Fear has changed, "Terror" - Hegemony -

[Holy shit this makes sens]

Terror, fear, we hear about them alot on the news. I hope that what i am going to say is not going to Red Pill anyone here, we should all know the way "terror" is treated in the media and news is only perpetuating it.

Terror has evolved from being something that is used to control people - to unify people - It was used by people on people - Now it is a force of power that runs freely without the control of people.
Now it is dividing us and isolating us in something we cannot explain as cause and effect. It's like a virus turning our white-blood cells against our own body. it has no shape it isn't alive it can't be killed.

Terror is not one single thing or another it is an addiction, psychosis even, it is increasingly the state of mind in the world. we cannot fight it it wont go away and fighting it will only strengthen it and perpetuate it.

I am more scared of the anti-terrorism act bill c-10 (or the Patriot Act for americans) then i am of friggen "terrorists"
I could be called a terrorists and thank-god im white because i would probably be taken as serious possibility with all the shit i say on the web.

Lets talk about 9/11 quickly. 9/11 shook the world, the world trade center the WORLD TRADE CENTER the twin towers were destroyed. And they were destroyed in means that didn't need massive military budgets. A price of a plane ticket.
And when it happened it was unreal, it inhabited the same place that Horror movies do in our psyche. That of fantasy, we watch them (the movies) and the realistic sights scare us but we tell our selfs its fantasy it could never happen its not real its produced its directed there actors no one really died... We can't be effected by the Horror it is not actual Terror

even the holocaust and in general Genocide has inclusiveness to it, that were not on either side and that there are definitive sides, cultures to define, and we fantasize the terror of being on one side or the other.

When 9/11 occured, it was/could-be Anyone that did it. and they did to the whole world, it was real, it was hard to imagine.

the twin towers were not just another structure, The Empire State Building represents capitalism power, western world. the Twin towers were twins, the had a unity to them the were neither western or capitalist they had the world in them, It wasn't an attack against america it was an attack against the world and the objective of such attack was Terror.

We live in Hegemony.
We do, and the world is heading rapidly towards globalization. They may say it will bring world peace but it will only bring a harder enemy to face. That of the people that have already won. Hegemony is just another conflict to face, similar to domination. but domination can battled from the outside, Hegemony needs to be taken down and battled from within.

Does anyone know what im talking about? The world, The western world was first but, the world is having all signs stripped of their value. systematically cynicism is destroying cultural values, SELF-VALUE. it acts in contradiction and when post-modernism died our last hope to avoid hegemony died with it.

"Security is the best medium for terror" - Jean Baudrillard

Pretty much all these ideas - in there angle of view are from Jean Baudrillard.


SOO,
Let's hear Your own summery of "terror" in the new world.

I know my introduction of this topic is less then refined or formal but lets all get passed that in a defiance of its need.

 

[snafupants]

I dislike watching the news because I really don't feel anyone is "bad" or that events are so unidimensional. The idea that you must hate the "other team" is stupid and destructive. When I want to get abreast of current stuff, I read columns by certain reporters or online rags.

 

[Kuu]

I was going to go into several branching rants about how you worded things but when you said it was Baudrillard it all makes sense. Man, it's been a while since I read him. A shame he died. He would have had a field trip with the whole Lybia-Syria-North Africa humanitarian war deal and the invisible drone wars. The age of simulacra and simulation...

Perhaps I should still scold you, since Baudrillard was so french in his explanations and it'll just end in confusion, I can see it now.

 

[Holy shit this makes sens]

I was going to go into several branching rants about how you worded things but when you said it was Baudrillard it all makes sense. Man, it's been a while since I read him. A shame he died. He would have had a field trip with the whole Lybia-Syria-North Africa humanitarian war deal and the invisible drone wars. The age of simulacra and simulation...

Perhaps I should still scold you, since Baudrillard was so french in his explanations and it'll just end in confusion, I can see it now.

Sigh well your right Kuu but something i don't completely understand and it is something i constantly have trouble with. is that one may bring up a topic or like me post a topic that may not be concise or in any manner suitable to be used in helping another understand. But i must argue that it does not matter if i am understandable, if i say terror, if i say 9/11, if i say hegemony, it does not matter what the sentence says that they are in, only that i have spoken the words. Isn't that enough to cause debate, especially since i have said 3 Keywords in one argument, it doesn't matter what im arguing any more, people can see the context.

And so when something like this thread goes without much debate i don't know if people don't care about the connections between Hegemony, terror and 9/11 or that people don't bother or know.

I should not have to be understandable to generate discussion only that i present topics of knowledge to be discussed.

__________



I am some what surprised by the lack of any contemporary philosophy here, its mostly 18th century thought. Philosophy has changed and it resides in things like Hegemony and Globalization and Terror in there implications. not Humanist 18th century jargon.

___

And the fact that one needs to be understood is one such archaic thought. we simply need to know what the person says the Know to put ones own view out.

____

though that said there are some interesting topics here. and very interesting voices. im just up set cause my Girl Friend dumped me. go figure

 

[Da Blob]

I should not have to be understandable to generate discussion
only that i present topics of knowledge to be discussed.

Hear! Here! I'll drink to that !

Hope and Fear are the only two means of motivation. Both are anticipations of the Future and its experiences of Pleasure or Pain.

Unfortunately, in the social economy Pain has always been cheaper to produce than Pleasure. It is a matter of Supply and Demand. Therefore, it is also been easier to instill Fear as opposed to offering Hope.

It is reasonable to assume that because of the money and raw power at stake, that the generation of fear and terror has the status of an Applied Science and those who apply that science are part of a Hegemony?

IMO, most certainly...

 

[snafupants]

Hope and Fear are the only two means of motivation. Both are anticipations of the Future and its experiences of Pleasure or Pain.

That's true. Dang, humans seem simpler by the minute.

Even spiritual or romantic longing is disguised hope. Hope for an improved you.

Hope's not a bad thing, but it could turn delusive and depraved.

Unfortunately, in the social economy Pain has always been cheaper to produce than Pleasure. It is a matter of Supply and Demand. Therefore, it is also been easier to instill Fear as opposed to offering Hope.

Fear is not only cheaper, but it more dependably keeps people shackled.

When you combine contrived fear with natural fear - e.g., fear of death - watch out!

It's more of a trick to concoct joint hope. Nazism is one example. Haha, arguably nazism is an admixture of hope, fucking craziness, misapplied philosophy and butchered science, and fear.

 

[Cognisant]

People don't even have to hijack planes anymore, the big ones practically fly themselves, so if some determined clandestine group were to brainwash a few preteens, send them through school and university to come out with degrees in electrical and aerospace engineering, have them infiltrate airports around the world, or simply an airport in some underdeveloped politically neutral country where the saboteurs can go about their work relatively unhindered, well then you could put logic bombs in hundreds of aircraft, and nobody finds out until months, perhaps years later when they all simultaneously dive into the nearest city.

So the world needs something like Section 9 from the "Ghost in the Shell" universe, an elite group of the most talented individuals with the best technology available to hunt down, persecute, and ideally stop terrorists from achieving their acts of terrorism, which the NSA/FBI/CIA probably have, as would every other such organisation in the world, which brings us to why the Patriot Act and so forth are being introduced.

These "Section 9" groups are going to break laws, lots of laws, and particularly in the US they're not going to be able to hide this from people, in fact even trying to do so is the reason the US government is so mistrusted these days, as much as we like Wikileaks so do the bad guys, turning the populace against its government is one of the way a small group can bring down even a global superpower.

I don't really trust the US government, and I know enough about the Australian state government not to trust them much either, but sure as hell trust them more than the various extremist groups set to benefit from plunging the world into chaos, there's usually a damn good reason they're not in power.

 

[Da Blob]

Ask the Native Americans about trusting the U.S. Government. The government has yet to honor a single treaty ever signed - dozens of treaties over hundreds of years.

It is odd, we have been polarized, intimated, 'terrorized' into two parties, Conservative and Liberal, instead of being divided upon reality - those who actually trust the government (?) against those who do not...

 

[Cognisant]

I stand by order, if you want a better government get involved and make it better, don't just sit back and bitch that they're not treating you as you think you deserve, certainly don't encourage the agents of disorder, what makes you think they're any less insidious?

The revolution may be lead by Stalin for all you know, he was a revolutionary.

 

[Nezaros]

It is odd, we have been polarized, intimated, 'terrorized' into two parties, Conservative and Liberal, instead of being divided upon reality - those who actually trust the government (?) against those who do not...

Even that's too far. The fact is both parties feel almost exactly the same on just about everything. People subscribe to colors and slogans and figureheads without actually thinking about the issues for themselves. If everybody had an actual opinion rather than just a party loyalty there would be several viable political parties, not the one-sided-disguised-as-bilateral clusterfuck going on, featuring a few token independents to make the "traditional" parties look better to the average American.

I stand by order, if you want a better government get involved and make it better, don't just sit back and bitch that they're not treating you as you think you deserve, certainly don't encourage the agents of disorder, what makes you think they're any less insidious?

First and foremost, educate thyself. It's impossible to improve things if you know jack shit about what you're voting on.

 

[Cognisant]

You think I meant voting? Oh fuck that's pathetic.

My mistake, I come from a country where voting is mandatory, I didn't realize "doing something" counts as voting, I actually meant getting hired by the government, working your way up the hierarchy and changing things from the inside, but yeah sure you should vote too, I guess that might contribute in some small way to someone else doing something.

 

[Da Blob]

It is fortunate that I have a dark sense of humor. Fortunate for me, at least, as a defense mechanism against the absurdity exhibited by Humans.

Often, it is the very ones who rail against the traditions of religious beliefs, and the role that the institution of religion in the hands of Oppressors - who vehemently defend the traditional political views of their families and object strongly against the suggestion that political parties are even worse as bastions of the status quo than is any religion.

Once again, the foundation of any good government is self-government on the parts of its citizens.

Those citizens who do not have enough sense to be afraid, will be made to be afraid by the(ir) government.

 

[Cognisant]

Nonsense I think democracies are a scam and that the lack of separation of church and state is why they've gotten away with what they do for so long, it's just that unlike religious institutions the government isn't inherently despicable, democracy is a work in progress, better than the monarchies that preceded it and whatever we work out next will be better still, but that work remains to be done.

 

[Holy shit this makes sens]

A clearer version - read it if your not familiar with the death of post-modernism aka non-universal truth - and then the birth of the hyper real

Genocide offered fertile ground for the cultural empathy, voice and later terror which abruptly ended the post-modern movement. Genocide has always been a horrifying event throughout history but if the one witnessing or being informed of that genocide is not a part of the cultural group being systemically exterminated the horror of genocide inhabits the same place as fantasy or a horror movie would in their psyche. It was quintessentially post-modern in thought that one culture did not experience/have the same truth as another culture. The unilateral terror of the holocaust involved the same absolute evil that the world faces now post-9/11 but now everyone is seen as jewish. Post-modernism hence died when the world was unified in the truth that a plan had been carried out to systematically kill every culture represented in the world via the destruction of the world trade center. Previously held non-universality truth was by explaining reality was perceived differently and with a different angle by everyone. 9/11 had installed a unilateral (single sided) terror/truth that everyone was targeted to die by an undefined force that didn’t care about the multiple truths in a cultural diversity. Realization occurred that this reckless truth/evil unrestrained by cultural ethnicity had changed everything. Established powers, government ruling could be justified in expansion if the idea that security had to be enforced and combat this unidentifiable force of terror. The first steps taken soon after the event on 9/11 were to permit the government authority to seek out and destroy the forces of terror where ever and whoever it might be took form in the Anti-terrorism Act Bill c-10 and the National Defence act.

Globalization by Terror, Hegemony by fear and security.

 

[Sorlaize]

huge subject that justifies its own writings. but you have to put everything in perspective. starting with an investigation into the state/government and how they can very feasibly use the news as propaganda to further their own agenda; the elites/NWO; past behaviours and atrocities of governments; America's present slide into authoritarian tyranny. As the writers said here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism people are very much blinded by the identification of the holocaust with a great human tragedy.. as to whether any modern form of government is susceptible to the same problems. Which of course it is.

It goes much deeper than that, culturally, with an effect on the world caused by the bold creators of 9/11, and also is reminiscent of George Carlin's predictions for the world

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ls8RXqyZDsk

 

[snafupants]

I'm reminded of the Michael Crichton novel, State of Fear. Run for the hills!

 

[just george]

Well look, here's my perspective, and it's pretty simple.

If you're a politician, and you want to go to war, then go to war. Pack your bags, get your gun, and go.

But if you want to invade another country on bullshit pretenses, as is obvious in the invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen etc, and you want to send the army in to do it for you while you stay at home and sip a latte, then you have nothing to be scared of, right?

But then, if you are so terrified by the response of the people you illegally and immorally bombed, then dont declare a war on terror - because to put it straight, Im from a hard town. If you pick a fight, you fight the fight. Step up, or step off, is the motto.

If you're going to pick a fight with some people who want to fight back, and you're terrified, then my suggestion is not to declare a war on terror, but to not bloody well pick the fight, because you dont have the balls.

Personally, Im not scared (let alone terrified) of anyone, because I dont bother people. Hence, they dont want to bother me back - and we all get along.

So, I put it forth that the idea of a "war on terror" is a political construct made for whatever reason by clearly bullshit artist scared shitless politicians who have no business making wars on anyone because they piss their bloody pants and never do any fighting themselves.

I like the idea of personal responsibility. If you pick a fight, or start a war, then you fight personally. The idea that politicians here at home can pick a fight with others, then send in troops, then get scared of possible repercussions and declare a war on terror, and then control the population based on this imaginary fear, is absurd.

I say we pack all our politicians in a bloody big plane, fly them to the war zone, give them a gun, and say "hey mate, go finish what you started".

Cos like I said, Im not scared of anyone. Not because Im the toughest dude out there, but because I never gave reason to anyone to hurt me. The crazy ones who slip through and want to anyway based on their personal mental problems, I can deal with no problems, without taking my shoes off at the bloody airport.

 

[Holy shit this makes sens]

If you're going to pick a fight with some people who want to fight back, and you're terrified, then my suggestion is not to declare a war on terror, but to not bloody well pick the fight, because you dont have the balls.

I don't think the people fighting on either side are scared. It is the by-standards that are scared the person watching the news Joe Shmo.

Hegemony is the self-justification, the submission to power. You need power to change the world but absolute power corrupts absolutely. Fear/Terror is the Power of an idea that has come about in the totalitarian extension of good. Everyone can kill everyone can sabotage.
When you look at the new t.v shows coming out; Americans, where russian spies are placed in familys and the trailer goes on saying, you would never know intill the are triggered. the are ruthless spies bla bla bla.
And then another! Killer, (or something like that name) Talks about how you never know who will commit it, it could be your friend a relative. The Murder is just the beginning of the story blah blah/.. and im not making this shit up i see the trailers for these series all the time..

Besides further installing fear/terror into the minds of people it further kills post-modernism by saying any culture is the same and the will kill you regardless. Fear defeating cultural diversity. And a strange invert racism to legitimize it.

 

[Sorlaize]

If you're a politician, and you want to go to war, then go to war. Pack your bags, get your gun, and go.

Wars are about empire, never about human values or reason or being reasonable at all. The powerful do what they like in our world, including inserting politicians and figures of authority that play ball. This has been compared to academics and their role, for example;-

Those of you who have been through college know that the educational system is very highly geared to rewarding conformity and obedience; if you don’t do that, you are a troublemaker. So, it is kind of a filtering device which ends up with people who really honestly (they aren't lying) internalize the framework of belief and attitudes of the surrounding power system in the society. The elite institutions like, say, Harvard and Princeton and the small upscale colleges, for example, are very much geared to socialization. If you go through a place like Harvard, most of what goes on there is teaching manners; how to behave like a member of the upper classes, how to think the right thoughts, and so on.

If you pick a fight, you fight the fight. Step up, or step off, is the motto.

Poor people are always led to believe other poor people are their enemies. While war has an economic function that spends excess money (that doesn't exist) among other things. But hopefully in future generations this will all be clearer because of the Internet and its power to help us communicate effectively.

So, I put it forth that the idea of a "war on terror" is a political construct made for whatever reason by clearly bullshit artist scared shitless politicians who have no business making wars on anyone because they piss their bloody pants and never do any fighting themselves.

It's a sham, but politicians are only human, too. They are held subservient to the power structure ultimately. Therefore a true solution for world peace must arise to break those foundations.

I like this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiyEne9sZIY

 

[IdeasNotTheProblem]

Nonsense I think democracies are a scam and that the lack of separation of church and state is why they've gotten away with what they do for so long, it's just that unlike religious institutions the government isn't inherently despicable, democracy is a work in progress, better than the monarchies that preceded it and whatever we work out next will be better still, but that work remains to be done.

I see church and state as two forms of symbolic unity. The symbols origin derived from the need/desire to determine friend from foe. A nation founded upon religious freedom, must compensate for this loss of unity with overwhelming patriotism. In fact, a large amount of national pride is generated by this religious tolerance.

The fact that the NDAA and Patriot Act clashes with this sense of unity highlights the difficulties America has faced during their exhausting war with Al Qaeda. A Foe that does not represent a state and is a tiny fraction of a massive religion. For this reason, the ability to differentiate friend from foe through symbolic representation is erased and goes against human nature. It's my feelings that our innate urge to identify the foe in some symbolic form is what allowed the Iraq war to occur, and was not adequately challenged.

 

[joal0503]