the Lib Dems did a deal with the Conservatives to form a coalition Government the Queen could have sent Cameron and Clegg back to the ballot box until a majority verdict was forthcoming as Head of State she alone formally appoints Prime Ministers. Just before the last General Election there was talk of her doing just that as it was becoming increasingly clear to everyone in the UK there would be no clear winning political party.
A subtle and graceful Lady. A credit to your country.
What would her thoughts be on this, I wonder. Does she tweet?
But seriously, it is not the great unwashed that are getting the most manipulation it is us. We are the ones who eat the junk, buy the junk, keep the corporatocracy flowing with capital, even when it has to be stolen from us .. which is probably why the corporations figure they don't owe us any thanks.
We are given distracting, conflicting and divisive realities and set to fight amongst each other while the people behind the corporations take over the government by putting their appointees in at the top and slowly shrinking it until there is as little democracy left in the government as there is in our corporate tyrannies, that is supposed to be free-speech, and freedom of expression ... liberty.
There is no doubt there needs to be some social manipulation of society. We used to do it pretty well in my generation. We moved from being an apartheid state to one where there is a good chance racial prejudice will not totally screw up the lives of most minorities ... in short we made progress by being manipulative. They use these kind of manipulations to fight AIDS in Africa by putting up ads that ridicule men who go around having multiple wives and girlfriends and getting them and their children infected with their womanizing ways.
The average person in this world has a less than engages relationship with their society's and government - most are purposefully disenfranchised for some reason or another ... a great one in Islamic societies is that the clergy knows what God wants and is best for you. We did a little of this and still do here, but thankfully we are also free to laugh at it.
It's time for what is hidden to be uncovered and for people not to be manipulated but co-opted and partnered with. If corporations can be people, why cannot people be corporations ... why can't every person be their own corporation, and do just like the corporations do ... we could all pay no taxes, until everything collapses, and then we can start over fairly instead of being stuck with this nonsense coercive status quo that is unfair.
The world just can't end now I got my two tickets for the Monterey Jazz Festival this year.
The ideological difference in a nutshell is that the left believes this is the job of the government and "scientists" and other so-called "experts". "Social manipulation" assumes that people are too stupid to come to the right conclusions on their own. The problem is that when you throw power into the mix, the "social manipulation" is really more about an agenda, rather then integrity or doing the right thing. This is the road to #tyranny.
Unfortunately, that Road is well-trodden...and there is no roundabout. The sickness is endemic.
"The problem is that when you throw power into the mix, the "social manipulation" is really more about an agenda, rather then integrity or doing the right thing. This is the road to #tyranny." -
...and I quite agree.
Ah, but you should know me better than this! :)
Rene, that was just purely BS. First, I don't know what the Left believes and I'm sure there are many different interpretations or ideas on that, but your mind just latches on to things and then says with not proof, argument or qualification "this, is the difference" as if there is somehow some difference between people other than they have honest differences in ideas or experiences. What you do is unproductive and just plain evil, but I guess that is what allows some people in the right to feel they are right and must break the law or go outside the mechanism of discussion because they are so right or superior.
That's how your ideas and ideology so quickly gets ugly and how you dehumanize people - it is ugly, and you constantly do it, and you pander to the worst in others with this kind of thinking, and your gang mentality here. You say something and then your "regulars" chime in like dodo birds agreeing with you, and there is simple no discussion or sharing of ideas other then how to reword the so-called ideology you support. No wonder you feel the need to rig society, you cannot compete.
And by the way, I'm fairly sure that no matter what happens experts have a great hand in engineering how society and the economy is going to work, look the finance and banking industry and see how they do it, and they do it for money and their own interpretation of how what they call the free-market should work. Or Monsanto imposing their own ideas of how nature should work, or the military experts sucking up all our money and picking fights to make us look ugly to ensure their visions.
Really, that was one of the most clueless doctrinaire statements I've ever heard you make.
That's how your ideas and ideology so quickly gets ugly and how you dehumanize people
Sorry Bruce, I treat people as individuals. It is those who refer to people as the masses or the great unwashed who dehumanize them.
Human physics is such that individuals act and think completely differently as individuals than they do as masses...
What you do is unproductive and just plain evil
That's how your ideas and ideology so quickly gets ugly and how you dehumanize people
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
I'll see your gentle chide and raise you an apocalyptic epithet...
The left believes in power for powers sake. Nothing else.
Thanks for the laugh.
No heir looks promising at this point.
The fascist experiment will collapse under its own weight. It's a nasty little bug that crept back 5 decades after killing its previous host.
There'll be a renaissance for liberty. The idea of throwing a combine half composed of dictators and tyrants the power of life or death over human beings to change weather or birthrates will be a "what the hell were they thinking?" blip.
They think it's a good idea, if they hold the hammer. It's not.
sound money...individual responsibility...rule of law...civil rights...
That is.
You "progressives" are using the climate change problem to further your phony "liberal" totalitarian agenda...Your cohorts above don't even bother to deny it...
Paranoi is understandable to a degree. What I don't get is how can you be so selective in your paranoia? Climate scientists are out to get you while your fellow right wingers don't give you the slightest concern?
I mean give a bit of study of what life was like in your right wing dictatorships.
I perceive the "liberal" totalitarians to be a greater threat right now than the right wing totalitarians...
BTW...Right wing is supposed to be totalitarian as the words imply...
Left wing is supposed to be liberal...I don't mind totalitarian thought or expression as long as it is properly lableled...
BTW...it is not "paranoi" if the threat is real...
Calling the Dutch boy with his finger in the dike "paranoi" is the first "liberal" totalitarian tactic...
Were the liberals properly instructed by this? Well, you know liberals. You just can not reach your liberal through reason, and these liberals, intractible and impervious to reason as they were, started singing a leftist song.
And so our man Pinochet, a right thinker of the top drawer, ordered them all shot.
Now that is how you deal with liberal totalitarianists.
No more problem with totalitarianists anymore.
And they all, those who didn't "disappear" never to be heard from again, lived happily ever after with a right wing heaven.
And we could have that here to. All that's needed is we keep our guard up andonly ever listen to one another and never allow our minds to be contaminated by wrong thoughts and lies that the liberal totalitarianists conjur up from whole cloth.
Straw Man argument, Charles...stick to the point...
Aint no such a thing. Liberal lies, I'm tellin' you.
My point: If it's a totalitarian hell hole you don't like, be a practical problem solver who can work with other people of diverse opinions.
Ummmm - you do see the irony - the study knows what to do to make everyone better - and there is no deviating from it. There is no "working with other people of diverse opinions"
Wake up, Ashurst. Pinochet was a Leftist. There is no such unit as "right wing" Dictatorship.
AND NOW, BACK TO OUR REGULARLY-SCHEDULED PROGRAMMING.
Course, your liberal is never going to admit this. And why?
"And rule as a collective benevolent dictatorship forever...The reason they are so shrill is that they are controlled by this fundamental logical flaw and they can't see past it...
All evidence, human history and experience to the contrary notwithstanding... "
Thank God we people on the right aren't like that.
BTW...deflection, straw man...
I don't have a problem with people advocating dictatorship...what bothers me is that they call themselves "liberals"...
The only true liberals are libertarians...
Fact is...right goes to the right until it becomes left and vice versa...
Fact is:
The furthest Right....Anarchy.
The furthest Left...TYRANNY.(dictatorship)
Again...Hitler...far right...tyranny...
Stalin...far left...tyranny...
But...I think you (we) need to get off the right/left scale because there are infinite points that ate not gradations on that line...
Libertarians are neither right nor left...
Right is suppose to favor the king and...
Left is supposed to favor democracy...
In today's world, the words havew no meaning...
There is no such thing as a far-Right "Tyranny;" for, a Tyranny, by its definition, is Tyrannical, and not Anarchical.
But Jo Jo will always get a biscuit from me, because he is one of my favourites :)
Just when you think you've heard everything.
I have been trying to make this point for a long time...
The words have lost all meaning...
Historically, Right is the direction of more gov't and Left is the direction of less... (e.g. the Tories who favored the King were Right and the Patriots were Left...this expression took root in the English Parliament because the Tories sat on the right and the democrats on the left).
These days, Right has taken on the meaning "anti-"liberal" but since the "liberals" are really extreme rightists, everything is backwards...But, that doesn't automatically mean that all anti-"liberals" are left because there are an infinite number of political positions off the right/left linear...
I hope this clears it up for you...
I do understand what you're saying. It's simply incorrect is all. This is the Republic of The United States, not the Parliament of England. And Jo Jo is still one of my favourites.
:)
The REASON? Because Leftists love Communism...yet all Dictators are Leftists. Therefore, in order to deflect from the horror of the Left, they use Hitler (a Fascist Dictator) to do it...by calling him a "right-winger." It is their ONLY HOPE to revisionist History...and to deflect and deny the HORRORS of LEFTIST TYRANNIES.
This is FALSE.
Leftism...Tyranny.
Right.....Anarchy.
Hitler was a TYRANT, not an ANARCHIST.
I don't want to be pedantic but this fundamental linguistic glitch impedes clear thought...
Not far right or left of any other ideology, it's nobodys bitch. Learn it love it be it.
Hitler, Stalin, two sides of a coin. The reality of their misantropy places them left, the Germans actually understanding what money is puts them right of far left, both are disgusting. They were the last word in statism, and statism is evil.
"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." --Adolf Hitler
At the same time as General Pinochet living next door to him was a person called General Leopoldo Galtieri, I probably would never have heard of him but the bastard decided to invade my countrymen. Now the thing is old Galtieri may he rest in ever lasting fires of hell the bastard was a Dictator and he waged war on his fellow countrymen who were of the left persuasion to the point of chucking them from helicopters alive but bound into the cold waters of the South Atlantic a few Nuns and Priests met their master that way. I think its safe to say that both left and right are capable of being absolute bastards to get what they want out of life.
The only problem is that Big Bro Totalitarians (or, as they call themselves- "liberals") don't really understand the concept of constitutional limitation on federalized power...We have all learned that they just use it as a foot in the door toward dictatorship...or, at least, unelected oligarcy...
Yall.
They misperceive human nature...they really think that a committee of unelected "academic" rulers will come to office in altruistic wisdom, uncorrupted by self interest and stay that way...
And rule as a collective benevolent dictatorship forever...The reason they are so shrill is that they are controlled by this fundamental logical flaw and they can't see past it...
All evidence, human history and experience to the contrary notwithstanding...
Ditto ditto ditto again.
Your eternal liberal.
He clearly has no logical or factual response...
Only fools argue with fools...
My reading of history has plenty examples of totaliarian regimes. What I take from it is that right/left liberal/conservative believer/aganostic ideological isn't the main thing. The main thing about totalitarian regimes is here an inexpensive low tech way to subdue people.
Step one: Conjur up the enemy narrative along the lines of "The enemy is relentlesslys only ever about one and only one thing: to get you. And there's but one remedy. Obedience. Total complete unquestioning unhesitating obediance."
Thank God we on the right never fall prey to that sort of thinking. Right, Renee?
It's kind of how a democracy works, wouldn't you say?
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981854471
The subjects fit together perfectly...
"Social Norms and Global Environmental Challenges" is intended as an alternative to top down authoritarian rule. The idea being here are the environmental problems. People resist having governments address these problems. Is there any way through an understanding of human psychology to motivate people to address these problems themselves?
Man oh man, you people are hard to please.
Can't have governments address these problems. No. That would be Orwelian.
Can't do anything outside government to address these problems. That would be way too "New World Order."
Where does that leave us?
Here's my suggestion of how to completely take the wind out of the sails of these totalitarian liberals:
Take personal responsibility to solve the environmental problems youselves.
Conservatives are not anti-environment - they are anti-tyranny.
Already do. And you can tell those who tyrannically manipulate to keep their hands to theirs.
Unless they're dumping their garbage on your lawn, in which case, you might have some justification in trying to manipulate their thinking. You might have a go at reasoning with them, urging them to change their behavior.
Or, failing that, because they claim that the garbage doesn't exist for example - "you can't prove that garbage exists" - the only other recourse is the law.
Exactly. In theory anyway. If conservatives would only put conservatism into the practice, tyranny would vanish.
Today's right wing is the antithesis of conservatism. That's the basic problem
That does not look like a biodegradable cup to me, but what do I know?Those recycling plants generate a lot of waste. Not to mention all of the power the plastic cup plant takes to create the cup, the people who drive to work use gas in non-recyclable cars only to create the cup on non-biodegradable machines. Then they drive home and stop to get non-green gas for their cars! But the cup is now in your non-biodegradable recycle bin, where yet more workers, wearing their non-recyclable mobile phones on their hip, get in big trucks to pick up all the cups and burn a Sh*tload of diesel fuel on the way.
Perhaps you should drink directly from the lake. A faucet is not biodegradable.
I just purchased a plug-in hybrid car. It's a dream to drive. It's a positive. It's taking personal responsibility to solve a serious problem we have here in Northern Utah, which is PM 2.5 air pollution. Here is taking personal responsibility to reduce a global environmental problem of greenhouse emissions. Government had nothing to do with it.
The government didn't force me to do this. I chose to do it. For the positives.
It's a positive to come to a stop light and not have the engine idling, which is throwing away money and dirtying up the air.
It's a positive to accelerate from a stop light on electric power because the electric motor is a lot more efficient for low end torque.
I go for these positives, not because somebody is telling me to or forcing me to, but for the good reason that they are positives.
Seems to me all the right wing of America has to offer are paranoi and excuses why somebody else's positives are no good and all a big conspiracy to do you out of something.
What good are you to anybody, including yourselves?
Call me when you have China and South America under control...
But you people. You people of high moral standards. We expect you to set a positive example.
Right. Why, if the GOP were oh say trying to put impediments in the way of certain voters from voting, for example, why that would be downright unConstitutional.
This is where the true colors come out, Charles. We discuss degrading the American voting system, but I am trying to make you focus on the actual post to which you are responding.
Right wing taxation: A person with asthma can't go outside on a bad PM 2.5 air pollution day. Children can't go out and play.
Then again there's more than one kind of entitlement. They are a lot of people these days who feel they are entitled to pollute the air, for example. It's a free country. Nobody gonna tell what I can and caint drive. Nobody gonna tax me for doing what the Constitutition says right there in black and white - Congress shall pass no law that tells me a caint drive a clunker whenerer and wherever a fell lak"
But wait a minute here. Doesn't air pollution amount to a public tax of sorts? A tax that you pay at the doctor's office or hospital or morgue.
And isn't the right to drive a polluting clunker a publically funded entitlement of sorts.
They [sic] are a lot of people these days who feel they are entitled to pollute the air, for example.
and then
Nobody gonna tell what I can and caint drive.
Ironic.
This post is not about the environment. Pretend that the scientists were really trying to brainwash everyone into believing in Christianity. Then, how would you feel?
Mormons are too Christian.
Well, wait. No. I don't want to be brainwashed. But, I don't mind people trying to persuade me, especially when they've got a world of physical - not talking about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin here but physical evidence gathered from around an entire planet - to back up their case.
And I don't mind people trying to persuade me if they actually have some good ideas that make for a better world.
The Golden Rule for example. Now there is an idea. I'd be willing to listen to a pitch on that.
Then perhaps you should read the study with an open mind.
Can where I live Charles no problem and I live just on the outskirts of one of the worst polluted city's in the UK. Well it used to be before it cleaned up its act.
What are you talking about?
I know what you mean some times Renee.
The weak need to be kept out of the gene pool...
In year five of Obama. What a bastard.
See ya later, aligator...
Out green the greens.
We conservatives already do Charles.
Bottom line for me: Show me the results.
Show me the greenhouse gas emissions in decline.
Show me the PM 2.5 air pollution in decline.
Do that, and then you will have out greened the greens.
As you say when the climate change cause goes away (as it has) something else will replace it (as it has) Population control is the big new fashion for this year. Eugenics, euthanasia and voluntary genocide are what they will be arguing for pretty soon.
Not in nations where families have loads of kids they can't feed of course, no, they must be allowed to carry on breeding like rabbits. We in the west must exterminate ourselves.
In Bangla Desh, a country with a land area less than that of England or New York State, there are 250 million people, 85% of them living in poverty. And half of them want to live in Europe or America.
The lefties will be demanding lebensraum for them before long. But naturally the lefties will not consider killing themselves to make room for Bangla Deshis, Pakistanis or Indonesians, no way. If there were no lefties those poor third world migrants would have nobody to patronise them.
Yes. Could you stop voting for a man who didn't do thing one about 500 mountains being obliterated for coal, and denigrating his enemies?
The guy you support to the hilt isn't constrained by conservatives, has done nothing on the file, and won the last two elections.
To the hilt. Nothing. You.
You're not environmentalist, you're a Democrat shill.
Only if you show me your results first....
It is about phony "liberals" advocating elitist totalitarianism...
I have no problem with you advocating totalitarianism...just calling yourselves "liberals" while you do it...
And this news helps us how?
And as far as Xena goes, the discoverer were screwed out of their right to christen, it's wrong.
Now this is a stretch but work with me. Imagine for a moment that there really is a global environmental problem resulting from behaviors that virtually every human being on the planet it contributing to. Imagine for a moment this is not some people trying to scam you but is a real world physical not being made up problem that needs addressing.
How would a true blue right thinking person go about addressing such a problem as that?
I'm just curious.
You're going to address this problem using Conservative principles.
How do you do it?
Well, I'll wait to see what you come up with.
1.) Technical prowess – to determine whether there really is a problem.
2.) Character – the courage to face facts however inconvenient or unsettling and then act as needed on the facts.
Technical prowess. How is that established?
Results.
Say you’re a free country who wants to demonstrate that you have more technical prowess than a totalitarian country has. Is it enough to claim that the Soviet space program, for example, stinks? Would that fly? No. When we wanted to demonstrate that we had more technical prowess in the 1960s than the Soviet Union had, there was one and only one way to demonstrate that:
Results.
When it comes to technical prowess, what separates the grownups from the pups:
Results.
Those people and/or institutions who, one, have the guts to make projections, and two, those projections are the most accurate available, demonstrate they have technical prowess.
Those people, who all they have to offer is how others’ projections stink but they lack the brains and guts to make projections of their own, demonstrate they have zip.
Character: How is that established?
No excuses. People have the brains and guts to face up to a problem and solve the problem.
What is the one and only way to establish that the problem is being addressed?
Results.
How would a true blue right thinking person go about addressing such a problem as that?
By caring for the environment - which conservatives do - by their nature. Consider the damage to public parks, etc. by the Occupy movement vs, the Tea Party - as a brilliant friend of mine said once, the Tea Party could only be accused of committing a "neatness".
Not by setting up a fake industry like carbon credits so that one can feel justified in their uses of private jets.
I know how Charles " WAKE THEM UP" that takes care of ALL SIDES dont ya think.
Asked and answered a billion times, ad nauseum, Ashurst.
For God's sake.
Which it will go on and on and on and on and on being asked until it is.
Worth a try anyway.
Your ilk is responsible for over ONE MILLION DEATHS per year.
Conservatives and other rational People are far too Wise to let you have your foolish way, again.
I tried to leave it open, but Ashurst Bogarted on the deal.
I know what a buzz-kill it can be when the perfect spot and opportunity for something witty and devastating is taken...;]
Yep...100%.
Watch out, Linda Shaw might be lurking....
Gawd...Linda's got some subtle 'issues'...;]