Hello All

While Rose was watching the video above, I was watching the video that follows:


Who is Peter Joseph?" Full Version - A Mini-Doc by Charles Robinson

It was particularly striking at times, and I noted those times:

19:40 "Those that have something against me for the things that I talk about want to find anything they can to try to make me look like I'm hiding something or I have ulterior motives. And I expect that."

20:00 "I'm constantly interacting, putting myself out there. I have nothing to hide."

20:34 "Anyone who thinks that I do what I do for notoriety reasons or monetary reasons or anything associated with self-interest has a lot to learn."

I was reminded of Rose trying to "get the goods" on Peter Joseph when Peter said these three things. "Getting the goods" on someone is a "kill the messenger" type thing. Later, Peter delved into his anti-capitalist perspective that Rose finds distasteful but that I agree with, since ownership is primarily a sociopathic tool of power and control. Sharing is the empathetic way.

38:54 "The idea of ownership is controlled restriction. Ownership is simply there really for those at the top to make sure no one can interfere with the fact that they control mostly everything."

42:51 "Social interest needs to become self-interest. In other words, when I invent something, that is given to everyone, for them to improve upon and to utilize. That invention isn't hoarded through patents and trademarks, it's given to everyone. In turn, what that means is that every time anyone else invents something or creates something or has an idea, that comes to me too. Suddenly, humanity becomes a singular organism, it becomes a working system."

43:49 "I believe that a true spiritual awakening will be when people start to realize that they have to begin to work together, they have to share their resources, they have to begin to understand that they live off of this planet, that they get their light from the sun, that their energy sources that are natural and abundant that could be made available to all, that we share everything, that we work together, because that's what the system demands, that the Earth demands this, that the species demands this, for our survival. And that will be a spiritual awakening if you want to give it that type of term."

47:24 "One way or another, we will end up in a system that's not based on money as we know it today. Why? Because that will be realized in the future by historians as the total and pivotal cause of the destruction of civilization as we know it."

What really grabs my attention is how Peter and I arrive at nearly identical conclusions even though we are coming at these problems from different directions. The reason for that is that Peter has focused on the effects, whereas I have focused on the cause. The cause is the psychology of sociopaths. Once you understand the cause, the effects are predictable.

48:44 "I hope everybody out there will understand that either we change, or we die."

From my perspective, we either identify and manage sociopathy, or the sociopaths will eventually lead us into self-destruction.

 

I approve of exposing the damage capitalism inflicts on humanity, and I also approve of exploring solutions. The difference in our perspectives while observing the same thing is quite fascinating to me, and I enjoy exploring that phenomenon.

That's the point, actually. By accentuating our naturally existing "group mind" tendencies via their propaganda, mind control, brainwashing, and social programming, the ruling sociopaths have already greatly harmed us! They continue to ramp up the damage that they do. That's what Peter Joseph is trying to get us to recognize.

And yet they do. Nearly all people have emotions and are subject to them. We emotionally feel things, and that's normal. It helps to investigate and understand why we feel as we do.

Good timing, now we have an appropriate example to work with. You feel "hurt" and say I am "minimizing" you because I suggested you have an emotional bias regarding capitalism. I feel "hurt" that you would think I have any intent to deliberately put you down or disrespect you. So we both have reactions that have emotional components. From my perspective, bias is always emotional, and I too have biases. Though I was once heavily biased in favor of capitalism due to my so-called education, I am now biased against capitalism because of my own research into sociopathy. Yes, there is an emotional component to my bias because I am angry at the ruling sociopaths for economically enslaving humanity (me included) using capitalism! And I know the source of my emotional anger and my bias -- it's empathy. I hate unfairness, injustice, and inequality, all because I have empathy. Sociopaths don't care about fairness, justice, and equality, all because they lack empathy. Their bias is noticeably unemotional; "it's just business", remember? By pointing out your emotional biases, and mine, I am not minimizing either of us. Nor am I singing our praises. I'm just pointing out the facts. Just as I point out the facts about sociopaths and their lack of empathy.

Interestingly enough, I think you are biased in favor of capitalism for the same reasons I am now biased against it. Like me, you hate unfairness, injustice, and inequality. You feel capitalism works to promote fairness, justice, and equality. I too was raised to think that way, like every "good" American. Unfortunately, that view of capitalism is not true, it is propaganda. We were brainwashed.

 

Final comments for the Peter Joseph interview:


At 1:07:13, Peter Joseph says, "The military in its organization is brilliant, but its intention is absolutely awful."

It's just like sociopaths -- their ability to deceive and manipulate in the pursuit of power and control over others is brilliant, but their intention is absolutely awful.

The military is modeled on the sociopathic mindset of hierarchy, lack of empathy, inequality, reward and punishment, and the mindless pursuit of power and control.

At 1:10:00, "We keep replacing the same systems with just variations of the prior system. The next transformation should move into a much more dramatic place that is unlike anything the world has ever seen."

Yes! The world has never seen sociopaths identified and disqualified from positions of power and control. Once it happens, it will be a totally new world, for the first time in thousands of years!

 

Continuing on with commentary of the Peter Joseph interview...

At 27:43, Peter Joseph says, "We need to create thinkers, not followers. The entire political / social system is based upon people following, and that's a great disaster." That is very similar to my observations about how the world works. Peter and I are seeing the same things, even though we are coming at it from different directions.

At 44:12, Peter says, "There's a reason why there's been an empire throughout all of human existence. These are social patterns that have a system result. We have to break this system or it's going to destroy us." Peter doesn't go into what that reason is, but I do. It's the psychology of sociopaths, the very type of people who always end up leading humanity! The social patterns are the dynamic that exists between the organized sociopaths and the trusting non-sociopaths. That dynamic does indeed have a very damaging system result. And it will destroy us if we don't learn to manage it.

 

How about telling us how this video affects your feelings towards Peter Joseph? You are still not giving us anything to illustrate the negative vibe you apparently feel for him.

Here's one from me to you. At about the 10:00 mark, Peter claims he is a communicator who wants to "write and produce media that can change people's minds". Mind control? Brain-washing? No! "Propaganda style persuasion techniques"? It could easily be mistaken for that, but that's not it either. It's education. The intent is to educate. The intent is not to deceive or manipulate.

At 18:20, Peter says he wants to see "global change at the social level". The ruling sociopaths want to see that too. The difference is that the ruling sociopaths want a change that benefits them (the 1%), while Peter wants a change that benefits the vast majority (the 99%). That is why I have seen Peter Joseph, from the very beginning when I first saw the Zeitgeist video, as a genuinely positive agent of change, a change that will counter the evil that the ruling sociopaths deliver to the bulk of humanity.

 

We are all on different wavelengths, Rose. That's a given. That's why we have to discuss things in the open, on the forum, for example.

Thanks. That's why I asked for correction and clarification. But I'm still not understanding what it is you have against Peter Joseph. You also made no corrections to my point regarding your feeling about capitalism, so can we say I summarized that correctly? I really would like to understand the source of your dismissal of Peter Joseph.

Yes. Yes. No. Yes. No.

Are you of the belief that Peter Joseph is a sociopath much like Stephen?

 

Just to have a clearer understanding of this, may I summarize my admittedly poor observations of your reasons?

• Peter Joseph reminds you of Dale (George Ohwell), a mysterious person associated with Stephen that you have dealt with across a number of forums. You strongly dislike Dale.

• Peter Joseph finds flaw with the capitalist economic system, and you worked in the banking system for many years. You've seen enormous corruption in the banking industry from your insider position, but you think capitalism is a sound economic model, in principle.

Those are the only two reasons I have come to understand so far. Are they accurate? Are there other important reasons I have missed?

I ask because your reaction to Peter Joseph feels like a strong one, and it is usually important to ask what generates these strong emotions. I detected a similar reaction from you towards Steven Greer, and I wondered if there might be a connection there. I'm just being inquisitive here, trying to learn more about the human condition, with no ill intent intended.

 

Well, why didn't you say so? Would've saved me a lot of confusion. LOL!

I don't remember a lot about Dale's posts, and without Atticus1 being available for review, I don't have much to go on. I do remember that no one at Atticus1 ever made the kind of sense that Peter Joseph does. For that reason alone, I would guess they are not the same person, but it's just a guess, and I could be wrong.

 

Wrong, yes, no.

LOL! I thought you were digging into and displaying Peter Joseph's past! So that's Dale? I thought it was a young Peter Joseph! My apologies for not getting the message, but at least I was right that there was an emotional bias at play. I still don't have the same understanding of this bias that you do, since I don't have the background and experience dealing with Dale that you do, but at least now I have a vague idea of the problem. Thank you for spelling it out for me, because I was observing something else entirely (in error). And I didn't have a clue who George Ohwell was! A parody of George Orwell? Really, that went right over my head, probably because I am not good at remembering names. Dale going by George Ohwell just didn't make enough impression in my mind to warrant remembering it.

I actually love this kind of embarrassing incident that so richly illustrates how difficult it is to communicate! I would have benefited from more explanatory information in your posts, as I have a bias against listening to wannabe performers. I'm still laughing at this!

 

Have you ever looked in the mirror to check your appearance? Have you ever made a video in which you were the star? Have you ever performed on stage? Did you smell narcissistic self-entered deceptions at those moments? Is all narcissism bad, or just when it becomes excessive? How do you judge "excessive"?

Because of the somewhat disingenuous nature of your critiques aimed at Peter Joseph, I am feeling that you may have an emotional bias against him. Can you identify such a bias?

I am perfectly OK with the possibility that Peter Joseph may be trying to trick us, but I am not seeing any evidence for that, nor am I biased against that being the case. That's why your distaste for Peter Joseph is piquing my interest. What is really going on here?

 

I just watched this, so your timing is good. The context is that financial "experts" use economic language that the public cannot understand, which Peter illustrated with several real-life examples. The public's reaction to not understanding the "experts" is that they might feel stupid and thus concede their thinking to the "experts". I agree that this happens all the time, and it is by the deliberate design of the "experts". In the forums, Zook likes to do this kind of thing. He will confuse and obfuscate to the point that people can't really follow him, so his readers figure he must know what he's talking about, which is exactly what he wants.

This is the logical continuation of the public not understanding the "experts", so since they can't understand, they couldn't possibly have anything useful to contribute, especially if they cannot recognize how they are being fooled by the "experts"! So they let the "experts" do the thinking for them, which is the plan. Again, I agree with Peter that this is being done deliberately.

No, you are not following, and I realize that it is not easy to follow. I have to really concentrate on his information because it is so rich and dense. Peter claimed to have read the college course work on economics from undergraduate to graduate level to try to understand if there was indeed any real substance to the economic babble he had shown us with his examples. Even after doing that, he was forced to conclude that we are being scammed by these so-called experts. It is not at all about enhancing his persuasive powers or perceived authority.

I would expect that anyone who plans on exposing the propaganda we are subjected to had better be well versed in propaganda! Do you think I would be very good at exposing sociopaths if I was not well versed in sociopathy? I am not finding your reasoning here appropriate. Just because Peter has some background experience in propaganda does not mean he has the intent to use it against us! Rather, he is explaining to us how it is used against us by the controllers.

Rather than attack the man, attack his message. Show us where, how, and why he is using propaganda to deceive and manipulate us.

 

Rose, you worked in the banking industry, in the heart of the capitalist system. Do you believe capitalism is the best system, one that works in the best interests of all humans?

I don't know, and it doesn't really matter whether they see eye to eye on everything. What matters is what is true.

At 31:27 in the Xavier Hawk interview of Jacque Fresco, Fresco says, "In order to seek the truth, you'd have to know everything. How would you know what you're seeing is true or not? You'd have to be smart beyond description. So there's no such thing as a truth-seeker." That circular logic (i.e. you must know the truth to recognize it) is completely absurd, equivalent to saying there is no truth, so why seek it. So Fresco can be an idiot, as can we all. He can also be quite astute, as can we all. So it's not about the messengers and their friendships, it's about their messages. Each message has to be evaluated for truth to the best of our ability. And unfortunately, our ability is shockingly poor.

And therein lies the problem. Question everything, yes, but dismiss nothing. Tuning out is a form of dismissal. Have you really recognized the propaganda? Can you point to exactly where and how it is done for each example that you cite? Should the fact that you disagree with the information have anything to do with identifying it as propaganda? No, it should not. Disagreement is bias if it is done as a dismissal without considering all the evidence both pro and con.

I am ashamed to say that I used to dismiss a lot that disagreed with what I was taught. That's really where the disagreement came from -- from my programming. It came from information I carried that others that I trusted had given me. It had nothing to do with whether the information was true or not, because in reality I didn't know what was true and what wasn't. I only knew that the information came from "experts" that I "trusted". I assumed it was true (BIG mistake). I suggest that it is the same for you, Rose. Then the question becomes, do those "experts" really know what is true and what is not, and are we wise to trust them (i.e. not question them)?

 

Whoa! This video on propaganda is propaganda!

Propaganda is never a good thing. It is always used to deceive and manipulate. Just like this video giving us a false idea of what propaganda is.

When the German military uncovered the Katyn massacre during World War II, where over 20,000 Polish military and police officers were recovered from mass graves, still in uniform, each with a single bullet hole in the back of the skull, they told the German people and the world of the horror they had found! And you know what the Allies said? "Those Germans are relentless propagandists." Nazis were blamed for the massacre by the Russians, Nazis were tried for it at Nuremberg, and they were found guilty. But some 40+ years later, the Russians admitted that they had been responsible for the Katyn massacre! The Nazis had told the truth; the Russians, British, and Americans had lied, using propaganda!

Peter Joseph gave us the Zeitgeist films to expose the propaganda we are suffering from! That includes the propaganda that is religion, the propaganda of 9/11, and the propaganda of the money system. All of those three are systems of control that the controllers want us to support. Joseph didn't need to use propaganda to do the job. All he had to do is tell the truth. You either lie or you tell the truth. Propaganda is a very subtle and clever way of lying.

 

They did not quickly become interested. It took centuries. That mindset was forced on them, just as America forces "democracy" on nations all over the world at the point of a gun! That we would find few native Americans today that share their distant ancestors' philosophies only indicates the extent of the conditioning, programming, brain-washing, and mind control that native Americans have suffered at the hands of their conquerors!

But I'm glad you made this comment. I don't think you have realized the extent of the conditioning, programming, brain-washing, and mind control that both you and I have suffered by those same conquerors. Our ideas about democracy, capitalism, property rights, government, elections, justice, money, health care, and just about everything else were established and shaped by deceiving men who lack empathy. Our ideas about all those things are not really ours. Other people planted those perspective in us for many different reasons, but always with one primary and fundamental (but hidden) reason -- so someone could more easily control us. They did the same to the native Americans, to the Germans, to the Koreans, to the Iraqis, to the Afghanis, and to more human groups than I can count. I have questioned what I was taught about Hitler, and I have uncovered plenty of suppressed evidence to justify questioning the mainstream portrait of Hitler. I have done the same for 9/11, the Holocaust, the 20th century world wars, the "free" press, the monetary system, the American government, and just every other major subject we are indoctrinated with from birth. I realize that most people are not with me. How can they be, as they have not had the luxury that I have had to dedicate so much time to investigating such disturbing issues. Most people just go along to get along. I understand that, as I did too for much of my life. But somehow, I got lucky, hit a tipping point, and began to look into things that would cause me to change my life. I'm not saying you or anyone else should do this. All I do is share what I've learned, put it on the table for others to critique, and continue to learn.

As Neo said in the Matrix, "Choice. The problem is choice."