Brainstorm: Nonviolent but Actually Effective Dissent Ideas

[DrEvil]

Nice! I will keep an eye out for the facebook group.
Have to admit I hadn't heard about Taleb before, but I think I like him already

[Sounder]

(What in the fuck does a Rockefeller consensus have to do with this thread?)

There are context enriching connections that could be made between The Ludlow massacre, Sacco and Vanzetti and the ability of big bucks to buy the narrative. Oh yeah, and also your insistence that context be ignored so you may self-righteously condemn them through the use of that (bought) narrative. But hey I understand if you don’t want to go there.

Refers to…
Rockefeller found great value in hiring ‘public relations’ men to change his reputation after the Ludlow massacre.

Those words were written for more than just you FB. Fortunately all people have a sort of internal referee, and while I may be called for a fair share of fouls for straying a bit too far from consensus, you draw more on the ornery count alone.

Also, I'm pretty sure that given my lifetime commitment to non-violent ACTUALLY effective solutions, and that this is a short version of what I have to say in this regard, that this is indeed the proper thread to say those things on. Thank-you.

[FourthBase]

(What in the fuck does a Rockefeller consensus have to do with this thread?)

There are context enriching connection that could be made between The Ludlow massacre, Sacco and Vanzetti and the ability of big bucks to buy the narrative. Oh yeah, and also your insistence that context be ignored so you may self-righteously condemn them through the use of that (bought) narrative. But hey I understand if you don’t want to go there.

Refers to…
Rockefeller found great value in hiring ‘public relations’ men to change his reputation after the Ludlow massacre.


Those words were written for more than just you FB. Fortunately all people have a sort of internal referee, and while I may be called for far a fair share of fouls for straying a bit too far from consensus, you draw more on the ornery count alone.

Okay, I'm really interested in knowing exactly what this public relations thing is supposed to be, do. What does the Rockefeller consensus want to do to us? What does it want us to do, think, feel? What does it want to prevent us from doing, thinking, feeling? Be thorough, thank you. Provide links. I mean, if we're gonna talk about it in this thread, then let's have it completely talked about, not just ominously alluded to. Truly. Please. Thank you.

[Sounder]

Ah, thank-you very much FB.

My grand kids are coming over so I will be busy for a bit, but I will try to put something together.

[Joe Hillshoist]

(Doves and teddy bears...maybe, it's the best idea you've contributed, Joe.)

How many non violent but actually effective dissent actions have you been involved in this year?

You ignored the posts I made about the one I was involved in. Didn't even bother looking up the Knitting Nannas despite their similarity to the Nigerians you posted about earlier and refuse to acknowledge the fact that dissent and legal issues need to be addressed if dissent is to be effective. For example what's just happened to the Timika 6 in West Papua - they were non violent dissenters. Anyway if thats the value you put on my contributions I'll stop them now.

Nice one wrt the facebook page tho.

On topic, and staying legal, there's been research done showing that a loud minority can dominate and steer the public debate, simply by being loud and persistent. I think the number was 10% or thereabouts.

I think the left has to take a page from the conservative playbook. Stop being so nice and objective. Call them out on every little crazy thing they say, and don't pussyfoot around. If they're lying - call them a liar, if they're being misogynistic, homophobic or racist, call them a misogynist, a homophobe and a racist.

yeah this totally.

I wrote a blog post about this thing and flocking behaviour years ago. I'll PM you about it.

[FourthBase]

(Doves and teddy bears...maybe, it's the best idea you've contributed, Joe.)

How many non violent but actually effective dissent actions have you been involved in this year?

You ignored the posts I made about the one I was involved in. Didn't even bother looking up the Knitting Nannas despite their similarity to the Nigerians you posted about earlier and refuse to acknowledge the fact that dissent and legal issues need to be addressed if dissent is to be effective. For example what's just happened to the Timika 6 in West Papua - they were non violent dissenters. Anyway if thats the value you put on my contributions I'll stop them now.

[raises hand] My bad. Foul on me. My confirmation bias.
I had assumed you were just heaping on the scorn, that Knitting Nannas was a joke.

That's awesome, dude.

"There is a new term coming out and that is "protectors" rather than protestors, and that is what I see these women as being."

YES!

Nice one wrt the facebook page tho.

Thanks. Really, thanks to everyone here who posts a Blair link.
You are helping. We are helping. It might work.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Cheers bro.

[justdrew]

I think it's worth asking, "what is the purpose of dissent" ?

I think one of the main points is:

people often go along with "social norms" because they think everyone else agrees, and only they have a little question about the justifiability of that norm, and that they will be ostracized if they go against it. The point of dissent is to break this often incorrect thought, showing people they are free to disagree.

[Sounder]

Your questions have been a very helpful device for providing a point of focus. Thanks FB.



FourthBase wrote...

Okay, I'm really interested in knowing exactly what this public relations thing is supposed to be, do.

The core objective of PR is to assure the position of an entity to stand in the prime spots within the rivers of money. The Mr. big types define the ‘basin’ from which the ‘water’ is collected and the subsequent direction of flow.

That is what PR is supposed to be, it does this by maintaining a vertical authority distribution system as the most effective means for insuring the money interests.

http://ponderingconfusion.com/papers.php?id=orthodoxmed

But what doses OIL have to do with Medicine?
Absolutely the biggest spin-off industries from oil are petrochemicals and pharmaceuticals. By 1900, the Rockefeller Family had already expended heavily in both industries. William "Old Bill" Rockefeller, the father of John D, proclaimed himself a physician and began selling bottled raw petroleum on the yokels as a miracle cure for everything under the sun. In selling raw petroleum in a pretty bottle "Old Bill" did nothing new. He merely took a page out of the book of other patent medicine fakers who were then pedaling their wares from the backs of wagons - covered and uncovered.

"Old Bill" called his bottled petroleum "Nujo" (meaning new oil) and was eventually sold as a cure for constipation. (Rx List, The Internet Drug Index.) Today Nujol is an important material used in infrared spectroscopy. It is heavy paraffin oil so it is chemically inert and has a relatively uncomplicated IR spectrum. (Wikipedia English - The Free Encyclopedia)

1,000 six-ounce bottles of finished Nujol could be made from just one $2.00 barrel of raw material. These breath-taking profits make it inevitable that America's largest and most ruthless industrial combine (the Rockefeller Empire) should soon add drug trafficking to its already vast production and sales domain. It wasn't until 1929, however, when the Rockefeller Drug Trust was formed, that the upward curve in their drug profits began to assume the present gigantic proportions of today.

A New face for John D. Rockefeller
After the Court ordered breakup of Standard Oil, the American population saw John D. Rockefeller as the worst type of “Robber Baron” that ever lived. The Rockefeller Family, decided to hire the most talented press agent in the country, Ivy Lee, who got the tough assignment of whitewashing the tycoon's bloodied image.
Lee used the newly organized Rockefeller Foundation for promotional purposes by donating large sums of money - none less than a million - to well-known colleges, hospitals, churches and benevolent organizations. The Rockefeller Foundation made headlines all over the world, for in the days of the gold standard and the five-cent cigar, a million dollars was always news. The public soon forgot, or forgave, for the dazzling display of Rockefellerian generosity and philanthropy.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Am ... ssociation

The Rockefeller Foundation was originally set up in 1904 as the General Education Fund. The RF was later formed in 1910 and issued a charter on May 14, 1913 with the help of Rockefeller millions. Subsequently, the foundation placed it's own "nominees" in federal health agencies and set the stage for the "reeducation" of the public. A compilation of magazine advertising reveals that as far back as 1948, larger American drug companies spent a total sum of $1,104,224,374 for advertising. Of this sum, Rockefeller-Morgan interests (which went entirely to Rockefeller after Morgan's death) controlled about 80%. [4]

See also pharmaceutical industry.
Eliminating competitors to drug based paradigm

In his 1994 book, The Assault on Medical Freedom, author P. Joseph Lisa gained access to secret files in the AMA's Chicago Department of investigation under the guise of collecting information to expose "mental health quackery." In the process, he uncovered hundreds of AMA photocopies of memos, minutes and other documents. In a subsequent ten year investigation, he found little evidence of "quackery" and much evidence of an organized propaganda campaign to discredit alternative medicine and foreign drugs. The birth of the AMA in 1847 launched an organized push for a "totalitarian medical pharmaceutical police state". Funded by the drug industry, a single, medical monopoly was established using the insurance industry, the U.S. Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Internal Revenue Service (IRC), the U.S. Postal Service and other state and federal agencies. From the onset, the AMA is characterized as a greed motivated trade union, eliminating competitors to its own financial and political interests. Funded by the Carnegie Foundation, Abraham Flexner was ostensibly empowered to investigate the quality of medical education in all 161 medical schools that existed in 1910. In league with Rockefeller billions, Flexner helped destroy the credibility and funding sources for nearly all schools using non-drug based medicine. 161 medical schools dwindled down to 81 by 1919 and medical graduates declined from 5,747 to 2,658. "Overcrowding" of the profession became the public AMA theme for the "opportunities of those already in the profession to acquire a livelihood."[5]

http://www.think-aboutit.com/conspiracy ... EMPIRE.htm

"The last annual report of the Rockefeller Foundation", reported Bealle, "itemizes the gifts it has made to colleges and public agencies in the past 44 years, and they total somewhat over half a billion dollars. These colleges, of
course, teach their students all the drug lore the Rockefeller pharmaceutical houses want taught. Otherwise there would be no more gifts, just as there are no gifts to any of the 30 odd colleges in the United States that don' t use therapies based on drugs.

FB wrote...

What does the Rockefeller consensus want to do to us?

It wants to insure that the largest number of people possible remain as clients of that system.
FB wrote...

What does it want us to do, think, feel?

It wants us to do nothing, to think that they are the ‘good’ guys and to feel great anxiety about the whole world falling apart if were to be left without their ‘assistance’.

FB wrote...

What does it want to prevent us from doing, thinking, feeling?

It wants to inhibit people from developing their own inherent potentials that could displace our vertical authority distribution system with a horizontal authority distribution system. It wants to prevent any thinking that cannot be monetized through a corporate structure. It wants to mitigate active emotions and accentuate passive emotions.

FB wrote...

Be thorough, thank you. Provide links. I mean, if we're gonna talk about it in this thread, then let's have it completely talked about, not just ominously alluded to. Truly. Please. Thank you.

More links and commentary to follow, if called for.

[FourthBase]

Holy cow, Sounder, thank you. Mind, eyes: Opened!

So, perhaps one idea to add to this thread is: Sniff out and expose those who only hedge between evil and good causes for appearance's sake. Another idea, more of a tip: Do not accept funding for any good cause from just anyone, take that cash and press it to your nose first, smell it for traces of blood and pain and selfishness. Maybe take it anyway, only if it can be confidently re-purposed to...expose the "philanthropist" (rather, misanthrope) who lent it. Lent. Because no gift is ever free, if it emanates from the hands of the mega-rich and mega-powerful. Is this good advice? Is it incomplete?

[MacCruiskeen]

Non-violent but actually effective? Here you go:


No persons or animals were harmed in the making of this insurrection.

A thing of beauty and a joy forever. It just has to be kept up longer.

[FourthBase]

Uh, no.

Get that shit out of here. #dikembemutombo

[MacCruiskeen]

Uh, no.

Get that shit out of here. #dikembemutombo

Being telepathically gifted, I knew you would say that. You're thinking more along the lines of Ethical Shopping.

But note that your demand has two elements. A cake cannot be kept and also eaten. Nor does the smashing of windows constitute violence in my opinion, especially when it occurs in response to the theft of public education and the overnight institutionalisation of near-universal heavy debt. (See "Structural Violence")

#dikembemutombo

Ah yeah, right, that'll work. What the world needs now is nicer multimillionaires.

[FourthBase]

No persons or animals were harmed in the making of this insurrection.

Yeah, uh, real easy way to call bullshit on that. Wanna see?

It's autumn of 2011, Boston. You are one of those hearty souls camped right outside the Federal Reserve, across the street from South Station. You are technically violating some manner of city ordinance, but in a more Constitutional sense you're only exercising your 1st Amendment rights in the only public, 24/7 time, place, and manner you see fit. You are doing good. Then some thugs probably hired by The Man show up, and start wrecking property. Only property. Or, they vandalize the home or small organic restaurant or whatever of a leading Occupier. No persons or animals hurt. Or, were there? Of fucking course there were. QED. Vandalism is, in fact, violence. If you want to define it otherwise, don't forget you're redefining it for them, too. So: Don't.

[MacCruiskeen]

No persons or animals were harmed in the making of this insurrection.

Yeah, uh, real easy way to call bullshit on that. Wanna see?

It's autumn of 2011, Boston.

In fact no. It was autumn of 2010, London.

Vandalism is, in fact, violence.

That makes Banksy a very violent man.