What do you think is the ultimate purpose of the expertly crafted divisions among people?

[HunterSdVa29]

Ah, the elite are exploiting someone else's expertly crafted divisions so that they can then unite people together. And this is more effective than simple uniting them together in the first place. The elites need a better strategist.

well if one was to believe that theory, uniting people could produce more austerity for everyone, i.e. less for those that have it now

i get what you're saying, i think it's a mixture between the two in reality. For a few reasons, namely: i find it hard to believe any government nor multinational body is efficient enough to actually 'expertly craft' shit like this, call it the south park debunking of 9/11 Inside Job reasoning.
also, whether it's through inherited wealth and exploiting other means to increase that, rich people are rich for a reason often involving scrupulous or suspect activity. This also leads me to think that i doubt all these competitive rich 'elitists' are really working w/ each other, or if it's separate instances of individual/group exploitation that results in pervasive widespread trends that may appear to some as the Rothschild/NWO/illuminati etc... conspiratorial control

have no clue what i'm talking about, just spitballing here

 

[panamaican]

How else would you unite Americans with Africans or Muslims other than conquest? If there was a way around having to use armies then conquerors would have used those methods milleniums ago.

How would I do it? I would play up the commonalities, highlight the positives of each group to make them see the good in each other. All the stuff that research already says works for making people stop seeing the differences between themselves and others.

But this isn't about my strategy, it's about theirs. You're saying they're employing a strategy other than armies? And that strategy is to play up division between groups so those 2 groups then unite without the use of military conquest? This doesn't make any sense so I'm assuming something has been left out.

Flesh out their strategy for me, instead of asking me to flesh out my hypothetical about my strategy.

 

[panamaican]

well if one was to believe that theory, uniting people could produce more austerity for everyone, i.e. less for those that have it now

i get what you're saying, i think it's a mixture between the two in reality. For a few reasons, namely: i find it hard to believe any government nor multinational body is efficient enough to actually 'expertly craft' shit like this, call it the south park debunking of 9/11 Inside Job reasoning.
also, whether it's through inherited wealth and exploiting other means to increase that, rich people are rich for a reason often involving scrupulous or suspect activity. This also leads me to think that i doubt all these competitive rich 'elitists' are really working w/ each other, or if it's separate instances of individual/group exploitation that results in pervasive widespread trends that may appear to some as the Rothschild/NWO/illuminati etc... conspiratorial control

have no clue what i'm talking about, just spitballing here

No, you're very much on point. There's no logical reason to think all of these elites are working together to achieve some nebulous goal.

The Republicans couldn't even craft a united front to pass legislation in 1/2 of the U.S. Congress, when they had general support for the direction not the details, but we're supposed to believe that another group of highly competitive people is capable of crafting and executing a world shaping strategy unbeknownst to anyone but a few conspiracy theorists.

And the Dem's crafted and implemented the ACA in less than 2 years. But this secret group of high powered elites are incapable of executing their strategy after 100+ years.

I enjoy talking about this foolishness but only an idiot would take it seriously.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Economically, there are essentially two competing narratives in play vis-a-vis the "nefarious" State.

Right: Government is exploiting its citizens and its corporations via excessive taxation.

Left: Corporations are being allowed to exploit the citizenry by a government that is owned and controlled by those corporations.

Now, I look at the data, and the facts on the ground, and think that anyone who could possibly buy into the former narrative is functionally retarded.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

IMO because united citizens promote the retention of their culture, nationalism, border control, capital control, control of their own ressources and may stand up against deregulations and privatisations.

It's easy to see that all this doesn't fit too well with neo liberal economics, which advocates strong corporations and consumers to by their products.

 

[Leonard Haid]

I have no idea myself, just looking for some insights. The only thing that seems obvious to me is they are encouraged and promoted. Why? Also why do people buy in? For that last question Id like answers deeper than it fits their own beliefs if possible. Thanks.

Left - Right

Black - White

This faith - That faith etc. etc. etc.

I wouldn't call it expertly crafted, rather a natural evolution. People settle with others whom they perceive are like them, and before you know it there are rifts between and among the groups.

 

[helltoupee]

This.

The greatest con of all time is getting people to think that the difference between groups is bigger than the difference within groups.

After traveling across 6 continents, the biggest joke is that average joe think they are more like their masters than they are average joes of other countries. It is truly the oldest (and best) trick in the book.

Excellent post.

Reminds me of when George Bush visited a grocery story and was amazed by the scanners. This is a man so disconnected with the life of the average citizen, yet it's people like him, Trump, Clinton, et al., who are setting policies for the average joe.

The worst part is the people who are convinced they are part of the country club simply because they live in the suburbs and have a beemer in the driveway.

 

[nostradumbass]

I don't think it is that expertly crafted. Seems pretty haphazardly crafted for short-term political points. We just had someone running for president whose slogans were "I'm with her", whatever the hell that means, and "stronger together", then of course proceeded to call half the voters deplorable. Stronger together indeed, Madame President.

In Europe, the strong desire for "multiculturalism" and more migrants is just because socialism is a ponzi scheme that completely craps out as soon as the population shrinks, which it was among ethnic Swedes and Germans, so they just want more people to hopefully pay for what's already been spent, and they probably weren't going to get a lot of 1st world immigrants who just decided one day they'd like to start paying 60% in tax to live in a place that's frozen for 8 months of the year. It's either lure in dirt bags from shit hole countries or just admit your country's entire financial system is a failure, then hope you just die before the check comes.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

You sound like a sociology first grader at university

That's nice.
You sound like a simpleton.

 

[Gutter Chris]

You keep the people divided and they wont vote as one and throw your ass out of office or might make some rules that stop upward redistribution and those who rule cant be havin that as it is not what is best for business.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

one thing that makes me at least somewhat question the whole elite controlling shit theory, are Exchange Traded Funds a relatively recent innovation in equity investing. As they function much like Mutual Funds, yet don't have the drawbacks of the minimum buy in (of generally at least 2.5k if not 5 or 10) no commisions or trade fees if it's through your fund provider or like an agreement w/ Ishares or Blackrock or whatnot, and perhaps most importantly the expense ratio is often under .3% if not as low as .04% while mutual funds are what like .7 if not 1% or higher?

I get that they can adjust other things like distrubtion and dividend ratios through the composition of each investment, etc... but if they truly controlled shit why would they even allow things like that to become an innovation?
edit: unless the answer is the institutional holders (mainly retirement fund companies) which are like half the ownership of most ETFs (at least) are exploiting them for that same reason.....

damn rabbit hole hahah

 

[SafeSpace]

It's easier for the government/media to conquer us if we are all divided