The Counterfeit Culture

[Don Wassall]

I'd add to this article that more and more relationships among and between people have also become fake. U.S. "culture" sucks much of the joy out of life.

The counterfeit culture – useful observations for understanding why collapse is inevitable

Mike Adams
Natural News
Friday, September 2, 2011

(NaturalNews) Through a devolving web of greed, self-serving power and a departure from fundamental ethics, Western culture has, over the last hundred years, become the counterfeit culture.

Nothing is real anymore — not the food, not the money, and certainly not the evening news. And because it’s not real, it’s not sustainable. That’s why it’s headed for collapse, which isall too real, as many people are about to find out.

In the mean time, here are some observations about the counterfeit culture in which we all frustratingly find ourselves. It’s all about corporations, governments and institutions being “in the business of†counterfeiting something — faking something or pretending to create something of value when they really aren’t. Ring a bell?

The Federal Reserve is in the business ofcounterfeiting money.

The mainstream media is in the business ofcounterfeiting news.

The pharmaceutical industry is in the business ofcounterfeiting medicine(Biopracy! They are stealing molecules from nature then counterfeiting their own patented variations.)

The medical schools are in the business ofcounterfeiting medical degrees. (When a doctor graduates from medical school, he still knows virtually nothing about nutrition.)

Doctors are in the business ofcounterfeiting false medical authority.

The mega-sized food corporations are in the business ofcounterfeiting food. (Processed cheese food product, anyone?)

The global consumer product companies are in the business of manufacturingcounterfeit consumer productssuch a “baby oil†(which is really a petroleum product).

Social networks like Facebook are in the business ofcounterfeiting friends. (Please LIKE this article, okay?)

Cookie-cutter home builders are in the business of constructingcounterfeit homesout of plywood, styrofoam and sheetrock… many these homes will not be standing in just 20 years.

A man who recently stamped his own gold coins — out of real gold — was raided and arrested by the U.S. Treasury Department which announced that his GOLD coins were “counterfeit!†(http://thewarningsigns.blogspot.com…)

After the drug companies stole thelovastatinmolecule from red yeast rice to create their own statin drugs, the FDA tried to ban all red yeast rice as a dietary supplement, claiming it contained “counterfeit statin drugs.†(http://www.naturalnews.com/030010_d…)

When the alternative media like NaturalNews and Infowars publishes real news that nobody else will publish, it’s called “fake†by the corrupt, openly bought-and-paid-for mainstream media (the OLD media).

That’s how the world works today, folks: Things that are REAL — herbal medicine, gold coins, truthful journalism — are all called FAKE.

Meanwhile, things that are FAKE — the money supply, pharmaceutical medicine, myths of U.S. history and justification for war — are all called REAL.

No wonder most people feel like their world has been turned upside down. But there’s an easy way out: When you see someone from the government moving their lips, and words are coming out, there’s no need trying to figure out whether what they’re saying is REAL or FAKE.

It’s all simpler than you think: If their lips are moving, then what they’re saying is REALLY FAKE, and you can leave it at that.

http://www.infowars.com/the-counter...for-understanding-why-collapse-is-inevitable/

 

[jaxvid]

I agree with much of the content of the article and the spirit of it but there is a kind of Luddite mentality behind it too. Sure modern pharmacuticals are synthisized from other "molecules" but that's true of any manufacturing process. Are iron molecules "stolen" from iron ore to make metals? Any modern manufacturing technique takes a raw material and refines it into something useable.

Sentiments such as those expressed in the article almost seem to indicate that a return to the dark ages is preferable because it was all "natural" back then. It's similar to the sentiments of radical environmentalists in their desire for a natural paradise.

I think the danger in trying to propose a "unified field theory" of what's wrong with the world today is when it becomes an attack on all progress. As white people we create civilization and progress, does anyone doubt that left to our own devices we would not continue to create better and better societies. The problem we have is from contamination of the "others" who pollute our worlds with ignorance and tribalism and turn our great acheivements into fake things because they are fake in that they do not belong in this type of society. Remedy that problem and the other fakery goes away.

 

[DixieDestroyer]

Good article. I'd add the modern "pop culture" counterfeits how society should (used to be). Just think rap (= crap), Lady Gaga, pop "country", Facebook, "reality" TV & video games....ALL crapola representitive of today's "pop culture". :thumbdown:

 

[Michael]

I agree with much of the content of the article and the spirit of it but there is a kind of Luddite mentality behind it too. Sure modern pharmacuticals are synthisized from other "molecules" but that's true of any manufacturing process. Are iron molecules "stolen" from iron ore to make metals? Any modern manufacturing technique takes a raw material and refines it into something useable.

Sentiments such as those expressed in the article almost seem to indicate that a return to the dark ages is preferable because it was all "natural" back then. It's similar to the sentiments of radical environmentalists in their desire for a natural paradise.

I think the danger in trying to propose a "unified field theory" of what's wrong with the world today is when it becomes an attack on all progress. As white people we create civilization and progress, does anyone doubt that left to our own devices we would not continue to create better and better societies. The problem we have is from contamination of the "others" who pollute our worlds with ignorance and tribalism and turn our great acheivements into fake things because they are fake in that they do not belong in this type of society. Remedy that problem and the other fakery goes away.

I think the article is using the word "counterfeit," in many cases, to mean goods and services that use to be high quality are now low quality. As for molecules quality is always questionable when it comes out of a factory, especially, with what is hired to work in factories today, compared to nature, but, also, how can man claim to own exclusive rights to what God has created. With iron it would be as if someone claimed that they owned the iron molecule and no one else could use it without their permission. It could be claimed that the claims to ownership and the privileges to do certain things and the skills to do certain things are what is counterfeit.

You are right the fakery centers on those from outside the White race, but with the assistance of a few of our own race. Our race has always been a race of builders as you allude to and many other races will come and slash and burn take everything and leave a wasteland behind and move on to the next land.

 

[Paleocon]

I think the danger in trying to propose a "unified field theory" of what's wrong with the world today is when it becomes an attack on all progress.

The article does come off as a defense of herbal medicine injected into a general political argument. Medicine is a hard science; politics is not. Arguments about the merits of various medical approaches need to stand on their own in the field of science. Trying to load a medicinal pet cause onto a political movement doesn't really do much for either. Doing so seems more like an attempt to sway people to believe in alternative medicine, not because it works, but rather because the government doesn't want you to do it.

 

[jaxvid]

Ihow can man claim to own exclusive rights to what God has created. With iron it would be as if someone claimed that they owned the iron molecule and no one else could use it without their permission.

If the iron molecule is on my land then you are damn right I have exclusive rights to that molecule. That is the very essence of "natural law" based on the biblical principle that God has given the earth to man to use wisely. I thought you religious guys were all about that.

What God has given to me is mine, and mine to use as I please, he can judge me on how I use it at that later date when such judgement is his providence. Other men must understand that what God gives to me and what I do with it are between Him and me and if another man interfers by laying false claim or stealing it then he is wrong and should be punished.

 

[Michael]

If the iron molecule is on my land then you are damn right I have exclusive rights to that molecule. That is the very essence of "natural law" based on the biblical principle that God has given the earth to man to use wisely. I thought you religious guys were all about that.

What God has given to me is mine, and mine to use as I please, he can judge me on how I use it at that later date when such judgement is his providence. Other men must understand that what God gives to me and what I do with it are between Him and me and if another man interfers by laying false claim or stealing it then he is wrong and should be punished.

The example with the molecule of iron was not about a specific molecule but claiming that they own all molecules of iron everywhere even on other peoples' private property. As for who these people are they can be Christians, Jews, pagans, atheist, or any other religion, as for politics they can be liberals, communist, fiscal conservatives, libertarians or any other political leaning. Which can be Hypocritical for especially for fiscal conservatives, libertarians who believe in minimum government and especially socialist who don't believe in private property.

 

[jaxvid]

I see. Then what you are inferring is that someone shouldn't have a "right" to some mixture of chemicals because those chemicals may be available to anyone, and anyone should have a right to mix them up in the same combination. I guess by that logic no one should have exclusive right to a book or written word or a song since everyone has a right to words and music? Therefore your argument (if I am understanding it correctly) is that there should be no copyright, no tradmarks, no patents?

I guess such an arguement is consistent but consider the result. Who would bother to discover or be creative if they could not profit from it? What would be the point of spending long hours in making something if someone else can just come along and copy it without the investment. If you do that you end up with ----China.

 

[Michael]

I see. Then what you are inferring is that someone shouldn't have a "right" to some mixture of chemicals because those chemicals may be available to anyone, and anyone should have a right to mix them up in the same combination. I guess by that logic no one should have exclusive right to a book or written word or a song since everyone has a right to words and music? Therefore your argument (if I am understanding it correctly) is that there should be no copyright, no tradmarks, no patents?

I guess such an arguement is consistent but consider the result. Who would bother to discover or be creative if they could not profit from it? What would be the point of spending long hours in making something if someone else can just come along and copy it without the investment. If you do that you end up with ----China.

One should be able patent the process to create it that they created but not the end result if it already exist in nature, if someone comes up with a new process to do the same thing all the better.

You are right about the reason for copyrights, and patents are to increase the nation's prosperity by giving people exclusive rights to their works for a limited time and it should be limited probably to no more then 20 years in order to keep them productive and not allow them to set on their behinds and watch the money roll in for their lifetime and much of their children. A nation needs their creative people to remain productive. Once in public domain others can improve upon them and increase the nation's prosperity even.

As for trademarks, limit the number a business can have one would be good but maybe five could be acceptable. The idea of a trademark's is an assure the customer that it is your product and your business's reputation is based on it so it is better to allow only a limited number of trademarks so big business's don't hide behind many different brands and let quality fall without people knowing who is responsible.

The big question area of copyrights, patents, and trademarks today is that big companies steal from individuals or small businesses and the courts refuse to enforce the infraction whereas they let big businesses make highly questionable claims in order to terrorize small businesses and individuals. The laws must be reasonable and equally enforced. Today neither seems to be true. That's why we have----China! It we enforced our existing laws China would have a lot of imports banned!