Check out this higherside chats podcast with Allison Mcdowell:

https://www.thehighersidechats.com/alison-mcdowell-human-capital-markets-predatory-philanthropy-the-gamified-world/

talks about 'human capital markets'....relevant relating to last point of how they plan to 'fix' inequality...basically tie people to social credit systems and 'invest' in their development, then amortize that 'debt' by trading humans as a commodity in the market. Pretty sure this woman figured out the gameplan.

(ps. THC has a promotion if you use the codeword CURRY you can can a week of the plus for free...highly recommend using just to listen to the full two-hour of the above podcast)

1. The word 'experimental'.

I think we'll probably only ever have presidents that represent America in the worst ways from here on out (for the record I think Trump was a pretty good representative of America...narcissistic, corrupt, pugnacious, etc.)

testing, testing, faggot, syphillis 1-2

Check out her activities in haiti:

https://www.coreysdigs.com/haiti/clintons-haitian-black-magic-secret/

building a business and getting rich isn't exactly the type of 'novel experience' I'm talking about..but that's another law: 'energy flows where attention goes' or 'whereever you focus your intention will eventually bear fruit'

"All the world's a stage, and all the men merely players"

The aboriginals believe we're in 'the dream of a dreamer'. I do feel like the universe rewards you or supports you in pursuing novel experiences....the more novel the experience, the more the assumed barriers standing in the way of doing it seem to melt away.

Passio is awesome. Natural Law lectures a must.

His most recent vid is pretty poignant:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-4avI64rxU

What are you guys gonna do/think if nothing happens and Trump just dips and Biden gets inaugerated and that's that? Not trying to be snarky, legit curious....I've watched people fall for fugazi political movements so many times in my life at this point I'm permanently cynical and don't believe anyone in power has the people's best interests in mind.

I know most ppl on this thread are on the 'trust the plan' tip, but just curious if any of y'all had maybe considered the possibility it was all a con, and then thought about what you guys would feel/think/do if that turned out to be true?

yeah, the official story is that he scraped MIT's JSTORE library and because he was so involved in activism against SOPA they hit him with that ridiculous lawsuit that would destroy his (financial) life. The pressure made him hero...but with the more recent revelations about MIT cats being associated with Epstein, and one of their professors publicly defending pedophilia, maybe there was something else there. I didn't know about the hanging thing...can't find how exactly he did it.

Hanging yourself on a doorknob is literally prison shit. If you could afford a gun, why the fuck wouldn't you do that instead? More painless, more immediate, way more effective. When Carradine went to thailand 'seeking out information on secret societies' and died that way, I heard a lot of people say this was an erotic autoasphyxiation thing gone bad. Doesn't seem so possible now with this trend.

Here's a scene from Michael Clayton: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3Fva8HFRDg&list=PL27WbeSAsYarcEqsQFW51w2G-UJURPm-w&index=15&t=0s

Co-sign. Very fun show.

Yeah man, but again, all power is given to these people by us. I don't recognize their authority, no one else has to either.

Well...there's the idea that language itself is an infection. We think in language, and it's fundamentally structurally flawed in regards to it's efficacy in accurately communicating an experience to someone else (Semiotics explores this extensively)....it would be much easier if I could somehow telepathically beam an experience I had into someone else's head instead of trying to find the right words to describe it (and maybe we can do that, but just don't know how)

It limits us in our ability to connect universally (because what if two people don't speak the same language?) It effects how we perceive things...there have been studies done that find the linguistic tradition someone comes from actually changes how they see the world...there are cultures that have words for concepts other cultures have no concept of. I believe there was a study that found some African tribes literally couldn't distinguish between different shades of blue because they didn't have a linguist concept for them outside of the shades being 'blue'.

We think language allows us to communicate and thus get shit done, but it does have a lot of fundamental problems...consider someone who isn't as linguistically inclined struggling to put their feelings/emotions into words, and thus being unable to pinpoint or make sense of their own feelings. If we all exist in a speaking world and relate to one another through speaking, someone who isn't as proficient at using language (and all our brains process/work differently) is at a distinct disadvantage in navigating life....even at a basic level of understanding themselves.

Perhaps we don't ever seriously consider these limitations because we don't think there's any other options available as far as ways to interact/communicate with one another. There's ample evidence that telepathy is possible. We could theoretically be communicating exclusively in images and symbols...after all, that's all language really is with the added step of a 'sign' (word) that's representative of a symbol. But the meaning of the symbols associated with words isn't universal (if I say 'cat' we all know what a cat is but that word also recalls the mental image a different specific cat for all of us based on our life experiences with cats). If we could somehow communicate in symbols that had universally agreed upon meanings/associations, maybe that would be better.

The power of language isn't debatable. Air that comes from my lungs vibrating in a certain way has the power to make someone feel like shit or make their heart soar. The more interesting idea is that 'what are our thoughts, and where do they come from?'. Can we be sure all of our thoughts originate 'from us'? If those thoughts are in words, maybe that could hide where they're actually coming from, if not from us.

I think it's good to ask these questions. Here are some things that came to my mind as I was reading.

1. this information was already out there. I knew about all of the stuff they talked about in that doc, but I'm glad that it exists because it's a digestible way to communicate this info to normies.

2. In regards to Netflix having an agenda....Netflix buys whatever it can get it's hand on in regards to films, which is why a lot of their content is dogshit. They pick up indies that studios passed on, little quirky projects, random stuff. Their own production arm isn't as robust as studios yet, so they still rely on a lot of other people's content to fill out their library....so I'd be curious to know if this was a netflix-produced film or something they bought.

3. you're 100% on the money about the emotion-inducing little b-story and the personification of ads guys. I chucked it up to there not being enough 'oomph' behind the premise, or maybe it was too dry with just the interviews...but that also means they had a big budget...again, I think knowing who made this/who financed will be elucidating as to if there's an ulterior agenda.

4. I'm not seeing how this film makes social media or the tech companies look good in any way. If there were to be an ulterior agenda, how about this: James Corbett has done some reporting about how twitter/FB would love to become considered public utilities, as it would cement their position in society forever. Even though they're ubiquitous, they're still always at risk of being usurped by some new tech...if the government decided to get involved, ostensibly to regulate them, that's good for business. So maybe they're highlighting these issues in an attempt to get gov to merge with them? (I'll try to find Corbett's article on it coz I prolly fucked that explanation up)

5. However, this is exactly what 'data is the new oil' is about. People are making money hand over first over all this, so I don't think they'd want to drop something that might fuck up the bag. Social Dilemma only focused on the advertising side of it, though....no mention of Palantir or NSA data centers or the more nefarious sides of all this data collection.

I think if we found out who produced this and their associations we could draw better conclusions