The following may seem lenghty but is but a snipet of information that dwells within this site...
quote:
This document articulates the nature of the modern western establishment, its methods and goals, and their final consequences.The modern western establishment is a vast and cryptic cult that aggressively infiltrates and consolidates positions of social influence and control throughout western civilization, with ambitions that encompass the entire world. It is a functionalistic hierarchy. The greater ``Those who formally rule take their signals and commands not from the electorate as a body, but from a small group of men (plus a few women). This group will be called the Establishment. It exists even though that existence is stoutly denied. It is one of the secrets of the American social order. [...] A second secret is the fact that the existence of the Establishment -- the ruling class -- is not supposed to be discussed.''
-Arthur S. Miller, George Washington University law professor (deceased)
one's proximity to and involvement with the establishment, and the higher that proximal portion of the establishment is in the hierarchy, the more thorough and insistent is the enforcement of establishment codes of conduct (many of which are fluid and unwritten).
The term ``hierarchy'' etymologically means ``sacred rule'', but has come to denote any pyramid-like acyclic network arrangement. The root is instructive, however: theistic religions are power structures in which adherents pledge obedience to an illusory god or gods, but (inevitably) obey the commandments of men who duck accountability by dint of their god ruse. For comparison, the ruse by which the modern establishment ducks accountability is the committee, and the members of these committees believe they wield god-like powers to command humanity and define right and wrong. A key commonality is a pathological inability to recognize that the laws of nature are constant.
The establishment has no master plan. Components of the establishment periodically attempt to promulgate such plans, but this is inherently ineffective.
The preeminent establishment commandment is that one not acknowledge or articulate the broad nature of the establishment, or its methods and goals. Members of the establishment act in a manner informed by covert knowledge of methods and goals, but this knowledge is evident only to those who already possess it. The establishment introduces many of its inductees to the policy of tight lips through shared rituals of a humiliating and often pathologically sexual character (in college fraternities, and historically, in brotherhoods such as the Freemasons) that few participants would deign to discuss, even with those who have already undergone them, except by brief cryptic reference.
The establishment facilitates the ascent of those in whom they recognize covert knowledge and a congenial modus operandi, endowing a rising balance of social capital for such people unless they betray the establishment. This rewards and fosters loyalty.
The higher one's position in the hierarchy, the broader is the range of methods and goals one is permitted and expected to recognize ``There does exist and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so.
I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for 20 years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret record.
-Carroll Quigley, Georgetown University history professor (deceased), in Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, 1966, p.950
[...] In addition to these pragmatic goals, the powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds' central banks which were themselves private corporations. The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect injury of all other economic groups.''
-Tragedy and Hope, p.324
``... I am now quite sure that Tragedy and Hope was suppressed although I do not know why or by whom...''
-Carroll Quigley, in a letter to a friend
consciously (though without explicitly communicating them). However, no one in the establishment is permitted to recognize all of them, or the broadest ones and their final consequences. It would in any case be paradoxical (in fact, plain evidence of grave psychopathology) to recognize the broadest goals of the establishment, yet remain aligned with it, since this recognition is intrinsically accompanied by a recognition of one's own individual prowess, and of the hopelessness and Thanatos of the establishment.
A member of the establishment who defies its commandments in an obvious and visible fashion, or defies any key commandment, or who consistently defies commandments, is ejected whenever it is feasible to do so without causing net injury to the interests of the establishment (most vitally, to its covertness). Ejection is by social ostracism, denial of insider privileges and immunities, sometimes by various forms of deliberate and punitive economic, legal, and political harassment, oppression, and deprivation, and on rare occasions, by assassination.
The ejection of people who recognize the broadest goals of the establishment, and of people who overtly communicate its methods and goals - in short, of sentient individuals - tends to expel ideas that lead to such awareness and communication. In time, the establishment becomes a collection of people and ideas that scrupulously precludes the possibility of conscious awareness of establishment methods, goals, and consequences. The cult becomes ever more cryptic, ever more effective at defying investigation and exposure, ever more thorough in evading accountability. In short, the secrecy of broad establishment programs is secured by depriving the whole of the establishment of conscious awareness thereof. This is key to the success the establishment enjoys, however modest and temporary it is. It has an ironic corollary, however. In time, members of the establishment lose the ability to discern what is and is not permissible and advisable to openly articulate. They make statements that reveal grave establishment secrets. These statements can be collected and compiled (as in this compilation) to document the nature of the establishment in the words of its own members.
Because decision-makers in the establishment never bring unfettered conscious examination to bear on the matters before them, their decisions exhibit the dream-like semi-logic of the subconscious. Irrationality is fundamental to the process, and the establishment cannot withstand relentless accountability to reason. Political science, properly, is largely an investigation of human psychology in the sphere of social control.
``According to its form a strong revolutionary organization may also be described as a conspirative organization - and we must have the utmost conspiracy for an organization of that kind. Secrecy is such a necessary condition - that all other conditions (number, and selection of members, functions, etc.) must all be subordinated to it.''
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (``Lenin''), the acknowledged leader of the Bolshevik revolution in Russia, in Chto Dyelat (``What to Do''), 1902
President Woodrow Wilson (in The New Freedom, 1913) wrote of the western establishment:
``Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.''
Overwhelmingly, the ``power somewhere'' to which Wilson refers is the cryptic cult (with its powers of censure and disfranchisement) populated by the very people expressing fear. It is an ironic and sad state of affairs. The establishment has leaders of a sort, and some ``[...] For I agree with you that there is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents. Formerly bodily powers gave place among the aristoi. But since the invention of gunpowder has armed the weak as well as the strong with missile death, bodily strength, like beauty, good humor, politeness and other accomplishments, has become but an auxiliary ground of distinction. There is also an artificial aristocracy founded on wealth and birth, without either virtue or talents; for with these it would belong to the first class. The natural aristocracy I consider as the most precious gift of nature for the instruction, the trusts, and government of society. And indeed it would have been inconsistent in creation to have formed man for the social state, and not to have provided virtue and wisdom enough to manage the concerns of the society. May we not even say that that form of government is the best which provides the most effectually for a pure selection of these natural aristoi into the offices of government? The artificial aristocracy is a mischievous ingredient in government, and provision should be made to prevent it's [sic -AMPP Ed] ascendancy. [...]''
-Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to John Adams, 1813
of these are investigated below, but actual enforcement is by the foot soldiers of the establishment - ordinary business executives, government employees, academicians, professionals (e.g. doctors and lawyers), etc.
*
America's domination of modern innovation is a consequence of precisely the individualistic trends and processes the establishment seeks to undermine. As always, the establishment hopes to perpetuate its position of privilege by holding back the tectonic drift of culture. In so doing they make the seismic cataclysm of revolution inevitable. It is buildings that kill, not earthquakes, so timely exit is the key for those determined to survive.
Misled by hegemons and their minions, most of the world's population readily enlists in the establishment program. This program is dominated by collectivism, in general, and socialism, in particular. Most people understand they do not individually have the potential to compete economically, in a fair contest, with the prodigious producers among the world's population. However, the producers - that small minority - are more able than all the rest combined, no matter how the rest organize themselves.
In the contemporary model, the non-producers (an overwhelming majority whose values are shaped principally by the state-controlled education and mass media apparatuses) vote in referenda and elections to empower the despots (give them the political capital) to impose progressive income taxes and other institutions of naked theft and oppressive regulation. This is democratic socialism. As the despots 'They're trying to kill me,' Yossarian told him calmly. - 'No one's trying to kill you.' Clevinger cried. - 'Then why are they shooting at me?' Yossarian asked. 'They're shooting at everyone,' Clevinger answered. 'They're trying to kill everyone.' - 'And what difference does that make?'
-Joseph Heller, in Catch-22, 1961
and their constituencies conspire to enslave the producers, the producers in time deny their products to the rest, recognizing that such service is aid and comfort to their enemy. They will instead apply their talents to the mounting of resistance, sometimes resisting in novel ways no one has yet conceived. The despots compound the economic catastrophe of producer boycott and rebellion by imposing policies that arrest or retard production itself, and through intellectually and morally destructive schooling, reduce the number of producers. Having brought desperate poverty to nations where in living memory there was broad prosperity, the despots will lose the support of their constituencies. Without a constituency, or the services of the producers, their regimes will collapse by default. Though further transient despotic regimes may follow, eventually the producers will prevail, to the benefit of all but the despots (who are pathological and plainly evil). The syndicates of the despots and their majorities of fools are fleeting bankruptcies.
Exposition
The United States is the world's oldest surviving nation: it is the first constitutionally founded nation, and the birthplace of modern civilization. Many key chapters in the book of history have opened here, and most of those that opened elsewhere have already closed. The world now dances to an American beat, a beat that is oldest here where it began. America is the first of the modern representative republics, and the birthplace of federal regionalization. It is the pioneer of the assembly line, the age of electricity, the skyscraper, the age of the airplane and helicopter, the nuclear age, the television age, the computer age, and the networking age, all of which are key components of the global status quo. The United States is the most important nation in the history of the planet, but it is weary and battered, from burning brightly, but more, from suffering the slings and arrows of those it has frightened and of those who have sought to domesticate it. The western world is in a downward spiral of demoralization and irrationality that will quite possibly end in the spastic, catastrophic collapse of western civilization, into a new dark age akin to that which followed the disintegration of the Roman empire. If the domineering habits of the corporate United States and the authoritarian and collectivistic trends throughout the western world do not abate, this will certainly transpire. The United States (or some portion thereof) can, however, be among the first nations to start anew, better, stronger, wiser.
In the meantime, America is no longer a functioning republic (constitutional representative democracy), and its failure is due not to a natural decay of its citizens, but to the manipulations of the establishment. They are transforming America, and the world, into a giant steel trap that springs when, where, and how they desire. Moreover, American society in particular has been transformed into a small collection of massive cults - plus myriad smaller ones - through a complex campaign of marginalization.
This social fragmentation is uncanny. Prominent examples of American cults are the environmentalist extremists, the animal rights extremists, the New Agers, the pro-life extremists (no abortions for anyone) and pro-choice extremists (state-subsidized abortions for everyone), the centralist-statist-authoritarians (which includes the near entirety of the government bureaucracy, and much of the law enforcement and military communities), the entitlement cult (addictees of food stamps, welfare payments, tort awards, favoritism through so-called affirmative action, the ``reparations'' movement, etc. - lawyers are prominent in this cult), the fundamentalist American protestant Christians (e.g. the Christian Coalition), the GOP, Farrakhan's Nation of Islam, the nationalist socialist populists (e.g. Pat Buchanan and Lenora Fulani), the Scientologists, the Moonies, the Mormons, the radical feminists, the Randites, national union labor, the white power / white separatist movement, the Clintonites, the DNC, the market cowboy cult (Wall Street et al.), the soccer mom cult (closely related to the New Age and centralist-statist-authoritarian cults), the metacult (e.g. Subgenii), and on and on so that most of the population is consumed. What these and the rest of the nation's cults have in common is that they are founded on false premises (indeed, are constructed within a Hegelian epistemology, and in most cases, exhibit a Hegelian power structure), and left to their own devices certainly fail in time (as any competent system dynamicist can explain).
America possesses, or possessed, a potent combination:
a constitution explicitly recognizing, for each individual citizen not convicted of a crime: freedom of speech, of assembly, and of armament, the right to fair and impartial treatment before the law, sovereign private property rights, and exemption from involuntary servitude
a constitution forbidding subordination of the nation's government, or any part thereof, to any foreign power (i.e. international court, parliament, etc.)
a vast military and economic might
a citizenry that is habitually inventive, to an economically disruptive degree
Thus America was, and to a great degree is to the present day, uniquely problematic for the establishment. (1), (2), and (4) are simply contrary to their perceived interests, as will be explained in much greater detail below, and (3) makes control of America of paramount importance to them simply in order to safeguard their hegemony. America is thus a distinguished target in their machinations.
The national character of the United States is to neither dominate nor be dominated (with the obvious exception of slavery before emancipation). This character has been eroded by urban and suburban culture, by the welfare state, by corporatization, and by the national security establishment, but it nonetheless survives recognizably. For other nations, notably those in Europe, the idea of a nation militarily and economically capable of imperial domination and the exacting of tribute, but refraining from doing so, is alien. People in these nations (and most others, of course) therefore at once distrust, fear, and admire the United States, not quite understanding, but believing it to have identified a formula for relatively unaccountable domination while maintaining prosperity and political stability. Sadly there is a grain of truth in this point of view: the US establishment certainly seeks to dominate the international stage, and to a large degree, does so. They hide behind the curtain of the nation's largely subverted electoral institutions, and they are empowered by the wealth of inventive freedom-loving Americans.
The Elephants in the Room
``The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the constitution which at any time exists, 'till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole People, is sacredly obligatory upon all.''
-George Washington, in his farewell address
Here at the outset, I should briefly detail some obvious and important examples of constitutional abrogation.
The state (in combination with the private banks) issues fiat currency, whereas in Article 1 Section 8 it is only authorized to ``borrow money'' and ``coin money''. The several states use this fiat currency exclusively, whereas Article 1 Section 10 commands that ``No state shall [...] make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts [...]'' (I'd be surprised if any state would actually accept coined bullion at all as payment for a permit or state income tax).
The first amendment includes this language: ``Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof''. The income tax Congress enacted (within title 26 of the US code) exempts religious entities (corporations) from the taxes that all other individuals and corporations must pay (except eligible educational and charity corporations). From one point of view, Congress was required to provide this immunity to religions, to steer clear of the ``free exercise'' clause. However, by taxing nearly everything and everyone except religions, in reality they made an end run around the first amendment, subsidizing the creation, maintenance, and prosperity of religions (directly violating the ``establishment'' clause), and violating the ``free exercise'' clause by making religion an activity with Congressionally subsidized profits.
The provision of Article 1 Section 8 that ``The Congress shall have power [...] To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries'' is invoked to justify federal statutes that allow so-called ``intellectual property'' (books, movies, music, software, etc.) to be bought and sold like so many sacks of wheat, whereas a sound literal reading of the provision permits no such transfer of exclusive rights. The preeminent exclusive right contemplated by the framers is the exclusive right of the creator to decide who will produce, disseminate, or practice the creation, and on what terms. Copyrights and patents, to be constitutional, must remain under the control of the actual original creators. Any construal of the provision that ostensibly permits a denial to the creator of that right, or of any other exclusive right held to derive from the provision, is void. Moreover, any interpretation of the provision that is inconsistent with Amendment 1 (``Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press [...]'') is void. Constitutional rights and immunities are directly applicable in unabridged and undiluted form in the criminal law context, so the constitution is brazenly flouted in the copyright and patent regimes.
The Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) makes various forms of plainly constitutionally protected expression, or acts prerequisite to them, federal felonies carrying fines up to $500,000 and imprisonment up to 5 years (or both) for the first offense and up to $1,000,000 and 10 years imprisonment thereafter. The law empowers the state to decide, unilaterally and without more specific provisions in law, whether a particular technology ``is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected''. A general purpose computer (an ordinary personal computer, for example) is extraordinarily effective in circumventing such measures, so that the state could criminalize them all (theoretically) simply by finding that that is their primary purpose. In fact, the law commands that ``No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof'' that facilitates circumvention, and since nearly all actual circumvention systems are computer programs that run on general purpose computers, the law in fact inevitably criminalizes general purpose computers. Because DMCA is ambiguous on the question, however, Fritz Hollings is threatening to introduce the Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA) making these draconian restrictions explicit.
The commandment of Article 1 Section 9 that ``No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.'' is daily abrogated in court through the tort system. As a result, the guarantee that ``No person shall [...] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law [...]'' (Amendment 5) and that ``No state shall [...] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law [...]'' (Amendment 14) are routinely violated with respect to property.
In the introduction to The Constitution of the USA - Analysis and Interpretation (1996 GPO printing, published by the US Senate and the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress), Killian and Costello write that ``The demise of substantive due process, apparent in the 1950s, is a fact today insofar as the validity of economic legislation is concerned [...]''. The source and the conclusion are sterling.
The guarantee that ``No state shall [...] deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.'' (Amendment 14) is annihilated by regimes of so-called affirmative action (coercive state-enforced race, ethnic, and gender favoritism). Such regimes created by Congress and enforced by the corporate United States are abrogations of Amendment 10 (``The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.'')
As a result of arms regulation and prohibition regimes enacted by Congress (chiefly those of 1934, 1968, 1986, 1993, and 1994), and innumerable such regimes (some effectively constituting unabashed and undiluted bans on all firearms) enacted at more local levels, the guarantee that ``the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.'' (Amendment 2, safeguarding the ability of the common citizenry to defend itself) is in shambles. In fact, the second amendment recognizes a much stronger right than even the first amendment, since it restrains all infringement on the right to have and carry weapons, by any public law or private contract, not simply infringement by act of Congress.
The guarantee that ``Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.'' (Amendment 13, ratified 1865-Dec-6) was effectively repealed in large part by Amendment 16 (ratified 1913-Apr-8), which reads ``The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census of enumeration.'' Moreover, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that Amendment 16 does not create any new federal authority, and that income taxes were consistent with the Constitution with or without the income tax amendment (i.e., has not conceded the significance of Amendment 13). (c.f. Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co., 240 U.S. 103, 112 (1916), Bowers v. Kerbaugh-Empire Co., 271 U.S. 170, 173-174 (1926), 26 USC §1, 26 USC §61, and 26 USC §63.) The return filing requirement (26 USC §6011) obviously infringes the constitutional right under the Amendment 5 not to ``be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself'': a filing is obviously testimony, and someone who refuses to pay taxes must either reveal the violation or commit perjury. The Supreme Court of the United States has never conceded this, even though it has conceded a nearly identical point regarding compliance with the provisions of the National Firearms Act.
The clause of Article 1 Section 8 authorizing Congress ``To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions'' was effectively repealed by Amendment 13, yet the military draft has been activated many times since 1865.
As a centerpiece of the War on Drugs, the guarantee that ``Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.'' (Amendment 8) is routinely abrogated. The guarantees of due process of Amendments 5 and 14 are routinely abrogated, both in the War on Drugs, and even more brazenly, whenever an accusation of terrorism or illegal immigration is levelled. The War on Drugs itself centers on federal statutes and regulations that have no legitimate constitutional underpinning, and so are utterly illegitimate.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, is a rogue agency. Their primary business is the systematic abrogation of Amendment 2. Regarding alcohol and tobacco, their business is the abrogation of Amendments 4, 5, 9 (``The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.''), and 10. They also abrogate Amendments 4, 5, 9, and 10, with respect to firearms, of course.
The Internal Revenue Service is also a rogue agency, whose primary business is the abrogation of Amendments 4, 5, 8, and 13.
The Drug Enforcement Administration is also a rogue agency, whose mission is justified speciously with the ``provide for the [...] general welfare'' clause of Article 1 Section 8, a clause which so liberally interpreted permits the corporate United States to do anything not explicitly forbidden - clearly not the true intent or meaning of the clause, a distortion which in any case is clearly superseded by Amendments 9 and 10. The DEA is in roughly the same business as the ATF and IRS, abrogating Amendments 4, 5, 8, 9, and 10. Finally, as any informed, rational, honest observer can attest, the War on Drugs actually harms the general welfare.
The vital pillars of the current establishment regime are:
the tort law system (non-contract civil suits)
the compulsory citizen jury and the jury-culling racket
the military draft in time of war
the national income tax and the withholding system
state and local sales and property taxes
Federal Reserve style central banking (fiat currency, central authority on loan policies) and fractional reserve banking (by inferior banks)
state borrowing and bond issues
non-employee stockholders
mergers and acquisitions of companies that compete with each other
single entities holding stock in companies that compete with each other
transferable copyrights
transferable patents
state-operated primary schooling free to attendees
state-licensed, state-regulated broadcast and cablecast corporate empires that monopolize the mass media
the winner-take-all, gerrymanderable electoral system
constant community patrolling and policing by state agents
The entrenched establishment of the US will resist, at any cost, changes that threatens these pillars. They expect to parlay them - each of which, without exception, is a dangerous corruption - into global economic and political hegemony.
*
The establishment leaders' vision is to transform world political and legal reality so that the historic role of the nation-state is played by largely sovereign transnational corporate trusts, to which nation-states are subordinate. Their envisioned seat of world government is not a United Nations but a United Trusts, a transnational oligarchy ruling from behind closed doors. This is the role for which Bilderberg fancies itself suited. Revealing this rather directly, David Rockefeller (in Newsweek International, 1999-Feb-1) said ``[...] somebody has to take governments' place, and business seems to me to be a logical entity to do it.''
In order to empower a global banking, managerial, regulatory, and surveillance infrastructure, they cultivate economic interdependence at scales from the household to the multinational region, to a degree that cannot be justified by appeal to overall efficiency or profit advantages. Speaking at the Business Council for the United Nations, on September 14, 1994, Rockefeller said ``But this present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for long. Already there are powerful forces at work that threaten to destroy all of our hopes and efforts to erect an enduring structure of global interdependence.'' Indeed, the organization's quarterly publication is called The InterDependent, and indeed, such forces are at work, and will eventually prevail.
Consider the Webster's dictionary definition of dependent: ``1: hanging down 2a: determined or conditioned by another 2b: relying on another for support 2c: subject to another's jurisdiction 2d: SUBORDINATE''. The establishment envisions an arrangement of universal mutual slavery. To the nuclear establishment - the core of the establishment, which in a fitting lexical coincidence, is responsible for the nuclear weapon arsenals - freedom is largely or wholly alien. John D. Rockefeller exhibited this pathology when he declared ``The combination is here to stay. Individualism has gone, never to return.'' He simply could not conceive of the alternative. With the income tax, Rockefeller and his cohorts installed an engine of subsidy for the collective: a corporation never dies and so is never affected by inheritance taxes, whereas an individual cannot pass his fortune (or more to the point, his farm or his business) on to his children without forfeiting nearly half of it to the state - which is to say, often the farm or business cannot be passed on at all in an economically workable form, and so the heirs must liquidate the estate (with the vital spoils bought up by corporations). And of course, the tax code provides direct monetary rewards to people for making other people dependent on them - the larger the number of ``dependents'' entered on the tax return, the larger the deduction in tax liability.
Central to the establishment vision is the economic and eugenical regimentation of world society. The plan, in summary, is paternalistic, feudalistic, oligarchical, techno-industrial world government. Most Bilderberg affiliates of record pursue this agenda unwittingly, and were it laid out for them clearly and concisely, they would find it congenial in most of its aspects. The most dreadful aspects of the vision - eugenical regimentation and feudalism - are not explicit or conscious Bilderberg programs, but instead are consciously pursued only by the nuclei of the establishment - the houses of Rothschild and (to an increasingly exclusive degree) Rockefeller. Affiliates consciously innocent of these visions would shudder and briefly balk if their conscious proponents - the establishment leaders - presented them plainly. However, most would in short order recognize the congruence of the visions with their own sensibilities, and embrace them, as did their counterparts in the indigenous establishments of Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. Indeed, the Nazi eugenical program was borrowed whole cloth from the movement in America and Britain, promoted most specifically by the American nuclear establishment. Consider that Adam Carolla, cohost of Loveline (distributed via Viacom's MTV and Westinghouse's WXRK (K-Rock east, home base of Howard Stern) and KROQ (K-Rock west, home base of Loveline) - note that Viacom and Westinghouse (CBS) have merged into a single corporation) openly and repeatedly maintains (in the program, over the air) that the state should have the authority to decide who is and is not permitted to procreate.
The recent institution of genome patenting implies that the patent holder in some way owns the individual with that genome, since that individual is obviously practicing the patent. This is a remarkable corruption, and a generous (and unlikely) interpretation would allow the patent holder to kill the individual at the patent holder's caprice, since this is the only way the patent holder could halt unauthorized practice of the patent. A more established institution in the same vein is civil commitment, which operates like civil forfeiture, with a reduced burden of proof, only the object seized by the state is an actual living human individual. Civil commitment is an extraconstitutional mechanism by which private citizens licensed by a committee of executive appointees cause the forcible imprisonment of individuals charged with no crime, with subsequent judicial review based principally on standards promulgated by the private American Psychiatric Association in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the ``DSM'').
The establishment's vision is substantially implemented, in each of its facets, today. They now seek only to make their control more precise and complete, its exercise less unwieldy and risk-laden, and its instruments and infrastructure more permanent and unchallengeable.
An important theme of the establishment model is corporate specialization, in which a company's domain of production is narrowly circumscribed. Such an arrangement is often attained by a series of spin-offs (vertical disintegration) and mergers of competitors (horizontal integration), with the objective of securing a monopolistic turnstile at a key nexus of the economy. Such monopolies force other companies to become dependent, and are themselves completely dependent on other companies, since their raw materials must be supplied to them by other companies, and their products are not useful in and of themselves but instead simply serve to supply other companies with raw materials. The end effect is that the economy is made into a single fantastically inefficient corporation managed by the state through regulation, in which each nominally sovereign corporation is just a department, and all interaction between de facto departments is within the state's regulatory purview. Since these interactions between departments often traverse national boundaries, often it is the global state (currently, principally the WTO) that is empowered. The machinery of regulation is itself controlled by various committees.
The effect of the patent system is like the effect of corporate specialization. Inventions are systems, and systems have components. If an inventor's palette of available components is curtailed by patent encumbrances, he is disempowered. He must choose among various obsolete components on which the patents have expired, unless he is working for an immense multinational corporation with an armada of lawyers and a vast portfolio of patents and patent-sharing agreements. This grossly impedes innovation. What impedes innovation reduces the tools available to the scientist, reducing his prospects for breakthrough discovery. This, in turn, reduces the knowledge available to inventors, reducing their prospect of conceiving breakthrough inventions. Of course, patents are accessible only to large corporations, because even if an individual obtains a patent, the cost of detecting infringement and defending the patent in court (a process without which the patent is meaningless) is prohibitive. The total dynamic dramatically diminishes prospects for prosperity.
Committees are a central feature of establishment organization, and committees were a particularly ascendant feature of power structure in the twentieth century. There are all sorts, some rather recent inventions, others dating to antiquity. Legislatures, juries, panels of justices, and the whole of the voting citizenry, are all committees described in the US constitution. Executive commissions and panels, such as the Federal Communications Commission, Federal Trade Commission, Securities and Exchange Commission, Federal Election Commission, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Federal Reserve Board of Governors and associated Federal Open Market Committee (which are actually an especially innovative type of committee, comprising state and non-state members) are another type of committee, a type popularized in the twentieth century. Industry councils that consider, adopt, and promulgate standards, such as the International Standards Organization and American National Standards Institute, are another important type of committee popularized in the twentieth century. In the eighteenth century, a pivotal type of committee was incepted: the corporate board of directors. This type of committee ascended to dominance in the nineteenth century. In the nineteenth century, the multinational multilateral multisectorial council of eminent persons was incepted, and it ascended to dominance in the twentieth century, with the incorporation of the Council on Foreign Relations and Royal Institute for International Affairs, and eventually, of Bilderberg.
Committee organization serves the purposes of the establishment as follows:
Dissent is squelched by the law of large numbers.
Activists are pacified by the (often mistaken) sense that they have exerted influence, and that there is nothing more to be done.
Arenas are created wherein unadorned and immediate peer pressure encourages the enshrinement of consensus, coordinating action, with dominant members positioned to veto undesirable consensus, so that the will of the dominant members is implemented without their issuing explicit or accountable orders or proclamations, and without the sense that there is a corporeal center to the will imposed on the members.
The accountability of any individual member is reduced, and the actual command hierarchy is camouflaged. Dominant members largely sidestep vulnerability to direct attack, and in many cases, can more freely exercise authority to their own ends.
Dominant members gather intelligence on the stances of other members, and on those the other members are responsible for or represent.
Organizational change and action are retarded, which with the aforementioned intelligence, allows dominant members of the establishment to anticipate political events, and exploit or protect against them through more agile non-committee channels.
The continuity of the status quo power structure is safeguarded by redundancy and fault tolerance.
Many of these common features of the committee system are clear weaknesses. Some of its gravest weakness are immediate corollaries of the features enumerated above. In particular, the squelching of dissent tends to squelch vital wisdom. Most members of committees sport pedestrian intellects or hidebound outlooks, and are distrustful of and frightened by the small minority that alone has the intellectual and psychological wherewithal to anticipate, prepare for, and surmount through inventive strategy, rare or unprecedented contingencies (particularly those with a broad macroeconomic or sociological character). This phenomenon can be seen in its logical extreme in the establishment's unshaken dedication to their vision (paternalistic, feudalistic, oligarchical, techno-industrial world government), implicitly or explicitly rejecting the dissenting wisdom enumerated in this document and in countless other books, articles, speeches, and statements.
One sure seed of the establishment's demise is found in a particular dynamic closely related to the weaknesses of the committee system explored above. Current leaders of the establishment choose to promote, and invite into their inner circles, people they believe will not threaten their positions - sycophantic, servile Doberman types (think Henry Kissinger). This reverse-meritocracy is continued generation after generation. The result for the establishment is the same as would befall a baseball team whose management relentlessly signs players they believe will not overtake the batting average of any current player, or a university whose management recruits students and professors they believe will not overtake the achievements of the current crop. A side-effect is that (for example) most Rockefellers are not really in the corporate House of Rockefeller, though many or most still reap certain dividends from a certain level of association.
*
Topic Closed
Chemtrail Central Forum
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
This topic is 17 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
posted 12-29-2002 07:18 PM
posted 12-29-2002 07:53 PM
