Activity

This is certainly a question that should be of concern to everyone. To open this discussion I’d like to begin with a question or two (or more)? What is the purpose for the perpetuation of the education (hereafter identified as PE)? What should be the scale of the perpetuation? How best to attempt the perpetuation?
Some brief thoughts about each question … As regards the first question … Does one see the PE as prophylaxis or as more of a general prevention? Depending on the choice made between the two (maybe both simultaneously would be in order) each would seem to require different approaches and resources. To the second question … Should the PE be individual, small group (3-10 or so), or some larger group? The third … person to person, small meetings, social media (text, video), pamphlets, books?

Two things that should probably be kept in mind: 1) PE, it would seem, can not be forced (nor should it be, to do so would mean that one would begin by dehumanizing the other (s), and 2) allowed 1 as true, one corollary is that world views, held without what might be called “The Will to Learn” are difficult to penetrate.

Some (certainly not exhaustive) characteristics of having “The Will to Learn” …
1) Having a genuine problem, question or doubt (e.g. don’t begin as Descartes believing that one can simply declare doubt) and
state it as clearly as possible upfront (bad ethics of inquiry to come up with the question after the fact).
2) Being Ok with being in a state of doubt (doubt is our friend, it also means that one is more likely than not about to learn something), and avoiding censorship (see 6 below)
3) Guessing (abducting – producing a hypothesis – not the same as inference to the best explanation) about what might be (fallibilism is the rule) the correct answer.
4) In a community (others genuinely interested in objective inquiry as best can be conducted) of others willing to learn.
5) If the proposed answer is tested and found wanting, get a new one and test it.
6) Always welcoming of criticism (reminded as we are by Monty Python’s Argument Shop Sketch – that simple contradiction is not acceptable as genuine criticism, and as so well put by Palin’s character because “Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.”) and the arrival of new evidence.

Justawhoaman’s question is extremely important and should be given much serious thought by the Giza Community. It is probably the case that most in the Giza Community agree with Dr. Farrell and Catherine Austin Fitts that we should “weaponize our minds” and seek to acquire “actionable intelligence.” The question then becomes once the intelligence is acquired what actions should be taken.

FYI I gave each of my grandchildren Rules for Argument for ‘graduation’ from middle school. amzn.to/2YOXm6B

I think one way could be to always have ready a set of facts, well supported and fleshed out, to throw into conversations so that they will seed into people’s minds. You don’t want to be a doom and gloom sort of person, so have solutions at hand to complete the equations. The power of reason is stunning.

In addition, one could also walk the talk – visually and habitually. Dress, talk, eat, read, watch, speak etc. All of these human actions are representative of who you are inside. You’d be amazed how many people look for role models and don’t even know they’re doing so. So if you inspire someone next to you on the bus without even speaking with them, you’ve made a tiny little shift in their perception and that seed may sprout depending on the individual. Free will – it’s always up to them.

Change from coercion is never long-lasting, but change from reason and inspiration is. This is a spiritual arena as much as it is a political and economic one.

Fantastic question! We should continue with it 🙂

BlueWren is right: fundamentally, the issues are at least as much spiritual and esoteric as they are material. Also, I believe a significant chunk of the population is aware that something is seriously wrong but they believe Colonel Nathan Jessup’s warning that they “can’t handle the truth” and therefore choose not to enquire – and even turn a deaf ear. Think CAF’s red-button story.
Justa seems to be issuing a rallying cry that we take to the ramparts and join the psychological, spiritual and info war going on all around us in a more structured and organized way than we are already. I would argue that it is imperative that we do so. Even forming the intention as a grouplette to do so is powerful.
Perhaps some time could be set aside in vidchats for group meditation/prayer?
“Put on the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.” Ephesians 6:11
As for outreach to the asleep and to those who think they would prefer not to know, preaching to them would be counterproductive. As BlueWren says, you have to plant seeds and drop breadcrumbs to entice them into taking their red pills. One simple idea is to put a thought-provoking one-liner as a footer or in the signature of your emails – eg, “The pharmaceutical industry creates cures? Or customers?” These can be tailored and changed as often as you like. OK, it’s not going to win the war over night, but wars are not won overnight. However, to go back to my opening comment, the spiritual/esoteric aspects of this war are at least as important (if not more so).

I think the next step that we take is going to be different for everyone. For some people it may just mean making small changes such as buying organic food locally or banking with a community instead of a large bank such as JP Morgan Chase. Others may decide to get more material published on these issues and do research the way Fits and Farrell have been. More practical individuals may decide to apply the teachings of Fits and attempt to establish a stronger local economy and more powerful local government by working in business or politics to accomplish this. Still others may either challenge the standard narrative in the respective field they study or simply do what they can to ensure that their actions are contributing to a stronger culture and local economy.

Good comments, I commend you all. I think you are all right, there are different kinds of people that will require different responses. As I am just a layman and autodidact, I generally, as a rule of thumb, take Dr. Farrells’ approach and let “whomever” indicate to me, by their words and what they are saying, indicate to me just how deep, or how superficial my response will be. That lets me know whether to continue or stop wasting my breath.