Thank you for the previous comment and link suggestion. Much appreciated.

Invisible Rulers are defiantly a reality. When we think of them we think of large corporations. They are high ranking and their corridors are inaccessible to inquires and lower ranking soldiers behind their cause (i.e. market control).

My comment is to shine focus on the lower ranking soldiers, the small fish in the pond. (I acknowledge that the rulers in previous metaphor are not bigger fish, rather they are those who control the HP levels of the water).

With that said, I think the small players actually have the bigger influence to the success of the high ranking rulers and to the confirmation that this system works. The mass is made up of small parcels of individuals who, for the most part and by necessity, because of their individuality, think they are right about...all their POV's.

But we all know that like the playground, there are kids who are good at sports, are those who are social butterflys (people/parcel pleasers), and perhaps those who would eat by themselves and people watch. No one ever paid attention to them.

[I was all at some point. I dabbled in each intentionally]

Basically, I think we need to pay attention to the analyzers, those who we brand as judgmental and perhaps even awkward.

[I feel as though I am becoming more an more awkward. But I realize awkward is a relational state of being. In that I am awkward in respect to environment/culture that has the majority in rule and number].

We need to challenge them. Ask them why they are judgmental. My prediction is that we end up being challenged ourselves in the process and that might awaken us.

Programs that promote such interaction are:

Charlie Rose
Daily Show

We need to have more round table discussions and promote broadcasted, analytical arguments that focus on the content of the arguments rather than rhetoric (which ultimately entertains and thus sells ads). We need to stop wanting to be entertained all the time. A little patients to listen could do us good. We also could use less of those uncomfortable laughs and smiles that is so characteristic of an American adult in awkward situations. Realize you are being challenged. Acknowledge it and defend yourself. Don't just laugh it off.

- Nima Moinpour

http://www.examiner.com/x-35392-Brooklyn-Documentary-Examiner?showbio

You cannot separate people from the social climate in which they live. Kind of like fish living in the water of a "social pond". Even the "least social" people are still inexorably tied to this social network.

"Propaganda" can be selective government censorship, corporate advertising, paid commenters or bloggers (as done by China and other large organizations such as Microsoft and Apple, as mentioned above). Direct corporate influence over governments adds to this (and we have seen many examples of this, such as on the part of the media and energy industries, in addition to the two other companies already mentioned).

So you could say freedom in our world is being subverted:

1) In communist regimes, by the government.

2) In democratic regimes, by those who have the most money and thus can exert the greatest influence over the people (via their governments and via control over the media, advertising, and so on).

As such, I think there is value in knowing that we -- as "fish" in the common pond of our society -- are being affected by the quality of the social "water" in this pond. I think that this can allow one to make more informed decisions. As well, I think that those involved with corporate ethics should temper their use of advertising and other forms of influence on the public and governments, with the understanding of the higher degree of influence they hold due to the larger financial resources typically available to corporations. Google sets a good example here.

I think we "can" be as powerful as an entire corporation, at least as it concerns the ability to change our own minds (and perhaps the minds of a few others), IF we are conscious of some of the processes at work here. Others that do not consider these issues may not be so empowered, and be in effect forced to swim in the corporate-generated and/or government-generated currents of the "social pond". As for Communist China, I think Google has started a rather large rock rolling, toward the "non-evil" side of the equation.

Here is a short video clip on Edward Bernays, a pioneer of the use of propaganda, that I think illustrates this process (based largely on a BBC series 'The Century of the Self"):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiKMmrG1ZKU

Look at Appleinsider. According to my genius self, It is a site of propaganda for Apple. The news are distilled in a very insidious way to make you believe Apple is the coolest hardware software maker in the world (so called experts believe that ...., polls say ..., rumors etc.). The people's comments in the forums are very biased and some are certainly paid for that.

What I mean is not only govt use propaganda but Multinationals too.

BUT the overarching problem is that The Rich, The Government, Corporations, The Religious, and so on, all have an interest in gaining power, and are funded by doing so, which then allows them more activity.

Too often the simple fact conspiracies *do* exist is lost in details (many of which are noise put out by the conspirators).

Concentrated interests *always* conspire to defeat the general interest. They'll fight among themselves for the top *after* their common goal of increasing the power and scope of gov't is achieved.

In brief: distrust all power; always seek to reduce it.