Stoned thought about politics!!!

[Loc Dog]

We know that douchebag Nixon made Cannabis a schedule one drug to control the hippies and African Americans.

Could they also have done it because stoned people can see through their bullshit, by seeing things without blinders. Able to put 2 + 2 together, and not believing everything they are told?

I spend a lot of time on facebook, discussing and researching how completely corrupt the government is. It is obvious, but in a police state, they even treat protesters as terrorists.

If the message can not get past the owners of the networks, it can not get on air. Thank Reagan for that one. Repealed a law that required media to report the truth.

This is a video, that summarizes Noam Chomsky's video from 1992, called Manufacturing Consent

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34LGPIXvU5M

Do not blame you if deleted, for being too political.

 

[geneva_sativa]

It is well known that herb hampers mind control attempts.

It is exactly the reason that it is illegal on the federal level. . . it is why we still see Reefer Madness on front page of MSM outlets in 2017. . . and exactly the reason it is again being threatened by top AG, even as states continue to 'legalize' it.

 

[Loc Dog]

It is well known that herb hampers mind control attempts.

It is exactly the reason that it is illegal on the federal level. . . it is why we still see Reefer Madness on front page of MSM outlets in 2017. . . and exactly the reason it is again being threatened by top AG, even as states continue to 'legalize' it.

I having been smoking some QWET oil recently, and examine political aspects from all angles. That way I do not doubt myself, and can debate if needed.

I do not do that here, since frowned upon. Maybe against terms.

 

[Loc Dog]

I having been smoking some QWET oil recently, and examine political aspects from all angles. That way I do not doubt myself, and can debate if needed.

I do not do that here, since frowned upon. Maybe against terms.

Could also be that I have analyzed for last 3 years.

 

[Loc Dog]

It is well known that herb hampers mind control attempts.

It is exactly the reason that it is illegal on the federal level. . . it is why we still see Reefer Madness on front page of MSM outlets in 2017. . . and exactly the reason it is again being threatened by top AG, even as states continue to 'legalize' it.

Watch that video - it is about constant mind control by the media.

 

[Cvh]

People who are capable of thinking for themself are considered uncontrollable and possibly dangerous by governments.
It's nothing new.

 

[slaveplanet]

i thought so too, but it is just an illusion. wishful thinking.
just take a look at the people here in the forum or in the world, at people you know that use cannabis or maybe at yourself.

it might be true for some people depending on their own personalities but overall i can not see that cannabis has the ability to change people to become more critical or better persons.

it depends on the information you get in your upbringing and the way you are brought up.
your view if the world is a place where only the "strong" survives, what is important in life, if you received a normal human upbringing with love and caring etc.
it is very unlikely that you or me or the majority of people using pot had a normal human experience and therefore can expect to be truly human.

you may have critical thoughts and think you might have some illuminating ideas etc. but you can only think with that which you have learned and experienced.
so let's say you think you are critical about politics and think you can see through their bullshit... but maybe what you believe is true and the truth is also just bullshit... because you are processing information that may be critical of whatever you may be thinking is bullshit but itself is also bullshit...

to get back to cannabis...it was just an illusion of people in power that cannabis was somehow anti-establishment or dangerous to the system, i don't know why. later maybe because it was brought into connection with psychedelic drugs that can show more people something about themselves and the world and have a higher probability to become dangerous to the system... but i think now it is becoming clearer and clearer that cannabis is not dangerous so it is slowly accepted and even more it is understood that cannabis use is pro-establishment and good for the system and helps to stabilize it.

just my opinion

 

[slaveplanet]

forgot:

it also depends on the information you get later on not just your upbringing and if you can integrate that maybe true information into your thought construct and can relate it to other information.

 

[Loc Dog]

i thought so too, but it is just an illusion. wishful thinking.
just take a look at the people here in the forum or in the world, at people you know that use cannabis or maybe at yourself.

it might be true for some people depending on their own personalities but overall i can not see that cannabis has the ability to change people to become more critical or better persons.

it depends on the information you get in your upbringing and the way you are brought up.
your view if the world is a place where only the "strong" survives, what is important in life, if you received a normal human upbringing with love and caring etc.
it is very unlikely that you or me or the majority of people using pot had a normal human experience and therefore can expect to be truly human.

you may have critical thoughts and think you might have some illuminating ideas etc. but you can only think with that which you have learned and experienced.
so let's say you think you are critical about politics and think you can see through their bullshit... but maybe what you believe is true and the truth is also just bullshit... because you are processing information that may be critical of whatever you may be thinking is bullshit but itself is also bullshit...

to get back to cannabis...it was just an illusion of people in power that cannabis was somehow anti-establishment or dangerous to the system, i don't know why. later maybe because it was brought into connection with psychedelic drugs that can show more people something about themselves and the world and have a higher probability to become dangerous to the system... but i think now it is becoming clearer and clearer that cannabis is not dangerous so it is slowly accepted and even more it is understood that cannabis use is pro-establishment and good for the system and helps to stabilize it.

just my opinion

It may be since an extreme loner, may look at everything objectively. I can not talk of others, since no exposure.

 

[slaveplanet]

It may be since an extreme loner, may look at everything objectively. I can not talk of others, since no exposure.

as a loner you definitely have a higher probability to see things more "clearly" (if you have the capability for it, depending on use of logic, infos, data etc.) but also has the risk of becoming too focused on a view that may be wrong or not entirely correct.
getting information on facebook or other internet sources is highly problematic because you will only get very subjective views and manipulative views and views that probably have an hidden agenda.
if i were you i would read books by scientists (chomsky is very good, but also has a certain worldview) and understand the thoughts that lie behind their ideas and what agenda the person you get the information from might have.

what i know is that objectivity does not exist. it is always subjective what you think and see. but one can try and look for the truth. but for that you must see what the world is and understand your own indoctrination.
it's very difficult, but very interesting and very scary.

 

[Loc Dog]

as a loner you definitely have a higher probability to see things more "clearly" (if you have the capability for it, depending on use of logic, infos, data etc.) but also has the risk of becoming too focused on a view that may be wrong or not entirely correct.
getting information on facebook or other internet sources is highly problematic because you will only get very subjective views and manipulative views and views that probably have an hidden agenda.
if i were you i would read books by scientists (chomsky is very good, but also has a certain worldview) and understand the thoughts that lie behind their ideas and what agenda the person you get the information from might have.

what i know is that objectivity does not exist. it is always subjective what you think and see. but one can try and look for the truth. but for that you must see what the world is and understand your own indoctrination.
it's very difficult, but very interesting and very scary.

Did you see link in first post. It was summary of Manufacturing Consent from 1992, by Chomsky.

 

[slaveplanet]

Did you see link in first post. It was summary of Manufacturing Consent from 1992, by Chomsky.

yes, i saw it. if you want to know my recommendations then here are some:
the subjects are emotionally very disturbing and can get you anxious, depressed etc. so if you really want to read them then take your time and don't overdo it

derrick jensen has very good books... endgame... culture of make believe...myth of human supremacy.... etc.

chomsky is very good... who rules the world etc....

animal and human slavery, the dreaded comparison by marjorie gross

eternal treblinka

books about native americans and the invasion of the americas but from a critical point of view or indigenous people around the world
kirkpatrick sale columbus book forgot the name

jack d. forbes columbus and other cannibals etc.

american holocaust stannard

 

[Loc Dog]

as a loner you definitely have a higher probability to see things more "clearly" (if you have the capability for it, depending on use of logic, infos, data etc.) but also has the risk of becoming too focused on a view that may be wrong or not entirely correct.
getting information on facebook or other internet sources is highly problematic because you will only get very subjective views and manipulative views and views that probably have an hidden agenda.
if i were you i would read books by scientists (chomsky is very good, but also has a certain worldview) and understand the thoughts that lie behind their ideas and what agenda the person you get the information from might have.

what i know is that objectivity does not exist. it is always subjective what you think and see. but one can try and look for the truth. but for that you must see what the world is and understand your own indoctrination.
it's very difficult, but very interesting and very scary.

I was a network systems analyst, specializing in intrusion detection systems. Then, the absolute source of knowledge was the companies, and the whitehat hacking community.

With politics, I check all sources for credibility. Mainstream media, is owned by the corporations that own the politicians, so they never tell stories about their crimes.
Reagan did away with a law that held news outlets accountable to be accurate and fair, and Clinton allowed all news media to be owned by 5 corporations.

 

[Loc Dog]

yes, i saw it. if you want to know my recommendations then here are some:
the subjects are emotionally very disturbing and can get you anxious, depressed etc. so if you really want to read them then take your time and don't overdo it

derrick jensen has very good books... endgame... culture of make believe...myth of human supremacy.... etc.

chomsky is very good... who rules the world etc....

animal and human slavery, the dreaded comparison by marjorie gross

eternal treblinka

books about native americans and the invasion of the americas but from a critical point of view or indigenous people around the world
kirkpatrick sale columbus book forgot the name

jack d. forbes columbus and other cannibals etc.

american holocaust stannard

I have always looked at things from American Natives perspective. I hate cowboy movies, except Clint Eastwood movies that were against the atrocities of our fore fathers.

 

[St. Phatty]

One of the most illuminating history resources I ever witnessed was the library of 50,000 video interviews with survivors of WW2 German internment camps. At USC.

 

[coldcanna]

Enlightened people realize that power is best left in the hands of the people. It breaks my heart to see my generation embracing the evils of government control and socialism, people won't realize what freedoms we had until they are all gone

 

[slaveplanet]

Enlightened people realize that power is best left in the hands of the people. It breaks my heart to see my generation embracing the evils of government control and socialism, people won't realize what freedoms we had until they are all gone

don't want to attack you personally, no need for fighting ... but....

typical american indoctrinated view...

never were free, never will be...

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

Just to make clear what OBJECTIVE and SUBJECTIVE means.

Anything objective sticks to the facts, but anything subjective has feelings. Objective and subjective are opposites. Objective: It is raining. Subjective: I love the rain!

Objective is a busy word and that's a fact. An objective is a goal, but to be objective is to be unbiased. If you're objective about something, you have no personal feelings about it. In grammar land, objective relates to the object of a sentence. Anyway, people often try to be objective, but it's easier for robots. Here are examples:

"DNA testing and fingerprint analysis and all that technology stuff is objective, they declare confidently. The machine cannot be fooled." (Salon)

"Consider checking in with a third party, to get an objective opinion." (Wall Street Journal)

Subjective , on the other hand, has feelings. Anything subjective is subject to interpretation. In grammar land, this word relates to the subject of the sentence. Usually, subjective means influenced by emotions or opinions. Humans are a subjective bunch and we like it that way! Here's subjective in the wild:

"Because many of the decisions we made are subjective, there is the possibility of human error in our data set." (Slate)

"Now, I realize that is totally subjective because there is no standard unit of measurement for fun." (New York Times)

It's true that opposites attract. Here are some examples of both words cozying up in the same sentence:

"But now we, as a pathologists, need more objective measures because symptoms, to a certain degree, are subjective." ( Time)

"We take our unruly, subjective feelings about a year of television and groom them into something that looks mathematical and objective." (Slate)

Be objective when writing things like summaries or news articles, but feel free to be subjective for arguments and opinions.

Lets try to be more objective than subjective in this thread, or it could end up being a slanging match full of emotional responses rather than factual ones.

 

[coldcanna]

Flipping through the Sunday morning news programs I find myself pondering what can you really believe anymore? If you're on the right you watch Fox and read Breitbart or Washington Times, if you're more left you have pretty much all the other media outlets in your camp. I try to read and watch a little bit of everything to balance things out, but this raises the question..... as a responsible citizen where can you even go to get accurate information anymore?

I know there are plenty of talented journalists out there but media is a business at the end of the day and their editors are pushing stories that fit storylines which bring them revenue and readers.

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

Seriously .....I think that the whole right/left thing is a game to keep the people divided by those that really have control.

But shhhhhhush!

Don't let it be known too widely or our overlords will seek us out and destroy us.....for knowing too much about them, and how they operate.