How the “Public” taboo deceived America

In Europe if a maniple of politicians hijacked a whole country and the ransom was Public Health you would see riots in the streets, while in America it is considered “Business as Usual”. 

America is kept in hostage by a maniple of crazy cyborgs who hide themselves behind the flag of the Republican Party and a resuscitated Astroturfed organization called Tea Party, which is clearly sponsored by a private organization whose only interest is annihilating any possible chance the American people get their deserved Healthcare Assistance.

How can it happen that the Land of the Freedom is being hijacked by an obscure Mr. X who is so evil that his personal greed puts at risk the health of 150.000.000 people? 

According to a Harvard Medical School Research Study, about 45.000 people have been dying in America in the past 12 years due to a lack of Healthcare coverage. That means 540.000 people died because they had no health insurance.

In today’s world you can perpetrate a genocide and no media talk about it? How can such an operation can take place while the only reaction is some liberal pundit who talks about “Republican Hypocrisy?” or “GOPs act like kids”?

The answer is Deception, operated through Fear and Pride and the creation of language taboos thanks to an almost infinite budget.

Since the end of World War II, after having defeated the Nazi, America had a new enemy: Communism. Being America the homeland of Business and Capitalism, the Soviet Communist Regime was perceived as pure Evil, or better “the Evil Empire” as Ronald Reagan once said. 

In the 50’s America was fighting the Cold War against Communism, a war that was not fought with conventional means but basically relied on propaganda and clandestine operations and the continuous subsidizing of the various anti-communist governments around the world. Like Pinochet in Chile, Batista in Cuba, Somoza in Nicaragua, Marcos in the Philippines, the Shaw in Iran. All these dictators were sponsored by the U.S. Government to fight against Communist rebels. And that’s just fine.

During 1948-86, military purchases cumulated to $6,316 billion, averaging about $162 billion per year, or 7.6 percent of GNP. To this budget you have to add almost a similar amount for the so called “Black Budget” which is the government's illusory and tangled accounting of what it spends on intelligence gathering, covert operations, and - less noticeably - secret military research and weapons programs. By estimates of those who watch it, the black budget may have hit US$30 billion a year - a figure larger than current federal expenditures for education. 

This budget was used to build up a series of propaganda initiatives to fight Communism, both overseas and domestically where the War on Communism turned into a War against Social justice and the Welfare State. In practice it was a war against the very concept of "poor" and the "cultural" heritage of this enormous effort is what we are witnessing today as the main (non) reasons shown behind the Government shutdown: "We don't want to help you" where "you" is the majority of the American people. 

The money spent during the Cold War for the propaganda against Communism was so enormous that still at today in America, Communism is considered “the worst enemy of the State” like anything that gets slightly close to its meaning.

Still at today you see these people who define themselves “Republicans” raving their meaningless rants against Socialism, Stalinism, Communism, Marxism and so on.

In May of 2009, conservative pollster Frank Luntz released a memo, "The Language of Healthcare 2009: The 10 Rules for Stopping the 'Washington Takeover' of Healthcare." In that memo, Luntz advised conservatives to use phrases like "rationing," "Washington takeover," "government run," "government takeover," and "bailout" when addressing health care reform."The effect of that is that public policy is harmed if the public cannot weigh in intelligently on what is being proposed and what is actually happening"

What do we have to make of all this? simply that Language is important because it's the main disinformation tool when you fight against an enemy using non conventional means. It's called Psychological Warfare.
But the American people is not an enemy you have to deceive! Or not? I mean why Republicans and Fox News should use propaganda and disinformation within the American Audience?

However I ignore how much was the budget at Luntz's disposal, but during 40 years of Cold War the propaganda budget was of almost $10 trillion that has been spent to convince Americans: 1) you can’t trust the government 2) everything that is government-related is Socialist and consequently evil 3) if you claim any entitlement from the government you are a selfish individual who wants to depend on government like a parasite. 

The exploitation of the Cold War budget was meant to completely destroy concepts like “Welfare state”, “Public Service”, “Poverty” and by creating a linguistic taboo zone. 

These words mentioned above became so much of a taboo you couldn’t even name them while in good company.

At the end of the day, what these “people” managed to do was to create a sense of fear among the American people with everything that was “Public” related. In addition whoever was asking for "Public" help or Government help had to feel ashamed. You don't hear many people using the word "Public" Don't ya?

"Public" is an adjective you won’t find in any American news media, no matter how much “liberal” it is, you won’t find it. The few things that pick “Public” as an adjective have negative connotation: “Public School”, “Public Hospital”, “Public Enemy” and “Public Servant” which is the title of those who work for the Federal Government which is the number one enemy of every good American (according to the GOPs).

The American people are so scared about the Government and the concept of Res Publica, that they don’t even know what the concept of “Public” is really about. And I am not talking of uneducated folks or the man from the street. I am talking about educated people like academics and journalists who have been “educated” (read “restrained”) almost to their unconscious level to keep away from everything that might be considered as “public”. So how can they stand for something Public if they are scared of it? They are so much scared that they are not even able to know what the word “Public” means.

When I wrote my article on the new restrictions that were put in place on Facebook, most of my friend’s reactions were along the line “in America we don’t care about Facebook, basically it’s a non-topic!” 

Like if Facebook being a private company has nothing to do with the concept of “Public”. The truth is that when you offer a service to the public, that service becomes a Public Service so it’s not a mere business anymore. So if you put in place new restrictions on a Public Service that’s a restriction you put in place against the public itself. But if you ignore what is public you don’t even know what is "yours". And what you are entitled to.

And that’s exactly what’s happening with the Affordable Care Act, the American people completely ignore to what extent the concept of Public is able to affect your personal sphere.

Indeed still at today the “Public taboo” is worth the money it has been spent for to be in place: 40 years of Propaganda that costed $10 trillion

The greatest of all American taboos is the term “working class”. Back in the 90s, America was still on the economic wave of the former decade, if you did ask around, to every person you knew, you weren't able to find anyone who said “I belong to the working class”. Today neither. I don't think in America you can find many people who claim to belong to the "working class". Because the working class is a communist category which found no place in the Public (again!) imagery.  

Why? Because that’s a taboo that was built with the Cold War money, and what they bought was abolishing the term “Working class” and changing it with the better “Middle Class”, so that people would have felt better, I mean in America we don’t have a working class, we have only Middle Class and the richest 1% of the whole world to which everyone in America one day will belong to. That’s the American Dream!

Indeed the American Dream was injected like heroin within the whole American society so that even the poorest unemployed guy who lives in the Detroit suburb, he would never think of subscribing to a Union and take it to the street. Absolutely not. Because in the collective imagery belonging to a Union it means you are a Communist a subversive, a parasite who wants to be entitled because is a selfish individual. That guy down in Detroit he has to think like a businessman and go get a job and become rich so that other people around him will become rich too, that's altruism! And that’s what you are supposed to do. Get rich or die trying.

In the American public imagery (sorry for the public) or in Hollywood movies there is no hero who belongs to the working class and leads a Trade Union to victory. When you say “Union” in America your mind goes to Jimmy Hoffa, the mafia and his unknown burial site. Hoffa was not a hero, but a corrupted crook. Who would ever be associated with such a dark figure?

Another aspect of this story that doesn’t add up, it’s what is called “Republican hypocrisy”. Last Wednesday because of the government shutdown the Washington Memorial was closed, a few Tea Party cyborgs like Michele Bachmann were able to show up and pull a couple of veteran’s wheelchairs while being photo-op’d.

If those veterans had some blood in their veins they had to refuse the help of those tea-party people but they did not. Instead those veterans were even happy to get together with those cyborgs. They completely forgot that less than a year ago, former Republican candidate Mitt Romney said “time for Veteran’s healthcare to go private”. We want to cut your healthcare but we pull your wheelchair so that we can be portrayed as compassionate cyborgs.

What’s even worse, nobody in the “liberal media” used the Romney’ statement to object against such an awkward move. Actually what happened was that Bill Maher made the greatest mistake ever by saying “nobody said they were the brightest generation”.

No surprise these people are able to hijack the government if the other political side let them do it. 

Indeed it is probably better that Democrats do not respond to such an escalating Brinkmanship strategy. Why? Well because these “people” are willing to bring the conflict to the maximum level, because what they really want is chaos in the streets. 

When the chaos will hit the streets, President Obama will have lost all of its credibility and a new “Order” will be in place, under a new Republican President who will sign a Super Patriot Act where rights and entitlements will be completely cancelled. 

This is the war of the Rich against the (poor) American People and nobody wins.

E Pluribus Unum

GOP's Astroturfing defeated by Consciousness

On Facebook it's plenty of anti-conservative groups and social pages publishing cartoons or funny images portraying the latest devilish outburst of these "wingnuts", as Right Wing Extremists are usually called by the liberal media.

You can read the latest Bill O' Reilly's nonsensical rant about "Obamacare promoting selfishness" or Ken Cuccinelli raving that "oral sex is a communist plot". 

For some reason, wingnuts use harsh and blatant tones like if they're always addressing a brawling crowd in a night cellar.

Instead this is not something to laugh at. These people's communication strategy is extremely and carefully pondered. Their nonsensical rants over extremely sensitive social issues are all part of a nefarious strategy to attract the sympathy of their audience segment and beyond. 

The GOP's communication strategy is basically focused on one single keyword: Emotions. 

Playing with emotions is the key to reach the people's emotional sphere bypassing their consciousness and rationality.

By Doing so they make people let them into their emotional sphere so that they can prop up their huge clashing contradictions, because average people's mind relies on the very basic principle that "seeing is believing". 

Just an example: after having tried to repeal for 42 times the Healthcare reform which aims at saving the lives of about 50.000 people each year and tried to cut $40 bn of food stamps which support 40 millions of American citizens and after having threatened to shut down the government to defund Obamacare, Republican Senator Ted Cruz was portrayed while praying hand in hand with other "people" in front of the White House. A real display of hypocrisy indeed.

However instead of having bystanders spitting on his face, (they probably hired an army of policemen plus private security) he made himself the opportunity to take this picture:

What he was praying for? These are the kind of questions average people don't ask themselves, as average people only see the exterior side: "this humble politician asks for the help of god". It doesn't matter if he's a mass killer. He's praying hand in hand with an elderly citizen, a woman, a pastor and a black man. This picture is a flashy postcard that aims at representing a stereotyped old fashioned image of a society, (which doesn't exist anymore), tied-in by the faithful Republican man. 

Although in this picture there's nothing of today's real society, there is no same-sex family and there are no children. This picture is Astroturfing(1) at its best. 

First of all this picture lacks authenticity because these propaganda amateurs made two major mistakes: 

1) the first is they "forgot" to include children and they did it on purpose because otherwise the attention would have been focused on the kids instead of Ted Cruz whose face is the missile that has to reach the emotional side of the audience. 2) The biggest mistake is represented by the fact that praying is a very intimate moment and such a public display of "faith" is at least anachronistic, because people today do not pray in public and it belongs more to a psychiatric environment rather than politics. 

Praying is a moment of intimacy between yourself and God, so the public display of faith is something that only prophets and saints have done in the past and Republicans chose to present a medieval setting which confirms their refusal to accept reality and their living in total denial. 

The intentions of this very-non-subliminal message is "Ted Cruz is a prophet". A prophet that aims at cutting people's food stamps and healthcare assistance. Amen. 

However in order to be successful, such a public performance needs extremely talented players because otherwise, (like in this case) the outcome can be a total disaster and it can produce opposite effects of what you desired in the first place.

While Astroturfing is a wonderful idea, you always have to consider that human beings are substantially "living Consciousness", who carry values and beliefs, (unless they are complete sociopaths).

Unfortunately for these amateurs, Consciousness is unable to lie and you can't hide it in a box and unless you hire professional actors, Consciousness always outs to manifest its real feelings, despite what the script says. Nonetheless even if these people perfectly knew it, they insisted using non-professional actors for these public display of religious faith.

Archetypal postures is a subject of study within the discipline of Anthropology, the science that studies human behavior. If you look at the praying picture above and focus your attention on the green-dressed woman kneeling on the right side of the picture, you will notice that her head does not bow down straight ahead but it's clearly turned to her lower-left, while usually when you pray you bow the head down as a sign of submission to God, not towards the left or the right. 

Why this woman turns her head to her left-down side instead of bowing her head straight ahead? 

Shame. 

Despite what she's been told to do, this woman's consciousness made its way up to the surface and she's actually not even looking left, she's looking away in sign of shame. She feels ashamed of what she's doing because she knows what she's doing is not ethical and not moral according to the values she grew up with. 

This posture not only is able to literally kill the picture, but to completely destroy the whole plan of showing faith, because the picture thanks to this woman, acquires a new meaning and the new meaning is "the revolt of Consciousness". You can tell her attitude is coherent because she's the only one who doesn't hold the hand of the fellow next to her, interrupting the human chain while the old man next to her he's hiding himself too, but he's not displaying the same level of shame she is.

Unfortunately for these "Astroturfing amateurs", Consciousness always outs, and what's even worse is that the photographer (just for pure luck) was able to catch one of those rarest moments in life in which you see Consciousness in action. 

That woman's unique pose indeed represents the moment in which Consciousness embodies an archetypal feeling that is already present in the collective imagery, which is something that takes place once in a million times. And that feeling is Shame. But not simple shame, Universal Shame. The Archetypal Shame. The picture was probably taken by chance or by a unique combination of factors that happen when the Universe collides together with Consciousness.

That picture will go down in history as a  legendary iconic image of Consciousness Awakening and its value is incommensurate. 

What really makes it a bad-luck event for Ted Cruz and his gang is the fact that Archetypal Shame is universally recognizable because archetypal postures are the most powerful way to transmit a message to an universal audience. 

Indeed while trying to Astroturfing religious faith and submission to God, Ted Cruz managed to do something that completely destroyed the chance of any future attempt towards that direction by anyone. 

Because that woman, (whose identity is unknown) will be remembered in history books as the manifesto of  the power of Human Consciousness. That means "you can't lie to your own Consciousness", you can't stage a fake feeling such as compassion or faith because Consciousness will always out and completely destroy your pathetic attempt to stage the most desperate of human acts: praying. 

Humans pray when they are desperate, when they need the help of a superior force. These people are not desperate for help, (indeed they are but in another sense). These are just political cyborgs who are told what to do and they do it, but one among them has some Consciousness left. And that's when the real miracle happens!

This is the greatest lesson these "people" could have ever received: if you carry things too far that's what happens: you get punished by your own meanness! That's what Consciousness usually does...and you can tell this is exactly what happened here because the effect that this picture produces is the exact opposite of its initial intentions.   

Indeed all the Democratic forces on the planet should say "Thank you" to Ted Cruz, because thanks to his hypocritical initiative and his absolutely contradictory nefarious intentions, once again Consciousness prevailed. And that's a lesson these people won't forget. 

This picture in my opinion not only represents the end of these people's Astroturfing Politics, but the starting point of a new era, the era of the inevitable truth of Consciousness.

E Pluribus Unum

(1) Astroturfing is the practice of masking the sponsors of a message (e.g. political, advertising, or public relations) to give the appearance of it coming from a disinterested, grassroots participant. The term astroturfing is a derivation of AstroTurf, a brand of synthetic carpeting designed to look like natural grass.

Gianluca D’Agostino is an Italian journalist and Scholar has a Ph.D in Theory of Information and Communication. He worked as Researcher at the Department of English of Stanford University and was Visiting Scholar at the Media and Communication Department of Fordham Uniersity NY an at the Film Studies Program of UC Berkeley. He also worked for CNN and Associated Press. 

GOP’s objective is to kill 45.000 Americans each year

According to a Harvard Medical study, since the year 2000, 45.000 Americans have been dying each year for a lack of healthcare coverage. 

After Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was signed into law on 2010, Republicans made 42 attempts to repeal the law that aims at saving the lives of these 45.000 and of 150 million Americans who are under-insured within the private healthcare regimen. 

Since the law has been approved, these Republican “patriots” did not accept to save the lives of millions so they kept trying to repeal the law with all of their forces. For 42 times. 

I think the only other organization on this planet that couldn't be more happy of repealing such a crucial lifeline for the American people, is the terrorist network known as “Al Qaeda”, whose main objective has always been to kill as many Americans as possible. 

45.000 people: 15 times the number of casualties of September the 11th. 

The GOP is being doing a better job than Osama Bin Laden himself.

How can a political party call itself  “patriotic” or even "American " whilst trying to repeal a Law that aims at saving the lives of millions of American fellow citizens?

The answer is: it can’t. 

The real paradox is that according to the Brookings Institute, under the private insurance system, the US, federal and state agencies were increasingly involved in healthcare spending, by paying about 45% of the $2.2 trillion the nation has spent on medical care, almost 10 times more of other country governments like Canada, Australia, Japan, France and Italy, which all have a government-funded healthcare. Nonetheless despite the highest spending on the planet, 40% of Americans were not able to receive healthcare assistance. 

The U.S. government spent more on healthcare than on Social Security and national defense combined, while under the Affordable Care Act the government is not only going to save trillions of dollar but probably the law will provide a new boost to the U.S economy because a study in Health Affairs concluded that under the private regulated system, half of personal bankruptcies involved medical bills. You know what that means? That under Obamacare, Americans won't have to worry of getting bankrupt because of their medical bills, they will have more money on their pocket and consequently the economy will recover much quicker.

So a natural question comes into mind: "in whose interest Republicans are acting when they try to repeal the law?" Certainly not in the government’s best interests nor in the American Taxpayer's because the U.S. Government is going to save not billions but Trillions under the new provisions. And for sure Republicans did not act in the interest of the majority of the American people who is uninsured or under-insured.

Let’s see: maybe the interests pursued by the Republican Party in repealing Obamacare is the one of the Private Insurance sector? Maybe, because under the private regimen they made more money, by squeezing the Government subsidy to cure… sorry, not to cure American citizens because of pre-existing conditions...

If that is the case, in practice the Republican Party acted like a contract killer. 

Although what’s even more incredible, is the fact that these “people” they are still considered as legitimate political representatives of the American people.  

Go figure: A bunch of Contract Killers are the Political Representatives of their own victims. They are not happy about having killed 45000 people a year since the year 2000, they want to kill more while being their own political representatives. 

These people's stated objective is to kill more Americans as possible but they want to run the country.

Sounds good.

The subsequent logical question  is: “Who is going to vote Republican at the next elections?”. 

I would really love to know one reason, that is able to explain me why in the world a registered voter would want to vote for the Republicans?  How did they manage to get a double digit result at the latest elections with a mass-killing agenda?

And even more: ”who is going to publicly affirm of being Republican from now on?”

The less dramatic aspect is that since these people have been in business the world has changed and these “people” still haven’t realized how their own situation has changed, which could  be summarized in the sentence “naked in front of a tv camera in world live”. 

In other words, being under the spotlight without being aware of it.

In today’s world, “not only the kings but the whole world is naked”, because if you steal an ice cream in Rome, Mumbai or Wichita, after one second you show up on Facebook and Twitter and every single person on the planet is going to know your name in an instant. 

On the contrary, these “scientists” keep propping up their selfish attitude, like Neanderthals in the Stone Age, without being aware that the whole world is watching them. They think they still are in the XIX century when the only media was the horse. 

However what really amazes me, is the lack of reaction towards these mass-killers. I mean what really confuses me is the fact that traditional media still consider these dregs of society like legitimate people who deserve respect. 

A weird phenomenon is occurring indeed: some independent media, actually fill their daily news stream with the latest “crazy rant” of Glen Beck, Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh or Bill O’ Reilly, like if they were “funny”, because they're raving about social issues while hypocritically invoking religious beliefs, like Satan, the Devil, the bible etc.

This is the saddest aspect of this whole story: the fact that these people are not ditched in the garbage as the scum of society but they still preserve some public dignity because they are considered  “funny”.

It doesn’t matter if they want to kill 45.000 American citizens a year, the “liberal media” call them  “wingnuts” and each of their daily outburst is considered “a joke” and at the end of the day, they are back on track and almost considered “nice people”, or this is what some independent media want us to believe. 

Because these "people" are everything but funny. Last week after having passed the motion to repeal Obamacare for the 42nd time, they were not satisfied and approved a $40 billion food stamps cut, which is the only support of about 150 million Americans.

With 4 out of 5 U.S. Citizens struggling with poverty and joblessness, why a political party would ever want to cut the  basic support of millions of American Families?   

If you look at the general picture, it is enough clear that the real objective of this “Political Party” is not only the one of killing as many Americans as possible, but to keep them in poverty, which in today’s world means keep them in slavery. 

Why in the world a political party would ever will to keep millions of its fellow citizens in a condition of slavery? 

Maybe to exploit them in a much easier way as under-paid workers in Fast Food chains and Wal Marts?  

Just saying. Maybe this is the new economy, the economy of Slavery. 

Sounds good!

I vote Republican because I am an American Patriot!

E Pluribus Unum

GOPs agenda is against Human Rights and Evolution itself

House Republicans passed a bill to cut $40 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) criticized the initiative by saying the cuts will snatch food out of the hands of millions of neediest children and their families."

At the same time House Republicans will vote today on a stopgap spending measure that would defund the Affordable Healthcare for America Act. Its direct consequence would mean 50% of American citizens will be without Healthcare insurance

Why Republicans act like reckless sociopaths with no empathy for their own American fellow citizens?
Why in the civilized world someone would ever want to cut welfare benefits to those in need?

Right after the Affordable Care America Act became the law, the House Republicans made 42 attempts to repeal it. A law that allows 100 millions fellow American citizens to be granted the right to have healthcare assistance. It’s 1/3rd of the U.S. population.

According to a study conducted by Harvard Medical School nearly 45,000 people died in the United States each year since 2000.— One American citizen every 12 minutes -- in large part because they lacked health insurance and could not get appropriate care. 45.000 dead people means 15 times the number of casualties of 9/11 each year.

It’s like having 15 terrorist attacks the size of 9/11 each year. More than one a month. Albeit these dead people have not the same dignity of the 9/11 victims so they don’t’ deserve any attention nor cannot be remembered, celebrated or even mentioned. They deserve no respect.. They didn’t deserve to live and they are completely forgotten once they’re dead. This is more than shameful.

Even more shameful is the way this issue is dealt by the American media and the Political Organizations. Instead of throwing eggs and spit in the face of each Republican expressing his Anti-American view, each day you witness the so called “liberal media” smiling at their lunatic outbursts. In doing so, you tolerate the most basic violation of Human Rights in the country that is supposed to be the first and largest Democracy in the world.

Human Rights must be undisputed. Healthcare assistance is a basic Human Right because it concerns the Human Dignity of each man or woman living on this planet who has the right to be cured.

If we don’t supply 100 million American with basic healthcare we will witness a domestic humanitarian emergency.

In 2009 Remote Area Medical, a non profit medical association that provides free medical care to people in remote areas around the world Remote organized a free healthcare session in Los Angeles in August 11 at the Inglewood forum where the medical staff have met with 14,561 patient encounters. Matt Hendrickson, a doctor working for RAM spoke to Italian journalist Daniela Roveda:"I have worked in the worst world areas and I never thought one day I would have provided assistance right here in the United States."

                                                     

 

It was not Damascus or Mumbai, it was Los Angeles, California where an estimated 8 million people are today out of the healthcare coverage”.

This is not a political matter anymore, this is a Human Rigths emergency and it belongs to the basic ethical spectrum.Whoever allows this to happen has to be treated like the worst enemy of  the American People.

Tomas and MadolineTuba hold their son John, 8, while waiting 
on a sidewalk for tickets into a free health clinic on August 13, 2009 

in Inglewood, California. Tuba, a department manager at a grocery 

store, said he has health insurance but cannot afford the co-pay fees
for medical procedures for his family. 

You can't have a democracy if a political party represents Corporation rights and the other one represents Human Rights. It just can't work out. The people's interests concern Human Life which is the most sacred good on earth and consequently it must always be represented. The Republican Party does not represent the interests of the American people, it represents the interests of Corporate America and they consider Human life at the same level of material objects. How can such an organization be tolerated within a country whose flag is the world’s landmark of Democracy?

Where is political representation? Whose interests represent the Republican Party? Why the American People tolerate the existence of the GOP being the worst enemy of the American people’s health?

You can’t put human life and material objects on the same level because this is how reckless sociopath and criminals see the world. In practice the very existence of the Republican Party is an hymn to criminal behavior. As long as this issue is not questioned under the moral and the ethical point of view there won't be Democracy in America.

The GOP’s main objection is “Where do you think the money to run the country comes from?”

Alicia P.Melis, a researcher from Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, in Germany went to Ngamba Island in Uganda to study chimpanzee behavior.

In the wild, chimps are not in an evolution process because of their selfish attitude, a sort of natural instinct that push them to “exploit” their fellows to achieve food and not to share it. The experiment consisted of two chimps in a cage and food put in front of them outside of the cage. A rope passes along a wood stick where the food is. In order to get the food the chimp needs the help of his fellow. He calls his fellow and they cooperate to get the food. That’s intelligence. However when they get it if this is not enough for both of them, only the alpha fellow between the two get to eat. The second time the food is put on the stick the second fellow do not cooperate because he knows he won’t get any reward. This is where evolution arrests for chimpanzees.

And this is the exact same destiny we are going to share with the chimps if we allow this primitive behavior not only to exist but to lead the world. Selfishness stops evolution. Can you hear me?

Selfishness attitude won’t ever help a civilization to move forward as a whole. We are missing a main point here that is called Oneness. Before Religion, here on this planet we, as a civilization we should act like a single person, a single consciousness. That’s the very beginning of real Human Evolution.

The GOP’s agenda instead is not only against human rights but aims at leading our world back to the Stone Age. 

Good Luck Everybody!

E Pluribus Unum

The Syrian Paradox or the End of the Deception Era

                                            How the Social Media Revolution is Changing the World as We Know It

What is happening in these hours on the Syrian theater cannot be defined but as a real Paradox.

Yesterday, the British Parliament has rejected a possible UK military action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's government to deter the use of chemical weapons.

Why in the world the British Parliament rejected the military strike on Syria proposed by its greatest military ally, the United States of America?

The main theory to explain such an unexpected response, is due to the public recollection of what happened in March 2003, when then British Prime Minister Tony Blair claimed that Iraq's alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) posed a threat to their security and that of their coalition/regional allies.

Blair claimed that Iraq could have launched a chemical or biological attack within 45 minutes and the Parliament's approval decision was taken upon that emotional sense of urgency.

After an investigation following the invasion, the U.S led Iraq Survey Group concluded that Iraq had ended its nuclear, chemical and biological programs in 1991 and had no active programs at the time of the invasion.

Tony Blair lied and misled the British parliament in the build-up to the Iraq invasion, that's why in the British public imagery the words "chemical weapons" inevitably lead to the recollection of those deceiving lies.

The consequent situation created by those lies was well summarized by current British PM David Cameron: "Tony Blair 'poisoned the well' of public trust".

The War Speech made by Tony Blair back in 2003, was in fact a well originally poisoned by the Bush administration, to justify the Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Indeed the fairy tale that Tony Blair told the British Parliament on March 20, 2003 was based on the story told on February 6, 2003, by U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, who appeared before the UN general assembly to "prove" the urgency to engage a war with Iraq.

Although the presentation failed to convince the members of Security Council, Powell succeeded in hardening the overall tone of the United Nations towards Iraq but failed to convince Europe where there was widespread skepticism of any links between Iraq and al-Qaeda.

The British intelligence denied the existence of any terrorism link, given the mutual hatred between Islamists and the secular regime in Baghdad.

Now that the chemical weapons have apparently been used by the Syrian regime and we desperately need international support for an overdue air strike, we are living in a giant paradox because the US government's credibility is well gone thanks to the former Administration and because of this, no support by The United Kingdom, our greatest ally, will be provided.

Judging an history paradox is difficult because the British rejection of the military strike, or even better, the British Parliament's representation of the Syrian reality was based on the worst of all possible assumptions: that the American Administration could have lied on the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime because last time they presented a similar case, (Iraq) they fabricated the whole thing and government officials of the highest ranks lied publicly in a solemn location such as the United Nations General Assembly Hall.

Some people overseas would just shrug his shoulders and say "ok what's the big deal?" but the British take these things quiet seriously and that's probably the reason why they never lost a war.

The most odd element of this whole story is the fact that what is really put in doubt here by the British parliament is not just the legitimacy of the Air strike, but the very reason for a military strike. Like if the President of the United States could lie to the British people and the whole world just to go to war! 

This is quiet unbelievable but this is exactly what is happening, thanks to the destruction of the White House reputation caused by President W Bush, who back in 2003 while he was desperately trying to convince the world that invading Iraq was the right thing to do, he exploited the Presidency reputation, its historical greatness and its intrinsic credibility only to pursuit his own happiness.

The British rejection of the American Air Strike in Syria will go down in the history as a point of no return, because for the first time in history, the United States government's credibility has been questioned by the greatest of its allies: The United Kingdom.

However I don't think that the Bush Administration by itself might have completely destroyed the U.S. government's credibility, because as General Turgidson says in Dr. Strangelove: "you cannot condemn a whole program because of a single slip up"

Indeed in the past few years we have been witnessing an increased sense of skepticism towards the government's credibility and it has been skyrocketing in the past ten years. It started with the attack of September 11 2001 and lasted for the whole duration of the Bush presidency until the Election of President Obama.

More in particular, the discussion over the government's credibility has been boosted by the coming of the Social Media technology, through which, average citizens started to interact each other over crucial issues, to question government organizations, elected officials and the former mainstream media outlets.

Ultimately the social media revolution helped in mobilizing people for their shared goals. See for example the same-sex marriage that became a law just recently both in many U.S. states and in the UK, or the Occupy Wall Street movement, which is still active thanks to their social media channels despite the fact they are not acknowledged by any political group or party. People use social media to grab the attention of authorities for wrongful convictions, like in the case of Ryan Ferguson, who thanks to his 55.000 Facebook supporters managed to obtain a further appeal hearing.

The most important aspect of how Social media affected public life both in America and in the rest of the world is that it has helped the world's citizens to put an end to government and media deception.

The traditional media labeled the interpretation of supposed government lies as "Conspiracy theories" although if these were only "theories" they would have not been able to stop such an important institution as the British Parliament from giving its consent to an air strike over a small country like Syria. The conclusion is that something is definitely changed in the audience perception and its ability to debunk deception.

I think that time has come for all the world's governments to face more in depth their credibility problem and how to cope with this new reality that allows every citizen to analyze and scrutinize every single bit of information coming from traditional media outlets or government organizations.

The major change is that in a world of Social Media, you can't hide a skeleton on your closet, not anymore! Not even a bone, or a pubic hair…. thanks to the social networks, like Facebook and Twitter, people started to exchange information in a faster and unexpected ways.

You have to see this change like an independent alternative stream of information which has been created by itself and found its way to the world's audience in a very customized fashion so that everyone on the planet has the clear perception of what's happening. This way  there is no risk for deception by propaganda outlets because they would be immediately debunked.

This stream of information, only eventually would land to the traditional media outlets which have been started struggling to keep up with the social media information flow.

According to a Survey made by the PEW Research Center, 70% of those interviewed relies on Facebook as their main news source while 36% go to Twitter.

This represents a major change in the media landscape, I would say it's a real revolution because at present Facebook, Twitter and Youtube have become the new "Mainstream media", as the majority of people do rely on these new media as their main news source and not on the traditional media such as the old tv networks.

People today choose to rely on independent and credible news sources that are not owned by giant corporations that might be entangled with Governments and whose credibility might be in doubt.

So what's happening is that governments might lose control of their public agenda if their credibility is only supported by old traditional media.

The collapse of the traditional media opened a completely new scenario where it's the people and not the government or the traditional media that controls the news and more widely the information.

In the past sixty years we have been passively suffering the corporate media message, which went on air on a one-way direction to our tv set in our living room and we were completely unable to verify the authenticity of the message, to respond or to interact with the media or to comment the news together with the other viewers.

Today things have completely changed and every message from the media is analyzed, checked, scrutinized, questioned, commented and only eventually gets labelled as authentic or discarded by the audience as a fake. In practice there is no room for deception or lying in the new media system, because average citizens have the tools to confront each other on real time on every single thing they re being told and that's an extraordinary instrument that can be defined as "real time democracy".

In fact despite the downplaying of the social media by the former mainstream media, the social media completely took over the news production machine and I am not talking about breaking news, I am talking about debunking the news propaganda operated by some news outlet which still at today think it's possible for them to present a manipulated reality instead of the objective one.

In a world made of social media, even thinking of being able to present a different manipulated reality is simply ridiculous. I just want to make you a little example about the power of Social Media:

In the past six months the Cable Network Fox News has literally fabricated a series of phony scandals to diminish the image of the U.S. President.

What they did is they have put into these fake scandals all their energy, time, money and all the human resources they had, but for the first time in history of modern communication, their attempt has completely failed and the products of their news-fabrication machine have been completely debunked and rejected by the audience and labelled as preposterous and ultimately fake.

This is something completely new in the media field: one of the largest traditional news media saw its content being not only disputed but completely dismissed by its own audience. Consequently Fox News posted its lowest ratings in the A25-54 demographic since August 2001 in both total day and prime time. (Nielsen Live + Same Day data)

 In today's world the audience doesn't buy anymore whatever the traditional media pukes out. If you are not credible or if your information doesn't match with our reality checks, you are immediately vaporized and labelled as "not credible".

In a world of social networks, people make more questions and are not satisfied with the infotainment they are offered by the traditional media but they always look for a second opinion to confirm what they learn.

The general assumption that the media in the wealthy world are simplistic, superficial, and celebrity-focused is seeing a reversal of trend and average people they are turning to social networks to exchange information about what's really happening on main street.

However the traditional media, especially those linked to the Conservative side of the political spectrum don't want to surrender to the new reality and they keep living in a state of denial. Although the only effect they are obtaining is to lose more audience every single day.

We live in a world that learned that change is possible and that has become our daily goal as a global audience. Social achievements like same sex marriage, medical marijuana and other shared goals have been reached thanks to the mobilization of people through social media.

Despite these major achievements we still have to assist to painful show of despair by those sickening people who live in a state of denial and they fear the new media like the Devil itself. People like Pat Robertson whose masochist activism is still focused on lesbians practicing witchcraft, or Rand Paul ravings against people using food stamps.

What conservative pundits still struggle to understand is that the social media revolution completely annihilated the brinkmanship strategy of those traditional media that blindly represented only corporate interests. What happened is the new mainstream media, represented by the social networks is composed of people, human beings! And this new world is completely focused on the interests of citizens first and then on corporations.

This new vision shifted our priorities towards the well being of citizens rather than the one of corporations and this is a point of No Return.

In a such a new scenario there is only one chance for all of the world's institutions and organizations: to be honest and truthful because there's no chance of reversing the situation unless you want to establish a dictatorship.

America has the unique chance of having an incumbent leadership which is enough enlightened to take advantage of this new media revolution and lead the world to an endless time of peace and prosperity.

The only way to do so is trying to level (for what is possible) all the major conflicts within our own society by wiping off all the phony issues and the meaningless positions held for example by the Conservative groups as they really have no future.

It is simply unbelievable we still reading news about people being discriminated for having a darker complexion or Republican leaders not attending the MLK march. It really makes no sense, for a civilization whose main goal is progress and advancement. Physical appearance is something that can only frighten primitive brains, or it can only be a phony excuse to keep up divisions within our own society for a primitive political purpose. But who are the voters who support such a Neanderthal's agenda? You really want their votes?

In a world of social media, these are major blows for any organization, because everybody would know  in real time what your stance is over such a crucial issue like Racism and civil rights.

The time of the phony issues is over. What reactionary forces still struggle to grab, is that people of earth will keep gathering on Facebook and Twitter and what they are forming is a single giant consciousness, that gathers the whole world in it.

We as a single consciousness are able to judge what's really going on and every lie or mystification or fake scandal would be immediately debunked because the world's consciousness is made of a combination of millions of opinions and representations that confront each other and mix and grow.

One way or the other the truth will out. Like in biology, where monoclonal antibodies tend to prevail over viruses.

So if the world's population gets everyday smarter and smarter and more united in a single giant consciousness, it becomes harder to fool them with the same old propaganda gimmicks.

At the end of the day there are two options left: 1) you make up a more sophisticated propaganda scheme with the risk of being debunked once more 2) You stop cheating.

E Pluribus Unum