Archives

Tagged ‘Manipulation‘

La révolution ne sera pas subventionnée ou l’échec absurde de la gauche (une interview avec Cory Morningstar)

 

Nous avons récemment interviewé Cory Morningstar, une journaliste d’investigation canadienne spécialisée dans l’écologie et la politique. Son travail remarquable peut être consulté librement en ligne, sur son site web (en anglais). Nous avions déjà publié deux de ses articles sur notre site, à savoir 350.org, AVAAZ, et la marche mondiale pour le climat — Comment l’Empire nous fait marcher (par Cory Morningstar), et 350.org, Bill McKibben (& Naomi Klein): L’écologie made in Wall Street.

ONG

A quel point notre situation, en tant qu’espèce vivant sur la planète Terre, est-elle grave, et pourquoi?

Cory Morningstar: Elle est si grave que nous sommes incapables — ou que l’on ne le veut simplement pas — d’en comprendre la magnitude. Même ceux qui seraient en mesure d’en saisir la magnitude sont souvent incapables de l’accepter entièrement. J’entends à travers ça que nous continuons à planifier des choses sur le long terme alors qu’il est établi qu’elles ne seront ni plausibles ni possibles au cours de notre existence. Nous sommes tellement endoctrinés et conditionnés à la folie que nous semblons incapables de nous libérer. De plus, même si nous rassemblions le courage nécessaire pour nous libérer, le système qui nous asservit garantit que nous ne le puissions pas. Si l’on observe les données et la science comme le fait Guy McPherson, il est clair que nous avons déjà dépassé les limites maximales (1°C) établies par le Groupe de Conseil des Nations Unies sur les Gaz à Effet de Serre (United Nations Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases (UNAGGG)) dans un rapport datant de 1990. Un document qui, d’ailleurs, fut délibérément enterré afin que continue la croissance du système économique industrialo-capitaliste. Sans parler du réchauffement auquel nous sommes d’ores-et-déjà condamné en raison de ce que nous avons émis depuis, mais qui n’adviendra qu’au cours des décennies à venir en raison du temps de latence.

Si davantage de preuves étaient nécessaires afin d’apaiser certains doutes persistants, il suffirait d’écouter les avertissements apocalyptiques de Natalia Shakhova sur la fonte du permafrost et des émissions colossales de méthane qui s’ensuivraient. Shakhova, l’une des principales scientifiques expertes des hydrates de méthane, voit ses publications mises au ban sur la liste noire des médias depuis de nombreuses années. Il suffirait également de prendre en compte le fait que d’éminents scientifiques utilisent le terme « Anthropocène » depuis des décennies, afin de décrire cette époque géologique distincte de l’Holocène – une transition/changement causée par les impacts humains. Nous ignorons collectivement cet incroyable point de basculement.

Voici quelques-unes de mes principales observations, mais le plus dramatique, c’est ce que j’observe dans ma vie de tous les jours. Ces simples observations de la façon dont les gens 1) se traitent entre eux, 2) traitent les êtres sensibles, 3) les formes de vie non-humaines et 4) notre mère, la Terre. L’horrible vérité, c’est que les gens traitent les quatre comme des déchets jetables. Mince ! Ils traitent même leurs propres corps comme une poubelle et sont plus que disposés à empoisonner leurs enfants de multiples façons. On ne peut que se demander s’il s’agit purement et simplement d’ignorance ou bien d’une haine de soi. Peu importe, nous continuons à involuer rapidement. L’importance de la dissonance cognitive est manifeste quand on sait que toutes les civilisations ayant jamais existé se sont effondrées, mais que celle qui surpasse toutes les autres en terme de pillage de l’environnement naturel dont nous dépendons absolument est considérée comme exempt de ce même destin prophétique.

En Occident, dans les sociétés industrielles, la principale opposition politique envers la culture dominante, qui n’est peut-être pas autant en opposition qu’elle aime le prétendre ou le pense, et que j’appellerai « la gauche », afin d’être bref, semble n’être qu’un colossal échec, qu’en penses-tu ?

Cory Morningstar: Oui, c’est très vrai. Il s’agit manifestement d’un échec complet. Plusieurs raisons expliquent cela, selon moi. J’en citerai quelques-unes. La majeure partie de notre « gauche » est constituée de blancs issus de la classe moyenne, de privilégiés. Ces mêmes 1% qui qui émettent 50% des émissions mondiales de gaz à effet de serre. Il est incroyablement difficile de persuader quelqu’un de regarder dans le miroir lorsque tous ceux qui l’entourent diabolisent les corporations des combustibles fossiles, comme si l’industrie était, de quelque façon que ce soit, séparée de la société et du système lui-même. [Lorsque l’activisme est redirigé et piloté par diverses grosses ONG, par les médias, par toute la gauche bien-pensante, vers un simplisme comme ce « désinvestissement », cet improbable et incompréhensible « abandon » des combustibles fossiles brandi isolément comme LA solution miracle qui nous sauverait tous, sans aucune compréhension du fait que c’est absurde, impossible et implausible tant que TOUT LE RESTE, TOUS LES AUTRES SECTEURS de la société ne sont pas radicalement changé, avant, qu’avancée toute seule cette injonction à « désinvestir des combustibles fossiles » ne signifie rien, NdT]

Après des années de travaux sur le climat et les problèmes écologiques, j’en ai conclu que l’écologie occidentale était morte, et qu’elle avait été remplacée par l’anthropocentrisme du 21ème siècle. Le mot « activiste » en Occident est un terme qui ne fait plus référence qu’à un anthropocentriste égocentrique — volontairement aveugle aux horreurs de l’impérialisme et du racisme qui sous-tendent le système tout entier. Une partie importante de notre langage a été cooptée par le Complexe Industriel Non-Lucratif (CINL), y compris l’environnementalisme, l’activisme, le mot radical, et même le mot capitalisme — mot vague qui fournit un effet de style dans un discours visant dans les faits à protéger et à propager le système socio-économique même qui nous tue.

La critique révolutionnaire, en Amérique, est morte. Le processus bien entamé de la « nouvelle économie » (la financiarisation de la nature) ne suffit même pas à faire émerger la résistance significative, féroce et nécessaire dont nous avons besoin. Bien que Facebook (et son Deepface !) puisse jouer un rôle dans la transmission d’informations, ces métriques sociale sont, en un sens, de l’argent. 500 000 abonnés n’ont rien à voir avec des actions révolutionnaires, tout comme l’argent qui n’est soutenu par rien. Et pourtant ces deux phénomènes dominent le meilleur-des-mondes moderne dans lequel nous vivons aujourd’hui. Je dirais même que les médias sociaux sont finalement un grand mal pour la société dans son ensemble, car il s’agit là du rêve ultime de tous les oligarques et publicitaires de notre temps. Comme mon camarade de WKOG [Wrong Kind Of Green, en français « la mauvaise sorte d’écologie », NdT] Forrest Palmer le dit, à l’instar du Latin, la vérité est une langue morte dans ce monde — tout comme la pensée critique. Les gens ne veulent pas du changement radical s’il nuit de quelque façon que ce soit à leurs privilèges. Et le changement radical nécessaire pour ne serait-ce que ralentir le changement climatique exigerait le plus radical (et pourtant habilitant [i.e. le réapprentissage de l’autonomie, NdT]) des sacrifices, celui qui démolirait les institutions qui oppressent ceux qui paient le prix pour les privilèges des Euro-Américains. J’ai accepté le fait que le privilège, sous quelque forme que ce soit, ne sera jamais abandonné par ceux qui le détienne — il devra être retiré par la force. Toute tentative légitime de démantèlement des structures actuelles du pouvoir, ou de ralentissement de nos multiples crises et de l’autodestruction qu’elles entrainent, ne peut émaner que de la classe ouvrière.

Pourquoi? Quelles sont les principales raisons de son échec?

Cory Morningstar: Il me semble que nous échouons à reconnaitre le niveau de notre propre endoctrinement. Des questions cruciales mises en avant il y a des siècles dans le discours sur la servitude volontaire d’Etienne de la Boétie demeurent sans réponses à ce jour. Personne, ou presque, ne s’intéresse à cet obstacle majeur qui nous empêche de résoudre notre problème majeur, et qui sert à protéger nos structures de pouvoir actuelles. Les faits ancrés dans la réalité observée par de vrais révolutionnaires, comme Assata Shakur, qui soulignait que « personne dans le monde, personne dans l’histoire, n’a jamais obtenu sa liberté en faisant appel au sens moral de ses oppresseurs », sont ignorés.

Je crois que la principale cause de notre échec collectif est le succès du Complexe Industriel Non-Lucratif (CINL), qui est financé à hauteur de billions d’euros par ceux qui nous oppriment. Ceux qui administrent le CINL font appel aux pires traits de l’humanité, plutôt qu’aux meilleurs. L’individualisme, le narcissisme, l’égo, la convoitise, la soif de pouvoir et la célébrité. Ils nous content les mensonges que nous avons besoin d’entendre pour continuer à vivre avec nous-mêmes, pour continuer à piller voracement. Les mensonges qui nous permettent de nous réjouir de nos privilèges sans culpabilité aucune. Les gens de la « gauche morte » suivent ceux auxquels ils s’identifient, comme Bill McKibben et Naomi Klein de l’ONG 350 — des « leaders » blancs et riches, nommés par les élites. Les Marilyn Bucks ne sont plus de ce monde. Les révolutionnaires comme Omali Yeshitela — avec lesquels la « gauche morte » ne s’identifient pas — sont ignorés. En 1966, le révolutionnaire Stokely Carmichael avait dit que c’était « la vraie question qui divise les activistes blancs d’aujourd’hui. Peuvent-ils démolir les institutions qui font de nous des captifs depuis des centaines d’années ? ». 50 ans après, nous pouvons répondre à cette question par un NON sans équivoque. Les activistes blancs n’étaient pas/ne sont pas prêts à abandonner leurs privilèges, quel qu’en soit le prix. Même au prix de leurs propres enfants. Et comme Forrest Palmer le souligne souvent, aujourd’hui, la bourgeoisie noire cherche à s’intégrer dans ce système oppressif plutôt qu’à le détruire. Utiliser le mot détruire dans la même phrase que le mot activisme est d’ailleurs souvent jugé inacceptable. L’autodéfense n’est pas reconnue comme légitime par ces privilégiés tandis que la violence de l’état policier est généralement considérée comme acceptable. La croyance selon laquelle les plus puissants capitalistes du monde vont abandonner volontairement ne serait-ce qu’une partie du pouvoir ou de la richesse qu’ils détiennent est absolument grotesque.

Il me semble que la gauche est un mélange confus de différentes idéologies, plus ou moins contrôlées et créées par la culture dominante, qu’elles pensent défier, et que nous pouvons de ce fait pointer du doigt plusieurs contradictions majeures qui l’empêche d’être une force efficace de résistance, de changement. Qu’en penses-tu, et quelles seraient ces contradictions ?

Cory Morningstar: J’ai compris que c’était le cas il y a des années. A savoir que si « la gauche » pouvait comprendre qu’elle est perpétuellement réabsorbée dans le système auquel elle prétend s’opposer, nous pourrions militer contre une telle manipulation ; qu’en embrassant pleinement la discipline et la pensée critique, nous pourrions empêcher que cela se reproduise encore et encore. Mais la société occidentale nous a enseigné l’inverse. Elle glorifie l’opposé. Ne pensez pas de façon critique. N’apprenez pas l’histoire. Croyez aux slogans que les superpouvoirs corporatistes vous soufflent à travers la chambre d’écho des medias et du CINL. Lorsque j’ai commencé à écrire à propos de l’horrible réalité des organisations non-gouvernementales (ONG) qui forment le CINL, j’ai découvert que les gens croyaient fermement en ces institutions. Cette croyance est profonde — proche de celle en ce dieu des hommes, blanc et aux yeux bleus.

Lorsque John D Rockefeller a dit que « la capacité à gérer les gens est une marchandise que l’on peut acheter, au même titre que le sucre ou le café, et je suis prêt à payer plus pour elle que pour n’importe quelle marchandise », il savait alors ce que la gauche mettrait des décennies à comprendre. Ce que la gauche n’a d’ailleurs toujours pas compris. L’idée selon laquelle nous pourrions modifier la balance des pouvoirs à l’aide des organisations financées par — et dans de nombreux cas créées par — les plus puissantes institutions du monde est ridicule. Et pourtant cette force surpuissante continue et garantit ultimement notre propre destruction. Et lorsque nous regardons ce que la gauche morte occidentale continue à « demander » (des demandes dont les réponses sont d’ores-et-déjà écrites et attendent derrière des portes closes), à savoir des « solutions » qui n’ont rien à voir avec la protection de la nature ou des formes de vie non-humaines, mais qui ne servent qu’à protéger le mode de vie occidental, on se dit que notre éradication est peut-être bienvenue. [Cory Morningstar fait ici référence, entre autres, aux solutions comme les panneaux solaires et les éoliennes, que le système dominant comptait de toute façon mettre en place au fur et à mesure, et met d’ores-et-déjà en place, ou comme le développement durable, et qui ne solutionnent rien bien au contraire NdT].

Voilà la partie la plus triste de notre histoire, celle du chapitre finale. L’ironie étant que si l’être humain avait placé la vie non-humaine au-dessus de la vie humaine, par défaut, nous nous serions sauvés. Voici la contradiction ultime. Et ce qui nous précipite vers la catastrophe. Il y a cependant une bonne nouvelle. Même s’il semble peu probable que nous parvenions à enrayer le changement climatique, ou à le ralentir, il n’est jamais trop tard pour approfondir nos connaissances et poursuivre la vérité et la justice. Tenter de recueillir ne serait-ce qu’une once de dignité tandis que la nature s’éclipse, voilà ce qui me semble souhaitable.


[1] « la quantité total de méthane (CH4) actuellement dans l’atmosphère est de 5 gigatonnes. La quantité de carbone stockée sous forme de méthane dans le plateau de l’Est Arctique Sibérien est d’approximativement 100 à 1000 gigatonnes. Seul 1% de cette quantité doublerait la charge atmosphérique de méthane (qui est approximativement 23 fois plus puissant en tant que GES que le CO2). Peu de choses suffiraient à déstabiliser ne serait-ce qu’1% de cette réserve de carbone étant donné l’état du permafrost et la quantité de méthane actuellement menacée. Ce qui empêche ce méthane d’être émis dans l’atmosphère est une mince colonne d’eau et un permafrost diminuant et perdant sa qualité de sceau. Cela pourrait se produire n’importe quand ». Natalia Shakhova, une des principales expertes du monde en hydrates de méthane.

[2] L’holocène est le nom de l’ère géologique qui représente les 11 000 dernières années. Correspond à la dernière partie de l’ère quaternaire période la plus récente dans l’échelle des temps géologiques.

Honestly, Ms. Klein, Author of NO LOGO & 350.org Board Member – You Really Don’t See This Intentional, Psychological Manipulation of Citizens?

As Noam Chomsky has pointed out, Obama is a “brand” like none other, having won the highest advertising campaign accolade and attracted unprecedented sums of money. The brand will sell for a while. He will close Guantanamo Bay, whose inmates represent less than one per cent of America’s 27,000 “ghost prisoners.” He will continue to make stirring, platitudinous speeches, but the tears will dry as people understand that President Obama is the latest manager of an ideological machine that transcends electoral power. Asked what his supporters would do when reality intruded, Stephen Walt, an Obama adviser, said: “They have nowhere else to go.” – John Pilger

“Every brand comes with a set of associations,” explains study co-author Gavan Fitzsimons, a professor of psychology and marketing at Duke University. “When we’re exposed to logos, those associations fire automatically, activating our motivational systems and leading us to behave in ways that are consistent with the brand image”—and our preexisting drives. Over the years, all the Think Different ads we’ve seen have seared a link in our brains between Apple and creativity… — Psychology Today 

7152obamarisingsunflag

“With enough repetition, people encode the brands identity (usually not as read words but as the recognized look, shape and feel) in their brains, preferably linked to things that matter to them.” – Branding Strategy Insider

2013-02-17-8482400823_957da00209_z

“So the original brands were comforting logos that were often people, like Quaker Oats or Aunt Jemima, that were essentially surrogate relationships, it’s like, ok, you’re not buying it from the local shopkeeper, you’re not buying it from the local farmer, but here is this image that you can relate to – you could form a personal relationship – albeit a fake personal relationship – with this mascot, with this figure. But the message was that you can trust it as much as you would trust it if you actually had a real relationship.” – Naomi Klein

forwardobama2

“And this idea was the idea of lifestyle branding, the idea that if companies wanted to be truly successful and competitive in a global marketplace they had to understand that their true product was not their product, i.e. sneakers, movies, lattes, computers, it was an idea, a lifestyle. It was meaning itself. The idea of brands not products explains for me a few things at once. It explained the assault on the public sphere in the form of corporate sponsorship. It explained why we were seeing evermore new and creative forms of marketing particularly directed at young people.” – Naomi Klein [Source]

ObamaBranding

“The point is that you don’t have the choice whether or not to turn it off because it is in the streets, it’s right in front of your face, on the subway or even in the bathroom, in a public bathroom. The point is to take choice out of the equation because choice, even when you can click with your converter, that is seen as the enemy in the world of marketing, that’s why you need to get your ad woven into the content of television shows, so choice is taken out of the equation.” – Naomi Klein [Source]

Avaaz: Imperialist Pimps of Militarism, Protectors of the Oligarchy, Trusted Facilitators of War | Part V

October 31, 2012

 

Part five of an investigative report by Cory Morningstar

Avaaz Investigative Report Series 2012 [Further Reading]: Part IPart IIPart IIIPart IVPart VPart VI

Avaaz Investigative Report Series 2017 [Further Reading]: Part IPart IIPart III

 

Introduction | By Jay Taber at Intercontinental Cry

In his seminal study Science of Coercion, Christopher Simpson observed that communication might be understood as both the conduit for and the actual substance of human culture and consciousness. As Simpson noted, psychological warfare is the application of mass communication to modern social conflict.

 

In the U.S. Army War College manual on psychological warfare, the stated objective is to destroy the will and ability of the enemy to fight by depriving them of the support of allies and neutrals. Some of the methods used in the manual are sowing dissension, distrust, fear and hopelessness.

 

In the decades since these publications were first published, a new form of psywar has emerged in the form of false hope. With unlimited funding and organizational support from foundations like Ford, Rockefeller, Gates and Soros, U.S. Government propaganda now has a vast new army of non-profits that, along with corporate media and academia, serve as both a third wing of mass consciousness and a fifth column for destabilization campaigns worldwide.

 

As Cory Morningstar captures The Simulacrum in her multi-part series on the non-profit industrial complex, domesticating the populace is a fait accompli, and the only question remaining is what will happen if and when capitalist activism is seen for what it is. By following the money from aristocratic derivatives to embodiments of false hope like Avaaz, MoveOn, and Change, Morningstar steps through the looking glass to expose how NGOs have become a key tool of global dominance using social media as a means of social manipulation.

 

When the smoke generated by phony progressives clears, all that is left is an industrial wasteland of false hope and real threats. When the betrayals of NGOs like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are known, we can finally begin to exercise our responsibilities. Until then, programs like Democracy Now remain little more than adult versions of Sesame Street for the toy Che brigades.

[The article above titled “Through the Looking Glass” was published by Intercontinental Cry on September 11, 2012. Jay Taber is an associate scholar of the Center for World Indigenous Studies, an author, a correspondent to Fourth World Eye, and a contributing editor of Fourth World Journal. Since 1994, he has served as the administrative director of Public Good Project.]

 

The Humanitarian Industrial Complex: The Ivory Towers within the Dark Triad

 “It ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things.” — Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince

Image: U.S. President Barack Obama with Avaaz co-founder and former U.S. Representative Tom Perriello.

Tom Perriello’s ideologies espouse the Machiavellian principle in which “the end justifies the means.” In essence, unethical, morally reprehensible, criminal and contemptuous behaviour is justified in order to, in Perriello’s words, “expand the use of force to advance key values.” Of course, the values Perriello speaks of are American “values.” Perriello’s belief that such noble key “values” are at the foundation of today’s America demonstrates even further delusion.

It is interesting to note the parallels. Scholars often note that Niccolò Machiavelli glorified instrumentality in statebuilding, embodied by his infamous suggestion that the ends justify the means. “Violence may be necessary for the successful transfer of power and introduction of new legal institutions; force may be used to eliminate political rivals, to coerce resistant populations, and to purge previous rulers who will inevitably attempt to regain their power.”

In the 1958 essay, Thoughts on Machiavelli, Leo Strauss proposed that the Machiavellian principles, embraced as a promotion of progress, would lead directly to the modern arms race. “Strauss argued that the unavoidable nature of such arms races, which have existed before modern times and led to the collapse of peaceful civilizations, provides us with both an explanation of what is most truly dangerous in Machiavelli’s innovations, but also the way in which the aims of his apparently immoral innovation can be understood.” [Source] “Machiavelli is the only political thinker whose name has come into common use for designating a kind of politics, which exists and will continue to exist independently of his influence, a politics guided exclusively by considerations of expediency, which uses all means, fair or foul, iron or poison, for achieving its ends – its end being the aggrandizement of one’s country or fatherland – but also using the fatherland in the service of the self-aggrandizement of the politician or statesman or one’s party.” [Strauss, 1958, p. 297]

Antonio Gramsci drew great inspiration from Machiavelli’s writings on ethics, morals, and how they relate to the State and revolution in his writings on “Passive Revolution.” It was the belief of Gramsci that society can be manipulated by controlling popular notions of morality. [Gramsci (1891 – 1937), renowned for his ideology of cultural hegemony as the means of upholding the state in a capitalist society must be considered one of the most critical thinkers and influential intellectuals of the 20th century.]

In psychology, Machiavellianism denotes a personality type.

In cognitive science and evolutionary psychology, Machiavellian intelligence (known also as political intelligence or social intelligence) is the capacity of an entity to be in a successful political engagement with social groups. The first introduction of this concept to primatology came from Frans de Waal’s 1982 book “Chimpanzee Politics,” which described social manoeuvring while explicitly quoting Machiavelli. Machiavellian intelligence is also known as Machiavellianism.

“Machiavellianism is the art of manipulation in which others are socially manipulated in a way that the user benefits from it, whether it is to the detriment of the people being used. The user would feel little to no remorse or empathy when their actions harm others.” — Wikipedia

Further, “the ‘Dark Triad’ is a group of three personality traits: narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy, all of which are interpersonally aversive – three theoretically distinct but empirically overlapping personality constructs….That is, individuals who possess characteristics of any of the personality disorders that make up the Dark Triad are likely to be selfish, possess a grandiose sense of importance, and feel an increased sense of entitlement. Further, these individuals are often pre-occupied with dominance and power and will use aggressive tactics such as manipulation and exploitation to get whatever it is that they feel that they deserve.

“Individuals who possess characteristics of the Dark Triad do not make for good friends. Not only are they not concerned with others, they are constantly focused on their own wants and needs and will do whatever they feel is necessary to achieve their goals, regardless of the consequences to others. This blatant disregard for others may lead individuals with these aversive personalities to behave anti-socially and to commit crimes. While there has been much research done to support the link between psychopathy and criminal behavior, there is currently no research supporting a direct link between individuals with Machiavellian and narcissistic personalities and criminal behavior. It is known that individuals with these personality characteristics are often found in offender populations, but further research must be done to learn more about the dark triad and criminal offending.” [Source: A 2011 European Association of Psychology and Law – Student Society Publication, Wikipedia]

The Empire

Roman Empire Emblem 753 BC – 476 AD [Senatus Populusque Romanus -“The Senate and People of Rome”]


United Nations Emblem 1945


Anonymous Logo 2003-2012

PSYOPS or Psychological Operations: “Planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals. The purpose of psychological operations is to induce or reinforce foreign attitudes and behavior favorable to the originator’s objectives. Also called PSYOP. See also consolidation psychological operations; overt peacetime psychological operations programs; perception management.” (Source: U.S. Department of Defense)

“Interestingly enough, the thirty-eight large and medium sized American facilities spread around the globe in 2005 – mostly air and naval bases for our bombers and fleets – almost exactly equals Britain’s thirty-six naval bases and army garrisons at its imperial zenith in 1898. The Roman Empire at its height in 117 AD required thirty-seven major bases to police its realm from Britannia to Egypt, from Hispania to Armenia. Perhaps the optimum number of major citadels and fortresses for an imperialist aspiring to dominate the world is somewhere between thirty-five and forty. America is well-situated to take over – everything” (The Green Zone, p. 36).

As stated in the propaganda model theory, the leaders of modern, corporate-dominated societies employ indoctrination as a means of social control. Working in unity, the marketing, advertising, and public relations industries utilize mass communications to protect and advance the interests of elites. The theory elaborates on how powerful economists and lobbyists have often used school systems and centralised electronic communications to influence public opinion. (Note that many liberals and some academic media analysts of the left despised the “propaganda model.”) It is critical to acknowledge that the non-profit industrial complex is a vital tool of the public relations industries, as well as 21st century lobbyists – experts in centralised electronic communications to influence public opinion.

With the Harvard Journalism reports (discussed further on in this report) and the role of NGOs in opening up/attempting to pry open the doors to foreign invasion in sovereign states such as Libya, Syria, Uganda and so forth, Herman’s and Chomsky’s propaganda model theory, criticized by the liberal left, has been both prophetic and vindicated.

In the race for global domination of the Earth’s final remaining resources, our shared planet is being decimated by cabals of psychopaths in collaboration with the corporate media complex and the non-profit industrial complex. In perfect synchronicity, they promote extreme fabrications of reality that must be considered nothing less than a brilliantly executed global psyops.

Avaaz Co-founder: Tom Pravda

Snapshot:

  • Avaaz International: Co-founder
  • Avaaz International: Secretary 2009
  • Avaaz International: Treasurer 2010
  • European Union: Advisor
  • Global Witness: Intern
  • Integrity: Senior Advisor
  • International Center for Transitional Justice: Consultant
  • Oxford Analytica: Consultant
  • Res Publica: Co-founder
  • UK Diplomatic Service: Member
  • UK Foreign Office: Advisor
  • United Nations Development Program: Consultant
  • U.S. State Department: Advisor
  • World Development Movement: Intern

 

Education:

  •  Balliol College, Oxford

 

Resides in United Kingdom

Tom Pravda is a British diplomat who co-founded both Res Publica and Avaaz. He has been listed as both secretary and treasurer to Avaaz. Pravda also sits on the advisory board of Res Publica. Pravda has worked for the United Nations in New York and is an advisor to the U.S. State Department, the UK Foreign Office and the European Union. Pravda has been a member of the UK Diplomatic Service since 2003 where he has worked on EU trade and development policy and relations with the Middle East and Africa.

Pravda is senior advisor to “Integrity.” [“While working in Afghanistan, directors Andrew Cleary and Anthony Ellis identified a need to provide organisations working in conflict, post conflict and fragile environments with insightful research and ethically driven localised consultancy services. Based on these principles they founded Integrity.”]

“Integrity” states Pravda’s qualifications as: “Tom is a diplomat and public entrepreneur, specialising in peace and security issues. At Integrity he is leading on public sector reform and good governance projects and is currently conducting independent research on global peacekeeping capacities in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan and West Africa. Tom is a specialist in the Great Lakes Region [not the North American ones], particularly the DRC, where he advised the U.S. State Department, the UK Foreign Office and the European Union on diplomatic, security and development strategies and programming for the region. Alongside his diplomatic career, he has set up and run successful NGOs in Africa and the U.S., most recently co-founding the world’s leading online advocacy community, Avaaz.org. He has consulted extensively on political, security, research and advocacy issues for a range of clients, including the UNDP, the International Center for Transitional Justice and Oxford Analytica.”

Oxford Analytica is “a global analysis and advisory firm which draws on a worldwide network of experts to advise its clients on their strategy and performance.” They provide an analysis services that gives “corporate and government executives a proven edge in assessing the impact of global events and turning risks into opportunities.”

Pravda has also interned for Global Witness and the World Development Movement. Global Witness receives immense funding from governments including Canada and the UK. In 2005, Global Witness also received funding from the NED for their work to “advocate for good governance of natural resource management in Liberia.”

It is unclear what NGOs Pravda has set up successfully and run in Africa, but one can safely assume 1) they were financed in whole or in part by Soros and 2) they have served and protected foreign interests since their inception.

Pravda received his degree in philosophy, politics and economics from Balliol College.

Avaaz Co-founder: David Madden

Photo by Lee-Sean Huang

Snapshot:

  • Avaaz International: Co-founder
  • GetUp!: Co-founder
  • MoveOn.org: Co-founder
  • TwitterPeek: Creator
  • United Nations Development Program: Consultant
  • World Bank: Consultant

 

Education:

  • Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government
  • University of New South Wales

 

Resides in New York City

David Madden, is the co-founder of the Australian NGO, GetUp, co-founder of its U.S. counterpart MoveOn.org, as well as co-founder of Avaaz.

Madden has consulted for the World Bank and the United Nations Development Program. As well, Madden has worked for the World Bank in Timor Leste, and for the United Nations in Indonesia. Prior to this, Madden served as an officer in the Australian Army.

Madden began his career with the Inspire foundation which created ReachOut.com. Reach-out.com is an organization that essentially targets the country’s most vulnerable and broken youth. ReachOut reaches out to those youth in deep pain and turmoil, such as those suffering from self-mutilation, depression, suicide, bullying and other societal problems.

Corporate Pedophilia: In the 21st century, children who have been left emotionally starved as a consequence of lack of nurturing, along with emotionally broken youth, are relentlessly targeted by corporations. This escalating, burgeoning crisis is a direct result of a toxic society. Therefore, one should not be surprised that the corporations who sponsor and enable this site to exist are none other than Bristol-Myers Squibb (through their foundation, which simply serves as a front group), “the philanthropic arm” of the Macquarie Group, the News Corporation and the American Australian Association. In other words, let us help you in your time of need while we feed you to the wolves.

Like many of his cohorts, Madden was educated at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government. He also attended the University of New South Wales, where he was President of the Student Guild. He is the co-author of Imagining Australia: Ideas for our Future, which he authored in 2004.

The Harvardite also understands the power of social media. Madden is credited with the creation of TwitterPeek, the world’s first and only mobile Twitter device for under $100.

In our culture’s growing addiction to instant gratification, society has become insatiable. Clicktivism serves as another form of instant gratification. “TwitterPeek” and applications like it will serve to enhance the clicktivism fetish. Remember kids, don’t think … just click.

Avaaz Co-founder: Eli Pariser

 

Snapshot:

  • AccessNow.org: Founding Board Member
  • Al Gore: Sponsored Speech Writing
  • Author: New York Times Bestselling Book, The Filter Bubble
  • Avaaz International: Chairman of the Board 2006, 2010
  • Avaaz International: Co-founder
  • Campaign for America’s Future: Board Member
  • John Kerry: Fundraising for Kerry’s Presidential Campaign
  • MoveOn.org PAC: Executive Director
  • MoveOn.org PAC: President
  • MoveOn.org: Chairman
  • MoveOn.org: Director of Foreign Policy Campaigns
  • New Organizing Institute: Co-founder
  • Res Publica: Advisory Board
  • Roosevelt Institute: Senior Fellow
  • SumOfUs: U.S. Advisory Board Member

 

Education:

  • Bard College at Simon’s Rock

 

Resides in New York

Eli Pariser is co-founder of Avaaz as well as president/chairman of MoveOn.org’s board. Prior to position of chair, Pariser served as the Executive Director of MoveOn.org. Pariser has worked directly with former Vice President Al Gore on drafting MoveOn-sponsored speeches and assisted in fundraising for John Kerry’s presidential campaign. In December 2003 Pariser worked with Jonathan Soros, son of George Soros, on a MoveOn.org campaign. On December 9, 2004, one month after Kerry’s defeat, Pariser declared that MoveOn had effectively taken control of the Democratic Party.

In an e-mail distributed to MoveOn.org members on November 22, 2005, Pariser announced that his organization had created a spinoff entity called the New Organizing Institute, “a unique grassroots program that trains young, technology-enabled political organizers to work for progressive campaigns and organizations.”

“The Internet has made huge changes in politics…. Now, our [MoveOn’s] former Organizing Director Zack Exley is working on cultivating the next generation of ‘online organizers’ at the New Organizing Institute. The first step: find 50 talented up-and-coming organizers, put them through an all-expenses-paid training week, and place them on 2006 campaigns where they can really make a difference.”

A fellow of the Soros-funded New Organizing Institute, he served as Obama’s ghostwriter for social media applications such as Twitter.

Pariser is a founding board member of AccessNow.org, which also helped launch the New Organizing Institute, “which has trained thousands of organizers to bring people together online.”

AccessNow.org is endorsed and supported by Avaaz, MoveOn.org, Witness.org, Blue State Digital and GetUp!

The AccessNow International Advisory Board includes Andrew MacLaughlin, Vice President of Tumblr, Chris Hughes, Co-founder of Facebook and Director of Online Organizing for Obama’s Presidential Campaign, Joe Rospars, New Media Director for Obama’s 2008 Presidential Campaign and Founding Partner of Blue State Digital, Scott Heiferman, CEO and co-founder of Meetup and many other prominent technologically savvy “leaders” in the world of social marketing.

On the AccessNow Twitter account, one can view an image of the Tehran protest in the background where a Western-backed coup d’état failed in 2009.

Those in the Soros network, with the help of seemingly naïve and bourgeois technological sycophants, are building an army of technological wizards to seize and condition the minds of the global population via internet technology (primarily via cell phones), SMS applications and social media.

In addition to overseeing MoveOn.org, Pariser is the board chairman of Avaaz.org. Pariser also serves on the advisory board of Res Publica and is a board member of the Campaign for America’s Future. In 2008, Pariser transitioned the Executive Director role at MoveOn.org to Justin Ruben and became President of MoveOn’s board.

Pariser, author of the New York Times bestselling book, The Filter Bubble, undoubtedly understands exactly why the corporate world has embraced him and has no qualms about funding his many ventures: Pariser understands the psychology of, and thus the power behind, personalization on the internet. He recognizes that internet via personalization poses a very real danger that people will not get exposed to viewpoints that differ from their own. Rather, they will be fed only what is familiar and, more importantly, what is comfortable, thus closing citizens off to new ideas, subjects and information that could challenge their belief systems. The “filter,” which one assumes gives us a much greater view of the wider world, is in reality, more and more effectively succeeding in screening the wider world from us. It is not difficult to understand how valuable an individual with such knowledge and perception is to the global oligarchy. The Filter Bubble reviews:

“On the Web, we often see what we like, and like what we see. Whether we know it or not, the Internet creates personalized e-comfort zones for each one of us… And what’s wrong with that? Plenty, according to Eli Pariser, the author of ‘The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding From You.’ Personalization on the Web, he says, is becoming so pervasive that we may not even know what we’re missing: the views and voices that challenge our own thinking.” — Natasha Singer, The New York Times

 

“Eli Pariser is no enemy of the Internet. The 30-year-old online organizer is the former executive director and now board president of the online liberal political group MoveOn.org. But while Pariser understands the influence of the Internet, he also knows the power of online search engines and social networks to control exactly how we get information — for good and for ill.” — Bryan Walsh, TIME

Pariser has been granted celebrity status by corporate media such as Good Morning America, World News Tonight and a multitude of major cable news channels. His op-eds have appeared in the Washington Post and other corporate media. Pariser lectures can be found on the C-span library as well as TED. Lavishing celebrity status on progressive voices has been an integral tool for those who wish, and most always succeed, to co-opt those who have a progressive voice or appear to/have the capacity to gain influence.

If you can’t beat’em – buy’em.

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

In essence, Pariser is a key asset of the elites; that of a valuable commodity.

The simple fact that corporate media bends over backwards to promote these individuals and their organizations should alone raise red flags and set off alarm bells.

The chosen ones by Rockefeller, Soros, the Clintons and others perhaps do naïvely believe that they are capable of harnessing the power of the Internet to democratize society, yet in reality, they are harnessing the power of the internet for those who wish to project their own flawed ideologies on global society. The corporate masters are using these minds to manipulate, shape and mould the public’s psyche and perceptions in order to homogenize world views, while crushing those who seek to protect their own autonomy – and resources.

Pariser has recently aligned himself with SumOfUs as a U.S. Advisory Board member and is currently working on Upworthy, a new startup focused on making trending issues go viral online.

Avaaz Co-founder: Jeremy Heimans

 

“From Sachs to Kristof to Invisible Children to TED, the fastest growth industry in the U.S. is the White Savior Industrial Complex.” — Teju Cole

 
Snapshot:

  •  Avaaz International: Co-founder
  • Davos: Award Recipient
  • Ford Foundation: Award Recipient: Ford Foundation Visionary
  • GetUp!: Co-founder
  • McKinsey and Company: Consultant
  • MoveOn.org: Co-founder
  • AllOut.org: Co-founder
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): Consultant
  • Purpose: CEO
  • Purpose: Co-founder
  • SumOfUs: Australian Advisory Board
  • United Nations: Consultant
  • World e-Government Forum: Award Recipient

 

Education:

  • Harvard University
  • University of Sydney

 

Heimans resides in New York

Jeremy Heimans is co-founder of both Avaaz and GetUp! GetUp, founded in 2005, is an internationally recognized social and political online “movement” that purports to have more members than all of Australia’s political parties combined. Heimans is also co-founder and CEO of Purpose: “a profit-with-purpose business that builds movements to help solve major global problems.” On his TEDxTeen talk, Jeremy Heimans tells us to “aim higher than the president.” Well, jesus h. christ, that certainly wouldn’t be too difficult.

Jeremy Heimans has consulted for the United Nations, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the International Labour Organization (ILO), a specialized agency of the United Nations.

 “The white savior supports brutal policies in the morning, founds charities in the afternoon, and receives awards in the evening.” — Teju Cole

In 2011, Heimans received the Ford Foundation’s 75th anniversary Visionaries Award. The award, which came with $100,000, declared Heimans “a next generation leader.” Heimans’s other awards include recognition from the World Economic Forum at Davos who named Heimans a Young Global Leader. Honours also came from the World e-Government Forum who named Heimans and Purpose co-founder David Madden (co-founder of GetUp!, MoveOn.org and Avaaz) among the “Top 10 People Who Are Changing the World of the Internet and Politics.” Heimans’s “contributions” have been given glowing coverage in publications such as The New York Times and The Economist. Heimans has worked for the international strategic consulting firm McKinsey & Company (“trusted advisor and counselor to many of the world’s most influential businesses and institutions”), a research scholar at Oxford University and a consultant for the UN, OECD and ILO (UN).

Heimans is co-founder of AllOut.org, as well as a member of the SumOfUs Australian Advisory Board. The only other member on this Australian advisory board is Heimans’s cohort, Brett Solomon, who is Executive Director of AccessNow.org and former Executive Director of GetUp.org.au.

On June 26, 2011, The Guardian published commentary on the “successful” “Arab Spring”:

“This is what democracy activists in the Middle East have been saying about the Arab spring. The real change for Egyptians was not the technology of Facebook – it was the moment when one by one, people realised they were not alone. As the We Are All Khaled Said Facebook page accumulated thousands and thousands of people, young Egyptians for the first time realised that together, they had the numbers. Collectively, they had power.

 

Many observers have been struck by the absence of visible leaders in the Arab spring uprisings. But this is precisely what online organising makes common: movements based on shared values, not charismatic leadership. The new model for social movements is not leaderless, but it is focused on building individuals’ sense of their own agency – not the leader’s power.

 

New movements also bring together the global and the hyper-local. Avaaz.org is helping to create a sense of global identity for individuals, where their local actions are dots on a larger canvas. Climate change campaigners 350.org have staged simultaneous days of action in local neighbourhoods throughout the world, engaging hundreds of thousands of people.”

Two red flags jump out from this article: 1) The Arab spring was not spontaneous, and 2) the fact that the Guardian promotes Rockefeller’s (and Clinton’s partner) 350.org and Avaaz as prime examples of successful movements. This would be considered an excellent example of an NGO-media partnership as outlined by Harvard. [To be discussed further in this investigative report.]

Above photograph by Dan Calliaster: Ricken Patel: “A recent portrait commission for The Guardian Newspaper. Ricken Patel is co-founder and executive director of Avaaz.org, the largest global political web movement in history with 5.5 million subscribers in all 193 countries.” (Bold emphasis added)

Behavioural Change

Just prior to this article, on June 10, 2011 in a separate Guardian interview, Heimans states:

 “…’the revolution doesn’t happen when people adopt new tools, it happens when they adopt new behaviors’ is a big part of what we do at Purpose. Twenty-first century activism is all about evolving models of social interaction, with the increased ease of peer-to-peer communications, and a many-to-many model that coexists and sometimes challenges a one-to-many broadcast model. Right now we’re only glimpsing the full potential of these new ways to tap the collective power of citizens and consumers.”

Organizations such as Purpose, 350.org/1Sky, Avaaz, in a sense, play both sides of the fence. While the persona, via branding, that they exude is one of youthful grassroots, in reality, they are drinking champagne and jet-setting with the Imperialist dinosaurs keeping us caged within the twentieth-century.

TECH PRESIDENT website, May 24, 2010:

“Two of the minds behind the global advocacy platform Avaaz.org and Australia’s social action network GetUp! are taking what they learned in the non-profit online organizing space and applying it to the world of consumerism.

“[Purpose] creates 21st century movements. We look for ways that movements can help solve major global problems. To do this, we work with some of the most exciting players in the new green and social economy to help them get to scale faster and some of the world’s biggest brands to mobilize their consumers for significant social impact….

Purpose was born out of some of the most successful experiments in mass digital participation. Our principals are co-founders of Avaaz, the world’s largest online political movement with more than nine million members operating in 14 languages, and the creators of Australia’s GetUp!, an internationally recognized social movement phenomenon with more members than all the country’s political parties combined…. Our movements are deploying huge numbers of people, online and on the ground, to influence the political process. At the same time, we are working to create the consumer demand and behavioral shifts required to bring about the kind of change that politics alone cannot.”

Purpose was founded in 2009. Both GetUp and Purpose are the creations, and ultimately the million dollar project, of Avaaz co-founders Heimans and Madden. All three of these organizations work in similar fashion to their sister organizations – MoveOn and Avaaz – by activating their members in what they term “mass digital participation.”

On the “Purpose” website, more irrelevant, brand-bolstering “highlights” along with promotion of a delusional “green” economy can be found on the media page. “Free Livestrong bracelet for your Twitter avatar” and “Avaaz’s Co-Founders Seek a Purpose-Driven Consumer Life” represent just two revealing examples of many.

What one may not notice is that Purpose is not listed as a non-profit – it is privately held.

On June 13, 2011, an interview published by The Design Observer Group, titled “How to Start a Movement in the 21st-Century,” highlighted Heimans’s latest venture, Purpose. Purpose was described as “a (for profit) New York-based consultancy on movement formation and development that has a not-for-profit arm that launches its own campaigns.”

Into the interview, when the journalist stated it actually sounded “a bit like a marketing, PR, or advertising firm,” Heimans was forthright in his answer: “The tools of marketing and design are critical to our work. We have clients who look to us because we’re good at building mass participation.”

After hiring his first employee in June 2009, by June 2011 Heimans’s company had grown to over 40 employees. And make no mistake, Heimans understands exactly what makes an NGO a success. Heimans’s staff are comprised of political organizers, behavioral economists, interaction designers, technologists, and, last but certainly not least, “brand strategists who know how to tell stories, [the] people who understand business.”

The difference between Heimans and the other Avaaz co-founders is the fact that Heimans is upfront in presenting himself, unequivocally, as a businessperson. Unlike his peers, he does not hide behind a false illusion of humanitarianism nor does Heimans pretend he is an environmentalist. Heimans’s company provides services that build “movements” for organizations. When creating his own “movements” under his “Purpose” foundation counterpart, Heimans establishes partnerships. A recent partner is the BBC. Heimans is also working with other NGOs in Rio “to make sure that ordinary Cariocas have a voice in the development that occurs there leading up to the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympics.”

Whereas a real environmental and social justice activist understands that the Olympics are nothing less than a thinking person’s nightmare, Heimans believes the capitalist illusion that this corporate atrocity can co-exist with social justice. Rather, the Olympics is an ongoing perpetual chain of never-ending resource depletion and exploitation belonging to 20th century (non)thinking, which serves to further corporate profit and dominance, an abomination that must end. Yet, blinded by indoctrination, bright-green “progressives” continue to reject reality and perpetuate the falsehoods: that the Olympics can be made to be “green” and “ethical.”

 “Even as tech changes, the need for real human connections and storytelling will be key.” — Jeremy Heimans as featured in the Guardian Activate Summit, June 10, 2011

May 2010: Avaaz’s Co-Founders Seek a Purpose-Driven Consumer Life | Behavioral Economics

Vision: “Purpose is a global initiative that draws on leading technologies, political organizing and behavioral economics to build powerful, tech-savvy movements that can transform culture and influence policy.”

What is behavioural economics? Behavioral economics is the fusion offspring of economics and psychology. In 1979, two psychologists of Princeton and Stanford Universities published “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk.” This was considered a “breakthrough” paper on how people deal with uncertain rewards and risks. It has become one of the most widely cited papers in economics. The authors argued that the ways in which alternatives are framed – not simply their relative value – heavily influence the decisions people make. This influential paper in behavioral economics, with its meticulous equations, suggested that the core assumption of the standard model was in fact backwards: It was found that it is only the mode of presentation (framing) that matters and not the actual value of alternatives, as previously believed. As an example, one may observe this very ideology held by a professor of business administration Nava Ashraf, who has worked extensively with NGOs in Africa and the Philippines. In 2006 she noticed that “farmers and small-business owners were often not doing the things that a development policymaker or economist thinks they should do” and considered this very problematic. While working in Zambia for Population Services International, a nonprofit that seeks to focus private-sector resources on the health problems of developing nations, Ashraf stated “There are ways of manipulating people’s psychological frameworks to get them to buy things. How do you use this knowledge to get them to adopt socially useful products or services? It’s so practical, and very important in development, for anybody who wants to help people reach their goals.”

The Behavioral Economics of Hatred

The Avaaz “Good Versus Evil” campaign for the Rio Summit. Above: A downloadable poster as found on the Avaaz Press Centre published in the Financial Times. Vilification: Note the dark cast/ugly sky behind the leaders Avaaz would wish you to believe are “evil”, versus the light and sun shining through over the Imperialist obstructionist “leaders” that Avaaz is attempting to convince you are “good”. Keith Harman Snow (war correspondent, photographer and independent investigator, and a four time Project Censored award winner) discusses the art of so called “humanitarianism” via the industrial non-profit complex with precision and candor in his many lectures.

Keith Harmon Snow Discussing Western NGOs and Africa: (running time: 2:54)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6l0zsdf2Zc

Within George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, the purpose of the Two Minutes Hate is to “satisfy the citizens’ subdued feelings of angst and hatred from leading such a wretched, controlled existence. By re-directing these subconscious feelings away from the Oceanian government and toward external enemies (which likely do not even exist), the Party minimizes subversive thought and behavior.” [Source: Wikipedia] Orwell did not invent the term “two minutes hate” however; it was already in use/utilized in the First World War by British writers to satirize German propaganda.

In a somewhat similar fashion, an economist’s definition of hatred is the willingness to pay a price to inflict harm on others, according to Edward Glaeser, Princeton-educated economist and professor at Harvard.

In an article published in Harvard Magazine titled “The Marketplace of Perceptions,” author Craig Lambert writes:

“The psychological literature, [Edward Glaeser] found, defines hatred as an emotional response we have to threats to our survival or reproduction. ‘It’s related to the belief that the object of hatred has been guilty of atrocities in the past and will be guilty of them in the future,’ he says. ‘Economists have nothing to tell psychologists about why individuals hate. But group-level hatred has its own logic that always involves stories about atrocities. These stories are frequently false. As [Nazi propagandist Joseph] Goebbels said, hatred requires repetition, not truth, to be effective.’

 

‘You have to investigate the supply of hatred,’ Glaeser continues. ‘Who has the incentive and the ability to induce group hatred? This pushes us toward the crux of the model: politicians or anyone else will supply hatred when hatred is a complement to their policies.'”

One can safely state that the behaviour of economics of hatred has been a key component in the psychology behind the recent Avaaz campaigns attacking the sovereign states of Libya, Bolivia and Syria.

The two minutes hate has risen again.

“When we have reached the point of utilizing placards with childlike fantasies to convey a message between purported forces of ‘good and evil,’ then we will turn to those same fantasies, such as ending fuel subsidies, as being the solutions to the much deeper problems of environmental and ecological collapse from capitalism.”— Forrest Palmer

 Purpose

Purpose has built global movements to fight cancer (with LIVESTRONG) and eliminate nuclear weapons in 20 years (with Global Zero, a new initiative led by more than 200 world leaders and endorsed by President Obama). Purpose also works with some of the world’s biggest companies to mobilize their consumers for social impact, and is currently incubating new consumer movements to help the green economy achieve scale, including a platform to accelerate the transition to electric vehicles.”

The fact is, “free Livestrong bracelets for your twitter avatar” are never going to solve cancer. Further, there are already cures for cancer that are being suppressed in order to protect corporate interests and unfathomable corporate profits, which are only protected if people continue to be sick. Of course there is no information regarding the atrocious harassment by the FDA of Dr. Burzynski nor is there any campaign to focus attention on his plight – and cure. And the fact that President Barack Obama, President Dmitry Medvedev, Prime Minister David Cameron, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon have endorsed Global Zero (a stated campaign to eliminate nuclear weapons in 20 years) guarantees that GlobalZero is nothing more than an effort to pacify the public today by pretending to do something in the far away future that no one has any intention of doing.

The Purpose of Purpose

The fact that Purpose works with the world’s biggest corporations “to mobilize their consumers for social impact, and is currently incubating new consumer movements to help the green economy achieve scale” is more than just a little revealing and more than just a little terrifying.

When Heimans was asked how he was going to use the $100,000 he received from the Ford Foundation, he stated:

 “I’d like to use the funds to promote the idea of movement entrepreneurship and to incubate a couple more movements. We’ve been talking in a broader way about the future of consumer activism, of organizing people not as citizens but as consumers.

 

“We think there’s a massive untapped opportunity to organize consumers for social change.”

There you have it, as honest and blunt as it comes: “….organizing people not as citizens but as consumers.”

And if you’re not angry that citizens are considered first and foremost as consumers, to be herded like a flock of sheep in order to serve corporate interests, maybe you don’t deserve any better.

The Managing Director of Partnerships for “Purpose” is Marilia Bezerra. From 2006 to 2011 Bezerra held an integral position within the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) executive leadership. As Clinton Global Initiative director of commitments, Bezerra led the redesign of member engagement and commitments services into a year-round operation. From 2007 to 2008, Bazerra held the position of sponsorship manager of the Clinton Global Initiative where she directly managed five major sponsorship accounts, including Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Procter & Gamble, valued at over $2 million dollars. From 2006 to 2008, Bazerra held the position of Commitment Development Senior Manager for the Clinton Global Initiative. In 2009, Bezerra was Deputy Director of Commitments for the Clinton Global Initiative.

Bezerra took a central role in building the Clinton Global Initiative from its start-up. The Clinton Global Initiative was integral to the creation and funding of the Rockefellers’ incubator project 1Sky, now merged with 350.org (which was also integral to the creation of 1Sky). The CGI is a partner to 350.org/1Sky. Bill Clinton is recognized as a notable ally.

In November 2011, VoltaireNet.org reported in the article “Hillary Clinton aide at the helm of Amnesty International USA”: “Suzanne Nossel, former assistant to Richard Holbrooke in his capacity as UN Ambassador and currently Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Assistant for International Organization Affairs, has been selected as the new Executive Director of Amnesty International USA. In the discharge of her duties at the State Department, she diligently exploited human rights to benefit imperial ambitions. Ms. Nossel had previously worked for Human Rights Watch, as well as for Bertelsmann Media Worldwide and the Wall Street Journal as Vice President of Strategy and Operations.”

 

Next: Part VI

 

[Cory Morningstar is an independent investigative journalist, writer and environmental activist, focusing on global ecological collapse and political analysis of the non-profit industrial complex. She resides in Canada. Her recent writings can be found on Wrong Kind of Green, The Art of Annihilation, Counterpunch, Political Context, Canadians for Action on Climate Change and Countercurrents. Her writing has also been published by Bolivia Rising and Cambio, the official newspaper of the Plurinational State of Bolivia. You can follow her on Twitter @elleprovocateur]

How to Start a (Wall Street-backed) Revolution

Documentary Whitewashes Wall Street’s Global Blitzkrieg

by Tony Cartalucci

November 26, 2011 – Gene Sharp of the Albert Einstein Institution penned the book “From Dictatorship to Democracy,” originally designated for the destabilization and recolonization of Myanmar, still called “Burma” throughout much of the West. Sharp’s book would then be utilized by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) throughout Eastern Europe, throughout Asia, and eventually, in 2011, for the US-engineered “Arab Spring.”

According to Sharp’s own Albert Einstein Institution (AEI) 2000-2004 annual report, AEI had been sponsored by the US government’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and its funded subsidiary International Republican Institute (IRI) to train activists in Serbia (page 18) Zimbabwe (page 23) and Myanmar (page 26) to help overthrow their respective sovereign governments.

Australia’s Southern Cross University’s “Activating Human Rights & Peace (AHRP)” conference had put out a revealing account of their 2008 proceedings illustrating that all of Gene Sharp’s work, beyond what was even mentioned in his own institution’s annual report, had been fully funded and in support of the US government and its global domineering agenda. Beginning on page 26, Sharp’s affiliations, in particular with the National Endowment for Democracy, which is described as carrying out “a lot of work that was formerly undertaken by the CIA,” as well as the Ford Foundation, and billionaire Wall Street patriarch George Soros’ Open Society Institute are fleshed out in immense detail.

%d bloggers like this: