Two months ago, I highlighted a powerful video from Warren Pollock in the post: Video of the Day – The Religion of Consumerism. Today, I am highlighting another one of his videos.
While this one is no less interesting, it’s likely to be quite a bit more controversial. He poses questions that philosophers have no doubt pondered from the very first moment human beings came together to organize into centralized political structures.
Namely, what is the responsibility of a citizen in a society in which the majority is ruled by a small minority? By living passively within this system has a citizen de facto given his or her consent to the minority? If so, is that citizen therefore ultimately responsible for the fate of the society as a whole?
Protect your wealth – Buy Gold and Silver Bullion with Goldbroker.com
Mr. Pollock has some very strong opinions on the matter. While I I wouldn’t have chosen the examples he did (Ferguson and Gaza) to make the point, it is clear what he is trying to do and who he is addressing. He is talking to people who are already awake and aware of the criminality and corruption of the current status quo, and he is trying to spark strong political action within them. He realizes something that I also recognize, which is that while a reasonable percentage of the population is already greatly dissatisfied with the status quo, only a tiny fraction of that minority are actually willing to make the sacrifices needed to usher in a paradigm shift. As a result, those who do make the sacrifices generally become martyrs while their fellow citizens play it safe. As long as everyone plays it safe, nothing changes.
I did not share this video because I agree with the way he presents the argument, but rather because the questions he poses are very important ones. Moreover, I believe that without a doubt “the powers that be” do adhere to this philosophy. They think that any population so apathetic about its collective condition deserves what they get. So they will continue to pillage everything in sight until enough people get together to stop them. Equally important, history does demonstrate that when enough people rebel the status quo always falls.
In Liberty,
Michael Krieger
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G
Follow me on Twitter.
If the Revelation of Jesus Christ to John is to be believed, then many, even millions, will become martyrs. In fact, the end game as I see it is that the Fascist Uber Menschen want to wipe out the Jews and Christians once and for all, and just as it has been the Catholics in the past who have martyred more than any, so too it shall be when their pervert papal prince assumes his mantle as spiritual leader of the world system. What are all those guillotines for anyway?
A couple of points in this video are valid – it only takes a small minority to instigate real change and a vote with your dollar is more important than at the ballot box. People don’t realize that buying a Starbucks coffee is a form of compliance – why not have a locally owned coffee shop and thus the money remains in your community? And, yes, learn to live with a lot less.
But if Mr. Pollock utters the word consent one more time, I’ll scream. Hitler and Stalin came down so hard and fast, that not to consent meant death, but first they’d make you watch the execution of your children. Because it only takes a small minority to take over, the majority had no idea they were consenting to a reign of unspeakable horrors.
Americans are frightened of losing their jobs (instead of creating new ones) – the middle class is sinking into the underclass. But if I tell people I never shop at Walmart, they don’t get it.
diogenes “is there an honest man”.
it is discussions like these, that make for thoughtful conversation because they bring into question the legitimacy of concepts such as ‘nonagression principle’ that libertarians are so fond of ,without truly thinking them through.
there is no such thing as nonagression when the very existence of the majority-minority dynamics of all societies mean that by PASSIVELY EXISTING YOU ARE PROVIDING YOUR CONSENT FOR AGGRESSION. or by passively refusing to participate your are attacking and supporting revolutionary destruction of the existing system, upon which so many sheep depend upon for their , and their childrens’ bread.
it is important to study this concept as it is all to easy to just listen to excellent speakers like stephan molyneux and be easily led into a naive thought framework of how the world works, and what you , as a sheep, or a as a wolf, or as a lion, can do about it.
i do take issue with the idea of victimizing the so called ‘consumers’ or ‘sheep’ as this speaker so astutely attempts to avoid . but this majority of people, the ‘sheep’ aren’t necessarily stupid or bad or self aware , and they don’t always have a choice about wanting to feed their children, let alone wanting to feed themselves. people are sometimes scared of death and don’t have the internal choice to take the risks or certainties of suffering that others choose to bear—wheather by circumstance, by birth and genetic predisposition , or by years of training to an older age [an old dog cannot usually learn new tricks].
the youth are more pliable, this , paradoxically, makes them better sheep, and also more effective weapons to be wielded either by the entrenched minorities, or those revolutionary minorities seeking to evict them. the sheeps’ world view(s) is both a target of propoganda and the weapon of propoganda itself.