A lot can be said about pop culture and how it has affected the generations immersed in it. Yet, one of the lesser understood traits is how it can push certain "agendas" from those who are powerful enough to influence cultural trends.
Pop culture, in many ways, can influence the way the entire society operates. For example, what are the "traits" of the ideal man or woman? Hollywood, TV, magazines, the web, even advertisements, will subconsciously imprint on us what is "desirable" and what isn't.
We will also get "samples" of what a man or a woman should be, or shouldn't be, in terms of what they look, what they do in their life, how rich they should be, how many children are "OK" to have in a family, etc etc.
Most people are affected by this in ways that they do not even understand. Think video clips of the 70's, 80's or 90's and how you get a reaction on what the hair looked like, or what the clothes looked like. Yet, that was normal for each time period. Why is it "funny" now and wasn't perceived "funny" back then, in real time, so as to get rejected?
Eugenics
This gets more serious than hairstyles when our perception is also affected in what we deem attractive since this will have far broader implications in terms of our marriages and families. For example what type of women are "favored"? Petite or large? Thin or fat? Light-colored or dark-colored? If my perception of the ideal woman is affected, then obviously I will choose someone in line with what I thought I wanted based on my cultural influences. And this, in turn, will impact my children. We are already seeing, unfolding in real time, a beautification of the younger generation due to beautiful parents marrying.
Eugenics, is all about promoting the proper cross-breeding of certain members of a species, that carry certain "desirable" genetic traits, while preventing the less desirable traits from propagating. But if we allow pop culture to dictate which traits are desirable, and we also take for granted that the masses *will* be affected by these "hints" due to proven herd-mentality, whether in terms of appearance, abilities, etc, then we (as pop-culture designers) can indirectly influence the propagation of certain traits.
This influence will be imperceptible and thus go unopposed compared to a program that visibly tries to pair certain people up, or bar other people from mating: Brainwashing people into the choices they will be making creates a pseudo-"voluntary" choice, which they have no-one to blame for.
Population Control
On top of the covert Eugenics, we may also be promoting a covert system of population control. For example, a system that promotes an "independent working woman" will lead to women who have far less time to raise children compared to full-time housewives of two generations ago. Additional measures can be taken through the promoted standards of living.
Through the combined influence of the above, one can make it (indirectly) evident that multiple children become an economic liability that threatens the ideal standard of living that one is striving to attain. So, if you are striving for a good life and you are perceiving that 5 children are a danger to this goal - or that these kids may well take you to the other direction (poverty), compared to raising just 1 or 2, then you'll go for a more "rational" 1 or 2.
The Economic incentives/disincentives pale in comparison to the Cultural ones
In theory, the economic disincentives would be the most important factor when deciding things like the size of one's family. There would be no need for any other type of disincentive. But, evidently, if we look around the planet, these disincentives are not sufficient.
What we see instead is that in underdeveloped or poor countries, in which people barely get by, they also have a lot of marriages and births. But these countries are, for the most part, culturally unaffected by the western pop culture and therefore the economic disincentives are proven inadequate by themselves.
However, slowly but surely, this is changing - as the western standards get propagated. That's why the cultural spread (a long-term agenda) is so important for the western Elite: It allows it to exercise indirect control over the global cultural norms, thus also indirectly controlling vital "policies" including Eugenics and Population Control.
Is Islam a problem? A theory and prediction about Islam
One of the greater forces of resistance to the western cultural standards is hard-core Islam. In a system where looks matter less and women stay at home raising children, there are quite strong defenses against pop-culture influenced Eugenics and Population Control. If we assume that the Elite can implement any policy they want (we've seen in the past how a lot of Muslim countries were secular under US influence), then why take these secular-Muslim countries and make them hardcore right now?
I think this real-time paradox will be solved over the longer run. Islamism seems to be "useful" right now as a perceived enemy in the West for geopolitical reasons. Thus the other agendas are placed on a secondary priority. Once these geopolitical reasons are no longer, the West will swiftly use its influence in those Islamic regimes and convert them back into secular - a process that will probably require 1-2 decades. This might require some good excuse like a new 9/11 (though bigger) - always tied to hard-core Islam.
Just found your blog - now following you.
Apparently Radio Frequencies, like those in Wifi reduces sperm motility in rats. Interesting how the test shows that it lowers the population of rats but not us. Or does it?
External quote:
It depends on the frequency. wifi 2.12 has a different effect than the earlier 1.89....
they pale in comparison to that emitted from TV (it kills brain cells)
Bluetooth, on the other hand, is benificial...it's got higher frequency, similar to grow light for plants.
This probably deserves an entire piece of its own, in terms of how hidden dangers indirectly promote the Eugenics of those who are able to perceive them, despite what the establishment tells them.
Let's say X or Y modern lifestyle choices, foods, technologies are harmful. Companies have an interest in saying they are harmless. By the time the general population finds out it's too late - and their DNA has been damaged. Those who understood the truth prior to the establishment admitting it are thus benefited.
Certain radiowave applications, GMOs, etc could fall into such scenarios.
How about promoting a gay president (Barry) and then replacing him with another gay president (Killery)?
Wasn't expecting that one... LOL...
I'm thinking that it might be a good deal to replace the current POTUS with just about ANYTHING.
I think, you are right
i substantially agree. depopulation is an agenda to centralize wealth and control, and to limit liberty of the majority.
islam is the weapon, not the wielder. islam produces ignorance and primitivism. islam will never be organized enough to be a real threat to a civilized, not brainwashed populace. just look up the number of muslim, nobel prize winning scientists. good luck finding any of those.
Nobel prize??? please say whatever do u want but do not mention nobel prize as a level of something valuable, it is a joke after they give the peace nobel prize to Obama... please! ... and about your second point, never forget many scientist, wonderful writers and so on came from arabic countries (from Islam) in the ancient times, the fundation of the modern medicine also came from there... when in europe they where dying because of the bubonic pest (u take bads because of arabic countries ;) ) that was not hapening in the arabic countries... u should read more about history of the human civlization I think... But Im agree with there is a depopulation agenda and that they are using the more extremist parts of the countries with islamic believes as a weapon... but hey, there is also good people there.
thanks for the chat, i must go now. i will return. i will follow your blog. i hope to chat again.
:) You are welcome and thanks to you too. Im pretty sure we are more agree than disagree in many things. Really sorry I stopped also to answer because I had work to do today and finally, Im finish now. We will chat again for sure, see you around
I forgot, followed you too with my 2 accounts
most people are not aware of the horrible origins and history of nobel prizes. kissinger got one for hell's sake! hitler and stalin were both nominated. my point was, there is not much in the way of islamic thinkers.
do not misunderstand me, i do not discount the knowledge of the arabs or the persians, but i have read the koran, brutal, primitive savagery. any good in a people can be wiped out by such beliefs. every muslim i have ever known beat their wife and washed their ass in the sink, from tunisia, iran, indonesia, somalia or anywhere else. multicultural propaganda would have us believe that all cultures are equal, they are not. only western cultures seem to be able to keep the lights on and the plumbing working.
i have read quite a lot, thank you. it appears, more than you, if you read as well as you write.
bubonic plague was 600 years ago. how much has life in the islamic countries improved since then, without help from the western, age of reason?
I will reply with my original account. Sorry if my English looks very poor for you, it is not my mother language and also not the language I use in my everyday live, Im from Cuba and I live in Germany since some years. Making this clear for you, maybe we can continue without not so nice comments like you made. And btw, I read since Im 4 years old, my mother was Spanish professor in the university and teach me at that young age at home, so I have read a lot in my life.
i would love to continue without comments that are not so nice, like the comment implying that i know nothing because i need to "read more about history of the human civilization". my parents made sure that i could read and write before i went to school, so i could read the king james bible. we can compare intelligence, and learning, or we can look at the demonstrable facts that are evident in the world today. i am confident that the facts will support my observations.
I apologize for my words "read more about history of the human civilization". but im not implying you know nothing. If I do, why should I ask you something or start the debate in the first moment? Btw What historic facts did u learn from the king james "bible"?
i learned how to refute flawed arguments. the bible uses every flawed argument known to man and then some.
Your argument til now is not for the bible is for your personal experience
and btw, the bible was not wrote by people from the "western cultures", was translated by them... so all this knowledge you got come also from middle east civilizations
What help are you talking about? And where do you live that you only know so horrible muslim people? Here in Germany have meet very nice and friendly muslim people. Bad people that do
You can go to Latinoamerica, in a lot of countries there still men do that and they see it normal... and they are mostly catolics btw
i am not catholic and i am not defending any third world behavior, from anywhere. all of the muslims i have known have been from their home countries visiting or living in the US. the man from tunisia recommended that i should beat my girlfriend. the muslims from somalia were as racist and ignorant as any southern redneck that i grew up with. there are savages in this world, and some are created by ideologies.
by "the age of reason" i intended, the rebirth of the use of western philosophy, which gave us a systematic method of thinking, and removing untruth and contradiction. this allowed Europe to pull itself up, out of the dark age, and build the future that we live in and see being destroyed in front of our eyes today.
I can show you people in the "modern Western" society that take the shit out of they wife and children, maybe they do not promote but they do. Not necessary Catholics, I can look in any religion, and social class from whatever country you want. Means that shitty people there is anywhere in the world.... One more time, the modern problems in the middle east are because of the greed of the "western civilization". Why you do not see that?
the modern problems in the middle east are not because of the greed of the "western civilization". the west bombed japan to cinders. does tokyo look like kabul? nope.
again, i am not responsible for the actions of all of these idiots. i am doing my level best to find out what the hell is going on in this world and find the best method for sorting out my part of it.
Japan was never a colony for many years of any western countries as far as I know, big difference with almost all the middle east and african countries.
And as you, Im also looking what is happening in the world, or at least trying to figure it out... but Im not assuming a culture it is better than the other or people from one country are better than people from another. This, I think, is a wrong way to look the problem. They are good things and bad things anywhere in the world. I asume you have traveled a lot and seeing by your self other countries?
you are correct, the knowledge i gained was from refuting the myriad flawed arguments of a primitive middle eastern religion, using reason. the reason that keeps the lights on and the plumbing working.
maybe out of 1.7 billion muslims there are a few smart ones. i have yet to meet one.
i have probably only met 20,000 people in my whole life. i would be shocked if over 500 of them were muslim. maybe, one day i'll meet a smart muslim. for now, i'll watch my back. there aren't very many people out here who are smart, muslim or not.
Do you practice a religion? I know you are not catholic. Because I think this is our difference, I look from a point of view of someone who see religion more in a cultural and sociological way
hong kong then. you can make up excuses for people who fail all day long, or maybe set about ,and find what successful people do and failures don't. pretending that everyone is the same is an insult to everyone.
i know what feces smells like and it doesn't smell like success. i've seen the third world and it looks like failure.
religion serves different people different ways. the purpose it serves depends on many variables for each individual. to say it is cultural and/or sociological is to place constraints on religion that are not there. some like the people, some the ritual, some the beauty and some the peace. some like the submission, some the control. i could go on and on about what most people want or need or use religion for.
this is why i think it is individual. if someone wants a religion of conformity, leave me out of it. i don't need the god of the lowest common denominator.
My individual point of view of the Religion is that one, the cultural and sociological(anthropological)... but then you have good people and bad people and it does not matter what kind of Religion they have.
saying that the religion does not matter is similar to saying that it doesn't matter whether you use a pair of tweezers, a hammer or a gun to remove a splinter from your toe.
if you take a "good" person, and teach them that god will only reward them if they wear a bomb vest into a hospital, and that the same god will torture them and their children for an eternity if they don't, that person will do what they believe they have to.
someone being good or bad is irrelevant, in some cases.
Is this the help you are talking about? To the destabilization of the middle east helping terrorist groups who, I do not why, only kill more Muslims? If you have read history you should know that all the problems in the middle east start with the colonialization of the zone from Western countries... as far as I know... maybe you know more and can teach me something new, Im always open to learn https://steemit.com/news/@contentjunkie/clinton-and-islamic-state-are-funded-by-the-same-money-julian-assange
i take no responsibility for the actions of those who are now seeking to destroy civilization, just as i can take no credit for the civilization that was built before i was born. i can only look and see what i think is of value and want to see more of, and work toward creating more of that. i do not think socrates would be party to creating or sustaining or radicalizing any group that would do what these misguided people are doing.
these cultures would not have been chosen to accomplish the goals of destabilization if they were not suited to the task. if any group could be used, then why not some amish folk? there are plenty of those to be trained living much closer to CIA headquarters. they even have beards.