Placeholder Image

字幕表 動画を再生する

  • There we go. We got it, Bob! Hi! Sorry, we're running a little bit late.

  • Excuse me a second.

  • Hey Bob, think fast! [Glass breaking] [Shouting]

  • Sorry, man!

  • Welcome to 'Culture in Decline'. My name is Peter Joseph.

  • This show is designed for those that want to be a little bit more skeptical

  • about society, because perhaps, you're like me.

  • As you stumble around this experiment we call global society,

  • you can't help but feel an increasing sense of unease,

  • perhaps even frustration, with respect to how we, the human family,

  • have chosen to organize ourselves on this little planet.

  • The late astronomer and well-known advocate of scientific thought, Carl Sagan,

  • in his famed PBS series 'Cosmos', once invited the question:

  • "If we were visited by a superior species from another part of the galaxy,

  • and we were forced to explain to them our stewardship of our planet,

  • not to mention the state of human affairs today,

  • would we be proud of what we described?"

  • How would we frame our explanation of how almost half of the world,

  • over 3 billion people, are either barely surviving in abject poverty and sickness,

  • or are simply dying off unnecessarily

  • at a rate of about one person every couple of seconds,

  • all occurring in the wake of an advanced technological reality,

  • where we could easily feed, clothe and house every family on Earth

  • in a respectable standard of living?

  • How would we frame the global warfare:

  • 230 million killed by their fellow man in the past 100 years alone

  • based on what, meaningless territoriality, resources,

  • dogmatic, obsolete ideologies?

  • Again, this all occurring in the shadows of a looming scientific recognition,

  • that we are indeed simply one family sharing one household,

  • bound by the exact same laws of nature,

  • and hence the same unifying operational ideology.

  • How about our economic system, the bedrock of what defines our society,

  • not to mention our dominant motivations?

  • How would we explain the reality that, rather than organizing ourselves efficiently

  • as a single system to properly manage this household we share,

  • we childishly divide and compete and exploit each other

  • through an archaic, completely environmentally decoupled game.

  • A game, by the way, which not only appears to perpetuate

  • a vast spectrum of social atrocities,

  • but now seems to be further destabilizing society,

  • decreasing our public health.

  • Sorry to say, as an individual,

  • I really don't care what you believe, nor do I particularly respect it.

  • Why? Because I don't really respect what I believe either.

  • There is no evidence to show that any of the traditional values,

  • establishments, social structures or common practices

  • we have today, will be relevant tomorrow.

  • The only thing that appears to stand the test of time is this very notion of change,

  • the ever-evolving understanding of ourselves and the world we inhabit.

  • Perhaps, some might think that that's actually the definition of human intelligence.

  • What do you think about that? Less about what we know,

  • more about how vulnerable we are.

  • So, when you look out your window, ask yourself.

  • Do you see intelligence or do you see dogma?

  • Do you see a culture listening and working to realign itself

  • with the ever-emerging natural orders as they unfold,

  • or do you see desperately stubborn efforts by many,

  • particularly those in positions of power,

  • trying to keep everything the same to the detriment

  • of the entire human experiment?

  • You know, like you,

  • I might be only one member of this family that is now 7 billion strong;

  • and like most families, sometimes it's hard for us to agree,

  • but sometimes, things get so bad we need serious intervention.

  • The following series is that intervention

  • in the hope to salvage what is clearly, a culture in decline.

  • It's an election year in the United States

  • and some may say it's an election year for the whole world.

  • Still the dominant empire, the United States' political system

  • has spent roughly 25 billion dollars in the past decade alone.

  • An amount of money, if averaged and distributed annually,

  • could house and feed every homeless person in America,

  • effectively ending the epidemic.

  • Perhaps, like me, by the end of this program,

  • you'll find that money will be better well-spent.

  • Be that as it may, the 2012 presidential election

  • is gearing up to be one of the most expensive,

  • and ostensibly important elections of all time,

  • given the ongoing debt crisis, the unemployment crisis,

  • and the vast destabilization we see across society.

  • However, I'm not particularly interested in the left or the right,

  • or am I interested in any candidate's political merit.

  • What I'm interested in, is the entire idea of global democracy

  • in the tradition as it exists, and how it is blindly accepted

  • by the vast majority of people on this planet, as being the only option

  • to satisfy their interests and create good well-being,

  • and hence societal management in its optimum state.

  • That's what interests me.

  • (P. Joseph) So, rather than debate about who should be the next president,

  • why don't we step back and consider some broader issues?

  • Such as, I don't know,

  • maybe, why we even have a President to begin with?

  • What is this, medieval feudalism?

  • I thought the days of kings, dictators, and giving one person enormous power

  • was coming to an end. Or, more generally,

  • doesn't it seem a little absurd to claim a participatory democracy,

  • when the public itself actually has zero say,

  • when it comes to the actual decisions made by those elected?

  • It's bad enough that those voted in have literally no legal responsibility

  • to do anything they might have claimed on the campaign trail,

  • but if you examine history, you will find the historical fact

  • that the public good has always been secondary to other interests,

  • mainly, financial and business interests.

  • Of course, this is common knowledge now, right?

  • Why did the US government, completely against all known public interest,

  • allow the private banking system,

  • a system which actually creates nothing,

  • to be bailed out to the tune of 13 trillion dollars?

  • You have a 14-million-dollar ocean front home in Florida.

  • You have a summer vacation home in Sun Valley, Idaho.

  • You and your wife have an art collection filled with million-dollar paintings.

  • (PJ) While the public was left out to dry with overflowing private debt,

  • job losses and a stagnating economy.

  • If we're going to persist with this silly little game we've concocted

  • called the growth economy, where the movement of money defines everything,

  • it might be a good idea to do the math regarding what might actually help

  • this economic system operate at some passable level.

  • Therefore, if you raise taxes on the so-called rich,

  • you're really raising taxes on the job creators,

  • and if the goal is private sector growth,

  • you have to recognize that the best way to create that growth

  • is to leave capital in the treasuries of the job creators.

  • (PJ) If that money spent on the bank bailout was spent on

  • relieving private household debt instead,

  • while letting Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan

  • and all of the other technically meaningless, non-producing financial institutions

  • experience the failure and bankruptcy they deserved,

  • simultaneously nationalizing the entire US banking system as a whole,

  • the US economy might have had a chance. Why?

  • Because banks don't actually contribute anything. People with jobs do.

  • [If] you want growth in this type of system, you need jobs.

  • If you want jobs you need demand,

  • and demand requires people having free money to spend.

  • By helping the public debt burden,

  • you would plant the true seeds of economic growth.

  • As obvious as that may seem, many forget one thing:

  • The bailout had nothing to do with helping the US economy,

  • nor does it or will it work to help

  • any hurting sovereign economy in the world.

  • Why? Because we live in a plutocracy, not a democracy,

  • and the only true power is actually behind the curtain, not in front.

  • The financial and business powers not only own and control this country,

  • they own and control the whole planet;

  • and no, it's not a conspiracy. It's a value-system disorder.

  • As long as a dollar sign is associated with every blade of grass,

  • every plot of land, every fleeting thought or invention,

  • not to mention judging the merit of individuals

  • for their right to life through labor, we should expect nothing less.

  • Since the inception of the state itself,

  • coupled with the underlying power of money

  • as the ultimate driver of human decisions, and hence persuasion,

  • the true power has always been financial,

  • and those little people you elect into office every couple of years,

  • they have owners too, and don't you forget it.

  • - Democracy: Is that something you believe in as it exists today in America?

  • - When you say as in 'believe in', does it exist? Like forest fires, God,

  • or the devil?

  • - What is your opinion of the American democratic system as it exists? - It's broken.

  • It's deeply, deeply broken. - Democracy, goes, of course, to Greece

  • and it's the theory that the people own the government. Is it in practice

  • happening, in 2012, in this country? Not close! It's a corporatocracy.

  • (PJ) All of this considered, let's now think a little more accurately

  • about this whole democracy deal.

  • Since the tradition of our democracy has to do with representatives

  • elected to apparently do our thinking for us,

  • a critical question becomes: Where did these people come from?

  • Why are they the ones on your TV and not others?

  • Did you decide that these people are the best choices

  • to compete for such critical leadership,

  • or have you noticed that the most pronounced candidates

  • especially the Presidential, sort of come out of nowhere;

  • and through the media, are given credence merely by repetition of exposure?

  • The term 'democracy' comes from the Greek 'demos' which means people,

  • and 'krates' which means rule.

  • The people of a given society express their opinions through votes,

  • and policy is created by the majority's interest.

  • It appears the process was formalized in ancient Greece

  • and has been adapting ever since.

  • However, it didn't take long for a bit of cynicism to emerge

  • with respect to the process itself, given the fact that

  • the entire basis of the idea assumes that the voting public

  • actually is educated enough to know what they're doing.

  • Franklin D. Roosevelt once acutely stated:

  • Winston Churchill, on the other hand, was a little less forgiving, stating:

  • The infamous Mark Twain jumped to the inevitable punch line, stating:

  • I would like you to ask yourself: If we were in the ruling class,

  • the 'investment ownership class', to paraphrase Thorstein Veblen,

  • and we wanted to preserve our interests against any interference,

  • what would we do?

  • First, we need to take the broadest possible view we can.

  • We need to make sure the voting public is as uninformed as possible,

  • regarding relevant issues that might contradict our establishment's practices.

  • Coupled with that, we also need to eliminate as much independent, logical,

  • causal, scientific thought as possible.

  • So, let us support an extremely underfunded, outdated,

  • and deprived public educational system,

  • a system focused on merely getting a person a job one day,

  • not teach them how to critically and logically think.

  • - The heart of democracy really is the basic assumption that the public is well-educated

  • about critical thought. They know how to think about things and evaluate,

  • and therefore they can make proper decisions, right? What is your opinion

  • on American education and its effect on the democratic process?

  • - I think that we have multiple problems in the education in America.

  • One: I think we are dealing with the dumbing down of America.

  • - Do you feel that this sort of poor educational system

  • actually benefits the establishment? - Oh, absolutely!

  • Absolutely! Keep them stupid, keep them easily entertained.

  • If they're uninformed, they can't fight back!

  • (PJ) However, to further reinforce this,

  • we also need to push and reward

  • belief systems that support passive obedience;

  • belief systems and values that are stubborn, irrational,

  • and promote closed thinking.

  • Religion becomes super helpful in this circumstance.

  • Is it possible that religion is being politicized

  • and that candidates are using it as a tool?

  • I believe that God created the Universe.

  • And we're enjoined by Scripture and the Lord Jesus to oppose it with all our might.

  • Let us not pray that God is on our side

  • in war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God's side.

  • May God bless the 7th Day Adventist Church.

  • I think the God who loves us, the God who gave us life, who gave us our being...

  • And so to every sailor, soldier, airman and marine

  • who was involved in this mission, let me say, you are doing God's work.

  • (PJ) If people are groomed to be obedient and follow blindly,

  • they are ripe to extend that obedience to others who claim authority.

  • Check.

  • Next, it's critical we recognize

  • a unique, sociological characteristic of the human condition.

  • Something we will call 'herd psychology'.

  • This is the tendency for us humans, when faced with mass appeal,

  • to often behave in extremely thoughtless and malleable ways.

  • In the words of Charles McKay, famed author of:

  • However, this doesn't just apply to a soccer riot.

  • Such mob persuasion can be generated through simply shared cultural events.

  • Remember September 11th? Talk about mass insanity!

  • This event created an immediate crowd madness with fear and revenge,

  • and it didn't take long for the US government, and other governments, in fact,

  • to harness that madness and funnel support

  • for draconian legislation and illegal invasions.

  • However, this herd psychological tendency is not only very useful

  • for implanting and guiding perceived issues of importance,

  • it is also critical in setting rigid limits of debate,

  • creating the tendency for those who begin to question beyond those limits

  • to be ostracized and rejected by the herd itself.

  • You know, if someone talks about

  • a more equitable distribution of income in society:

  • All the growth that has occurred in our country, over the last decade or more,

  • has gone to the upper 1, 2%. 'Fucking communists!'

  • If someone speculates about the obvious power manipulation and corruption,

  • "God damn it! I am so sick of these conspiracy theorists and their lies!

  • The Federal Reserve does not collude for its own self interest!"

  • And heaven forbid we get those do-gooders

  • who want to actually apply modern scientific knowledge

  • and improve society with it. "Yeah right!

  • Feed, clothe and house everybody on Earth with technology?

  • Utopian jackasses! " [glass breaking]

  • Remember, probably the greatest way to control human thought,

  • is to establish a deep fear of social rejection,

  • and associate that fear to culturally taboo subjects.

  • So, with that ground work in motion,

  • we now have to deal with the pesky problem

  • that the public just might wise up enough

  • and work to maneuver a person into political power

  • that will cause us problems.

  • Therefore, some more specific structural safeguards are in order.

  • Basically, we need to make sure that those unwanted candidates,

  • are unable to get anywhere near the major outlets for public digestion;

  • and if they do, the practice is to treat them like freaks.

  • Are you suggesting that heroin and prostitution are an exercise of liberty?

  • What you're inferring is "You know what?

  • If we legalize heroin tomorrow, everybody is going to use heroin."

  • How many people here would use heroin if it was legal?

  • (PJ) How do we do that? With money,

  • and our corporate constituency has plenty.

  • We just need to make sure the use of this money

  • for political influence goes uninhibited.

  • In a US Supreme Court 1976 decision, the freedom for a candidate

  • to use unlimited personal money for their campaign was deemed legal,

  • equating spending money with the right of free speech, in fact.

  • What this translates to, in effect,

  • is the removal of any regulated fairness of expression;

  • and hence, whoever has the most money has the most resources,

  • and hence, effect. Perfect.

  • However, let's secure this a little bit farther.

  • Let's also make sure that our corporations

  • are given the legal right to promote our little puppets without limit.

  • Luckily, in 2010, our pals again at the US Supreme Court

  • confirmed that the government may not restrict

  • political spending by any corporation in candidate elections,

  • as they are, once again, protected by the 1st Amendment.

  • So, now we can buy mad ad space to promote whoever we want,

  • as much as we want, drowning the opposition in the media.

  • ...and double check.

  • With those broad measures in place,

  • it is still important to control the basic unfolding

  • of the electoral process, from start to finish.

  • The best way to do this, is to create a false duality:

  • the illusion of competition between parties.

  • We need a 2-party system that, constantly argues with each other in general,

  • but still upholds the basic elitist policies

  • that we need to maintain our advantage.

  • The beauty of this dominant 2-party farce,

  • is that it not only gives the public the needed illusion of choice,

  • it more importantly oppresses those upstart third parties.

  • As we know, these annoying self-righteous third parties

  • have been trouble makers from day one.

  • The civil rights amendments, women's suffrage,

  • broad worker rights, child labor laws and other agitations for industry,

  • all came from these rising third parties, historically,

  • not from the dominant, established group, us.

  • So, we need to be vigilant here.

  • We need to get the public so used to this 2-party dictatorship

  • that they don't even mind if the two parties are given direct control

  • over most of the electoral process itself.

  • They need to have the power of organizing the rules of electoral redistricting,

  • the primaries, the caucuses and debates,

  • and of course, we, the ruling class, will moderate their actions

  • through lobbying, campaign contributions, you know,

  • exactly what the free market promises: the freedom to manipulate everything.

  • Meet our friends: the Commission on Presidential Debates, or CPD.

  • In 1988, the Democratic and Republican Parties,

  • or the 'Demo-publicans', as I like to call them,

  • established the Commission on Presidential Debates.

  • Posing as a non-partisan institution, the CPD successfully took control

  • of the most influential election event, the Presidential debates.

  • The CPD, which is a private corporation co-chaired by the former heads

  • of the Republican and Democratic Parties, decide through secret contracts,

  • who is going to participate in the debates, and what is going to be talked about.

  • Those pesky third parties, along with controversial ideas,

  • can only come into play if the 'Demo-publicans' decide they can.

  • Really, can you imagine what would happen if those annoying social upstarts

  • actually were able to come up against the trite,

  • miserable, logic, and narrow subject matter typical of our rigged debates?

  • But for the nurse, the teacher, the police officer who

  • frankly, at the end of each month, they have a little financial crisis going on:

  • They're having to take out extra debt just to make their mortgage payments.

  • We haven't been paying attention to them.

  • If you look at our tax policies, it's a classic example.

  • I'm sorry to interrupt Mr. President, but I couldn't agree more.

  • However, don't you feel that the tax policies

  • and other common acknowledgments about what is hurting the average American,

  • is actually quite benign, when compared to

  • the very foundation of our economic system?

  • You know, making money out of debt, charging interest on it that doesn't exist,

  • which means that there's always more outstanding debt than there is money to pay for it.

  • Of course, that lends itself to more debt being created to cover it,

  • and essentially, failure and bankruptcy is inevitable.

  • Not for the upper classes as much as the lower middle classes,

  • (Why?) Because the lower classes are the ones taking the loans

  • for their home and their car, while the upper class are making interest income.

  • Rather than paying interest, they actually make interest

  • through their deposits and investments.

  • Obviously, this secures a massive growing class divide, structurally.

  • Is that not something worth considering?

  • No?

  • As a final point about the CPD,

  • our corporations can now directly donate to them,

  • hence the parties, imposing our financial influence, and hence agenda, even more,

  • making another end run around that pesky legal legislation,

  • barring corporations from contributing directly to political campaigns.

  • A beautiful end run.

  • However, nothing is perfect, and you can't be too careful.

  • Sometimes, good old-fashioned, time-tested tactics are needed.

  • Nothing is as old-fashioned, as good old direct electoral fraud.

  • Let's get some of our corporate buddies to build some voting machines

  • with really terrible integrity,

  • and get them in as many critical spots as we can.

  • Yeah, I know, it's sloppy. It has already become public

  • that the machines can be hacked remotely, with about $10 of materials

  • and an 8th-grade science education;

  • but since most Americans are completely distracted by their debt,

  • lowering standard of living, and ongoing job losses,

  • the liberal media falls on deaf ears.

  • So, let's recap.

  • Free thinking people tend to recognize

  • the need for ongoing adaptation and change,

  • so we need to make sure education supports the existing tradition,

  • through mere rote learning, not critical, logical thought.

  • Next, we establish clear limits of debate in the culture

  • and make sure those who go beyond the pale,

  • are shutdown by endless ridicule and debasement.

  • Then, we need to harness the herd psychology

  • and guide it through our media, to either identify

  • with the issues we need in the forefront or distract them outright.

  • As far as large scale influence,

  • we need to have the freedom to do whatever we want

  • and to use our vast corporate wealth to influence

  • both public opinion and the candidates themselves.

  • Our legal status as a corporate person now ensures our free speech,

  • and hence, free spending.

  • Next, we create the public illusion of competition and choice,

  • and gain as much control over the election process as possible.

  • Our Demo-publican pawns, with our endless sponsorship and lobbying,

  • now handles this well, including the restriction of public debate

  • and the denial of all interfering third parties.

  • If that wasn't enough, screw it! We'll just reorder the ballot counts ourselves,

  • with the black box voting hacks in the most influential electoral states.

  • And so it goes!

  • Since the beginning of civilization,

  • those in power have successfully restricted the interests of the majority

  • by regulating their values, by controlling resources through money,

  • not to mention controlling the very processes that exist to challenge them.

  • Is it a conspiracy? Do such powerful men meet in dark rooms,

  • and work to figure out how to keep their power?

  • Actually no, not as much as you might think.

  • You see, the hilarious thing about all of this is that such a process

  • of manipulation is actually self-generating,

  • justified in a step-by-step manner

  • with basic self-interest guiding the whole way.

  • You see, the real corruption is not occurring in back-room meetings, or at the docks;

  • the real power resides in how you, the public,

  • actually perpetuate, condone and support

  • the very underlying systems that oppress you.

  • Final thoughts: Many watching this program's content

  • will likely interpret the broad farce known as American democracy,

  • or really the farce of global democracy, in fact,

  • as a system in need of better regulation.

  • The ACLU, Democracy Now, Michael Moore, Occupy Wall Street, Annie Leonard,

  • and other intelligent and outspoken activist institutions and figures

  • seeking what they call 'change',

  • all actually operate within the same presupposition:

  • "If only if we can better regulate monetary and corporate power,

  • we can fix the world."

  • No.

  • I'm sorry to say that until the social premise itself,

  • and hence, the fundamental psychological drivers of our economy:

  • imbalance, scarcity, narrow self-interest, exploitation and competition.

  • Until those are altered to the extent that the system begins to reward

  • and reinforce collaboration, human and ecological balance,

  • efficiency and sustainability, nothing is going to really change.

  • In a sociological condition, where everything is based on advantage over others,

  • what we call corruption today isn't actually corruption at all.

  • It's just business as usual.

  • Seriously, what did you people expect?

  • In an economy where everything is for sale by the very ethic inherent,

  • underscored by the false notion that we can't possibly work together intelligently

  • to benefit all, no level of supposed corruption

  • should surprise any of us.

  • In short, to assume we're going to perpetuate this economic philosophy here,

  • and then contradict it over here with the idea that certain elements of society

  • should be off-limits for monetary manipulation and gain,

  • is completely naive and absurd;

  • but don't take my word for it. Just sit back and watch the ebb and flow

  • as we move from one set of corrupt, damaging practices to the next.

  • Sure, we'll slowly fix a few issues with our in-the-box thinking,

  • but until the whole system is addressed at its core,

  • unfortunately, it's all mostly a waste of time

  • and improvement would be very little.

  • Until we grow up to that level, sit back, relax, enjoy the show

  • and until next time, I'm Peter Joseph,

  • an agent and victim of a culture in decline.

There we go. We got it, Bob! Hi! Sorry, we're running a little bit late.

字幕と単語

ワンタップで英和辞典検索 単語をクリックすると、意味が表示されます

B1 中級

Culture in Decline | Episode #1 "What Democracy?" by Peter Joseph

  • 191 22
    Why Why に公開 2013 年 03 月 27 日
動画の中の単語