Rome Bread & Circuses

bread and circuses

• Word Origin

See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
something, as extravagant entertainment, offered as an expedient means of pacifying discontent or diverting attention from a source of grievance.

America does this same thing only on a far more grand scale. Even within political matters in which Rome desired their people to be ignorant of, America does within political arguments.

Today's political arguments from within the "people" are contrived and setup by the government and or powers that be. In determining the reactions of the people within particular areas/topics, they (the people) become predictable. And can be feed appropriate measures as to deter them (people) from that which is desired. Such as JFK/9/11! Specific topics that the people argue over, are given and for specific reasoning. This allows them to continuously stay ahead and on top of the people. For they know what is coming next.

If they didn't want people to know the true story of JFK, the above is the best solution, and maybe the only way to keep people from looking into it.

The best way to beat the opposition, is to lead it.

So the political arguments within the people of America are not only lacking truth, but they push the people in a desired direction, as a result of the lies.

Republicans and democrats today, are nothing more than a cult. Because they care not of the truth, rather most importantly, weather or not their political party is seated upon the throne. Lies are not only ok to get to the throne, but are needed as well.

For some reason the American people fall for it over and over again. Jobs, healthcare, education.

They (govt/powers that be) pretty much get up behind the podium and spew a list of reasons as to why you need them. In turn you feel you do need them, in reality you don't.

 

Are you advocating anarchy, or just conspiracy thinking? I can't tell.

 

Anarchy is only a word as to deter people from freedom, and to except a master who rules over them.

Common sense gives us that which is good, (thus evil as well) for some reason people don't have the common sense to treat people as they would their own loved ones. As a consequence, a master is born.

 

That seems like an eloquent non-answer.

 

When most people hear the word "anarchy" they think of people rioting, physical harm and or killing, looting, etc. When I think of anarchy, I think of freedom, and people doing that which is good. There is so much un-used land out there. A person cannot claim it as their own, even though nobody else is using it. Yet the government can. So who really has the "freedom"?

Now I realize the argument would be, well people would just keep claiming land. But that is not what is of good. If you already own land, you don't need anymore. In doing that which is good, you would realize there are other people who need land, and shelter, thus you would only claim one. This is just an example of many areas in which would be applicable.

What kind of answer are you looking for, and do you feel government is an absolute necessity?

 

More a crime family than a cult, but agree generally with the OP.

 

To answer your last line...YES.

I do not see government as a separate entity, but rather as an extension of the people. Granted, at times it may feel like it is not, but that is because of other factors.

What you are describing is unrealistic based upon the history of civilization.

 

Do you disagree that many of them are more concerned with power and money than representing the people?
I don't think it's a coincidence when it seems they pit one group of people against another to keep the common people from blaming them. They make policies that hurt workers and then throw crumbs to them to keep them complacent.

 

The process of government -- and that is what it is, a process, not a fixed thing -- is an ongoing struggle. That it gets thwarted and attacked from within and without I do not disagree with, but nowhere in history has civilization and all its benefits existed without some form of government and a system of laws.

 

I agree 100%. That's why I said the problem is within the people. Their inability to choose that which is good over evil. This as a consequence, a master is born.

And I hear what your saying about the government being a part of the people, especially here in America. Where our leaders are a representation of the people. What kind of people we have dictates our government. So aside from anarchy, a more informed and educated populist would be the best solution. Which is where the OP comes from. Because the American people are misinformed, and done so deliberately by the American government, thus "Bread & Circuses!

If a person is to investigate in a manner of opposition of what their government is telling them is happening, he/she is labeled a "conspiracy freak". This is very clear on matters such as 9/11 and JFK. In turn the "truth" becomes whatever the government says. Anybody that says otherwise is a fool.

Something to think about and or research. Every single president of American history is only of two different bloodlines? Every CIA director since it's birth, is either Jesuit, or Jesuit trained. Trump had 3 years of training.

 

I don't think anyone is suggesting to have no government. But many forms become corrupt over time and something needs to be done to change that.

 

I get where you are coming from, but having dug deep into the whole conspiracy thing back in the 90's, I can tell you that just because some things appear a certain way, they aren't necessarily a conspiracy.

To begin with, the entire concept of a conspiracy is usually absent one key ingredient; the ability to understand human behaviour. Two elements are needed for a conspiracy to be effective: careful and precise planning, and the ability of getting hundreds, even thousands of people to play their part without ever understanding the whole. Both of those requirements are humanly impossible, or as Abraham Lincoln said, "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

Yet many rational people feel compelled to attribute conspiracies and cabals to the perplexing chaos of our modern lives. I have come up with my own theory (though I'm certain it's not my own) of what I call Systems. Civilization requires us to create systems, autonomous rules and procedures that can continue to operate regardless of the changing players. Whether they are economic, such as banking and trade, or governments, or even businesses, everything short of direct authoritarian control relies on a system. This is what modern civilization has evolved into, yet for thousands of years civilization relied on monarchies. That sort of order is deeply embedded within the psyche of the human population, and so it is somewhat natural to assume these autonomous systems are being controlled by one or a few people, when in fact they aren't. The system itself is king, and no one person controls the whole.

Just like countless examples in the animal kingdom, humans operate in a hive mind too.

 

That's evolution, or revolution.

 

I can see what Mr. Lincoln is saying here, however, I think your missing a part of that statement or idea. "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time." Within that statement it is possible that a conspiracy can, has, and will be true. And it will be this group of people, that was not fooled at that particular moment.


Even having said that, a lie is a lie, even if everybody believes it, and the truth is the truth, even if nobody believes it. It is of my opinion that it is possible to deceive the entire world! And I think it has been.

However I could be wrong, and you could be right. The nature of humanity and the desires of men, is what tells me, the entire world could be deceived, either of many things, or simply just one. In the case in which I believe the world has been deceived, is the notion that the earth is a ball. When in reality it's flat. I won't change the subject and get into it, just an example.

As to changing or limiting the corruption within politics, I believe there should be term limits in every category (two years), and once a family member (direct family member), has served in a particular area, nobody else in that direct family can serve within the same area. If there seems to be a repetitive family name within govt, it should no longer be available for a set amount of time. This should help keep certain agendas from being chased, reduce the amount of corruption and more focus among the people as a whole, knowing they can only serve for so long. Any sort of corruption that is caught and brought to the people, the person who identified the wrong doings or conspiracy, should be rewarded in a large manner.

The less time govt. officials are allowed to serve, the more the people will have to stay informed. Which is a very good thing.

 

It is irrelevant whether the truth comes from the government or anyone else so long as it is based on reasonable evidence.

ALL of the reasonable evidence proves Oswald acted alone shooting Kennedy and 911 was a foreign attack by terrorists.

The truth is not WHAT they say it is what the evidence proves which is something you regularly ignore

 

And here comes the anarchy fallacy the LW is so fond of spouting. Correct them 100 times, doesn't matter, still keep spouting it over and over.

Disagreeing with the size, power and remote centrality of government is not an appeal to anarchy. Get that through your skull... eh I know you won't, and will be repeating the same claptrap next thread.

 

Yes, you are good at claptrap.

 

Evidence, you mean the plane, the fires, and the collapse of the building was able to create not just thermite, but a highly advanced, weaponized version of it. How was they able to account for the high-tech nano-thermite composite material that was discovered? That's right, they didn't. They simply ignored it. And anybody who brought it up, was a conspiracy freak.

"There is nothing hidden that shall not be known and come abroad."

Give it time, something will come up. Even Trump during his campaign said that if he was elected, he would give his best effort to re-investigate the 9/11 event. Instead of arguing with you, I will simply give it time.

 

I totally understand your reaction!

 

Nope, I don't think you do.

 

When I first heard of it, all I did was laugh. I started to try and debunk the flat earthers, and the more I tried, the more I discovered a very elaborate deception. I was only able to provide evidence that the earth is a ball, but I could not find any proof. All the equation's, the alignment with the stars, even how the southern and northern stars circle in opposite directions. This one alone would be considered "strong evidence", but nonetheless "evidence" not "proof".

And any image of earth or celestial bodies, (except of course sun and moon), are "artist renditions, CGI, composites" there is not one real photo of earth. And if you bring up the live ISS feed, I can assure you, George Clooney and Sandra Bullock are not astronauts. It's known as the Green Screen.

 

No such thing was discovered.

Your problem is not lack of time it is lack of evidence

 

You have been proven wrong on this many times.

There are many real images of earth and your claim that they are CGI is an outright lie. You have never been able to provide proof or evidence that they are CGI or fake.

The stars do not circle in opposite directions either

 

Ok...here we go....the conspiracy theory forum ain't here. It is somewhere down the hall to your left. Go visit it.