In 1932 Myles Horton, a former student of Reinhold Niebuhr, established the Highlander Folk School in Monteagle, Tennessee. The school, situated in the Tennessee hills, initially focused on labor and adult education.By the early 1950s, however, it shifted its attention to race relations. Highlander was one of the few places in the South where integrated meetings could take place, and served as a site of leadership training for southern civil rights activists. Rosa Parks attended a 1955 workshop at Highlander four months before refusing to give up her bus seat, an act which ignited the Montgomery bus boycott.Sunday, January 15, 2012
Rehearsal For The Civil Rights Movement ... Who Wrote The Play?
In 1932 Myles Horton, a former student of Reinhold Niebuhr, established the Highlander Folk School in Monteagle, Tennessee. The school, situated in the Tennessee hills, initially focused on labor and adult education.By the early 1950s, however, it shifted its attention to race relations. Highlander was one of the few places in the South where integrated meetings could take place, and served as a site of leadership training for southern civil rights activists. Rosa Parks attended a 1955 workshop at Highlander four months before refusing to give up her bus seat, an act which ignited the Montgomery bus boycott.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
53 comments:
DV,
You starting to scare me :). I was going to post this article yesterday in regard to Sista Rosa.
"Horton organized Highlander, then in the town of Monteagle, Tenn., originally to train Southern union organizers. Its primary focus moved to desegregation in the '50s, and the resulting controversy inspired state officials to take legal action to yank its charter as a school in 1960. Unbowed, Horton moved the institution to Knoxville's inner city, and then, about two decades ago, to its current setting on 110 beautiful acres of hilltop meadow with a view of the Great Smoky Mountains, about 20 miles out into the countryside east of Knoxville.
A search on Myles Horton turns up the following:
The Highlander Center in Tennessee was started in 1932 by Myles Horton and James Dombrowski, both members of the Communist Party. According to a book, 'Speak Now', a left-wing history of the civil rights movement, the original purpose was to train communist activists on how to promote textile strikes, hold protest marches, picket lines and learn 'socialist songs'
LOL.
Yeah I know what you mean man.
Most people are afraid to even acknowledge this aspect of the "Civil Rights Movement".
Appreciate your intellectual courage bra.
So what! This is nothing new.
Vast tracts of Africa was liberated by people closely aligned with Soviet Union or China. What option did they have? The Western powers repeated protected errant colonial states across Africa - Angola, Algeria, Namibia, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Guinea Bissau, etc.
Angola was liberated by Cuba - go and read about the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale - the Cuba/Angolans thoroughly defeated the South Africans forcing them to retreat and finally acknowledge that the days of an apartheid regime was numbered.
China supported Robert Mugabe (Russia supported Joshua Nkomo) in Zimbabwe in the quest to defeat Ian Smith and his mini apartheid Govt in "Southern Rhodesia".
I suspect your problem is not with the communist, but rather the Jewish association with Communism in the US. What a colossal waste of time. The Jews are simply practicing the deft art of survival which we blacks around the world should replicate.
Hello Omo.
Good stuff.
Yes. Communist intervened in Angola, Algeria, Namibia, South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Mozambique etc... You are right about that.
You are wrong by assuming I have a problem with it.
I have a problem with 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' portion of this story.
Every Negro in America can regurgitate the fiction of the Rosa Parks incident.
How many can separate the myth of the civil rights movement from the facts?
I think failure to deconstruct that portion of our history dooms us to repeat it today.
As far as Jews ... why is even ACKNOWLEDGING their participation and referring to them as Jews considered a "problem"?
Why is it OK for you to refer to the Chinese who supported Mugabe as ... Chinese ... but not OK for me to refer to the Jews who supported / handled a young MLK as Jews?
I don't get that.
Never have.
Brave?
Nah DV? I just love humanity so much that I willing to sacrifice my weak ass EGO(based in fear) to speak the unpopular stuff know as the "Truth" that has been kept away from us whether you are black or white in regards to the EL ites and their long term game plan using the best tool in the box, namely "communism".
THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN "ALL IN" in regards TO COMMUNISM AS THE BEST MODEL FOR THEM TO SURVIVE UNDER LONG TERM.
For example most people don't know that Joseph McCarthy had peep the elite communistic blue print and busted Secretary of State Dean Acheson (the Elite's main player who was rolling out the script.) To this day the script is still in play and most people are blind to it. For that he was taken out, set up and vilified.
There you go , Wax is defending Joe McCarthy. :)
Is that anti-history for you? I wish I could lay this out for all to see, but like you said DV this stuff is so far off the plantation, I will get run out of town first.
Namaste-
DV,
What you refer to is nothing more that the sanitize creation of the media. The US media is a completely asinine crew - that works off narratives. A narrative is developed for every event and becomes the conventional wisdom.
Bayard Rustin's contribution to the movement has been airbrushed away. Martin (who is great) has been position as the face of the movement and anyone writing about the movement kicks off from that baseline.
The problem is nothing more that the "laziness" of the citizenry. Why are the tea partiers on the street - protesting against their own interest. Said laziness is reflected in the widening wasteline.....Check this article for reference of what was considered a freak at the turn of the last century.
http://modeledbehavior.com/2010/04/18/americas-obesity-epidemic-bringing-sideshow-freaks-into-the-discussion/
I hardly watch the news. I listen to the BBC and Al Jazeera which are the best news source of the lot.
On the Jews. You seem to linger on what I consider conspiracy theories. I go by the rule referred to as Occam Razor. A variation of the rule is defined as follows:
"The simplest explanation for some phenomenon is more likely to be accurate than more complicated explanations"
I forgot to add that, if you have access to CNN International. Take some time to watch it. Not great, but a huge improvement over the US channel. Any station that can assign Rick Sanchez as host, has no right to succeed.
Thats why Jons Stewart job is so easy. News is parody. We are at the point where Onion news as pass for anything on Fox, CNN, MSNBC
@Omo
"I suspect your problem is not with the communist, but rather the Jewish association with Communism in the US."
My problem is with (and lets be careful here with generalization and identifications ) the ashkenazi "Zionist" creation, manipulation and implementation of a global communism/fascism(2 sides of same coin/ Hegelian Headfake meme) system in their long term plan to keep power by using it.
Trust me. Honestly follow the last 100 years of history and see past the scripts(good vs bad, wars,crisis, monetary system, etc.) in regars to the setup.
"The simplest explanation for some phenomenon is more likely to be accurate than more complicated explanations"-Omo
Hmmmm. I don't know how many homicide or crime detectives would agree with that. They are probably the biggest conspiracy theorists out there.
Gee-Chee,
Homicide detectives? Is your view from TV or real life. The vast majority of homicides are not based on some vast conspiracy, but more likely acts from people in their immediate circle.
Watch your local channel and track reported homicides and resolution.
The vast majority of homicides are not based on some vast conspiracy, but more likely acts from people in their immediate circle.-Omo
OK, lets reduce it to "only people in their immediate circle?" What are the procedures you suppose they are using to find those people? A torn piece of clothing on a shrub and a hound dog?
Are you using 'conspiracy theory' for it's loaded term application i.e. paranoia, irrational ideas or for how the word is defined?
"A narrative is developed for every event and becomes the conventional wisdom." Brother Omo
100% TRUE
"Bayard Rustin's contribution to the movement has been airbrushed away." Brother Omo
100% True.
But.
That begs a handful of questions.
1) "WHO" airbrushed Bayard Rustin's contribution?
2) "WHY" was Baryard Rustin's contribution airbrushed?
3)"WHO" was Bayard Rustin?
4)"WHO" sponsored his trip to Moscow in 1958?
5) If the "Civil Rights Movement" was indeed organized and financed by Communist Jews ... why was this fact shielded from the black Americans who were the ones getting bitten by dogs, jailed, sprayed with water hoses and killed?
6) If Black People were being used as simple foot soldiers for a communist movement ... shouldn't they know about it?
After we clear these questions up ... I suggest we peel back the onion of these romanticized notions of "communism".
Yo DV, why did you take down Wax’s Henry Makow “Red Rosa” propaganda?
“Rosa Parks was not a simple seamstress whose lonely act of defiance in 1955 sparked the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement. In fact, she was a trained Communist Party (CPUSA) activist.” – Makow
First Mrs. Parks was a “weak person with not much fire.” Now she’s a communist. These are obviously the ramblings of a schizophrenic mental slave or an agent provocateur.
“I am a Canadian and am not an expert on the Civil Rights movement (no shit!). However, if the CPUSA was involved, there was a hidden agenda.”—Makow
And Melted Wax is quoting this idiot. It takes an idiot to question “if the CPUSA was involved,” after stating that Mrs. Parks was a “trained CPUSA activist?”
It’s documented history that Mrs. Parks attended a session at Highlander in 1955. So what? Obviously, the brainwashed triplets believe that “inferior” Afrikan Americans have no capacity for critical thinking upon being exposed to new information.
“Martin Luther King at Communist Training School.” – DV
DV, you will fall for anything that fits you’re agenda. No cross-references! I can see where the lack of critical thinking is. Son, you need to look into the mirror.
Attorney General Robert Kennedy questioned his FBI liaison, Courtney Evans about a picture of Dr. King at Highlander after the picture had been “red-baited” and disseminated by Ross Barnett and George Wallace. Evans reported that “Highlander was not a Communist training school,” although “at times (it) had allowed individual Communists on the premises.” Evans told RFK that, “King had not been trained at Highlander—he had visited there only once, to make a speech.” That speech was in 1957.
A search on Myles Horton turns up the following: The Highlander Center in Tennessee was started in 1932 by Myles Horton and James Dombrowski, both members of the Communist Party—Wax
A statement like that could only be written by a mental slave of J. Edgar Hoover. Anyone interested in the truth should start with the Center itself.
http://www.highlandercenter.org/
My favorite nigger DV is fixin to dig into Rustin's communist, sodomite faggotry.
ATLAH!
@makheru,
"First Mrs. Parks was a “weak person with not much fire.” Now she’s a communist. These are obviously the ramblings of a schizophrenic mental slave or an agent provocateur."
Dude I am not judging Rosa. The first was a "quote" from a Civil Rights Advocate who knew her personally and told me that story at lunch.
I don't know Rosa, so therefore I just shared with you what she told me. Mrs. Chrenshaw is credible and her story that Rosa was not the first to resist adds up to the NY times and other articles.
Second, I respect Henry Makow and I know DV does also so therefore I posted his article about the subject.
"My truth" on this subject is that the official story does not add up and yes- they are various opinions about her, however the conclusion points me to it being staged. I noticed that you did not mentioned the NY Times article that said it was a set up also.
BTW it is not that hard to understand that if you pull back.
Brah -you are all in. I am not. No big deal.
Namaste-
This is really fascinating information. When you watch movies like the James Bond film 'Live and Let Die', the local Louisiana sheriff sees black hitmen in suits chasing Bond. He gets on the CB and describes them as "black Russians" or 'The Spook Who Sat by the Door' when the government can only conclude that the black guerrilla soldiers must be funded by the Russians.
This info shouldn't be looked at as disturbing where it only fosters resentment but as a window into the conditions they lived through, leading them into exploring other solutions.
Russia exerted the image of communism being the political ideology of the "non-whites" of the world.
It would make since for black people who are looking for alternatives out of experiences of racial conflict would at some point be steered to look at Communism.
It's just interesting that at moments in American history that Islam and Communism was synonymous with being black.
"...the local Louisiana sheriff sees black hitmen in suits chasing Bond. He gets on the CB and describes them as "black Russians" or 'The Spook Who Sat by the Door' when the government can only conclude that the black guerrilla soldiers must be funded by the Russians."
This suggesting that organized professional black people must have a "white governmental agency" behind them or funding them if it's not Democracy. Surely they could only be able to build institutions through the assistance of a greater more sophisticated culture. I think we tend to surrender to those ideas in regard to the Civil Rights movement.
Gee Chee said:
The vast majority of homicides are not based on some vast conspiracy, but more likely acts from people in their immediate circle.-Omo
OK, lets reduce it to "only people in their immediate circle?" What are the procedures you suppose they are using to find those people? A torn piece of clothing on a shrub and a hound dog
Typically, they use the 20th century equivalent: a snitch and a confession obtained through coercion.
Omo is right about most homicides involving known suspects who are familiar with both the police and their victims.
Also
Bayard Rustin gets airbrushed about of most Civil Rights narratives because he was a homosexual.
That's the main reason.
In a movement rooted and defined by the Christian church, it was uncomfortable to have a prominent figure who had homosexual relationships. King and others succumbed to internal and external pressure to marginalize Rustin even though he was many of the movements decisions were his brainchild and he was a tireless worker on behalf of Civil Rights.
Hoover regularly threatened to "out" Rustin to the general public, repeatedly sending Civil Rights leaders packages showing how Rustin had been arrested for engaging in homosexual acts in cars with men, as a way of neutralizing him within the Civil Rights movement. Movement leaders were extra sensitive of how they and other blacks were being portrayed in the mainstream media since they understood that most Americans form their opinions based on the mainstream media narrative.
That's why Rustin has been ignored. The Communism thing was a part of it as well, but the gay thing was a bigger problem.
"This suggesting that organized professional black people must have a "white governmental agency" behind them or funding them if it's not Democracy." Gee Chee
I'm not sure I get that.
Whachumean?
"Yo DV, why did you take down Wax’s Henry Makow “Red Rosa” propaganda?"
Man I don't know. Did I?
Maybe I moved it.
And?
Mak B. Stop playing bodyguard for Mrs. Parks.
She is an honorable woman who deserves to be treated with respect.
This isn't about Rosa Parks.
This isn't about Martin Luther King.
This is a conversation.
An analysis of history. A deconstruction of myth.
For the past 40 years African-Anerican and "Civil Rights" have been near synonymous.
I make no apologies for looking beyond the PBS Black History Month level of analysis.
"Typically, they use the 20th century equivalent: a snitch and a confession obtained through coercion." Big Man
Good point.
A telling point.
"a snitch and a confession obtained through coercion"
70 years ago people who managed networks of informants and obtained coerced confession were called The Gestapo.
If anyone did that today we would call them fascists.
... wouldn't we?
@Makheru
""Yo DV, why did you take down Wax’s Henry Makow “Red Rosa” propaganda?"
Man I don't know. Did I?"
DV did not. Calm down Bra.
You had me thinking something is up(I hate censorship too).
It is on the thread with O. Mahogany said... 45 comments. I just checked. still there.
Dude- no body is doing anything. As DV said just conversation. I am not interested in "winning" or DMG style "battling".
Peace be to you-
Typically, they use the 20th century equivalent: a snitch and a confession obtained through coercion.
Omo is right about most homicides involving known suspects who are familiar with both the police and their victims.-Big Man
Don't stop yet Big Man. I can step-by-step it too. Then after they've exhausted "a snitch and a confession obtained through coercion," then what? When it is not the usual suspects, what?
Big Man pointed out that Rustin was gay...Rustin then goes on to give a speech in 1986 entitled "The New Niggers are Gays", stating that "Today blacks are no longer the litmus paper or the barometer of social change...The new "niggers" are gays...It is in this sense that gay people are the new barometer for social change..."
That might be part of the "Why" you asked, DV.
Gee Chee
Not sure what you mean.
Omo posited that there the simplest solution is usually the correct one.
You opined that most homicides detectives might disagree with that.
I said they wouldn't. Most of the time their solutions are incredibly simple and based on long-held biases about who commits crimes and why. They often reject more complicated theories to focus on "simpler" theories that fit the narrative they prefer.
If you're making the point that the police are willing to fabricate evidence to get confessions, you'll get no argument from me. Beyond that, not sure of the larger point you're trying to make.
DV
I have no problem with you referring to the police as fascists or the Gestapo.
Personally, I just see them as a big gang.
They operate the standard protection racket of most gangs and have the same sort of code of ethics and allegiances as gangs.
'simplest solution is USUALLY'
That is correct. Actually my argument is that the nature of conspiracy theories is based on that 'usual' solutions have already been exhausted.
The loaded term 'conspiracy theory' is constructed on the grounds that the template NEVER changes. Therefore whenever it does i.e. a cop places dope on the victim as oppose to the numbers of suspects actually found with the dope. The time when the template changes, the conventional solution falls out the bottom, any further investigation is identified as conspiracy theory, code for irrational thinking.
"This suggesting that organized professional black people must have a "white governmental agency" behind them or funding them if it's not Democracy."
I'm not sure I get that.
Whachumean?-DV
The rational that was comically expressed in those movies that blacks are only successful by means of some foreign agency.
^^...the maternalistic narrative.
Or
"Niggas can't do nothing unless a white man tells them how to do it."
Which is why it was so hard for Hoover and others to believe that the Civil Rights movement could have been the natural outgrowth of longstanding frustration among the vast majority of American blacks instead of some sort of movement created by outside white agitators who possessed the real brains and moral fortitude.
Thus, the belief that the Civil Rights movement was really driven by communists.
And slave revolts were driven by abolitionists.
Instead of the idea that black folks just got sick and tired of being sick and tired.
I see your point about conspiracy theories, and I agree that term is usually employed as code to let people know that certain ideas are not even worth consideration.
Sometimes it's justified, other times it's not.
However, I think Omo's point has validity.
^^^Don’t forget the sincerity and resilience of the people is not being targeted, the argument is the stratagem. Somewhat like Paul Mooney’s joke about homeless white people, “What a waste of good white skin.” I believe, the Civil Rights was a waste of a good black power. Not in the since of black vs. white paradigm, but autonomy. That's real soul’er energy.
“And slave revolts were driven by abolitionists.”-BigMan
I know exactly what you mean but I have to say this… it was driven by abolitionists.
We just allow others to appropriate that word to indicate ONLY the John Browns and/or Negroes that gave heart warmed speeches. That is the significance of being robbed of your own language the NOI emphasized. We base our ideas off of our defining terms. Centuries later Ebony magazine drops a headline that the abolitionists would have disagreed with Malcolm X, then you open the magazine and here is an ad of some corny Negro by a running water prop smoking Kools. No, Nat Turner was an abolitionist. Not a runaway. A dog can be a runaway. You don’t need a brain to runaway. Children runaway while still holding sentiments for home. Slaves can hold sentiments for the plantation.
We hear and read about “the ex-slaves this” or “the ex-slaves that,” inherently programmed to subconsciously believe our destiny begins and ends with “who you are the ex-slave of”… the ex-slave of an agency foreign to your struggles. The ex-slave of a system so we need that very system to empower us...because...we are...no more than ex-slaves.
It is through that agency we equate the struggle for equality when the idea is to be an abolitionist and struggle for autonomy. Communism is not quit “letting go” the concept of assigning to yourself some other dominant culture to direct your liberation. That is what I was getting at with the Communism narratives. It is the refusal to concede to ‘soul’er’ powered solutions. “If Democracy isn’t the answer then Communism is,” sentiments for home. No, “If Democracy isn’t the answer than institution building is” is how collectively we should've reasoned it.
“Mak B. Stop playing bodyguard for Mrs. Parks. She is an honorable woman who deserves to be treated with respect. This isn't about Rosa Parks. This isn't about Martin Luther King.” -- DV
I agree. It’s about the character of Afrikan people. I believe in constructive criticism and creative contention. No one is above criticism. This “Red Rosa” propaganda isn’t criticism and it isn’t historical analysis. Its deliberate misinformation and historical revisionism with ulterior motives. I see it as part and parcel of the 500-year slander and defamation of the character of Afrikan people. In the absence of valid ethical charges I’m obligated to defend that character.
“I noticed that you did not mention the NY Times article that said it was a set up also.” – Wax
Criticizing a staged photo-op after the boycott is something quite different from claiming that the arrest itself was: “Staged. Manufactured. Scripted.” And that “she worked for a very rich Jewish couple who helped arrange the protest.” You chose to post this hearsay. Don’t be surprised that I challenged it.
HTP
"DV
I have no problem with you referring to the police as fascists or the Gestapo. Personally, I just see them as a big gang." Big Man
Actually Big Man I see it a bit differently.
I don't see the police as fascists.
I see the police as employees of fascists.
I see public school teachers as employees of fascists.
I see Plantation MD's as employees of fascists.
Mussolini astutely noted that Fascism could more appropriately be called "corporatism" because it represented a merger of state and corporate power.
I think that is an important distinction Big Man in this era when the "CDC" (ostensibly government) works hand in hand with Big Pharmaceutical corporations to sell drugs and vaccines that are not only unnecessary but harm the citizens who consume them.
Where does the corporation stop and the government begin?
The days of government as a benevolent avuncular protector of the people and guarantor of rights is long over.
Which leads back to our discussion of the value of legislation like "The Civil Rights Act".
It is a flimsy foundation for a people to build a house of freedom.
DV said
"The days of government as a benevolent avuncular protector of the people and guarantor of rights is long over.
Homie, when did they exist?
From its inception, the government of these United States has been protecting particular interests and ignoring the rights of hte people whenever it was convenient for those interests.
As the most deadly homo-thug in the world once said:
"The game is the game."
Anybody who thinks of government as a benevolent protector, anybody who has EVER thought that, was living in a fantasy world. That time never existed.
I was raised in a household where we were never allowed to believe that fairytale.
But, this doesn't relate to your point about the Civil Rights Act.
The Civil Rights Act had the power that we the people gave it.
Just like money.
Just like contracts.
Just like every other agreement established between human beings in a civilized society.
You refuse to understand or admit the reality of this concept.
Laws have power because humans give them power. Our ancestors understood this fact. So they worked on people's hearts, and they worked on the laws. They didn't accomplish everything that needed to be accomplished, but I'm not going to ignore what they did accomplish.
""The days of government as a benevolent avuncular protector of the people and guarantor of rights is long over."
"Homie, when did they exist?" Big Man
When Negros were marching in the streets arm n arm singing "We Shall Over Come" at the direction of outside intellectuals selling them a pipe dream.
Big Man, as usual you want it both ways.
You posture as if there exists real value in the "Civil Rights Act" ... but you also go to great lengths to make it clear that you understood LONG ago the conventional Civil Rights narrative was fiction.
"Laws have power because humans give them power. Our ancestors understood this fact." Big Man
Wrong. Our ancestors understood just the opposite.
There is natural law which exists with or without man's consent.
Nah, you just won't listen to nuance.
The civil rights movement demanded that black folks be afforded all of the rights they were supposed to be allocated as American citizens. That was the basic premise.
Now, I can see the value of demanding those rights, while at the same time recognizing that ALL RIGHTS are only granted by the agreement of people. If other folks are getting rights for their tax dollars, I want black folks getting the same rights for the same tax dollars. Bottom line.
But, DV, name a right you have right now that isn't granted to you by other human beings?
A right that cannot be taken from you at any time by someone else with the power to take it.
Go ahead, I'll wait. If you didn't recognize the reality of what I'm saying, you wouldn't keep juxtaposing the Patriot Act with the Civil Rights Act.
There is only one undeniable "right."
The right to think freely.
Everything else is crap. And you in here arguing about it like it has meaning.
The Civil Rights movement demanded the rights that Americans were supposed to be able to enjoy based on the values that are supposed to guide our country. I don't see anything wrong with that.
I've said that from the beginning. You don't want to hear it because that's just who you are.
Now, explain "natural" law to me DV. What is it?
Give me the rundown.
'Cause I'm willing to bet that what you deem "natural" law isn't "natural" at all. But let's see how you roll.
"But, DV, name a right you have right now that isn't granted to you by other human beings?
A right that cannot be taken from you at any time by someone else with the power to take it. Go ahead, I'll wait." Big Man
The right to defend myself.
Big Man,
Anything internal.
The right to worship whoever I want to...
The right to love whoever i want to....
Etc.,
Etc.,
See Gandhi for more.
Actually, it all boils down to the right to think freely.
Which of course is what we do when we love and worship.
That's the only right you have complete control over.
But, if we as a society agree that being an "American" grants you certain other rights, then black folks would have been fools not to demand ALL of those rights.
Particularly if we were being asked to pay the same taxes and fight in the same wars as every other American.
Settling for being second class citizens as far as our rights would have been beyond idiotic, in my opinion.
The right to think freely is policed as much as the right to move freely.
Denying the Holocaust is a thought crime.
Thinking about becoming a suicide bomber is a thought crime.
Worshipping traditional Gods was considered a crime...Gandhi knew this too well.
For as long as a 'right' is conferred by Law it can be taken away or limited...by a Law.
True, self-defence is no offence, but look at what the exercise of that right translated into for John Afrika and MOVE.
Nah KW.
Saying the Holocaust wasn't real is a crime in certain countries.
Thinking it is not.
Nobody can get up in your mind and determine what's going on there.
Your actions can say one thing, while your mind thinks something totally different.
There is no way to police thought. You can police speech and actions, but you can't police thoughts.
People may attempt to control your thoughts, but they truly have no real power because only you have control over your spirit, soul and mind.
In my opinion.
Ok fair nuff Big Man, but even if one didn't say it, policing thought doesn't depend on one's action but suspicion of one's, thought's, an intent to act or one's action.
A polygraph test is an example of how to tap into someone's thoughts.
And here's what the future holds.
"Actually, it all boils down to the right to think freely.
... That's the only right you have complete control over." Big Man
Apparently not.
Very few people think.
Even fewer think clearly.
People pick sides.
They go with the flow.
They are afraid to look stupid so they say what they believe others think.
Thinking is not a right. It is a practice. An art. It takes courage.
KW
Nah, a polygraph doesn't read minds.
It reads bodily functions.
That's why most polygraphs are inconclusive and inadmissible in courts.
Hell, if you take a polygraph while high, you can lie all you want and nobody will know because the bodily functions that typically accompany lying will not exist.
Besides, there is a difference between "policing" and "control."
Sure, folks can make in uncomfortable for you to act on certain thoughts, but they cannot truly control your thoughts.
Only you have that power. At some point you have to make an internal choice to change your mind.
DV
Thinking is a right.
It takes practice to exercise, and requires courage it employ and can even inspire art, but it's still a right.
Whether people exercise their right is another issue. But, when God created you and I, he imbued us with that right and that ability. From the Garden, it's been there. Personally, I think it's one of the main ways we were created in his image.
Big Man
What organ of the body generates the bodily responses that a polygraph test is designed to test?
Is it not predicated on the notion that deceptiveness or truthfulness can be detected in physiological processes in the body?
True a polygraph test is controversial but that doesn't mean thoughts can't be policed. The future is brain fingerprinting.
Control of thought is very possible - hypnosis is one form, spirit possession is another. Advertising, fundamentalists and cultists also operate on the principle of mind control.
For as long as you're brainwashed, your thoughts are never really your own - the capacity to resist/choose doesn't exist.
Sorry sis, I disagree.
First, polygraphs measure a variety of factors, including pulse and heart rate, along with blood pressure. They don't really have anything to do with your brain, just the way your body reacts when you lie.
Studies have shown that most people have common physical reactions to lying and these are measured by polygraphs. But, you can do some of the same measurements yourself through serious observation.
I read the link of brain fingerprinting. Again, that those not read, nor control thoughts.
It maps brain activity, which we can do already. Scientists regular conduct tests where they introduce stimuli and then watch what sections of the brain light up in different people. That's the basic premise behind brain fingerprinting, it's nothing new. While they can map out which sections of the brain do what, they cannot truly discover or control your thoughts.
Brainwashing and hypnosis both depend upon the willingness of the participant, which is why they don't work on every one. You have to open yourself mentally, a choice, in order to fall under the sway of both practices.
Personally, I believe the same is true with spirit possession. As the good book states, in order to take over a house, you must first bind the strong man. With your mind, that means that if you allow your connection to God, or your strong man, to be bound, it's much easier for other entities to take over the house, your body. However, it all starts with a conscious choice by an individual on how they are going to behave or think. The rest is just a domino effect.
Oh, and two anecdotes on polygraphs.
My pops was going for one of his first jobs. He knew they were going to ask him about doing drugs, and he knew that he couldn't answer honestly.
So, he practices lying about that question over, and over, and over for weeks until he actually convinced his body and brain that it was true. He passed the polygraph.
I read a news story a while back about this lady who was being investigated for playing a role in her son's death. The police were stumped because when she took a polygraph she seemed to pass with flying colors.
Then they got hipped ot the fact that she was a regular opiate user. They came back and gave her the polygraph again, but this time made sure she didn't have access to opiates. Sure enough, the results of the test changed drastically.
The brain controls the body, no doubt. But humans have never been able to crack the brain's code. We can track the actions it causes in the rest of the body, but we still don't understand how it does what it does, nor can we get inside of it to control or monitor it's work. All we can observe are its results.
Thus my comparision to God's image.
Big Man
Spirit possession is not always a conscious choice, sometimes the spirit chooses you or sometimes you are born destined to be possessed. It can come at any time or within a specific ritual setting. I wasn't talking about Christianity.
The way your body reacts when you lie has to do with what happens in your brain. No doubt the test itself is not wholly legit, but that doesn't mean the body is disconnected from thought nor does it mean it is impossible to detect thought.
That your Pops was able to fake a polygraph test is proof positive of being able to control one's responses - so does this not mean your responses can also be controlled a third party?
Consenting to join a cult does not mean brainwashing or thought control does not take place. Consent is neither here nor there, thought control depends on an individual's susceptibility to groupthink and propaganda.
Even if you oppose the majority in your mind, inability to express that thought makes you a prisoner of your thoughts rather than someone who is free to think. If a thought is unable to be expressed then it is controlled by the limits on expression; ergo thought control.
If the right to thought is curtailed by expression then free thought as a right or as a notion does not exist within a society.
In a somewhat functional society, expression is inextricably linked to and the facilitator of the right to free thought - it is not its inhibitor.
Big Man,
You are doing a great job bursting the emerging DV adulation bubble! He makes some great points sometimes, but the twist and turns of logic that accompanies his conspiracy theories and Larouche fascination is grating.
Cheers
Omo Naija
^^ ^^
Ahhh
lol
Brother Omo!
That's cute.
"He makes some great points sometimes, but the twist and turns of logic that accompanies his conspiracy theories and Larouche fascination is grating."
lol.
Name 1 _______________ ?
Omo. Bra.
Just because something is outside your immediate grasp doesn't make it a "conspiracy theory".
It just means you need to catch up.
LaRouchian?
lol.
(uh oh.)
Yeah.
According to little green eyed intellectually lazy nerds, anyway.
"LaRouchian" is what Plantation Negros of the Star Trek persuasion call brothers uninterested in their Malthusian misanthropic Sci-Fi eugenecist gimmicks.
I call a square a square
A circle a circle
And an infant a person.
If that makes me LaRouchian ...
Well. Kiss my LaRouchian ass.
Name one.....
1. According to you masons rule the world.
2. Jews this, jews that.....
Post a Comment