Sambop wrote:Smart People ...
Would know about Edward Bernays
........ the complex relationship between human psychology, democracy, and corporations. Bernays’ thesis is that “invisible” people who create knowledge and propaganda rule over the masses, with a monopoly on the power to shape thoughts, values, and citizen response.[4] “Engineering consent” of the masses would be vital for the survival of democracy.[5] Bernays explains:
“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.”
------------------------------------------
The threat of engineered consent in democracy has been expressed in a textbook on American government:[2] John C. Livingston & Robert G. Thompson (1966) The Consent of the Governed, 2nd edition, page 11, Collier Macmillan
Under modern conditions of political advertising and manipulation, it has become possible to talk of the engineering of consent by an elite of experts and professional politicians. Consent that is thus engineered is difficult to distinguish in any fundamental way from the consent that supports modern totalitarian governments. Were the manipulated voter to become the normal voter, the government he supports could hardly be said to rest on his consent in any traditional sense of that word.
I find your/you're/Yuer remarks to be the closest to reality that I've seen on this subject. It appears to me that the State Dept and military complex pulled off a coup with Kennedy's assassination, giving a strangle-hold in our government to the progressives.
Since then we have been "progressively" moving leftward incrementally until Soros created Moveon. Obama rose quickly through labor unions, which are the home of communist movements over the last century. Frank Marshall Davis' connections to the Chicago communist party were certainly helpful in getting him started, but it took help from progressives in the Democrat Socialist Party to launch his political career. There seem to be many "missing" years in Obama's life. Are you of the opinion that was time in the CIA? I've heard that but see no verification.
Anyway, from what I can tell, Obama's meteoric rise in the Socialist party, his support from Prince bin-Talal, and his influence in Leftist labor movements like ACORN caught the eye of Soros (if he wasn't aware and grooming him already)
as the perfect candidate for establishing gay marriage, open borders, legalized drugs, educational indoctrination, etc...
Soros has spoken about his disappointment with Obama not doing all that Soros has planned for him. I believe Sanders would have been his candidate if he thought Bernie could pull off half of what he promised, but instead he chose the safest alternative, an established politician that is easily bought in Hillary.
What people don't seem to understand yet is that Soros likely set up the Clinton Foundation, and in his own image. This is really his gift, knowing how to set up foundations and non-profits that are untouchable and utterly corrupt ways of dispersing bribes.
I'm very interested in your/you're/Yuer take on that....