We can only be kept in the cages we do not see. A brief history of human enslavement - up to and including your own.-YT
quantumushroomsays...

The "message" is all over the board, and the way the narrator uses the word "enslavement" reminds me of putting one's hand up to a flashlight beam so the shadow looks huge. Really, if you're going to ramble on about enslavement, start small. You're "enslaved" by your body, you will always need oxygen culled from air. You're "enslaved" by your own belly and the need for food. Except for a few lucky space/moon douchebags, most of us will forever be enslaved by gravity and the earth, never leaving it except to fly to Chicago on peanut-free airliners. You're "enslaved" by your loved ones who demand your time and energy to survive, with no permanent guarantee they will reciprocate. You're "enslaved" by your friends, their opinions, your opinions and the balance of honesty versus hurting feelings needlessly. And so on.

The State is "that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." We know this. The narrator was closest to the current truth when he described governments as mafias. But we've come a long way from the days when tyrants could execute whomever they wished at any time. At least in the "less enslaved" parts of the globe.

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." --G. Washington.

Modern civilization depends on the one lousy master, or a few masters with powers divided, rather than the whims of 100 million little ones, for when anarchy reigns, the neighbor with the biggest guns and posse wins out. S/he may be benevolent today but not tomorrow. And so ...to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...

Why do vids like this ultimately fail? Mostly due to vagueness and having no real answers, but mainly because they assume that in every epoch the State is all-powerful and all-knowing, when history proves none of them has it 100% correct, or even 30% correct. Governments rise and fall like tides. Sometimes they have no idea what they're doing, at others they know the right things to do but don't or won't do them for any number of reasons.

So what does this all mean? Relax. Grab a beer. Light up a joint. Per quantum mechanics or string theory or something, you both exist and do not exist right now. You are both free and "enslaved". Have a nice evening. I will, for I have pr0n!

O Me! O Life!

By Walt Whitman

O me! O life! of the questions of these recurring,
Of the endless trains of the faithless, of cities fill'd with the foolish,
Of myself forever reproaching myself, (for who more foolish than I,
and who more faithless?)
Of eyes that vainly crave the light, of the objects mean, of the
struggle ever renew'd,
Of the poor results of all, of the plodding and sordid crowds I see
around me,
Of the empty and useless years of the rest, with the rest me intertwined,
The question, O me! so sad, recurring--What good amid these, O me, O life?

Answer.
That you are here--that life exists and identity,
That the powerful play goes on, and you may contribute a verse.

rougysays...

@blankfist, truly a man as unjustly overtaxed and under-appreciated to the point of persecution such as your uber productive self...a man who by dint of will alone manages to frequent this site and share with us the bright shards and cryptic remnants of his costly, hard-won wisdom...fording statist subterfuge...and...and.... surmounting collectivist ramparts...

Aw, fuck it. Bite me.


kronosposeidonsays...

Ah, another one of those "If you can't see the problem, you're in denial" narratives. I don't necessarily reject some of the things he said, but really, how is his hypothesis testable? "If you don't see it, then your blind" or "Wake up, idiot!" aren't exactly the best places to start from.

NetRunnersays...

So, up until the 8 minute mark this sounded utterly correct. In particular around 7:20 or so, he mentions that the system of ownership breaks down when you get a fair income distribution, and see a middle class start to emerge.

I agree.

Then he takes a really stupid rightward turn, and insists that it's unions who're doing the hatchetwork for our owners. Please. Unions don't work for governments, or for companies. They work for us livestock.

Government, on the other hand, can easily wind up doing all the hatchetwork for the owners. Take the ultimate libertarian government -- one that only enforces ownership rights. What more could our owners want than that? Here is the natural endpoint of such moronic ideas. All the better if people come to believe that such slavery is really freedom. After all, freedom only belongs to the owners, and limits on their freedom so you can have some is wrong.

That's why income equality is such a threat to the owners -- once people get to the point where they're not constantly in a struggle to provide the basics for their family, and get a taste of real disposable income, they realize how very little money they really need, and they get very, very dangerous to the system.

They're right that economic growth attracts thieves -- the capitalist kind, who demand tax cuts and a continued maintenance of welfare to keep their livestock healthy and educated. That leads to debts, debts that they don't have to worry about paying, because they can just use their ill-gotten gain to keep bribing politicians and brainwashing the ignorant livestock into thinking it's us livestock who've been living lives of undeserved excess.

PS: The other 1984 slogans were "War is Peace", "Ignorance is Strength", along with "Freedom is Slavery". They'd fit nicely on the RNC front page.

PPS: George Orwell was a democratic socialist.

blankfistsays...

@NetRunner. Downvoted your comment because I dislike the cut of your jib.

But seriously, I'm not sure even Orwell knew what he was. He was a Democratic Socialist as much as a Tory Anarchist and a member of the Labor Party. He was also, more than any other affiliation in his life, an Anarchist. But he certainly stood against capitalism, I'll admit that.

I don't get why it's important to bring up in the first place. Why believe someone's individual beliefs has anything to do with their art? I'm obviously Libertarian, yet I made a movie with a good Marxist buddy of mine. Our personal politics aren't meant to be dissuading factors for enjoying the many political themes within the narrative.

enochsays...

i had some people ask me about "seeing the farm" concerning this video.
while i will not attribute a draconian "they" to these ephemeral owners nor will i ascribe a universal intent to dominate but i also will not close my eyes to the indoctrination and subversion of my fellow citizens.

i really feel this is a worthy conversation and one where a better vehicle than comments should be used but that is all i have at the moment.that being said i shall attempt..feebly most likely..to convey how i see things in the most simplest of terms:

financiers,corporations and governments are in the business of expansion.over the centuries these names were different but with the same goal.over the past two hundred years these systems have increasingly grown....cozy.
how and what tools do these institutions employ to gain their objective?
people,workers and their ability to produce and in the past 50 years here in america..consume.
how do they get these people to throw themselves into huge debt?
or think that working three jobs is normal?
how do they get a country to stop producing its own food and import?
how do they get an entire country to agree that mass slaughter is in the best interest of the nation?

an over-simplified answer:
control the media and control the message.
control the education and indoctrinate children to not only hear that message but find it reasonable as they join the workforce.
keep the citizenry barely cognizent of current events and distract them with cheap and tawdry entertainment.

over the past 4000 years wars were fought over religion but in the last 100 they have mainly been fought over nationalism but BOTH forms had the same goal in mind....expansion and the aquisition of resources.
the vehicle may have changed but the goal was the same.
and WHO do YOU think fight these wars?not those who wish to prosper from the spoils but rather the most poor and ill-educated from that society.

does this mean there is some secret cabal of bildebergers planning the future of their utopian society?
i dont know..but i dont think so.things are just as they were centuries ago..those few who wield power wield it for their own interests..not yours.
they throw scraps and larder in the general publics direction to keep things relatively stable and keep production going.
they need you to buy the product.
they need you to find it good.
they need you to go fight and die in their war campaigns so they can aquire more resources.
they need you to not think too hard or look too closely.
because if you did think and look closely you may find that there is a hand in your back pocket and it has been stealing not only your future but your childrens.
that you are free is only an illusion.
and if you realized that..well.."they" would become very anxious.
because "they" need you.

WHO are "they"?
goldman sachs,the fed,walmart,the federal government...the list is not too long and all the players know each other but are they all in cahoots?
meh../shrugs..maybe i am being naive but i dont think so.i think they all have the same agenda which is the accumulation of wealth and power.
it is a small club..
and you and i ain't in it.

NetRunnersays...

@blankfist, it was a an afterthought of an afterthought, and I thought I labeled it as such. Apparently your only response to what I actually considered my main comment was to downvote it.

Dude, they're called owners for a reason. They like absolute property rights for a reason.

geo321says...

I know the video is an oversimplification, of everything, but anyway, to play the game I would change the main analogy a bit. From farming people to farming minds. Actually the farming term is narrow and loaded. Manipulating belief systems sums it up. Working with an ideological framework that the public is cued to have to herd them in the right direction. The more simplistic the cue (and reasoning) the better, as it is easier to change the cue later. Like a war on a verb or action like terrorism. But this all depends on the belief in the authority that is framing these situations. If you believe in the authority framing the situation (dichotomies are the most simplistic and usual way to frame something), then you'll follow their cues...through one hoop then the next..etc. And I'm a drunken rambling creature and I think I'll stop typing.

geo321says...

I think you hit a lot of nails on their heads. I'm thinking follow the money and power. That's the endpoint that can't be hidden easily...because the purpose of power is influence. Where and how is that coming from. Who's benefiting. In the US I'm sure you'll see that easily. Just look at who's gotten money and what policies have been pushed and who benefits from them. For Obama for the most part it's investment banks and insurance companys so far(so far). Actually the same constituency as Bush but by other means and words.
The major foreign policy push under Bush 2 was supposed to be an adrenalin like shot to your countries dominance in the world but it didn't work easily. But empires can't change their trajectory on a dime. Countries investments are set and wars are in play. So Obama, carries out the same basic policies under a new PR campaign, with well worded adjustments but in the same trajectory. >> ^enoch:

i had some people ask me about "seeing the farm" concerning this video.
while i will not attribute a draconian "they" to these ephemeral owners nor will i ascribe a universal intent to dominate but i also will not close my eyes to the indoctrination and subversion of my fellow citizens.
i really feel this is a worthy conversation and one where a better vehicle than comments should be used but that is all i have at the moment.that being said i shall attempt..feebly most likely..to convey how i see things in the most simplest of terms:
financiers,corporations and governments are in the business of expansion.over the centuries these names were different but with the same goal.over the past two hundred years these systems have increasingly grown....cozy.
how and what tools do these institutions employ to gain their objective?
people,workers and their ability to produce and in the past 50 years here in america..consume.
how do they get these people to throw themselves into huge debt?
or think that working three jobs is normal?
how do they get a country to stop producing its own food and import?
how do they get an entire country to agree that mass slaughter is in the best interest of the nation?
an over-simplified answer:
control the media and control the message.
control the education and indoctrinate children to not only hear that message but find it reasonable as they join the workforce.
keep the citizenry barely cognizent of current events and distract them with cheap and tawdry entertainment.
over the past 4000 years wars were fought over religion but in the last 100 they have mainly been fought over nationalism but BOTH forms had the same goal in mind....expansion and the aquisition of resources.
the vehicle may have changed but the goal was the same.
and WHO do YOU think fight these wars?not those who wish to prosper from the spoils but rather the most poor and ill-educated from that society.
does this mean there is some secret cabal of bildebergers planning the future of their utopian society?
i dont know..but i dont think so.things are just as they were centuries ago..those few who wield power wield it for their own interests..not yours.
they throw scraps and larder in the general publics direction to keep things relatively stable and keep production going.
they need you to buy the product.
they need you to find it good.
they need you to go fight and die in their war campaigns so they can aquire more resources.
they need you to not think too hard or look too closely.
because if you did think and look closely you may find that there is a hand in your back pocket and it has been stealing not only your future but your childrens.
that you are free is only an illusion.
and if you realized that..well.."they" would become very anxious.
because "they" need you.
WHO are "they"?
goldman sachs,the fed,walmart,the federal government...the list is not too long and all the players know each other but are they all in cahoots?
meh../shrugs..maybe i am being naive but i dont think so.i think they all have the same agenda which is the accumulation of wealth and power.
it is a small club..
and you and i ain't in it.

chilaxesays...

No taxes? Is that what this is about?

We've created the fastest rate of technological progress in the history of humankind, and all these people care about is they don't want to be under obligation to "the man." They'd rather be "free" even if it means we never invented computers and literacy.

enochsays...

>> ^chilaxe:

No taxes? Is that what this is about?
We've created the fastest rate of technological progress in the history of humankind, and all these people care about is they don't want to be under obligation to "the man." They'd rather be "free" even if it means we never invented computers and literacy.


i dont think that is the general gist of the video.
thats not what i got out of it anyways.

MaxWildersays...

I agree with a lot of what the video talks about, but I find it disturbing that it offers no answers to the problem it "unveils".

To satisfy all of its complaints, we would have to all be living on our own farms, educating our own children, and defending ourselves from aggressors with our own hands. This may be an anarchist's dream, but it's not mine.

To me, the real solution is a general public that is aware of the potential problems in government and watches closely to ensure that "civil servants" aren't actually manipulating policy for personal profit. Maybe that's the most unrealistic dream of all, but it's the only solution I see. There must be a government that is truly efficient and utterly bound to the will of the public balanced by the best interests of individuals (so that a majority does not oppress minorities).

siftbotsays...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'enslavement, sheeple, farming people' to 'enslavement, sheeple, farming people, stefan molyneux, anarcho capitalism' - edited by dystopianfuturetoday

siftbotsays...

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Monday, May 31st, 2010 6:18pm PDT - promote requested by blankfist.

chingalerasays...

*promote Stefan Molyneux, anarcho-capitalism, and some of the comments here (my own sentiments in-particular here stated by Blankfist's retort to NetRunner) in the true-spirit of the annihilation of all arguments blathered by sophistic cock-smokers, which have made me smile today.

chingalerasays...

Pompous, full-of-one's self horseshit

NetRunnersaid:

@blankfist, it was a an afterthought of an afterthought, and I thought I labeled it as such. Apparently your only response to what I actually considered my main comment was to downvote it.

Dude, they're called owners for a reason. They like absolute property rights for a reason.

Trancecoachsays...

As "The Captive Mind" posits that the primary means of ensuring compliance from "the people" is not propaganda, but physical coercion. The state does not 'reason' or 'debate' with non-compliance. 'Students' are forced to go to school and learn the 'official' version of history, for example (home schooling aside), and accept it (i.e., the hierarchical "binge-purge" model of education in which regurgitation of ossified narratives is valued more highly than any independent or creative thought).

Propaganda serves as post-facto justification in order to give people some way to rationalize what goes on around them. This helps to allow the threat of violence to suffice as a means of maintaining control without the state having to resort to actual violence, in most cases.

In one of Stefan's other videos, he calls professional licensure a dog collar that you're forced wear. He calls modern folks 'free-range slaves'. The 'human farms,' as he calls states, are run by 'farmers' who have realized that free-range slaves are more productive than those kept in a more strict captivity. (And it undoubtedly is better for for everyone than the slavery-of-old.) He says that allowing a few slaves escape here and there creates a desired illusion of freedom. One could argue about the accuracy of Stefan's ideas, but I don't find that as useful as simply accepting it as Stefan's own aesthetic/philosophical position, or his worldview, and understanding it or interpreting it as you would for say, any other artist/philosopher. This brings to mind the understanding that the 1% consists mostly of "human farmers" (i.e., kleptocrats and cronies) and other escaped 'slaves'.

It seems that folks who tend to take issue with my comments here (@enoch, @ChaosEngine, @newtboy, @Taint, among others) have taken on the recent swell of anti-"libertarian" rhetoric as their own (particularly the more tabloid-like forms of it).

That's not as important to me as the question of why there seems to be so much media attention given to these ideas of late? I think it may have to do with setting the stage for opposing a possible 2016 presidential run by Rand Paul (who has already been 'branded' as a 'libertarian' by opponents of both parties).* Or it may have to do with how technology (particularly in the Bay Area, where I live, but certainly in other places as well) is increasingly making individuals less reliant on the state, more self-sufficient, and more able to access the information they need to recognize their status as a serf, and/or plan their means of escape from the 'farm'.

*I guess the media cares less about an "ideological war" against "libertarianism" than they do about crafting a practical strategy of electoral politics. Hence their insistence in conflating conservatives, Republicans, libertarians, and even anarchists (which couldn't be more dissimilar at their core).

chingalerasays...

I'd be wary of trusting Rand Paul as a so-coined-by-media, 'Libertarian'.His father has distanced himself from him, he used underhanded threat-tactics when questioned by an independent reporter for RT recently(Abby Martin), he's a bought and sold team-player being groomed for yet another puppet-regime primary.
He's seems a solid prick.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osg0RYAP2cs

enochsays...

@Trancecoach
dude..did you just call me out on an old post just to berate me more?

i get it.
you have made it quite clear what and how you perceive me.

if you think i have issue with you being a libertarian then you seriously have no clue who i am.

SquidCapsays...

Has a underlying "taxes are theft" theme hidden inside. It also totally sidesteps a lot of important steps needed when large number of people live inside finite space, infrastructure, order, sustenance. It all needs to be managed, otherwise we are back to tribes instead of nations. We are free but responsible, if nothing else than to our fellow humanbeings. Being totally free also means freedom to kill, maim, destroy. And we are all a bit evil, selfish, enough so that taxes are not voluntary.. It is so easy to say that taxes enslave us when you don't give out any alternatives that would work.. Anarchy does not work, it's the power of the strongest, anarcho-capitalism is a horrible idea. It is about as equally terrifying as Ayn Rands ideas.

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More