Noam Chomsky - Manufacturing Consent

This strokes my interests...thinking aloud a bit here. This is somewhat offtopic, but it interests me and I can do what I want :) >3) we have bloody revolutions to claw it back and hope for the best. The structure of modern society, wealth and finance looks to render this option extremely pyrrhic and more or less impossible. Moreover, I kind of reject that "Their wealth already exists so" -- their wealth is an idea created within a much larger system. It's also kind of crazy to consider that "what to do with it" is actually a very deep consideration. The wealth that is held by, say, Bezos* (I'm going to define Bezos* as any very wealthy individual for the purpose of the thought) is predicated only by its possible use in society. The money he can use isn't in bills or bullion, but is some kind of leveraged asset like stocks, real estate, insurance, or other investments and the like. The value in it lies not in what it is, rather in projected stock prices, capital for use in other financial prospects, etc. If you took that away with a wand,(and you would need magic for this) it would render him as just a bald guy with a boat. To grok the way Bezos* can access his absurd billions largely tax free (and they do) is to first recognize that money isn't a real thing like rice is a real thing. The facts of fractional reserve banking and investments mean you have value that you can exchange for untaxed credit, loans, or other endeavors that will add to it. You don't need to get a dolla

See also a short video [1] or a long video [2] on the subject. Michael Parenti also published a book on this subject a few years before Chomsky. Inventing Reality: The Politics Of the Mass Media [3] Parenti also has plenty of talks on YouTube [4] [1] ▶ this video [2] link [3] link [4] link EDIT: I’m seeing downvotes. I consider these to be genuinely valuable resources on media literacy but if you disagree I’d love to know what aspects of Chomsky or Parenti’s theories you disagree with.

>Agency is the only option. This is the problem, agency is dead, or at least in the grand scales, manufacture of consent has been a thing for a long, long, long time now and it won't go away simply because some people are afraid of looking into the reality of things ▶ this video Also, not sure if you saw the provided podcast, but most of the things you mention are addressed there

I think that what you are missing is that this is not an option, this is a reality, Cambridge analytica already happened and since then they have moved into manufacturing consent in many other countries elections For a long time, marketing and political propaganda have gone hand in hand Manufacture of consent is something that has been happening for a long time now ▶ this video The difference now is that it can be done far cheaper, and on a bigger scale and more effectively than ever before, I would indeed recommend you to check out the planet money podcast at the least Lastly, just because you see the value of mental agency and thought liberty, it doesn't mean that other people will value it the same way you do, or as much as you do. Psychographics is also a thing, and used to great effect when it come to manipulating people this way

>The more I see of this emerging mass mind control dystopia the harder it is for me to think of non-radical solutions. You should 100% see the adamn Curtis documentary I mentioned above and read up on manufacture of consent ▶ this video What you mention is already the case , it is fully within the interest of the decentralized power holders and policy makers for them to control the population via the information that's fed to them, that's why the Iraq invasion happened in the first place, that's why the US continues to try spread fear about Iran or China. There is no way to destroy that machinery, only repurpose it for different means

Seriously, most outsiders can't even see the propaganda in their own media. How do you expect them to see it in other countries? Chinese propaganda at the moment is really amateurish. Just wait until they learn from the best [1]. 1. Noam Chomsky - Manufacturing Consent: ▶ this video

I won't deny this has occasionally happened to me, but look at your example: it's B2B when my claim is primarily for B2C. B2B ads tend to be more targeted, aimed at corporations, and purchases are for higher dollar amounts. The product being sold was also competing based on build quality, a material improvement. Businesses often make more rational decisions because they can assign someone to do research (like you did of your own volition) who will make comparisons and think about it. Imagine the same process happening for shampoo. I'm sure there are some people that want "the best" shampoo, but most of the products are going to be nearly interchangeable and the marketing will try focus on various kinds of manipulation to dig that moat. These manipulations aren't what most people think of, like a sex symbol hypnotizing you. Instead they work to increase brand familiarity, social proof, and provide a life style narrative you can tell yourself and show off to other people with. The capital hiding behind these campaigns funds newspapers, television, radio, and civic centers. It acts as a filter on the public discourse. If you're interested, look up Manufacturing Consent for more information. Here's a clip from a documentary based on the book: ▶ this video

> Your whole argument is predicated on the idea that what happened with the DAO was "theft". So did the Ethereum Devs, who owned a bulk of coin from the initial auction. And they just so happened to also control development of the protocol AND the client programs. This was the message they "asked" users... link "....IN WHICH FUNDS RELATED TO THE EXPLOIT ARE RESTORED...." Consensus is nice, especially when you can manufacture it. Noam Chomsky talks about this in great detail. ▶ this video Chomsky: "The first place to look is, who's in a position to make the decisions that determines the way a society functions."