How to Rule the World (Picking a Lapdog) (991 hits)
Category: PoliticsLabels: ETS_Sociopolitical_Commentary ETS_Essays
Rating: 1.04 on 33 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (View user info) at 2006-01-29 20:55:03 EST
I tried to stay away, but I realized that I can't in good conscience leave the idiots to bombard the ignorant masses with thier misguided ideologies unchecked. I cannot bring myself to let a few people direct attention away from the real issues at hand. Besides, Bart seems to have banned my alter for some absurd reason.
I've come to the conclusion that I need to go back to school at some point to persue a career in politics. I really didn't used to give two shits about politics, but that was back when I was a lot more naive and self-centered, if that's even possible. Plus, I can't stand standing on the sidelines talking about all this shit and not getting my hands dirty.
So, continuing my recent trend of politically-charged submissions, I give you the following:
----------
So you've got a lot of money? You've got a lot of respect and power? Got enough education and/or other prestigious credentials? Now what do you do? Run for president? No, that's a sucker's game. Leave that to the little people. You are above all that. You are the member of a secret society whose lineage goes back hundreds of years, and whose ranks have included some of the most powerful, rich, and influential people in history. You are the creme de la creme...the best of the best...the truly elite. You are a Bilderberger and an Illuminati. Together with your international fraternity buddies, you control the flow of money, the fate of nations, and the course of history. You don't have to read the morning paper because you wrote it. You don't have to turn on the television because half the programs you've paid for. You don't run for president, the president runs for you!
Nevertheless, maintaining this level of control is not easy; it demands your undivided attention, and every four years you are going to have to decide who you want to act as your henchman in the hot seat of the United States presidency. So, the first thing you want to do is find a Republican or Democratic candidate who is well known, well liked, and appeals to the widest demographic possible.
You understand the way democracy works...you know nothing is ever certain, but you also understand how the human mind works, and, more importantly, how human societies work. You are NOT a gambling man and you don't go for long shots. You live for the numbers, and failing that, you simply BUY them. You're often surprised how easy it is to manipulate people, how few will say anything about it, and how fewer still will believe them that do. You also know that very few people are willing to martyr themselves for a cause.
Money usually talks much louder than any 'cause'. And besides...more often than not the idea that the 'cause' can simply be twisted in the media after one has been hung out to dry on his political cross or been shot down in the street from a grassy knoll is enough. They usually know better than to go trying to be a hero. A quick history lesson will drive home the futility of their endeavor.
"He was a quiet loner."
"Sources close to him say the pressure of his position had been weighing heavily on him."
"It appears the gunman acted alone."
You get the drift. Remember the Kennedys? Reagan? Do you think it's any coincidence that George Bush Sr. was vice president at the time of Reagan's assassination attempt and that he eventually took us to war in his term as president? Do you think it's any coincidence that after Kennedy was assassinated, Johnson took us on a collision course with Vietnam?
Of course YOU don't. Hell, it was your little fraternity that made it happen, wasn't it? But I really wasn't talking to YOU. I was talking to the hypothetical proletariat...the bourgeoise...the ignorant masses. But, of course, you knew that.
Just like peddling pine cleaner to housewives or sports mags to their husbands, the American presidential race in this proliferation age of information boils down, first and foremost, to initial impression. What does the guy look like on TV? Does he sound like me or does he sound like one of those 'weird people' from another state? Seeing as that's all most people of voting age have time for, the powers of the Illuminati that pull the strings behind both parties want someone who can pull off an impressive 'trust me' face. They have to have a warm smile - one that says, "I could be your dad or maybe your grandpa." The last thing you want is for the smile of your candidate to look like they've just discovered a way to fuse dead human flesh together using the power of lightning.
For decades, Americans have been systematically numbed to the fact that their political system is going to be crooked regardless of who they vote for, and they have been slowly taught to accept some measure of corruption so long as it's perceived to be in their best interests. (The whole, "so what's in it for me" thing applies here.) It's OK to play the Washington game as long as it's done in the interests of those who voted you in. It's OK to double deal and to trade votes and to sell votes so long as the money is going to a good cause and no American jobs are being lost. As long as us little people can still make our bills every month and have a little left over for ice cream and movies, we're good. 'The lesser of two evils' is a choice the American people are used to accepting.
It's always a good idea to find someone who is a governor, preferably from a state with a lot of electoral votes like New York or California. Senators are next in line, but governors are a safer bet since they have a shorter tracable voting record that can be spun by the opposition to mean whatever they want it to mean. In short, there is a lot less to explain, and, therefore, a lot less reason for people to be skeptical. Remember, people aren't going to take the time to listen to the whole argument, they are used to getting their news in 30 second sound bytes, so you have to make sure the opposition has as few negative things to say about your candidate as possible.
One important thing to remember is, if possible, divide the two main parties on the issues as much as possible. This will keep the public divided and will also serve to maintain the status quo by increasing voter loyalty over red herring issues such as abortion and gun control. The last thing you need if you're seeking to pull the strings behind the curtain is a third party stepping in unexpectedly and tipping the balance of power it's taken your organization decades to maintain.
Remember, the more angles you utilize in your assault on the voter's senses, the less likely they'll see your influence on the process, and the more likely your candidate will be taken as a credible contender. Remember the power of popularity - it has the ability to conceal your agenda even if you think it's too obvious... It's like hiding in the open, if you will.
When all else fails, just buy both candidates. Or at least make it as difficult as possible for the outsider to rule by undermining their credibility, limiting their power, or keeping them scared for their life or the lives of their loved ones. The power of blackmail can be particularly useful here, and a few well-placed contacts at the FBI or CIA will prove invaluable.
Above all, never forget the will of the people to be fooled. Most people want to be ruled by someone else. They don't want complete autonomy. Autonomy and freedom, if taken in their literal sense, are devoid of brotherhood and fraternity. People don't want to be different really, even in their so-called "revolutions". Even here we see the massive throngs of people huddled together, looking toward their neighbor for answers.
Fortunately for them, you'll always be there to help them.
--------------------
This concludes our lesson on picking a lapdog. Next, we hope to bring you "Planting Stories in the Media". I hope you have found the information so far useful, and will continue to garner use from future installments.
One more thing...
Who would you vote for, Condoleeza Rice or Hillary Clinton?
User Reviews
Submitted by Drone_of_Industry (user info) at 2006-01-31 10:59:11 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Someday this will all be used against you.
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-01-30 16:10:27 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
ewwww. you smell like butt then.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-01-30 13:50:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by c1ndy (user info) at 2006-01-30 13:25:35 (#)
Ranking: 2
OOOh I was hoping you'd come back.
Have you read the Jon Ronson book about this?
---------------------
No, but I might have to check it out. Thanks.
Submitted by leilani (user info) at 2006-01-30 13:41:36 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
oh nevermind, got it
Submitted by leilani (user info) at 2006-01-30 13:31:05 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Sacrilicious (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:04:20 (#)
Ranking: 2
I'm glad your back. Besides, that was the most transparent alter I've seen, and I haven't even been here that long.
--
what>? who was your alter?
knew you'd be back
hillary
Submitted by c1ndy (user info) at 2006-01-30 13:25:35 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
OOOh I was hoping you'd come back.
Have you read the Jon Ronson book about this?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-01-30 13:20:17 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Here is a link to a zip file containing a Microsoft Access database of the attendance list of 15 meetings of the Bilderberg Group, a secret society that meets once a year to discuss foreign policy. http://www.cc.jyu.fi/%7Epasaojan/mirror/Bilderberger-database.zip
You'll notice as you browse the lists of names that included are some of the most powerful and influential people on the face of the earth.
Past attendees have included:
Bill Clinton (while he was still governor of Arkansas)
Tony Blair (before he was PM of Britain)
Donald Rumsfeld (he's a consistant attendee)
John Edwards (in 2004)
Mark Warner (in 2005...he is considered by many to be a possible presidential candidate for 2008)
This is just the tip of the iceberg...
The lists also include:
the editors of major world newspapers, magazines, and TV outlets like the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post, and NBC,
CEOs of corporate giants like Pepsi, Ford, Xerox, Microsoft, DaimlerChrysler, BP, AIG Insurance, and Nokia,
Presidents of major world banks including Chase Manhattan, the US Federal Reserve, Deutsche Bank, and Citicorp,
Presidents of workers unions,
Secretaries of State, Secretaries of Defense, future Prime Ministers, Queens, future US Presidents, senators, congressmen, members of the EU Council, Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Ministers of Trade, treasurers...
This list goes on and on. It's really eye-opening.
I think it begs the question why soon-to-be world political leaders are meeting with people from banks, corporate CEOs, EDITORS FROM MAJOR NEWS SOURCES, leaders of workers unions, education professors from leading universities and the like to have secret, off the record, discussions on world policy?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-01-30 12:32:51 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-01-30 12:00:54 (#)
Ranking: 0
we still missed ya.
do you smell like garage?
----------------
At least someone did.
Do I smell like garage? hmmmm...
*puts hand down back of pants and smells it*
Nope. No garage here.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-01-30 12:26:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-30 11:36:45 (#)
Ranking: 0
Were you S.O.S.?
---------------------------
What do you think?
As for Kennedy and Vietnam, the following was taken from here: http://www.english.uiuc.edu/maps/vietnam/causes.htm
"Most American wars have obvious starting points or precipitating causes: the Battles of Lexington and Concord in 1775, the capture of Fort Sumter in 1861, the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, and the North Korean invasion of South Korea in June 1950, for example. But there was no fixed beginning for the U.S. war in Vietnam. The United States entered that war incrementally, in a series of steps between 1950 and 1965. In May 1950, President Harry S. Truman authorized a modest program of economic and military aid to the French, who were fighting to retain control of their Indochina colony, including Laos and Cambodia as well as Vietnam. When the Vietnamese Nationalist (and Communist-led) Vietminh army defeated French forces at Dienbienphu in 1954, the French were compelled to accede to the creation of a Communist Vietnam north of the 17th parallel while leaving a non-Communist entity south of that line. The United States refused to accept the arrangement. The administration of President Dwight D. Eisenhower undertook instead to build a nation from the spurious political entity that was South Vietnam by fabricating a government there, taking over control from the French, dispatching military advisers to train a South Vietnamese army, and unleashing the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to conduct psychological warfare against the North.
President John F. Kennedy rounded another turning point in early 1961, when he secretly sent 400 Special Operations Forces-trained (Green Beret) soldiers to teach the South Vietnamese how to fight what was called counterinsurgency war against Communist guerrillas in South Vietnam. When Kennedy was assassinated in November 1963, there were more than 16,000 U.S. military advisers in South Vietnam, and more than 100 Americans had been killed. Kennedy's successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, committed the United States most fully to the war. In August 1964, he secured from Congress a functional (not actual) declaration of war: the Tonkin Gulf Resolution. Then, in February and March 1965, Johnson authorized the sustained bombing, by U.S. aircraft, of targets north of the 17th parallel, and on 8 March dispatched 3,500 Marines to South Vietnam. Legal declaration or no, the United States was now at war."
While Kennedy's policy followed closely along with his predecessors, it was not one of full committal to an all out war. In other words, his operations there were not the kind that were going to make anyone in the arms industry any significant amount of dough. All the facts of the case stink of conspiracy at the highest levels.
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-01-30 12:00:54 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
we still missed ya.
do you smell like garage?
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2006-01-30 11:41:54 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Whenever Davy gives me shit, I just go here and laugh.
http://www.ubersite.com/m/63796
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-30 11:36:45 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.ubersite.com/m/82231#1781101
You stayed away 3 days longer then I guessed, at least with this name.
Were you S.O.S.?
Oh yeah, kennedy started putting military "advisors" in Nam.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-01-30 10:16:21 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DavyJones (user info) at 2006-01-30 05:48:30 (#)
Ranking: -2
I tried to stay away, but I realized that I can't in good conscience leave the idiots to bombard the ignorant masses with thier misguided ideologies unchecked. I cannot bring myself to let a few people direct attention away from the real issues at hand.
----
You're such a joke. You, with all your wondrous knowledge PLEASE SAVE US WITH YOUR ENLIGHTENED WISDOM...I hear high school diplomas mean a lot these days, and the real thinkers all smoke fatties in their mom's basement while they remake Nirvana songs. Who are you to pretend you have any real knowledge about anything, let alone to be so condescending?
---------------
You do realize that you have to read that with a pinch of salt, right? Maybe a little tongue in cheek humor? I was setting up the joke that was the next sentence. Sure, it wasn't a slap-me-on-the-back, fall down laughing joke, but that's what it was.
It doesn't surprise me that you see me as being condescending. I'll bet you get that vibe from a lot of people. (Take that to mean whatever you wish.)
It's easy to be condescending toward people when they've already proven themselves to have absolutely no idea what the truth is, yet they want to spew bullshit on the screen like it's gospel. Sure, I might be included in that...
...but I'm not.
And THAT'S the difference.
I'm not going to put up with people who are obviously wrong. I'm not going to stroke your egos like I'm stroking my own cock and tell you you're right when everything I've learned about life tells me you're wrong. Bottom line, if you want the truth...ask ETS. If you want endless reinforcement...ask your grandmother.
PS: I don't live in my mom's basement...
...I live in the garage.
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2006-01-30 08:21:49 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
So, you want to become a politician, but you criticize them?
Trust me, in politics, you only become what you hate the most.
Submitted by thecaes (user info) at 2006-01-30 07:34:22 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Welcome back.
Submitted by DavyJones (user info) at 2006-01-30 05:48:30 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
I tried to stay away, but I realized that I can't in good conscience leave the idiots to bombard the ignorant masses with thier misguided ideologies unchecked. I cannot bring myself to let a few people direct attention away from the real issues at hand.
----
You're such a joke. You, with all your wondrous knowledge PLEASE SAVE US WITH YOUR ENLIGHTENED WISDOM...I hear high school diplomas mean a lot these days, and the real thinkers all smoke fatties in their mom's basement while they remake Nirvana songs. Who are you to pretend you have any real knowledge about anything, let alone to be so condescending?
Submitted by RamenNoodle (user info) at 2006-01-30 02:26:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Everytime I see the letters NWO I think of that badass Ministry song.
Submitted by charminglybeef (user info) at 2006-01-30 01:51:26 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
No Comment
Submitted by Nobb (user info) at 2006-01-30 01:30:48 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Reagen was as big a cunt as Bush sr and could easily have been a pawn for the NWO. Kennedy actually began the trek into Nam.
Submitted by apollo88 (user info) at 2006-01-29 22:57:08 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
How the fuck has this got a positive rating?
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2006-01-29 22:25:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Submitted by PokeyPecker (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:17:53 (#)
Ranking: 0
You were gone?
Submitted by joedaddy (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:40:03 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
the best cure for aspiring political candidates is formaldehyde
Submitted by Sacrilicious (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:37:13 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Ugh..I'm glad *you're back. Given only those choices, I'd choose Hillary. Speaking of lapdogs, I think Condoleeza is one. And any further propagation of the current administration would be a scourge to this country.
Submitted by RamenNoodle (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:24:26 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
One more thing...
Who would you vote for, Condoleeza Rice or Hillary Clinton?
I absolutely detest Hillary Clinton, she is the worst/best politician ever. She is a really good politician because she changes her policy on a whim in order to drum up maximum support, and the worst because its so damned obvious that she has no real convictions.....yet the tactic still works!
Even though it appears the 2008 election will be Hillary vs Condi, I would much rather see a Guliani/Gingrich ticket or Guliani/Condi ticket.
Submitted by PokeyPecker (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:21:22 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by PokeyPecker (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:21:06 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Sorry. Meant to +1 that.
Hillary.
Submitted by PokeyPecker (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:17:53 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
You were gone?
You write well but you didn't say anything that hasn't been common knowledge since the days of the Egyptians and before.
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:17:35 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
uh i meant +2 for coming back. but i'm really a dipshit and can't fucking figure out scroll button. either way welcome back. learn to lie better with alters. and... i'm not reading that. but i read the intro. you probably should be a politician, just so you can fight allllll day long and be paid for it.
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:15:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
yay you're back!!!!!!!!!
go start a fight now. missed ya.
Submitted by CaptainThorns (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:14:27 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
YOU CAME BACK!!!
Damn glad you did too. We're stronger in numbers.
Okay, warm welcomes aside, you've missed a lot of my good posts recently...check 'em out.
Submitted by RamenNoodle (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:13:19 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I generally disagree with damned near every word you post, but this post was the exception. Whether is the illuminati or whoever a case can certainly be made for your "puppet masters". I also agree that it is far to easy to get over on the American public by creating the red herrings of which you speak. I look forward to your next post.
Submitted by Sacrilicious (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:04:20 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I'm glad your back. Besides, that was the most transparent alter I've seen, and I haven't even been here that long.
Submitted by GuinnessSince1759 (user info) at 2006-01-29 21:01:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Hilary Clinton....She is smarter and more dangerous than her husband...heh. Other than that...I thought this was a very good piece.