Thread: Pros Cons and Methodologies for opposing CFR

Originally Posted by Chosen

What are some obstacles folk have run into in explaining the CFR to others?

In no particular order:

1) People are too apathetic to care about it.
2) People discount it all as a conspiracy or 'that can't happen here'.
3) The idea itself is abstract and complicated. Many can't follow it.
4) Since the threat is not clear and present, people watch American Idol instead.
5) There is a widespread, profound misunderstanding of our founding ideals.
6) The media colludes with the CFR types in society. When an opposing viewpoint is advertised, it is often misrepresented.
7) When not misrepresented, it is mocked or ignored.
8 ) Some average Joes agree with the CFR goals. The self-annoited 'progressive' usually falls in this category.
9) There are the genuine kooks from the fringe of society that dilute or confuse the argument before you even get to them. Many times you have to compete with half-digested truths or misunderstood ideas.


I think any discussion centering around the CFR should refer to it as 'collusion' instead of 'conspiracy'. We should take a page from the opposition and use language to re-frame the issue. This sort of material has already been stigmatized too badly to continue using the same language. People have been trained to automatically discount this sort of topic.

Also, if we were to correct the issue of Point #5, that would almost certainly vaccinate the American people against the ideas of the CFR.

Originally Posted by Chosen

What are some obstacles folk have run into in explaining the CFR to others?

Dealing with people who do not know a thing about our government or about the real and devestating problems facing our freedom. Nothing against Ents, but sometimes, its like talking to a tree.

I think time is better spent getting people to understand the we have laws that aren't being enforced. CFR is part of the picture, but making a convincing case is an enormous task. You can show that the CFR discusses policy, but can you show they are in control?

Making them a target, then getting people to aim at them, that's possible, but I wouldn't bet on it being successful.

Non-enforcement of the workplace provisions of 1986's IRCA is another thing. It's easier to show, and resonates with both politically sophisticated as well as the naive.

"Tragedy and Hope" is a GREAT book, but you won't get more than 2 or 3 in a hundred to read it. A film version of the book would be unwatched.

With illegal immigration you can show crowded trains moving North, interview ICE agents who say they don't really do nuttin, and interview employers who say "His papers looked good wink wink to me".

Others will advise swallowing the whole marshmallow. I say, take a bite.

Originally Posted by jazzloversinc

So many people have no idea what the cfr is. I am giving out video's to people about the history of the fed. You can get Aaron Russo's America: Freedom to Fascism ...activists copies..for 1.25 each to hand out here:

www.freedomtofascism.com

It took me awhile to figure that it was "The Council on Foriegn Relations"

and not The Council on Federal Regulations or The Commission to the Federal Reserve.