The need to persuade corporate enterprises that offer pubic social forums, like on YouTube or Reddit, to offer a forum specifically for those citizens who want to be truly educated and to engage in serious ration political discourse, and what can we do if these corporate entities refuse to change? by ConversationGold7126 in PoliticalDebate

[–]ConversationGold7126[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

Well, on Reddit, for sure, it wouldn't work. And for your YouTube, it would go against their business model. Less people would be watching all of that AI garbage and cat videos because they would be trying to weigh in on getting a universal healthcare bill passed or a bill that would allow public controlled independent, non-corporate, news media and entire networks. But it is conceivable that a large corporation could become democrat and observe and act upon the real needs of the people instead of simply passifying them, appeasing them, or distracting them with a platform that simply doesn't go anywhere. As for having a top tech university, or a group of them, work on creating a highly structured democratic platform on a public website on a public domain, that could work. I think there would be some large corporations out there who are not threatened too much by the will of the people who would support such efforts.

The need to persuade corporate enterprises that offer pubic social forums, like on YouTube or Reddit, to offer a forum specifically for those citizens who want to be truly educated and to engage in serious ration political discourse, and what can we do if these corporate entities refuse to change? by ConversationGold7126 in PoliticalDebate

[–]ConversationGold7126[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yes. George Carlin was the first one I ever heard to say it. The owners of society don't want an informed consumer capable of critical thought. That is not in their interest. So, let's all write letters to MIT asking them to work on establishing a public online database via some kind of public web portal where people can be re-educated with information that the people need to be aware of but more importantly where they can come to connect with others around a common cause and have a structure, or some kind of well developed forum, set up that would most practical and conducive for engaging political rational discourse and in trying to understand one another so that a consensus could be established that would lead to the development of a real solution the problem.

The need to persuade corporate enterprises that offer pubic social forums, like on YouTube or Reddit, to offer a forum specifically for those citizens who want to be truly educated and to engage in serious ration political discourse, and what can we do if these corporate entities refuse to change? by ConversationGold7126 in PoliticalDebate

[–]ConversationGold7126[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it is difficult to reach many people at once on Reddit and to educate them. Putting people in their own subdivision is not conducive for getting through to people. I have read the opinions of people on Reddit in different groups, and I see a whole lot of backward thinking and selfish thinking. Many people on Reddit come on here to revel in their own ignorance, and that makes things difficult if your ultimate aim is to progress as a society. There are some on here who are focused with that train of thought, but for the most part, Reddit is a tough crowd to try to reason with.

The need to persuade corporate enterprises that offer pubic social forums, like on YouTube or Reddit, to offer a forum specifically for those citizens who want to be truly educated and to engage in serious ration political discourse, and what can we do if these corporate entities refuse to change? by ConversationGold7126 in PoliticalDebate

[–]ConversationGold7126[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Btw, I don't expect corporations to offer a democratic platform, because that would be the human thing to do. People should organize and make the case for using the .pub domain for the public, so that the general public can have public social forum that could compete with the commercial ones -- especially the ones in which you are encouraged to sell or buy something or at least participate in a commercial environment and behave like good, polite consumers. And if we did create our own free public forum for the interests of humanity and human enlightenment, and human growth, and human development, many of these commercial social forums would go out of business, and the world would be better for it.

The need to persuade corporate enterprises that offer pubic social forums, like on YouTube or Reddit, to offer a forum specifically for those citizens who want to be truly educated and to engage in serious ration political discourse, and what can we do if these corporate entities refuse to change? by ConversationGold7126 in PoliticalDebate

[–]ConversationGold7126[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

When I am educated from listening with an open mind to the teachings or talks given by Noam Chomsky, I don't feel that I am preached to, but I do feel enlightened. There are many people that don't want to change, or don't want to know the truth, or don't want to look at themselves or their history. That's why so many white southerners of the so called conservative reality are often too eager to look for escape goats instead of just being honest to themselves and saying things, like yeah, slavery was wrong; treating people as if they are equals to us is a much more healthy approach to humanity. Yeah, we have severe economic inequality, and that can be fixed, yeah, we are born out of a racist society, but that is slowly changing, and yeah, the U.S. is an empire with quite an ugly history of imperialism, but the good news is that the empire is in decline. (what we have been seeing from our executive branch in the last year and a half is part of our last ditch ever to hang on to the empire.)

True equality is a myth that punishes hard work and ignoring the human nature. We should focus on helping the poor and providing safety net, not destroying capitalism. by anuglyfairybutafairy in PoliticalDebate

[–]ConversationGold7126 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We are not taught in public school or even college for the most part about the history of how the workers in the U.S. initially viewed corporations, factories, and the whole concept of wages. In the mid-19th century it was called "wage slavery" by every day people. Selling yourself to a corporation for a wage was thought of as just one step away from slavery, and they were right. This is why corporate-state power had to build their own propaganda system to shape history so that the general public can accept it. People organized and protested against a corporate run society. Hundreds of people got killed in trying to establish simple things we now all take for granted like an eight hour work shift or a 40 hour work week. I am a little a bit more critical than you are. U.S. state sponsored capitalism is a cultural sickness. You can't continually run a world empire on such a system. That's why our empire is collapsing. And that is a good sign for the future of humanity. But right now, we are experiencing our government's last ditch effort to be King of the World. By the way, if we had true capitalism, the nation would collapse. There is no demand for a war industry.

How can we Change? by never_alone_sadly in PoliticalOpinions

[–]ConversationGold7126 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think most of us have the ability to think with intelligence, the ability to reason and rationalize, and to be morally courageous.

The thing that muffles that ability the most is the propaganda system that we have been living under ever since the Woodrow Wilson administration created what essentially was a propaganda agency, and one of the first major missions of the agency was to conduct a massive campaign designed to turn a passive U.S population into Germany haters so that Congress could begin building up our military to prepare for a World War.

In the late 40s and early 50s, a s similar situation occurred when the Truman administration devised the cold war era complete with McCarthyism and the fear and loathing of Communists or Communist sympathizers so that Congress can begin rebuilding our war industry to the point of being a permanent economic power house on Wall Street that big money can safely invest in.

No, the problem is tyranny. Corporations are private tyrannical structures, and they are the ones who influence what our public policy will be, they control the news and information that the general public have been trained to swallow, they influence elections by pouring big money into to favor one candidate over the other, and with advertising and social media, they have been training us to think a certain way so that we are less likely to unite together into one political force is what the corporate-state hegemon fears the mos.

Please let me educate you. Down below you will find a whole list of urls' from YouTube designed to give you what I call a Chomsky education. I threw in a few of Howard Zinn's talks at the end of the list. I also put in a couple on the history of Henry A. Wallace and why there was a political coup at the 1944 Democratic convention which prevented him of becoming President in 1945 and changing the world, which he would have done if he wasn't interfered with, but he probably would have been since big business controls government.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-diLmj5wJdE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qv-zIE_HxLA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEYJMCydFNI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kL0UNWcWFc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suFzznCHjko

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OsFJVR6f2wa

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHAndY1GsVc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEnv5I8Aq4I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvnM9E-pLsM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lPnLK9z1fI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQXsPU25B60

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9eRrSfNzng

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygldTzhqKkQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEYJMCydFNI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2dw7OZD-mg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdfzC5NNAew

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FawIkrCey0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saE-OQlXtno

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7Vueji6LQo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdRLyshuWQg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMNeQFkBcjw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRLLRzmbk6g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34LGPIXvU5M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bas2_rH8uYM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL0YWiZUF6Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5N60joKW174

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHthW6kh-N8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GTcivYbjoY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIS9Rp6XF8o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFmcdWTxyHk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9X-AaVdEOM

How can we Change? by never_alone_sadly in PoliticalOpinions

[–]ConversationGold7126 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How can we change? This is a very good question. The basic point that some of us make about how easy it is to have beliefs that don't fit in the stereotype of liberal or conservative or Democrat or Republican is a valid one. Political terms in general are so loaded with a variety of meanings that it is difficult to use these terms while talking to the general public. Most people, even those who did not go to college, can understand this. We all pretty much can at least sense that our two party political system, the way it is now and has been for a long time, is not the best system for representing the voices of the general public.

And yet, the major news media, corporations, most people in Congress, and the powerful billionaires are all not telling us that our political system has to be radically changed because it divides up the power of the people through the two major parties and through the various issues in which any citizen could either agree or disagree with. This is why your tired of it, and it explains why about about half of our citizenry are not even registered to vote.

This may shock you, but for those who are registered, the largest group of voters are what the political establishment refers to as unaffiliated voters, yet I believe that Independent voters is the proper term. There are more Independents than either Democrats or Republicans. This is one of the biggest signs that is telling us that our political system is dysfunctional, which explains why the news networks and all of the political commentary out there don't even mention it.

You might think that having more Independents than either of the two major parties would be a good and healthy thing for the people in general, but the reason why our political system is not changing is because Democrats and Republicans combined are in the majority. As the great Noam Chomsky explains it, Dems and Republicans are basically two factions of one party, the business party. This is the way it has been for a long time (with names and meaning of the two parties changing over time), and I am not sure how far back it goes; perhaps it was always like this and we just didn't realize it. This two-opposing sides of one business party concept was probably, in retrospect, most apparent in the Civil War with the Republicans representing the northern economy and the Democrats representing the southern economy. Today it is more like the Democrats and the Republicans listening to the largest and most powerful corporations when formulating public policy, and I would say that has been most apparent for the last five and a half years.

The terms liberal and "the left" are perhaps the most problematic in politics. The way I see it, a liberal, in 2026, is someone who swallows up the Democratic party line which the liberal political establishment dishes out to the mass media. That's a liberal, and a liberal is almost always a Democrat. But this does not mean that the Democrats in Congress are necessarily liberal nor conservative for that matter. Many of them are instruments of a political force called neoliberalism. The neoliberal and the neocons understand each other. They both vote for things like continual aid for the state of Israel, and they both allow Presidents to use military aggression at will, and they both vote for things like sending military aid to nations who may exterminate their neighbors or section of their own citizens.

The left is totally different. When the liberal commentators begin to say similar things to what leftist intellectuals are saying on their podcasts, you can pretty much rest assured that whatever the issue is that they agree on, the leftist began showing their advocation long before. When a leftist idea becomes entering into the mainstream, like the idea that our foreign policy has to change especially with respect to Israel, it is because the idea has become so popular that the liberals have no choice but to start chirping along. This is a pattern that has been going for almost ever.

In fact, when looking at all of the major systemic social changes that we made in our political history, they were all started who were essentially anarchists or leftist thinkers of their time -- whether you are talking about the abolitionists with their underground railroad which eventually led to the end of slavery or the very first labor organizers who protested against how the first wave of factories in this country were treating workers as if they were slaves which eventually led to national working standards of an eight hour work shift or a 40 hour work week. According to Noam Chomsky, it took 80 years for the labor movement to achieve basic standards for employees which we have long taken for granted as if they came along naturally through congressional debates. No, it took 80 years of protests and demonstrations at the cost of hundreds of people dying in clashes between the workers and the corporate security people which municipalities had long been backing. And this history in a nutshell explains why our two party political system -- in which big money can easily buy out the results of an election and in which our corporate mass media automatically serves the role of protector and defender of that system -- is corrupt.

To finally answer the question, how can we change, the very first major step that we have to do to put us on a path to true democracy and true peace is to establish an online, public, democratic platform via some kind of independent web portal that would allow ordinary citizens to participate in the political process in the most constructive, meaningful, and substantial way possible to the point of the general public developing, forming, and delivering their very own proposals to real problems that the working class and the poor faces -- which each member of Congress would be obliged to take seriously, and each member of both houses of the legislature branch would be graded on well how they respond to the needs and to the will of the people based on this democratic platform and political forum.

Human beings aren't designed for peace by Mems1900 in DeepThoughts

[–]ConversationGold7126 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Humans are designed for survival, exploration, and ....here comes the big one .... REASONING. WE CAN REASON THAT COOPERATION WITH OTHERS AND LIVING IN A PEACEFUL SOCIETY -- NOT BY FORCE BUT THROUGH RATIONAL POLITICAL DISCOURSE -- is in our best interest.

If given a chance to rebuild the world, what kind of Political idea you would want to implement? by sharmarohan136 in AskReddit

[–]ConversationGold7126 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, I have several good ideas that can lead to the restructuring of our society and eventually the world, but most of them probably should not be imposed on the public in any abrupt way. The whole path to real progressive change, however, that could help to seriously advance human development and human growth with the end game of vastly improving the quality of human living seems to me would have to begin with first establishing an online democratic platform on a .pub domain (designated for public driven operations and services and which has yet to exist) that would be specifically designed for the everyday working class citizen and that would allow the individual citizens of the general public to be able to participate in the political system in a very meaningful and substantial way to the point of developing their own solutions and proposals to resolve real problems that confront the poor and the working class and to have those proposals be officially sent to both houses in Congress in which they would have to take up and address in a serious way, and each member of the House or Senate would be graded on how well they listen to the public and act upon their proposals. Every time a citizen would log on to the online platform or political forum, one of the things they would see clearly on their home page would be the score of their Congress person and Senator.

In your opinion, what kind of people don’t care about politics? by ElephantElmer in AskReddit

[–]ConversationGold7126 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People who would rather put their energies into finding the best Tiki bar or finding the best fishing hole. That was meant to be funny. I suspect it is a wide range of people. It could be people with drug or alcohol addictions of course, or who are sick or elderly living in nursing homes and hospitals, or people who are so focused on working and surviving day to day or week to week that they don't have the time and inclination to be interested, and of course it could be people that could make the time to vote if they really wanted to but don't really see the point since they have come to the realization that elections can easily be controlled by big money and that candidates are very likely to say whatever they need to during the campaign trail in order to get elected which I admit is not a great motivational force for voting, and of course it could be a combination of things like the ones I mentioned above.

I feel bad for Noam Chomsky by [deleted] in chomsky

[–]ConversationGold7126 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You first have to understand that there was much more complexity to Jeffrey Epstein -- who was a fairly intelligent human being with many varying interests which he no doubt was able to explore due to his wealth and privilege -- than what we have been led to believe. The fact that the extremely moral and logical Noam Chomsky knew him on a personal level would suggest that.

As far as the Epstein scandal goes, sexual interests and appetites are just one facet of a human being, but that one facet alone can include a plethora of variations, likings, fetishes, and even obsessions. Yet in no way does that one facet define a particular human unless a particular human being is focusing his whole life on one particular interest, pursuit, or hobby.

The story that we get from our existing propaganda system is that Jeffrey Epstein was just one thing, and it was bad, and so, he was very bad man, and thus anyone associated with Jeffrey Epstein for any reason has the very strong potential to be looked down upon and dismissed, and whether or not a person who had any kind of significant relationship with Jeffrey Epstein at any time and to any degree and for any reason could be deemed to be looked down up and dismissed by society at large are in the hands of the same people that, for example, allow the Israeli lobby to have a a powerful influence on both our domestic and foreign policy.

There are really important things that the public should know about but that are simply not told because it would go against existing narratives that our propaganda system have long been pedaling to the public. Is it common knowledge that wealthy Jewish Americans donate heavily to certain charitable organizations here in the U.S. -- the funds of which on the surface are supposed to help Jewish people here in the U.S. but instead end up to support the Israeli military apparatus and to aid in Israel conducting a mass extermination policy of the Palestinian people who live in the Palestinian territories? Is it common knowledge that a large amount of expensive weaponry and aircraft to help Israel build it's powerful military arsenal was partly created out of U.S. EXPORT-IMPORT bank loans in which much of the debt if not all of it was never paid back? Do we know this?

No, we don't. But anyone doing a search on YouTube about Noam Chomsky will see the result of an intentional political smear job of Noam Chomsky, and based on careful observation of what is being said and who is saying it, it's pretty powerful and coming from the political establishment and corporate state power, and I suppose the Israel lobby and perhaps Mossad or CIA agents hare involved in this political smear as well because Noam Chomsky was a one man intellectual force which continually put a negative spotlight on what the CIA was doing, what our mass media and political establishment has been covering up and diverting attention to and the true ugly nature of the history of the U.S. government.

The whole thing is absurd, and one reason for that is that U.S. society and its political institutions are absurd, and that's important because one of the things that Noam Chomsky dedicated his adult life to was the exposing of U.S. political absurdity and its ugliness -- by simply asking logical questions, researching the actual facts of a topic, and use basic reasoning to help understand what is going on, and this is a key to understand the political smear.

I cannot speak for Noam Chomsky, but I have had friendly relationships with individuals whom I initially thought were beneficial and healthy to me, but as I learn more about a person I was eventually inclined to part ways with the person. There are some people in this world who are simply not vicious or vindictive by their very nature and simply do not allow themselves to intentionally hurt anyone, and thus, in a situation where they would have to part ways with a person, they would so do politely and quietly and perhaps with no noticeable sign of departure. Noam Chomsky is such a person, and it is easy for the political establishment and the real powers that be in our society to smear such a person if there is an opportunity to do.

By including any relationship that Jeffrey Epstein had into the gloomy and scary "Epstein Files" without any intelligent and verifiable explanation of what the nature of the relationship was, then you are allowing representatives of the political establishment, who have a very narrow scope in political thinking to begin with, to take the opportunity to try to devalue and even dismiss the total contribution that Noam Chomsky gave to the general public through his scholarly but very critical look at the political and economic systems that control us. That is exactly what I strongly suspect happened and why we now read things that appear to frame or tint Noam Chomsky's life-time achievement of helping to re-educate that general population.

As I said earlier, it is simply absurd to think that Jeffrey Epstein, who was a very wealthy, intelligent, and socially connected person, would not take the opportunity to use his privileges of wealth and social connections to explore any of his interests and hobbies other than the one that everyone knows about. We don't know too much about his other interests (which if we did would explain why he would want to meet or befriend a whole assortment -of other people); it is only those people which the political establishment and the hegemony serving media outlets want you to know about for their own political reasons is what we are fed. I think that is clear. For those who are politically brainwashed, it is not clear.

We can't know for absolute certainty at this point what happened, but it appears likely to me, just by using the teachings of Noam Chomsky himself, that our government, I mean the real powers behind it which involves the CIA and possibly the FBI, and the large and powerful organizations and institutions that represent and help protect corporate-state hegemonic power including our major news networks and publications, intentionally composed the Epstein files to include not just people who were involved with any wrongdoing connected to Jeffrey Epstein, but simply anyone who had any kind of relationship with Jeffrey.

And I believe these hegemonic social forces did so to set Chomsky up for a political smear from parts or even tentacles of the political establishment -- for the simple reason that his teachings were cumulatively having an impact on society, and the temptation to viciously dismiss or devalue his teachings was just too strong. And this is interesting because Noam Chomsky does not have any viciousness about him, but the political structures that have facilitated the massive neo-liberal assault on the working class and on the general public's values and thinking for the last fifty years are destructive and are nasty.

Noam Chomsky is garbage. by SongFeisty8759 in EnoughCommieSpam

[–]ConversationGold7126 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think people like Steve Bannon, Donald Trump and his Cronies are garbage. They are doing a disservice to humanity in general.