Quote:
Originally posted by The Jake
The Freemasons are a group in and by themselves who hide in plain sight. How the hell can you say it's not possible???
|
i meant this in relation to the illuminati and other major powers, if they really exist.
[/B][/QUOTE]I don't believe the door swings both ways in this argument.
Whoever is disseminating the information is in control. Books, newspapers, radio, television, Internet, all the information we absorb from all it's sources. We then interact with other people who also accumulate information from different sources. By being saturated by all this information and interacting with others in the same position we become conditioned to believe what we see and hear. We can't help it. It's natural.
Whoever is in a position to control the flow of that information shapes what we see and hear. People might gain an open eye to events around them and question the source of the information but the person who controls that will ultimately maintain power over the situation.
If Joe Bloe finds out the Illuminati are real who is he going to tell? Who is going to believe him? And if by some chance someone believe's Joe's story, what do you think is going to happen?? Joe's reality doesn't conform to consensus reality. Why? Because the person controlling the flow of information controls what is consensus and what is not. [/B][/QUOTE]
ok, i'm ready to cede you this argument.
[/B][/QUOTE]You obviously have far greater faith in humanity than I do... [/B][/QUOTE]
yes. yes, i do.
[/B][/QUOTE]Working on the big fat presumption that the Illuminati do exist I do not believe the pull all the strings. I don't believe any secret society does or could claim to. The problem with subversive movements is not that thtey could but they have enough power and influence to be able to SHAPE the course of history and our destiny, although not necessarily control it directly. The possibility of any one group could have such power and use it without consequence or without proper government is wrong.
That, in addition to the above quote, is a very, very big supposition...
[/B][/QUOTE]
these are all major suppositions - we're talking about control over nations - all suppositions will be huge. i'm playing devil's advocate as much as you here, just throwing ideas around, not necessarily my own.
[/B][/QUOTE]Due to the inherent nature of a subversive movement, we do not know who the players are. Hence we have to assume that they do not have the best interests of everyone at heart - else why would they be subversive? (that in itself raises many points and is probably flawed but it is the strongest argument I can think of for why a group would wish to remain subversive). [/B][/QUOTE]
good point, and i generally agree, but i didn't mean that was their principal aim. what i meant was that the two could go together.
[/B][/QUOTE]I for one am not comfortable with anyone having that much power. Particularly when there they are invisible and have no (true) democratic process or accountability. [/B][/QUOTE]
i'm with you on that one!!
[/B][/QUOTE]I think we're confusing the issue here.
I see the motives of a secret society as being seperate to how they could remain over time. [/B][/QUOTE]
just diversifying the argument. plus, surely motivation dictates how any group exists, succeeds or is destroyed?
