Soros, #OWS, and Reuters

[reggie]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters

"... the co-called Macy Conferences mark perhaps the most important event in the history of science after WW II. "

Between 1946 and 1953 ten conferences under the heading Cybernetics-Circular Casual, and Feedback Mechanisms in Biological and Social Systems were held. Sponsored by Josiah Macy Jr., the co-called Macy Conferences mark perhaps the most important event in the history of science after WW II.

Using new terms such as »information«, »feedback«, and »analogical/digital« as starting point, the participants tried to develop a universal theory of regulation and control, that would be applicable to living beings as well as to machines, to economic as well as to mental processes, and to sociological as well as to aesthetical phenomena. These concepts permeate thinking in such diverse fields as biology, neurology, sociology, language studies, computer science, and even psychoanalysis, ecology, politics, and economy. They marked the epoch-making changes from thermodynamics to cybernetics (Wiener), from the disciplinary to control society (Deleuze), and from the industrial to information society (Lyotard).

The Macy Conferences are of special historical/scientific value since they do not deal with completed texts yet, but rather with interdisciplinary negotiations, which are continually being edited, varied and expounded upon. This edition collects all known transcripts from the Macy Conferences, including many up to now unpublished documents concerning their organization, historical essays, and a plethora of introductory essays.


Volume II offers introductory essays and commentaries, as well as the letter-exchange and the documentation of the Macy Conferences preparation. It also includes a commentary on the history of cybernetics by Heinz von Foerster and texts by i.e. Norbert Wiener, Warren Mc Culloch and Stewart Brand.


Claus Pias is professor for Communication Theory and Electronic Media at the Universität Essen. His publications include Kursbuch Medienkultur (Co-editor, Stuttgart 1999); Hermann Bahr, Zur Kritik der Moderne (Weimar 2004)


http://www.diaphanes.de/scripts/fore...isch.php?ID=46

How can one understand the events that are unfolding today without understanding the science behind the system that serves these events? Discussing "system outputs" will never result in wisdom.

[*T*]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters

If you would like links to John Boyd, or info on the Macy Conferences then let me know and I'll dig into my notes and post some relevant material

I'd like some info on what Boyd has to say. Don't expect a detailed response in a hurry.

[c1ue]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters

How can one understand the events that are unfolding today without understanding the science behind the system that serves these events? Discussing "system outputs" will never result in wisdom.

It is science only in your own mind.

[*T*]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters

It is science only in your own mind.

To be fair to Reggie, the ideas at the Macy conferences certainly influenced all activities in science. The ideas have had an abiding positive impact in the hard sciences and engineering and have influenced psychology and biology. Applying these ideas at societal level has been attempted and is documented. Where I differ with him is the idea that, with regard to economics and society, whether these ideas proved remotely successful. Even by his own examples, I would contend that they have not. The problem there is that the modelling is difficult and that by and large, economists are an insular discipline and not very good at maths.

[c1ue]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters

To be fair to Reggie, the ideas at the Macy conferences certainly influenced all activities in science. The ideas have had an abiding positive impact in the hard sciences and engineering and have influenced psychology and biology. Applying these ideas at societal level has been attempted and is documented. Where I differ with him is the idea that, with regard to economics and society, whether these ideas proved remotely successful. Even by his own examples, I would contend that they have not. The problem there is that the modelling is difficult and that by and large, economists are an insular discipline and not very good at maths.

Indeed, and that is the point.

A concept which has relevance in certain fields does not hold relevance in all fields.

The pseudo-science aspect I refer to is the belief reggie has that these principles are either being deployed or being deployed successfully.

Certainly it may be that these principles do apply, but frankly I have yet to see any actual evidence.

In the meantime such pseudo-scientific ridiculousness manifests itself just as often at the 'high' levels of society as elsewhere; witness the abject and utter failure of the 'Club of Rome' pronouncements along with their prophet, Paul Ehrlich.

[Hypatia]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters - Dress rehearsal for OWS was in 2009 - Michael Moore

...progressives in the Obama Administration?

There are progressives in the Obama Administration? I wonder where he's hiding them.

Here are some groups that in my opinion hurt the progressive cause and dilute the message of the OWS protests and the Obama Administration:

1-11) Anyone who disagrees with Steve and is therefore worthy of childish name calling.

Finally, the focus of the OWS and the Obama Administration should be very clear; it should be:

a-j) Steve's personalized shopping list.

[Starving Steve]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters - Dress rehearsal for OWS was in 2009 - Michael Moore

There are progressives in the Obama Administration? I wonder where he's hiding them.



1-11) Anyone who disagrees with Steve and is therefore worthy of childish name calling.



a-j) Steve's personalized shopping list.

Dear Hypotia:

Would you like to join the starving masses? A little starvation helps to put "your personalized shopping list of what needs to be done" into better focus....... It is rather clear to me (and to most others in the progressive movement) what has to be done in America, in Canada, Mexico, the UK, and worldwide. I am sure it will be to you, too.

The agenda of progressive politics has NOTHING to do with the prejudices and constant wars in the Middle-East. It has NOTHING to do with "saving the San Francisco County rare and endangered field-mouse". It has NOTHING to do with Al Gore's theories about so-called "global warming caused by CO2". It has NOTHING to do with down-sizing, solar panels, windmills, feminism, nation-building adventures, pot-smoking, border walls, English-only, nor abortion, nationalism, wages, nor preventing urban sprawl, nor preserving bio-diversity, nor cleaning the refuse floating in the North Pacific Ocean..... NOTHING!

Progressive politics is about how do we survive from to-day until to-night until, to-morrow, to next month and to next year. How do we survive unemployment, cancer, old age, crime, pay the bills, put food onto the table, and keep a roof over our heads? It's about raising our kids, giving them direction, and giving them half-a-chance. It's about staying married and trying to stay somewhat sane and somewhat happy.

If you have another agenda, go join some other movement. Join the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, the Republican Party in America, the Tories in the UK, the California Coastal Commission, join the PLO in Gaza or the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt; join the Zionists in Israel or whatever..... They'd love to have you.

[astonas]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters - Dress rehearsal for OWS was in 2009 - Michael Moore

Dear Hypotia: The agenda of progressive politics has NOTHING to do with ... [snip] feminism [snip] ... border walls [snip] ... abortion [snip]..... NOTHING!

This is factually incorrect, just as your broader point is thematically incorrect. The history of the Progressive movement (which began in the 1890's, and flourished especially through the 1920's) in America was in fact centrally concerned with women's suffrage, as well as things like worker's rights, and the prohibition of alcohol.

It was also a movement which strongly opposed immigration, since the labor unions associated with it were concerned about the competition for work that these presented.

Family planning was also a central tenet of the progressive movement, which went even further than abortion to promote Eugenics, the practice of engineering the family unit to require fewer resources, for the greater good.

Your environmental objections, which I have omitted for the clarity of referencing points in order, are also generally incorrect. Teddy Roosevelt was a prominent leader of the Progressive movement, and he instituted the National Park System, and pushed for many other environmental controls.

Progressive politics is about how do we survive from to-day until to-night until, to-morrow, to next month and to next year. How do we survive unemployment, cancer, old age, crime, pay the bills, put food onto the table, and keep a roof over our heads? It's about raising our kids, giving them direction, and giving them half-a-chance. It's about staying married and trying to stay somewhat sane and somewhat happy.

Actually, very few of the things you describe are prominent in the progressive movement of the United States, except incidentally in terms of generally bettering the welfare of the average worker. You have mentioned before that you are in located in Canada, perhaps there is a radically different definition of "progressive party" there?

If you have another agenda, go join some other movement. Join the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, the Republican Party in America, the Tories in the UK, the California Coastal Commission, join the PLO in Gaza or the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt; join the Zionists in Israel or whatever..... They'd love to have you.

Again, it is not Hypatia who has co-opted the term "Progressive" but your own definition, at least as far as it concerns the generally accepted definition of the United States' Progressive movement.

I'm not saying that the Progressive movement's platforms are necessarily acceptable today. But let's be correct in our definitions, shall we?

[Starving Steve]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters - Dress rehearsal for OWS was in 2009 - Michael Moore

Dear Astonas:

I think your comments are correct, overall, so I think your reply was very fair.

I am a progressive in the sense of the definition of what a progressive is in the sense of the New Deal of FDR, the Fair/Square Deal of President Truman, many of the projects of President Eisenhower in the 1950s including siting the UN in NYC and commencing the Interstate road project. Pres. Kennedy and LBJ were progressive in the sense of siding the federal govn't in America foresquare behind Dr. Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights Movement. LBJ began Medicare for the elderly in America. If he had not stuck his nose into Vietnam, LBJ would have gone down in history as one of the best and most progressive presidents the U.S. ever had.

Something happened in America after its defeat in Vietnam. All of the rightwing bozos came into the presidency, one right after the other, except for maybe Jimmy Carter. It just kept on getting worse, if that were possible, and it was.

When I compare the politics of being a progressive in America (FDR 1932 thru LBJ 1968) to the politics up until the election of Pres. Obama in 2008, I come up with my definition and my perspective of what being a progressive is all about.

I live in Canada, unfortunately in the rightwing/eco-fraud backwater of British Columbia. I have never seen such a place. It even makes Manitoba seem progressive, by comparison. I have never seen such a place where one can not find a doctor, nor obtain a simple building permit, nor drive a car faster than a child might skateboard on the side of a street. All of these mundane things, and many more, are an uphill fight, or maybe even impossible in BC.

Sad to say, because of brain seizures, I have forfeited my right to drive in BC where driving is deemed A PRIVILEGE. Since I can not get food for at least 180 days in BC (without a car), I have been forced to live with my brother and mother in California. So, I sort of live in BC, but I also reside in central California by necessity.

Here in Cal, although driving is also considered a privilege, the term of banishment from the roads is 90 days maximum, whereas the term in BC is 180 days minimum and possibly up to a year. That's one year walking. Any further brain seizures and the province re-sets your banishment clock back to day-one.

Now to discuss what a progressive is in the Canadian sense, it is a person in the tradition of NDP Premier Tommy Douglas in Saskatchewan, NDP Premier Ed Schrier in Manitoba and Workers' Party Joe Zuken in Winnipeg. I would even go so far as to say that Premier Loughead of Alberta, although a Progressive Conservative, was progressive in the sense of DOING THINGS FOR THE COMMON PERSON.... Move to BC, and it's like entering the Dark Ages. The speed limit drops 10 KPH as you enter the province, and that is just the beginning. Cops hide behind every bush, timing speeds.

What did Tommy Douglas do for the people? Answer: He started Medicare and Pharmicare for EVERYONE, regardless of age/health in Saskatchewan. He designed the model for Canada's Medicare programme. He also aided farmers, aided students, aided resource development, raised speed limits, funded freeways, helped to construct land banks, and funded the Diefenbaker Dam project. What did Ed Schrier do for the people? Answer: He funded vital public works projects including the Nelson River Project and the Red River floodway around Winnipeg. Ed Schrier and the NDP also developed Medicare/Pharmicare in Manitoba. The Pinawa nuclear reactor was built in Pinawa. What did Premier Loughead do for Alberta? Answer: He encouraged the development of the oil/gas industry, and he funneled oil/gas royalties into TAX RELIEF AND PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS FOR THE PEOPLE of Alberta. He also raised speed limits to 110 KPH from Edmonton half-way to Calgary. He helped to build Edmonton's subway and rapid-rail system. He also channeled money into higher education. He also encouraged the construction of the West Edmonton Mall. His government also encouraged urban sprawl so that EVEN THE COMMON PERSON COULD LIVE ON AND OWN IN CLEAR-TITLE AND FEE-SIMPLE A RESPECTABLE ESTATE IN THE COUNTRYSIDE, for example just outside of Edmonton.

In Saskatchewan and under the NDP, I was the one who busted-open the land banks around Regina. I was the one who helped to drive down the price of serviced land. I also tried to encourage urban sprawl and affordable homes.

In Alberta, I had my own coin shop. That was fun! Alberta was/is a really fun place to live.

I never met eco-frauds and eco-nazis on the scale of arrogance that exists now in BC, at least not until I moved there. One of my next-door neighbours won't even talk to me there.... I mean, they take this eco-crap and eco-regulation seriously--- like forty-days of fighting and $1400 of expense for a garage permit, something that should have taken five-minutes and $5. I have never witnessed the arrogance and scale of government in Canada until I moved to BC.... It's a world unto itself.

Can you imagine in BC: the RCMP picks me up off of my own road and tells me, "YOU ARE TO FEAR THE GOVN'T, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE HERE." The RCMP delivers me to Victoria General Hospital and keeps me there under observation for 30-days.... My roomates were Beth, a woman of 73, Harry by the wall, and Harry by the window, the latter two men both age 88. I was the baby of the room at age 63. We kept each other company for thirty long days, while we were "observed".... Meanwhile, a woman died in the next room. I won't even get into that story now. She asked for help sitting cramped in her high-chair, but no-one came to help her. I tried to get her help, but no-one would respond. She was called, "The Help-Lady". They were waiting for her to die.... I won't even get into the sad facts of that story now.

Anyway and for a few weeks, I am in California in my brother's multi-generational home. Forty-nine million Americans now live co-operatively in such multi-generational homes because of the Great Recession. Living independently is now too expensive.

[reggie]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters - Dress rehearsal for OWS was in 2009 - Michael Moore

I'd like some info on what Boyd has to say. Don't expect a detailed response in a hurry.

I'll post in another thread and note that to you in a PM once completed.

It is science only in your own mind.

Well, there is ample evidence that the sciences I describe have replaced Philosophy, and is replacing all other forms of science. You seem to be making numerous pronouncements about my posts and the references that I have mentioned so far, but I don't get the impression that you've researched this field, and therefore wonder why you have developed such a strong view, going so far as to call my material "hand waving".

For example, can you talk at all about the relationship between OWS and Complexity Theory, and why this is significant given current elite goals? If you can't see that, then you can't see how OWS are objects designed to perpetuate a system with specific outcomes in mind. Combine this knowledge with some inside awareness of how non-profit monies flow from elite interests to actors in the field and it becomes quite easy to understand what's happening now and where it is intended to lead.

These "protestors", at least the ones that are not on payroll, are pawns in the game, and it is quite unsettling watch this unfold and even more unsettling to see the genuine interest and support by so-called educated people.

To be fair to Reggie, the ideas at the Macy conferences certainly influenced all activities in science. The ideas have had an abiding positive impact in the hard sciences and engineering and have influenced psychology and biology. Applying these ideas at societal level has been attempted and is documented. Where I differ with him is the idea that, with regard to economics and society, whether these ideas proved remotely successful. Even by his own examples, I would contend that they have not. The problem there is that the modelling is difficult and that by and large, economists are an insular discipline and not very good at maths.

I agree that the modelling is not as granular as say a feedback control system in electronic circuitry or in an airfoil control surface, but societal controls don't have to be. We're talking about controlling language and imagery via media objects deployed on TV, print, radio, and in digital and physical spaces. It has to do with maintain definable perceptions within the audiences minds, albeit, there maybe a myriad of audiences with differing perception frameworks. But this is clearly being achieved today and can be viewed simply by being aware of it. For example, forums, just like this one, are great spaces for testing feedback control models for toward a specific audience.

Somewhere in this forum I posted a presentation delivered at Google by Daniel Goleman about how the mind perceives and processes information. Goleman is one authority who helps show is his work how the human mind wires itself based upon its synaptic inputs, and that these inputs form frames of perception. Once these 'frames" are created, it is quite difficult for one to view outside them. Hence, once perceptions are locked-in across an audience, propagandists can create models for presenting future information to that audience that will likely cause defineable decision/action responses. John Boyd, who I referred to earlier, spent his life working on this, and the US Military has adopted these feedback-control techniques into its war fighting strategies. These strategies have now filtered down into business, government, and other aspects of society.

Indeed, and that is the point.

A concept which has relevance in certain fields does not hold relevance in all fields.

The pseudo-science aspect I refer to is the belief reggie has that these principles are either being deployed or being deployed successfully.

Certainly it may be that these principles do apply, but frankly I have yet to see any actual evidence.

In the meantime such pseudo-scientific ridiculousness manifests itself just as often at the 'high' levels of society as elsewhere; witness the abject and utter failure of the 'Club of Rome' pronouncements along with their prophet, Paul Ehrlich.

You just simply don't know what you are talking about. Go back and review the work done by the men at the Macy Conferences. Their focus was to integrate a myriad disciplines into a definable science, which they termed Cybernetics (at the time). By viewing everything as a "machine", they have been able to achieve their stated goal.

With respect to the Club of Rome, their plans are in process now. While I grant you that "Climate Change" propaganda has not been as successful as the CoR actors would have liked, we are still witnessing actions being taken by gov'ts, international bodies and private corps that will continue to strengthen this dialectic between humanity and the planet. Further, the CoR's goals for chaos are in process, and the "failure of democracy" to address our "problems" is still very much at play, so it is too soon to judge the outcome of these strategies.

On Edit: For those interested, it might be worthwhile to review current trends in the healthcare field, as these developments clearly demonstrates current integration of Control Theory in to public health. Fortunately, the only tangible data source available right now is Medicare data, but that's changing quickly with the $600B+ development budget Obama has put in place. If you think these sciences aren't in play, perhaps this will provide a more real example that's current and relevant.

[reggie]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters - Dress rehearsal for OWS was in 2009 - Michael Moore

To be fair to Reggie, the ideas at the Macy conferences certainly influenced all activities in science. The ideas have had an abiding positive impact in the hard sciences and engineering and have influenced psychology and biology. Applying these ideas at societal level has been attempted and is documented. Where I differ with him is the idea that, with regard to economics and society, whether these ideas proved remotely successful. Even by his own examples, I would contend that they have not. The problem there is that the modelling is difficult and that by and large, economists are an insular discipline and not very good at maths.

Control the mechanized mind across society, and you control economics and society.

Studying the work done by the Macy Conferences will reveal an extraordinary effort to uncover the techniques for creating a mechanized mind in society, and then limiting that mind's Observations in the world as well as its Orientation toward the world. As one will find by studying John Boyd's work, Controlling Observation and Orientation gives one control over Decision & Action (ie behavior).

Per my earlier committment in this thread, I've posted some info on John Boyd's OODA thesis (Observation, Orientation, Decision & Action)
http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...28OODA-Loop%29

[lektrode]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters - Dress rehearsal for OWS was in 2009 - Michael Moore

as usual, gents - a 15or20 minute romp thru these posts gives a guy more to think about than a whole weeks worth of lamestreamers on the tube, or print for that matter.... esp mr steve, who does make some valid points (as per usual..) but jeeeeze mr steve, altho i've been to BC a few times (vancouver, whistler and blue river) i guess eye never noticed all this PC stuff - altho i will say that they (Vanc anyway) do a heluva lot better job with traffic management on the roadways than most any other place i've driven around.

[*T*]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters - Dress rehearsal for OWS was in 2009 - Michael Moore

Control the mechanized mind across society, and you control economics and society.

Studying the work done by the Macy Conferences will reveal an extraordinary effort to uncover the techniques for creating a mechanized mind in society, and then limiting that mind's Observations in the world as well as its Orientation toward the world. As one will find by studying John Boyd's work, Controlling Observation and Orientation gives one control over Decision & Action (ie behavior).

Per my earlier committment in this thread, I've posted some info on John Boyd's OODA thesis (Observation, Orientation, Decision & Action)
http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...28OODA-Loop%29

Whatever your view of Reggie's model of the world, Boyd's talk is excellent and worth listening to. I strongly recommend listening to it. (Note part 2 and 3 are incorrectly linked - but you can find the correct parts easily enough).

I understand reggie to mean that the adversarial relationship is between the elites and the people. By keeping the pace of change faster than the people can process, the people cannot step outside the situation and react appropriately. In Boyd's language, we are folded inside ourselves.

To some extent I agree with this. We see this in the response to the European crisis, the political response is reactionary and occurs on a different timescale. It therefore is broken and 'technocracy' can be imposed.
But I think it cuts both ways. Those operating on internet time are not suffering from the informational or processing ability asymmetry as much.
Additionally, I think the supposed controlling bodies are suffering from the inability to step outside themselves and form meta-models. The Fed, in particular, is not self-aware enough to perceive its own stupidity. It is therefore disorientated in the OODA loop sense. Essentially this is aggravated by the Fed-friendly hiring of academics. The function of academia is (supposed to be) the generation of new ideas by stepping outside the norms. The higher cognitive functions, if you will. Hiring in symbiosis with the establishment destroys this function.

He also demonstrates, quite elegantly, why when you do step outside the system and change things, the results are necessarily unpredictable.

This also explains, in science, why advances are so often made by outsiders moving into a particular field.

[oddlots]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters - Dress rehearsal for OWS was in 2009 - Michael Moore

Well, there is ample evidence that the sciences I describe have replaced Philosophy, and is replacing all other forms of science. You seem to be making numerous pronouncements about my posts and the references that I have mentioned so far, but I don't get the impression that you've researched this field, and therefore wonder why you have developed such a strong view, going so far as to call my material "hand waving".

For example, can you talk at all about the relationship between OWS and Complexity Theory, and why this is significant given current elite goals? If you can't see that, then you can't see how OWS are objects designed to perpetuate a system with specific outcomes in mind. Combine this knowledge with some inside awareness of how non-profit monies flow from elite interests to actors in the field and it becomes quite easy to understand what's happening now and where it is intended to lead.

These "protestors", at least the ones that are not on payroll, are pawns in the game, and it is quite unsettling watch this unfold and even more unsettling to see the genuine interest and support by so-called educated people.

Reggie... Listen to yourself: "Can you talk at all about the relationship between OWS and Complexity Theory..."

For someone who purports to be well informed in the science of social systems and their control mechanisms or whatever shouldn't you be more convincing? And if you're not, surely the worst approach is to blame this apparent failing on the audience you are attempting to communicate with.

I've had many moments while reading something where I want to run out in the street and accost someone and say "have you read this? Well you need to because I think it changes everything." ... as much to test out my own take as much as anything... but I never do it, at least like that.

Why can't you, in your own words, try and express what it is about the works you are citing that resonated with you or solved some nagging problem. Pronouncements and berating us isn't working.

[Shakespear]

Re: Soros, #OWS, and Reuters - Dress rehearsal for OWS was in 2009 - Michael Moore

Something happened in America after its defeat in Vietnam. All of the rightwing bozos came into the presidency, one right after the other, except for maybe Jimmy Carter. It just kept on getting worse, if that were possible, and it was.

Yes Steve, it was something corrosive and at the same time destructive, bringing us to a national debt of TRILLIONS. Amazing how easily it was done. All the laws and supervising institutions mysteriously failed. That is a Grand Mess