Stasi Influence on Canada & United States - The Informant Society

Here is an interesting book.

When you read through it, you'll discover that many of the techniques described are similar to what the Stasi was doing.

The increased sophistication of the modern day Stasi was learned from the past failures of totalitarian states. What caused their inevitable breakdown? A significant part was that past totalitarian regimes looked excessively threatening or oppressive.

Today's modern day technological dictatorships have become very good at giving people the appearance of freedom. We hear endless talk about freedom of speech in modern day "democracies." Freedom of speech is important and political correctness is a massive problem.

BUT. 

What if we actually live in a country of "political thought correctness," and to top that off --- what if technology exists that can literally influence human thought and behavior? To see further evidence of this technology, please see here, here, here and here.

Add to this that the majority of people are completely ignorant of the existence of such technology.

Below is a video talk given by a lady who wrote a book called Stasiland.

America Wake Up! Depleted Uranium and the Politics of Radiation

"Three Quotations for Little John Stuart Mill"

Sometimes a person can say something more powerful in three quotations than someone else says in a whole letter. Not me of course. I'm too "humble" to embrace a title of such distinction. I will leave it to a couple of writers.

First, let's take two quotes from a book I saw mentioned on a freedom and liberty lovers website. The website owner is a man of pure humility and truth. His truth and humility are so obvious that you wouldn't even need to read his brain with super-secret satellite technology to know it. But I don't know, I'm a horrible judge of character.

The book is titled "The Earl of Chesterfield's Letters to His Son" by the Earl of Chesterfield:

Below are the two quotes:

1. Manners must adorn knowledge, and smooth its way through the world. Like a great rough diamond, it may do very well in a closet by way of curiosity, and also for its intrinsic value.

2. It is commonly said, and more particularly by Lord Shaftesbury, that ridicule is the best test of truth.

Next, we'll look at a quote from Friedrich Nietzsche in his book titled the Gay Science. I picked this quote because it explains --- at least to me --- why someone might choose to do something "strange" from the viewpoint of today's ever-present, satellite spying, brain-reading eyes and ears.

A question that might be heard while reading further might sound like: "Ethics? You mean, you actually still think about that ridiculous stuff?"

The truth is I don't know if I believe in it. But, at least I still think about it. At least I haven't set it on fire and cast it into the sea --- because the conversation and the tug-of-war are still alive in me.

I cannot say that I'm "certain" that I've found "happiness" like so many others I see around me. I don't do something because everyone else is doing it, nor because it's easy or because everyone else says I should.

The quote below adds to what I mentioned on Mr. Humility's website about a thought plucked from my brain. The title of the post on the site was "The Wrong Route is Easy, The Right Path is Hard." I mentioned the following to a question from one of his friends:

I said: 

I would say this is more of an aesthetic rule of ethics that is hard to verbalize with the certainty of science. What you said is binary. A way of thinking that wants to simplify the world and compartmentalize people so we can make better predictions on human behavior. It isn’t that simple, like what Aristotle says about ethics, we don’t have the same certainty in this area as others. It might be better to say that when it comes to ethics this is so:

"Often the wrong route be easy” whereas often the “right path will be hard.” I would say it applies more to the ethical realm and not the scientific. Science is about utility, the path of least resistance. In ethics, if something doesn’t seem to agree with what we feel to be right, should one resist? I guess this is the question.

Here is Nietzsche's quote. It's a perfect fit for a bunch of herd-like hyenas that seem to believe in nothing and are incapable of taking anything seriously.  A quality that is just as contemptible as taking everything seriously.

"Noble and common.—Common natures consider all noble, magnanimous feelings inexpedient and therefore first of all incredible. They blink when they hear of such things and seem to feel like saying: "Surely, there must be some advantage involved; one cannot see through everything." They are suspicious of the noble person, as if he surreptitiously sought his advantage. When they are irresistibly persuaded of the absence of selfish intentions and gains, they see the noble person as a kind of fool; they despise him in his joy and laugh at his shining eyes. "How can one enjoy being at a disadvantage? How could one desire with one's eyes open to be disadvantaged? Some disease of reason must be associated with the noble affection." Thus they think and sneer, as they sneer at the pleasure that a madman derives from his fixed idea. What distinguishes the common type is that it never loses sight of its advantage, and that this thought of purpose and advantage is even stronger than the strongest instincts; not to allow these instincts to lead one astray to perform inexpedient acts—that is their wisdom and pride."

I would like to further mention to all the certain and happy ones --- and even more so to the humble and honest ones, a little bit about what I think the last man is about.

It's about a lack of a soul. 

"Ha,ha... the soul!"

"Don't worry about it," you say. "We don't have one of those anyway."

"Science hasn't found it." 

And yet,  we still talk about the importance of esteeming the "self," though we can no more find this "self" that is to be esteemed with modern day science.

I think the last man is about banishing the idea of the soul, or integrity, as they are strongly correlated --- for wealth, health, utility and public opinion.

The last man hops around the modern day scientific wasteland. He's always doing his best to make the most seemingly "rational" decisions that will best preserve and extend his life. Often these decisions mean compromising integrity for comfort, wealth and recognition. This preserver and extender cares no more about truth, only what others think is true. The appearance of truth is what is important to him.

He is "other" directed in the truest sense. He is driven by the need and recognition of the public for his opinion and reputation of himself, and because of this, he will do anything to get the public to look at him with adoring eyes. 

We have all been like this at least once in our lives. When we are in the thick of it, often we don't know until someone points it out to us.