parents and grandparents are benefitting from current policies…
Utter rubbish.
I very much appreciate the approach Chris is taking here at pp with regards to 9-11. By stating only what clearly known to be true, the position can be explained and defended clearly.
This approach has the advantage that it can open the topic for the first time and can be defended against the initial waves of skepticism. You can’t really argue your way out of “vertical collapse” and “free fall speed” and “the NIST fire-based progressive collapse computer model does not match observed reality” when the videos are viewed.
It is my experience here, that a little rent in the veil is likely to fall shut at this point unless a person then embarks on a major personal research effort to resolve the many points of cognitive dissonance that are created.
Pinecarr posted an article on this a few weeks ago (that I can no longer find!!) on the problem of not having a context to understand a particular deception. A single small peak through the veil is a starting place, but doesn’t offer the context to construct a new understanding of how things are actually working.
At some point, understanding the world requires the big picture level be faced too, even though it may be unproven and the little evidence available is messy, contradictory and sparse.
Though I personally do not know 'who dunnit' or what the overall plan is, I believe that someone did and that they have some sort of strategy in play, and that the world would probably* be a better place if this were understood.
I am agreeing with treebeard and DaveF on this: We don't need to crash the barricades, we just need to understand, so that we are no longer deceived.
*CAF leaves open the possibility that "they" know something that we do not and that "they" are doing what is necessary for some reason that is not publicly known.
1. What? For argument's sake, let's say that the above captures the essence of the "what". There is no more mileage to be made here.
2. So what?
3. Now what?
"…we just need to understand, so that we are no longer deceived." is NOT the answer for 2 or 3. It's the new "What?" Constantly changing what the "What" is wheel spinning - lot's of noise and smoke, but no traction and progress down track.
Which brings us back to:
2. So what?
- Now what?
Carry on…
Maybe you'd care to defend that. If you do, I'll read it.
I believe I've seen sufficient evidence to accept the broad premise, so if you have some basis for your rubbish comment, let's see it
I had heard the quote from Kourik before, not familiar with the site you linked to. The paragraph sums up my own feelings on the matter quite well. It is funny that he put Fukuoka in the "cult" permaculture camp rather than the "smart" permaculture group. I never did get a chance to visit his farm in Japan while he was alive, but I do remember him writing about westerners who showed up, enthralled with the idea of "do nothing" farming, until they realized how much work was involved, then they quickly disappeared.
Perhaps this is all part of the drunken energy stupor brought on excessive fossil fuel consumption for the past few decades that we have not yet recovered from. Our collective expectations have become so out of alignment with reality it does defy belief sometimes. Lawton has done some amazing restorative work, but after listening to more of his lectures and work, he seemed have less and less to say to me and own need to continue to develop my own gardening/"permaculture skills. I have read works from all the permaculture pantheon, Fukuoka, Kourik, Holmgren, Mollison, etc. I do miss the days of the New Alchemy Institute, they put together well researched papers on practical matters of all kinds of alternative technologies and organic gardening techniques in their Journal of the New Alchemists. I think you can still find used copies of those around if you hunt for them.
Following up on the cycles theme,
I've done a bit of digging and come up with the name Vilfredo Pareto and his book The Mind and Society which comes as a free download for those interested.
An introduction from the wiki page about him;
"He made several important contributions to economics, particularly in the study of income distribution and in the analysis of individuals' choices. He was also responsible for popularising the use of the term 'elite' in social analysis."
and
"Pareto developed the notion of the circulation of elites, the first social cycle theory in sociology. He is famous for saying "history is a graveyard of aristocracies".[9]
Pareto seems to have turned to sociology for an understanding of why his abstract mathematical economic theories did not work out in practice, in the belief that unforeseen or uncontrollable social factors intervened."
Anyway, I’m going to plough through his book and see what nuggets lie within. On the face of it both of his theories listed above seem relevant to any cyclical nature in society.
All the best,
Luke
England still has plenty of coal
As a lifelong lover and studier of history, global mostly rather than 'Murican history, I have to agree that history does in fact repeat itself. It repeats itself in that the cycles of one age often are cycles in another; civilizations rise and fall for remarkably similar - not usually exactly alike, but close enough - reasons. So I'll buy into this idea that a fourth turning could lead to a first turning, at least on the theoretical level of history.
However, and this is a BIG however, I have lived through the tail end of the most prosperous era in human history that has ever existed, according to multiple measures - energy production, consumption, population, scientific and technological advancement, production of almost everything humanly possible, etc etc - and the Voice of my Culture has whispered in my ear since birth that This Age of Humanity is BIGGER and BETTER than anything that has ever existed before…by an exponential, not incremental, factor. While it is debatable whether these last two hundred years have indeed been better, few would contest that it has not been bigger by an order of magnitude unseen in human civilization. So, drawing on my knowledge of the cycles and 'circles' of history, logic (and my gut) tells me that the end of this era will come with a commensurate collapse of the same exponential, not incremental, magnitude.
This is why I fear the future my children, at night when I am trying to sleep, and why I am preparing for the worst. I will most likely be dead within a decade or two, as will most everyone I love. I will live, prepare and fight for that NOT to be the case, but I have no illusions about what happens when a highly complex global civilization of over seven billion human beings comes crashing down around us; it will be ugly, brutal, and violent. We will come through it as a species unless we nuke ourselves into annihilation, and human beings will develop something sustainable in the next cycle, but I think that "first turning" very far off and with a lot - I mean a stupendously gargantuan amount - of human pain and misery in between. Then again, I'm a bit of a skeptical pessimist who has lived a life filled with spurious promises and outright lies from people with shiny smiles, so feel free to ignore me and call me on it. I can't help but feel that anyone who peddles a "brighter future" rather than a "very different one" is trying to sell me something, or is certifiably insane.
Fight for the best world while preparing for the worst world.
-Snydeman
"Fight for the best world while preparing for the worst world." thanks Snydeman, robie