Technocrats thrive off of the battles of class struggles, and battles of gap between rich and poor. Rather than route out corruption, and create actual opportunity, leftist elites favor and call on Technocrats who will "make everyone happy" and redistribute our energy and materials which we worked hard for, to the other "have nots" throughout the globe. Technocrats want there to be much less separation between the first, second, third, and fourth worlds. As do we all, but they are doing it in unnatural, and secretive yet coercive ways. How Smart Meters Enable Totalitarian Technocracy (video) | COTO Report Watch the second video, after scrolling down a bit. The 4:00 minute one. The first one with Patrick Woods is good too but longer. The 4:00 minute one is pretty good, and also gives you examples how Technocracy affects potheads. EDIT* Scroll nearly to the bottom that's where the 4:00 minute vid is. Discuss.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fvTxv46ano]All Your Base Are Belong To Us (Original) - YouTube[/ame]
Certain players on the left such as AL Gore are saying we have all basically failed as Americans, and that its Constitutionally Democratic Republic has failed us; that we should relinquish our decision-making powers to technocrats. That we are unable to handle the evil scary TV box. Yeah ok. why doesn't Al Gore call out the idiots ON THE TV rather than just say "the TV has failed us." Rubbish.
You realize all smart meters do is tell you how much energy your using, and it breaks it down to different parts of your house. This is so you can reduce your usage if you want too, since its easier to reduce if you know how much your using, and where your using it. And if their happens to be a power outage/surge you can set it up to keep giving energy to something important. Thats about it....
I'm not sure about this thread. Not that its wrong. But its poorly written and doesn't provide a persuasive argument Are you trying to say the there is a global domination plot to use things like carbon tax to control the world? Is this a NWO thread?
[quote name='"jay-bird"']Technocrats thrive off of the battles of class struggles, and battles of gap between rich and poor. Rather than route out corruption, and create actual opportunity, leftist elites favor and call on Technocrats who will "make everyone happy" and redistribute our energy and materials which we worked hard for, to the other "have nots" throughout the globe. Technocrats want there to be much less separation between the first, second, third, and fourth worlds. As do we all, but they are doing it in unnatural, and secretive yet coercive ways. How Smart Meters Enable Totalitarian Technocracy (video) | COTO Report Watch the second video, after scrolling down a bit. The 4:00 minute one. The first one with Patrick Woods is good too but longer. The 4:00 minute one is pretty good, and also gives you examples how Technocracy affects potheads. EDIT* Scroll nearly to the bottom that's where the 4:00 minute vid is. Discuss.[/quote] There's a second & fourth worlds? I though it was just 1st and 3rd lol Anyway the way countries were separated from eachother was much more cohesive than what technocrats are supposedly doing...
Well, the first world consisted of the US and it's allies. Second world was the Soviet Union and its allies. The third world was neutral. Nowadays first and third worlds have a different meaning. But it stems from the cold war. I say, we all live in the same world, so let's all work together for peace and prosperity.
Always remember: when in doubt, ask Google or Wikipedia for help. Second World From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The three worlds as they were separated during the Cold War era, each with its respective allies as of the period between 30 April 1975 (the fall of Saigon) and 23 August 1975 (the communist takeover in Laos). Colors do not represent current economic development. First World: the United States, United Kingdom and its allies. Second World: the Soviet Union, China, and their allies. Third World: neutral and non-aligned countries. "Communist world" redirects here. For the final stage of communist theory, see World communism. See also: Three Worlds Theory The second world refers to the former socialist, industrial states (formally the Eastern Bloc), the territory and the influence of the Soviet Union. During World War II, there were nineteen communist countries; after the fall of the Soviet Union, only four socialist countries remained: China, Cuba, Laos and Vietnam. Along with "First World" and "Third World", the term was used to divide the nations of Earth into three broad categories. In other words, the concept of "Second World" was a construct of the Cold War and the term has largely fallen out of use since the revolutions of 1989, though it is still occasionally used to describe countries that are in between poverty and prosperity, many of which are socialist and former socialist states today. Subsequently, the actual meaning of the terms "First World" and "Third World" changed from being based on political ideology to an economic definition (see the terms developed country and developing country). This might also cause semantic variation of the term between ascribing a region's political entities and its people.[1] Fourth World From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Fourth World refers to 1.sub-populations socially excluded from global society; 2.hunter-gatherer, nomadic, pastoral and some subsistence farming peoples living beyond the modern industrial norm.[1] 3.4th World can also refer to sub populations, existing in a First World country, with the living standards of those of the Third World, or developing countries. Fourth World follows the First World, Second World, and Third World hierarchy of nation-state status; however, unlike the former categories, Fourth World is not spatially bounded, and is usually used to refer to populations whose size and shape does not map onto citizenship in a specific nation-state. It can denote nations without a sovereign state, emphasising the non-recognition and exclusion of ethnically- and religiously-defined peoples from the politico-economic world system, e.g. the Romani people worldwide, the Basque, Sami, pre-First World War Ashkenazi Jews in the Pale of Settlement, the Assyrians, and the Kurds in the Middle East, Pashtun throughout Afghanistan and Pakistan, the indigenous peoples of the Americas and First Nations groups throughout North, Central and South America, and indigenous Africans and Asians. Spanish sociologist Manuel Castells of the University of Southern California Annenberg School for Communication has made extensive use of the term fourth world.
[quote name='"lenny88"'] Well, the first world consisted of the US and it's allies. Second world was the Soviet Union and its allies. The third world was neutral. Nowadays first and third worlds have a different meaning. But it stems from the cold war. I say, we all live in the same world, so let's all work together for peace and prosperity.[/quote] Yeah now I remember about the cold war origin, thanks. Today though in most cases 1st world is used as a ssynonym for a developed nation as 3rd world relates to a developing nation
yeah, I'm not exactly sure why, but I suspect that it's because most neutral countries were African and Latin American nations that were already poor nations. If you ask me, they are just terms used by the powers that be in order to divide instead of unite.
Smart grids and meters are only a few of the tools that global elitists, leftists, and technocrats (and yes, negative statists) can use to monitor us, and have power and leverage over us. They will be able to monitor and have control over our whole lives. If they see that a household consumes more energy than the average household does, they may tax that household more, or even worse, lessen the energy that is distributed to the house. I know that we already pay for our gas/water/electric as much as we use it, but this makes the possibilities much more complex and worse. The ideology of Technocracy pretty much assumes that the governments, states, and communities of the world have all failed each other and themselves. It is a symbol that the human species has pretty much devolved, rather than evolved. A technocrat may only view the people who have helped the process, such as the few great minds who propelled the revolutions in science, medicine, and technology, as assets rather than hinderances to the human race. Everyone else, was just some poor needy sap who was backstabbed by some other elite, who therefore deserves redistribution of things such as "energy credits" and the like.