Obama to Attend Copenhagen Climate Talks
By Staff News & Analysis - November 26, 2009

U.S. President Barack Obama will travel to Copenhagen, Denmark next month to attend a worldwide climate change summit. The president plans to lay out U.S. goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The announcement ends months of speculation about whether President Obama would take part in the Copenhagen summit. White House officials say the president will go to the Danish capital on December 9th, then to Oslo, Norway to accept the Nobel Peace Prize. While in Copenhagen, Mr. Obama will make a provisional pledge to cut pollution-causing carbon dioxide emissions by about 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. The president has said in the past that a final package cannot be completed in Copenhagen because the U.S. Congress is still debating legislation to implement the emissions cuts. Mr. Obama later said the United States might go further in negotiations than had been expected. – Voice of America

Dominant Social Theme: Steps necessary to address global concerns.

Free-Market Analysis: Around the world there are convulsions having to do with global warming. It is as if a snoozing animal is suddenly waking up, its fur rippling with a chilly, but steady wind blowing in from the North – where truth lies.

But as we have pointed out, one of the signifiers of an elite dominant social theme is its imperviousness to reality. Climategate – the falsification of data over numerous years to "prove" global warming – has definitively arrived and the damage to the global warming meme is immense. But don't expect the banking and political class to acknowledge that.

It is not that there is just too much money at stake. Or that those involved are committed leftists. These are convenient reasons tossed up to justify the continuation of the promotion that is climate change. But the reality – as the Bell attempts to show regularly – is that climate change is one of a number of memes sponsored by the monetary elite and these are notoriously difficult to dislodge. There is so much money poured into them – and so many people are enlisted to help with them – that it becomes very difficult to fully remove them.

But they can certainly be eroded and even rendered ineffective. This happens quite simply when the larger population begins to doubt them. It is fairly easy for the monetary elite itself (a few thousand individuals) to enlist hundreds of thousands and even millions of functionaries to promote these dominant social themes through a variety of governmental and private organizations (and public schooling as well). But ultimately, in order for these themes to gain traction, the promotions themselves (for that is what they are) must reach a receptive public.

These days, the Internet is exposing each of these promotions. When the credibility of these promotions is eroded, then they cease to work as planned. The mechanism remains, of course. Obama, who works the will of the elite in so many ways in our opinion, will likely redouble his efforts – as will many others. This is the only possible response. However, short of shutting down the Internet, there is nothing to do to fix the underlying problem which is that the target population (which numbers in the billions) is becoming far less receptive.

Another tactic the monetary elite can try – and we have anticipated in numerous articles – is to move the conversation AWAY from the realization of the dominant social theme in question. This is a critical element of what is occurring now in this very large, important and subterranean conversation. The monetary elite manipulates social behaviors in part through the Hegelian dialectic – thesis and antithesis. In order for the conversation to remain viable – and the media it controls credible – the monetary elite has to move part of the conversation AWAY from the direction in which it hopes to head. It has to move one set of goal posts, at least, in the OTHER direction.

This may sound counterintuitive but it is not. Throughout the 20th century, the monetary elite pretty had much was able to push the conversation (and thus regulation) in the direction it chose. But in the 21st century, thanks largely to the Internet, those who manipulate these dominant social themes for a living have had to scramble. In order to maintain the credibility of their allied media, they have had to allow the media to take far more radically libertarian views than they might have tolerated previously. The most obvious example of this is Rupert Murdoch. In America, especially, his media properties have become, in places, far more libertarian. Some Fox broadcasters, for instance, have even begun to sound a good deal like American classical liberals – so-called constitutional conservatives. But if you listen carefully to the rhetoric there are some lines that will not usually be crossed, some arguments that may not be made.

These are mostly focused around the military industrial complex and, perhaps, central banking. You will rarely hear – we think – certain of these broadcasters call for a further investigation into what really happened regarding 9/11. And generally those who are involved in this dialectic will not attack the Western military and its wars (or even central banking itself) nearly as vociferously as they will attack "leftist" elements that want to damage the "free market" model. The point is to continue to keep in control of the conversation as much as possible, while ceding as little ground as possible. This mechanism is not media specific. One of the reasons we have continued to track Sarah Palin is because Palin is to politics what these broadcasters and opinion-makers are to the media – a way of capturing the free-market argument as much as possible while preserving the parts of the dialogue most important to the monetary elite.

The idea, in this case, is to co-opt free-market rhetoric as much as possible, while discarding the portions of the argument that are unacceptable to the Western power structure. Sarah Palin, for instance, is for common-sense free-market principals, but you likely will not hear her call for a radical reduction in the size of the Pentagon's international operations. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to have a true free-market system, even in countries like the US and Britain, when the military and civilian-military forces are so big and demand so much revenue. The private sector is inevitably crowded out. Not to mention that the authoritarianism engendered by such large standing forces inevitably has a chilling effect on every facet of the free-market that remains.

After Thoughts

The power elite will combat the erosion of its dominant social themes in several ways. First, through proxies (like Obama, in our opinion), it will ignore the problems caused by the erosion of support for their various promotions. The second way the monetary elite will attempt to control the damage done by the Internet is to reposition the Hegelian dialectic in such a way as to encompass many of the arguments being made against dominant social themes. Once the monetary elite has positioned media and political allies in such a way as they are perceived to be representing the OTHER side, then the conversation may be once again controlled and gradually shifted back in the appropriate direction. The third way the elite will attempt to regain control of its promotions is by attacking the Internet directly. We will continue to follow these efforts – and others – as they unfold. It will give you, dear reader, a reason to return every day! Unless of course you disagree entirely. But then why are you reading this?

Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap