This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
How To Start A Populist Movement In Under Three Minutes
How To Start A Populist Movement In Under Three Minutes
In business, the extremely successful business is one whose product or service appeals to a widely perceived need (whether real or manufactured) and can be quickly and efficiently scaled up if and when demand explodes. There is nothing worse in business than to create or identify a need and then not be able to satisfy demand.
The same can be said about ideas or concepts. Every now and then I stumble across one that is instantly recognizable as correct in every way imaginable. Its simplicity is often deceiving because the deeper you dig, the more applications it can be applied to. It screams truth and is self evident and the more you think about it, the more you see. And it is scalable to infinity.
In my view, the entire purpose of the ZH blog is to expose the lies of the Ponzi and to speak truth to power. There are endless comments (including mine) bemoaning the fact that so many people are either ignorant or in denial of the truth. I suspect the vast majority of us would like to see a movement of some sort to throw the bums out and bring sanity back into vogue. But how do you do this?
This extremely short Ted Talk video by Derek Sivers is remarkable in its power, delivered in pictures and words. Watch it twice, then watch it again. During the first viewing, watch the video in the background as Derek speaks. Feel the power of what you are seeing. During the second viewing, focus solely on what Derek is saying. Think about how to apply this in dozens of ways. Then watch it the third time for the shear joy of the experience.
If I were to condense this idea down to the 30 second elevator pitch, it would be as follows. During the critical first moments of a budding populist movement, it's not the leader who's most crucial but the first follower, who validates the leader, and the second follower, who validates the first. Herd mentality can work both ways.
http://www.ted.com/talks/derek_sivers_how_to_start_a_movement.html
Same video, different location.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V74AxCqOTvg
And another derivative.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPShQ_hVJqY&feature=related
Be public. Be easy to follow.
- advertisements -
I'm pleased to see this question addressed. My perception of the ZH commenter community's evolution from the beginning to now is that the herd here has developed ever more sophisticated rationales, analyses, arguments and proofs, excuses, etc., for fatalistic surrender to impotence in the face of the criminal mass clusterfuck by the banksters and their minions. This strikes me lately as the perfect soil for a non-movement . . . a potential crop that just never germinated. If I were a NSA psy-ops guy, I can see that clever passivity would be a great thing to cultivate as cool enlightenment.
I would indeed like to see something different here, however.
I agree that initial followers are the most important figures. I've been saying this for many years, noting that Hitler was himself just a nut (like the ones who scream to themselves on the street) who would have been nothing without his circle of sycophants and handlers. They actually made him what he "was."
Same with every group and movement.
Nice video demonstration of a crucial concept that rarely gets recognized.
Bob, this fucker is comin' down regardless of what anyone does or does not do. Just sit back and try to avoid any blow-back. If you don't understand that the crash is inevitable, then you don't understand the certainty of the math.
I do understand the math, B9K9, but I don't understand sitting back. That posture may be good for the individual, but the larger community (it seems to me) deserves more from the people who are most knowledgable--meaning much of the ZH readership--than for us to circle our wagons and simply await the fireworks together.
I understand the odds of it making any difference, but it strikes me as throwing in the towel.
Do I have an active alternative to offer?
Not in cyberspace, I'm afraid.
Bob, many/most in the larger community are still in the Matrix. I know it is hackneyed to use such pop references, but in this instance, nothing else describes it better. Consider yourself red pilled, but you can't explain what happened to the larger community until the Great Unplug. Prepare for the time when your clarity of vision and your common sense explanation will cut through the cacophony and confusion.
Not if, but when.
B9K9, I couldn't agree more, whether you pick 1913, 1971, or some other date as the one that makes the crash inevitable. The point is that we are in the endgame and that anyone who believes that the present system -- by which I mean the so-called "democratic state" -- can somehow be reformed is going to be sorely disappointed. And worse.
For starters, one should read Lysander Spooner's "The Constitution of No Authority" -- http://praxeology.net/LS-NT-6.htm -- to understand that constitutionalism is itself an inherently flawed concept and thus doomed to fail. Then one should read Eric Garris's "The Internet vs. the State" -- http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/garris3.html -- to understand that even now -- i.e., even at its seemingly most powerful -- the state is in its twilight and that mere decades from now, it will be but a shadow of its former self, soon to wither away completely.
And that, quite simply, is what we need to be preparing (ourselves and our children) for.
Marx said the state would wither away too....but Lenin decided it needed a push.
Great point and this leads to another. But besides the early 1st follower action of Ernst Roehm and subsequent joining of Goering, Hitler was financed to power. How likely is it that our white knight will end up being a pawn of the powerful in disguise? That our 'savior' will indeed be our very captor? Chilling thought.
D.J. :
Not wanting to pick a minor point with you, but some of Adolf's early important followers (in addition to Ernst Roehm) who truly believed in the Socialism of "National Socialism" were Gregor Strasser and Alfred Rosenberg, who were pushing the "third way" between Bolshevism and the Capitalist classes.
One big reason Hitler got to power and stayed there was that Goering introduced Hitler to the Krupps, the Thyssens, and the former Junker classes who were horrified at the Weimar hyperinflation and disorder.
Above all, they wanted to return to their positions of unquestioned dominance and the NSDAP was the vehicle to make it happen....
The rest is history...
KrvtKpt laughing swordfish
still shoreside
No man, I actually expected it. It's been a while since I read Shirer, I sacrificed accuracy and detail for speed. I invite point picking, major and minor. I had an ego once, but then I realized I was clueless. I've since gotten dumber.
As I was reading Shirer I was in a mindset to look for a financial subtext, and I thought it was compelling. Shirer hits the names of the direct connections but only can provide vague references to who the real financial muscle was behind his effort. Although it is said that Thyssen was his largest contributor, my impression was that there was another more powerful financier in the background. Eh, conspiracy theories. Cheers
ps I'm going fishing for wahoo and bluefin/yellowfin for the next two weeks, pretty righteous, no?
Good thought.
While many believe that Thyssen was the major financial backer of Hitler and the NSDAP (per Shirer), the real backers who stayed hidden were the titled nobility who had backed Wilhelmine Germany's previous war efforts.
If you recall your history, the entire NSDAP program was sold to the German public on the theme of "righting the wrongs" of Versailles - that a victorious German nation had been tricked into surrender by an evil cabal of (Jewish) international bankers and financiers.
Of course, Germany's plutocrats and nobility, who were far more greedy and reactionary than those of our present day, lapped all of this up and screamed for more.
And there's more than a little truth in this - had Kaiser Wilhelm gone to unrestricted submarine warfare in 1915 (as he was urged to do by the Kriegsmarine), he might have won WW1 by the spring of 1918 - with the German Army in Paris, and a Reich that stretched from the Brittany coast to the Urals.
Unfortunately, he was talked out of this war-winning strategy by his Army-focused General Staff, who regarded the Kriegsmarine as an expensive sideshow and a competitor for scarce resources (Massie, Castles of Steel).
Anyhow, good luck on your fishing - my fomer LI (Leitendener Ingenier) on U-96 and I are going down to East Cape at the end of the month for some yellowtail and wahoo action and to swap tales with some other Unterseebootefahren.
I've had a decent month trading so I need a break ...
KrvtKpt laughing swordfish
heading back to sea
i campaigned, contributed to and voted for barack obama. got several non-voters registered and got them to vote for obama. i have voted for the democratic candidate for president since mcgovern except 1980 (libertarian). i would contribute to, campaign for and vote for ron paul. i disagree with him on free markets, the role and size of government and many other things. still would vote for him over the rest of the current line up from the two branches of the one political party that apparently rules the u.s. currently. for me, this discussion should start out with why not ron paul. is he corrupt/not to be believed? too unlikely to succeed? theoretically it seems far easier to agree on what's wrong than on what should be done to make things right. the critique here is somewhat consistent. the recommendations for change not so much.
How in the world can Barry win in 2014 if we do not support a third party?
Remember 1992?
Of those who voted, more voted for another candidate than the winner, that would be, if my daughter gives me a blow j*b it is not incest, Bill Clinton.
/ If oral sex is not sex then incest has not happened/
Did you praise McCain during the last election cycle as well?
what does this even mean? barry runs in 2012. ron paul would, presumably, run as the republican candidate, a nomination for which he has run before. because of the electoral college, some eighteen or so presidents were elected with less than a majority of votes. praising mccain during the last election cycle is inconsistent with your first sentence as he was the republican candidate. my favorite part of your amazingly garbled post is the asterisk censoring "job". i don't remember clinton exploring the incestuous implications of his parsing of the word "sex" especially with regard to his daughter. i see it turned you so on you remember it though and bring it up even though it has no relation to the subject. whatever it is you are advocating, stop it, you are doing it no favor.
It is a chilling thought. Especially given the question of likelihood--the candidate can really get nowhere without money, while money can just sit and observe the candidates to determine who is a "team player," i.e., who'll get the money.
Seems very likely that, under our current campaign financing system, the apparent savior will in reality be our captor.
That is chilling. Especially with the SCOTUS removal of corporate campaign spending limits.
What with Unions never making any contributions I see the validity of your post.
Are you AFL CIO or just another obese UWA member?
True dat - also, last time I checked, major media outlets were owned by corporations, and they don't need to donate to get a drum pounded... they bring their own.
Sorry, dancing is not allowed on the premises.
'Dancing is forbidden!'
- Master Shake
C D , I get the point but bad example to use. The individual must first determine for him/herself whether the cause is important, useful or significant enough. In this case, the act of clowning around appealed to the crowd at hand.
I struggle with this on a daily bases since my line of work involves innovation and creativity. It's easy to motivate people to join you but hard to get them to stick their neck out for your cause/vision. Of course the band wagon effect applies when you succeed. People are naturally lazy, selfish and gutless. As you've heard before, it always someone else's problem.
But also remember not to appeal to or attract the wrong kind. Just like "teamwork" and "group thinks", they always degenerate down to the lowest common denominator.
PS I always look out for your comments. Good stuff mate.
Time will tell the validity and power of a movement.
There’s a passage in Acts (5:27-40) that, for me, has always been an important reminder of this precept.
The council of leaders in Jerusalem, the Sanhedrin, was urging that the apostles be put to death because they wouldn’t stop proclaiming the deity of Jesus and the news of His resurrection. A law instructor named Gamaliel, however, told the leaders that sparing the lives of the apostles would be the wisest course of action.
“Consider carefully what you intend to do to these men,” he told them. “Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered. Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.”
The Sanhedrin then ordered the men reprimanded and flogged; but released. Today, of course, there is still an Easter story.
JR,
CD and B9K9 would do well to renegotiate their world views in consonance with the New Testament.
I understand.
It was intended simply as a metaphor/inspiration/analogy/whatever, to get people thinking that this can happen, to build morale, to create a spark, to open minds, to jump start realistic and rational hope as opposed to false hope and despair.
It was not intended to be an example of what to do . Of course the conditions are entirely different and not really applicable. That wasn't the point. I wanted people to think about possibilities rather than focus on impossibilities.
Sometimes it takes a clown or some other silly distraction to build morale.
CD, I have a slightly different take, as I recently expounded on the dying payroll report thread. ZH may have originally set out to expose the lies and 'speak truth to power', but given the speed and rapidity of recent affairs, that function has already been surpassed.
The events we are currently experiencing were set in motion decades ago. As Mako has stated not infrequently, the end game we are now part of was launched before we were even born. So actions are going to transpire as they must, regardless of what we may or may not do, whether we accept or deny they are occurring, or even protest against or advocate for necessary changes.
If this is the case, and I believe it to be so, then the real opportunity is to begin preparing for the post-war re-building period. By way of example, how many people know that post-WWII planning began only months after the USA entered the global fray? What, you thought there was any chance the Allies might lose? LOL
So in this regard, we have two knowns:
So the real opportunity is to begin preparing for the re-building phase. A shattered people are going to need to understand not only why the past events occurred, but what necessary controls & precautions will need to be put in place to prevent any future recurrences.
B9K9,
I have spent (and continue to spend) considerable time following this train of thought to it's end point as well and I've also come to the inevitable conclusion that this freight train is beyond the point of no return and will eventually run off the tracks. In fact, I came to the same conclusion from many different directions after I decided either that my original thinking was flawed or I missed something along the way. So I tried alternative paths to prove or disprove the theory. Same result.
Being extremely aware of the presence of my own ego I then began to explore if I was intentially creating the same outcome in order to remain passive and safely buried in my bunker with my years supply of emergency food and my back issues of Playboy. But then I realized that man's decadence will assure me an ever lasting supply of porn regardless of what happens so I jettisoned the Playboy, freeing up room enough for another 10 years supply of food. But then I saw the flaw, which was suddenly so obvious I became furious with myself. Damn, I could have had a V8. :>)
Of course, your speaking of the ultimate lesson in The Matrix trilogy, that Neo wasn't the first and won't be the last. Unless! You speak of henchmen and operatives departing on planes to waiting lairs when the apocalypse is upon us. You speak of cycles, small ones inside larger ones inside even larger ones. Which means those operatives will eventually depart from the safety of their enclaves and begin the enslavement of the human race once again. And if the cycles are to be, there is nothing you can do to stop them.
This is why I have been focusing on and will continue to focus on personal development and why I speak publicly about it here on ZH. Because as long as the slave stock remains the same in each cycle, the powers that be will always be able to round us up for their productive purposes and to our detriment. Our only hope is that we develop mentally, spiritually and emotionally faster than they can corral. I think we can. Thus I try.
CD,
Have you read Nathan Martin or heard about his SwarmUSA movement?
They are welcome to fight their battle on whatever flank/front they choose, but they certainly have a strange way of mainstreaming their arguments. They claim to be anti-gold standard, without harboring any animosity towards gold itself (bullshit, imo), but their aim is to imbue value on Government scrip, and they are a might bit aggressive in those aims. Denninger is on board, and I detect a bit of TickerForum orthodoxy in their behavior and actions. Here is a screed where von Mises is portrayed as a tool of the Rockefellers...
http://www.swarmusa.com/vb4/entry.php/37-quot-It-s-Difficult-to-be-Popul...
Excellent. Thanks for bringing this on. It’s eerie to remember that just as the young man who stepped out first was the “lone nut,” that often the first critics of a tyrannical government are referred to as nuts, crazies, and extremists. In America’s struggle against Britain, one of the voices referred to as “unbalanced” and “extremist” was Thomas Paine. And, of course, some of his later activities earned him the just criticism of even men such as George Washington. But in the beginning, this “lone nut” set a fire that would not be extinguished.
And to all those who despair, no one knows the exact moment when that fire for freedom again will be ignited, or who will ignite it, but ignited it will be. This video is an incredible show of "human action."
Those with the most to hide will accuse the "lone nut"
Those with the least to hide will hear him out.
Hopefully, those with the most to offer in assistance will have the courage to join.
Thanks CD. I always enjoy reading what you have to say.
Meh.. this video should be titled: How to start an absolutely non-controversial populist movement with no natural opposition in 3 minutes.
But for each person to join there is likely to be one or more opposing voices in reality.
Yes, unopposed growth is inviting to those on the sidelines. But aggressive confrontation is not.
The example of the dancer is interesting from a scientific perspective of a controlled environment with limited variables. But add the realities of opposition, and what is often more deadly to growth: others who seek to co-opt the movement to their own ends, and you have something less cohesive, less defined and less stable. These realities aren't easily inserted into the example of the dancer, which is why the dancing metaphor oversimplifies something that is a great deal more complex.
unless the motive is to appear as non-confrontational as possible while confronting.
like these cats:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDh0Cvsw9Jk&feature=related
Ha! Awesome video. The video is from the Gorge in George, WA. One of the greatest concert venues in the world. In you have never been, I highly encourage it. Just a 2 hour drive from Seattle.
Seeing Dave & Ben on Labor Day weekend. Bast damn shed fo sho. Now if the good folks at DMB warehouse could hook me up with a three day room package I would be nearly set.
When I was there in 1990 for a Fleetwood Mac concert (Stevie's birthday, no less), it was still a winery and you put your blanket on the steppes. It would appear from Google that either the winery or the venue has moved. It was indeed memorable.
Just to be able to say that I’ve visited George, Washington would be worth the trip. Maybe George Washington never slept there but I intend to--"the only city in the nation named after the full name of a president"! Never knew that about George or Gorge. Thanks! for the recommendation!