- This topic has 18 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
This isn’t just related to Blair. So I have started its own thread. Post here if you find diabolical examples of the State , EEC, USA, or media and public figures putting forward examples of social engineering.
That is , producing model citizens…either by laws, or by <br>suggestions for doing so by media figures, politicians etc.
This first post is about weight. I did try to warn you.
So the government start to unveil their plans to put the fatties up against the wall. No, they won’t shoot them…just yet. They will first attempt to frisk them for all their money, knowing that if they are that fat they must have money. They can tax them out of obesity!
Oh my cry the media ….that is a bit transparent. Pretending to be interested in public health….but you aren’t doing amything about anorexia.
Don’t worry. the Euro fascists are already seeing to that.
Whetehr for tax or for producing "correct" behaviour in citizens, it is easy to campare this to Nazi Germany once again.
"Strength through joy" the posters proclaimed, and showed us smiling happy families doing exercise together. Yep, I think of that every time I see the crap POSTER AND LEAFLET stuff in GP surgeries, schools, and even Hotel health spars. HEALTH FASCISM.<br>Now it is going to be the fault of the SICK that they can’t work…when really it is the fault of the uselesss health service. But they get their inspectors to get their treadmill tests rolling agion; all yo save money for public service industry workers which the state cannot really afford.
The Nazis did the same…banned smoking in public and bullied the fat and infirm. Blamed the sick for their own disease. The medical profession rushed to support them, saying "yes…we must breed the weak, jew, black, fat, crippled, mongoloid,  out of existence. If only the strong breed we will have perfection"
<br>MEANWHILE, the likes of Goebbels and Himmler continued their debauched lifestyle unbothered. I am not having a Labour Government full of fat pigs telling people they need to stop being obese.
But back to the Euro fascists.
Oh yes, they have turned on the thin. If you are slim and beautiful, you are not normal. If you work in an industry which PROMOTES women to be slim, you will be eradicated.
Waht am I talking about now, you cry?
Ask Esther Canadas. Spain’s top model.
She has a perfect figure. She smokes. She sets a bad example. She is not the CORRECT body mass:o SO they have BANNED her from modelling at the top fashion show in Spain. Banned anybody who doesn’t fulfil this formula. What the F*** is that? Formula? Measuring skulls again next…I am telling you.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/arti … article.do
This is esther by the way:
http://www.famousbabes.com/pics118/esther/esther103.jpg
http://www.famousbabes.com/pics118/esther/esther093.jpg
http://www.famousbabes.com/pics118/esther/esther095.jpg
Yeak like she looks really unhealthy. :o
But she presents an image that the functionaire society doesn’t want people to aspire to. She smokes  lots. She is too thin, she is glamorous and she models fur.
SO THEY BAN HER FROM WORKING<br>  Oh dear Esther you are in trouble. Watch out Kate Moss…you are next.
(Edited by GreenGreenDesert at 3:54 pm on Sep. 14, 2006)<br>
(Edited by GreenGreenDesert at 4:01 pm on Sep. 14, 2006)
Jeremy Kyle. God I would love to whack his narrow monded morality down, and stop him bullying the down on their luck.
Jeremy Kyle is without doubt one of the most narrow minded, judgemental, condescending idiots I have ever known of.
Admittedly some of the people on his show bring their own bad luck upon themselves, and some are unbelievable, but at the end of the day that whole programme revolves around a basic plan of rounding up people who have unfortunate histories or lifestyles, putting the most sensationalist spin on the situation as possible, and then having some smug, self-satisfied git in an expensive suit have a go at them for the viewing pleasure of an audience who doesn’t really give a toss what happens to them either way once they leave the studio.
Which is a bit sad, is it not?
(Edited by Zoz at 5:05 pm on Sep. 14, 2006)
I’ve never watched Jeremy Kyle but perhaps people who do (and similar programmes, Trisha, Oprah Winfrey, Springer Kilroy-Silk, Ricky Lake et al) should be forced to attend some sort of training (or at least denied the vote,) until they change their ways. <br>
Did you just click your heels?
<br>It isn’t the people that watch it. It is the people who put it out , and the homogenised morality that goes with it, that is the problem. It is lowest common denominator TV to keep the masses thick. Social engineering again.<br>
I am pleased to say that I have never heard of Jeremy Kyle so maybe I live a more interesting life than I realised :)  ÂÂÂ
Would like to stress that I am not a regular viewer of the man or any similar self important prat, I saw it when it first came out (stuck in bed with flu – I must have been deranged with medicine :laugh:) and thought he was a complete idiot.
okay then he is first up against the wall. After all the Labour Party except for Kate Hooey that is.<br>Hmmm. I don’t know though. Jeremy Kyle may not be quite as bad as Anne Widdecombe.
Jeremy Kyle is bad. Having watched it oncev I will never repeat the experience. At least politicians know their shortcomings!:biggrin:
I’ve seen the JK show twice and similar in the US.
Last night I watched the X-Factor for the first time. There was a woman on there who was not selected for whatever happens next. It was obvious to me that she was suffering some form of mental illness. I cringed for her. She doesn’t need this public humiliation. She needs the consistent intervention of a top quality psychotherapist.
Worse, I felt ashamed of myself for not having turned over.
It is the audience that creates the demand for this prurient nonsense. Both shows are little different in substance from turn of the century carnivals where you could pay a farthing to laugh at a pair of Siamese twins or a woman with weight problems.
In many ways, society has moved on. In others? Plus ca change, huh!
The aidience does not create the demand for it; the supply of it creates the audience in my opinion.
The idea is one of social engineering.
If we have a "meritocracy" , then unlike the old days when people could blame the fact that they didn’t have a decent education, those people now at the bottom are in theory ther because they deserve to be.
This could lead to widespread dissenchantment.
So the idea had been talked about for some 30 years how society copes with that. We need to "entertain" them and allow access to fame and fortune by other means or society breaks down.
Hence competitions, quiz shows etc for example are not based on merit but luck, the national lottery is a social institution and entertainment becomes watered down for mass consumption so everyone understands it. Access is all important…so trailer park trash can achieve their 15 minutes of fame.
So the Jade Goodies of this world demonstrate that everyone has a chance…when in reality nothing is further from the truth…..this diet is designed to keep the masses subdued .
This is how programme makers were thinking years ago.<br>It was conscoius social policy in the media and with governments and global corporation backing. When I did my degree at Bristol Uni this was openly talked about and planned at all levels by a variety of social institutions, government, businesses etc.
Quote: from GreenGreenDesert on 2:16 am on Sep. 15, 2006[br]Hmmm. I don’t know though. Jeremy Kyle may not be quite as bad as Anne Widdecombe.<br>
<br>Little on Earth is.<br>
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
Quote: from GreenGreenDesert on 8:20 pm on Sep. 17, 2006[br]<br>If we have a "meritocracy" , then unlike the old days when people could blame the fact that they didn’t have a decent education, those people now at the bottom are in theory ther because they deserve to be.
This could lead to widespread dissenchantment.
So the idea had been talked about for some 30 years how society copes with that. We need to "entertain" them and allow access to fame and fortune by other means or society breaks down.
Hence competitions, quiz shows etc for example are not based on merit but luck, the national lottery is a social institution and entertainment becomes watered down for mass consumption so everyone understands it.  Access is all important…so trailer park trash can achieve their 15 minutes of fame.
So the Jade Goodies of this world demonstrate that everyone has a chance…when in reality nothing is further from the truth…..this diet is designed to keep the masses subdued .
This is how programme makers were thinking years ago.<br>It was conscoius social policy in the media and with governments and global corporation  backing. When I did my degree at Bristol Uni this was openly talked about and planned at all levels by a variety of social institutions, government, businesses etc. <br>
<br>I had always presumed the kind of programs mentioned had been created merely as a vehicle to rip the sh*t out of the needy and greedy, rather than being imbued with the social policy overtones you have listed. However, they would certainly go some way towards explaining the emergence in the last ten years of one of my absolute pet hates – phone-in mutliple choice quizzes with deliberately, inanely easy questions.
gc<br>
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
Me too … opium of the masses and all that.
It seems to me, now that no-one believes in God anymore, that this is only going to get worse. People need some sort of escape from day to day reality and to look beyond what they can realistically achieve. I think it’s called an aspiration.
The next time Ginger Spice stands in for Kofi Anan, don’t vilify Ginger Spice try and think what Kofi Anan does, that Ginger Spice can do equally well?<br>
The whole issue of audience demand/programme supply is too close to chicken and the egg to clearly unravel, GGD.
But in a free market – and with the BBC largely ditching socially worthy Reithian directives, it IS a competitive market – the ratings are king.
If the ratings are low in the first series of anything, it’s canned. End of story.
Since time immemorial, the lumpen proletariat have an appetite for public humiliation, sensationalism and prurience.
From public hangings, freakshows, through scandalising celebrities, (remember Frank Bough?), all the way toward the shameless revelators on Jeremy Kyle and the shattered dreams of the self-deluding incompetents on X-Factor.
Its an infinite continuum based on the dark side of the human psyche, GGD. Commercial programme makers – to their eternal shame – are not slow to recognise this.
Yes it would…reality tv is chapere to produce.
But good programmes still are loved.
if you ask most people their favourites shows…they will say Fools and Horses, Fawlty Towers, Band of brothers, Star trek, Doctor Who etc.
The prgramme makers do NOT WANT us to be watching that all the time because they are all expensive. Its a short term view for them to get quick profits to make the annual books look good. But you can’t sell most of these shows and usually have to but the formats.
ook how Star Trek has sold? Look at the worldwide success of "Rome".
But the TV Barons BELIEVE that they have an obligation to male most tc accessible. Mass consumption for mass entrtainment that fits with the view of their "duty".
All thse crap programmes are the result of a conscious move…not just for ratings. Half of these reality TC shows get less ratings than national Geographic or Discovery channels.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.