Have you ever thought about why those in the First World watch the news and read history books about people in other countries constantly fighting against their own governments and the tyranny they cause, but when they think about their own government and the messed up things they are doing, they simply shrug their shoulders and carry on with their life? Some of them are more aware of certain things than others...but yet the majority of them still sit on their computers and complain about it, rather than standing up and doing something about it physically.
What is the difference between these First-Worlders and those people in other countries who are shown on World News every night physically standing up to their maniacal rulers and demanding to be treated like human beings? Are they braver? Perhaps. Are they getting a more direct and obvious "effing-in-the-ay" than the First-Worlders, and are therefore much angrier as a whole? Likely so. However, I believe the main reason is the fact that they don't have computers and internet to continuously share their contempt and disdain of the corrupt government with their fellow citizens. First World citizens do have that luxury, and they take advantage of it to the point of becoming addicted or reliant on it.
While it is good to go online, read non-mainstream news and spread the word to others about the stupid things their leaders do with their tax money or the crimes they commit in other countries, there has to be a point where they actually stand up and demand it ends. The reason nobody or no group of people are willing to actually pull the proverbial trigger on the inevitable revolution that has been bubbling all over America and the UK in the last few years is because they are being properly enslaved by very smart and cunning people who simply don't live by the same rules or have the same morals as most "little people". Now, I am well aware of how that sounds like something a paranoid conspiracy theorist would say, but I promise things will be more sensible by the end of this.
First-Worlders have freedoms, unlike the Second- and Third-Worlders who constantly fight against their corrupt governments. They are fighting for many of the same freedoms that the First-Worlders take advantage of. In fact, they are fighting for many of the freedoms that the First-Worlders abuse to the point of literally being too lethargic to actually fight in the way that the Third- and Second-Worlders do. Not that their violent methods of revolting are anything to admire, for I do feel there are much better ways of "fighting the system" than violent riots, but I think my point will be more clear soon.
There are a lot of great people in the First World nations that have created a myriad of entertaining technologies and luxuries that keep citizens infinitely distracted and content. Distraction and content: these, I believe, are the two main components in the strategy used to control the masses. The majority of the First World is either too distracted to wake up to the crimes of their government, or too content with their own personal life to believe some of the conspiracy theories that are so unfortunately true. And as for the ones who are, shall I say, "enlightened" to the "enlightened ones" a.k.a. the so-called "Illuminati leaders" who are subtly controlling the masses, well, the vast majority of them fall victim to the same exact tactics that the "sheep" do!
The so-called revolutionists are also still spending so much of their time on the computer, in front of the TV, on their phones, playing video games, pursuing hobbies, working their jobs, etc. These First World revolutionists would rather spend their time learning more about what crimes are being committed, as well as the cause and roots of the supposed "Illuminati", instead of standing up and physically doing something. Many of them seem to subconsciously not want to fight the system themselves, but would instead prefer to spread the word to others in hopes that those people will stand up and do something. It's incredibly hard NOT to do so (I myself am uber-guilty of this and probably a huge hypocrite for writing all this, but my points are still valid), and that is how the power- and money-hungry elite are able to carry on about their business, sometimes so blatantly out in the open that you have to assume they are extremely confident of this "distraction and content" method.
On the other hand, there is also the argument that the distraction method isn't sinister at all, and that it is simply a by-product of a flourishing and free society full of wonderful toys and stressful responsibilities. This is almost without a doubt true, however I do not believe that it should just end there and be chalked up to just that. That is part of the mistake people make all too often. Many people never even think about digging deeper to a question once they assume the answer they have is correct. But the hole to the truth is always deep, and you have to dig to the core of anything to find the real answer.
So yes, the distractions and content that the First World citizens experience most likely came about naturally, rather than being purposely imposed on us by a sinister group of global elitists as suggested by many of the misguided conspiracy theorists. That being said, this observation, or notion, that First-Worlders are living in luxury compared to the rest of the world and have plenty of distractions, is not a new idea at all. This was observed by pretty much anyone after the second world war when the economy began picking up, along with the industrial revolution and exponential increases in entertainment technology, while so many other countries remained in poverty, disease and tyranny.
First World leaders, or the ones pulling their strings, surely would have noticed this as well. It is a pretty simple observation if you--ironically--stop distracting yourself for a minute and actually think about it. So would it be all that hard to believe that they implemented their "plan" after observing this truth? I don't think it would take a super intelligent person to realize they could get away with committing crimes when all the victims and witnesses are thoroughly distracted and, for the most part, content with their current lives, or the illusions thereof.
Then you also have to consider how our own perceptions of First World leaders are manipulated by fictional TV shows and movies, as well as biased and flawed history, to make citizens believe there is no possible way a domestic First World leader would ever do anything that could hurt their own citizens. It is only OTHER countries' leaders who do awful things like that. We are all godly saints over here in the Holy United States and European Union, right? Right?
A large number of citizens are aware of the things their government does without it being reported on the mainstream news. And these same people know that the mainstream media is just another luxury they have that's being manipulated and used against them by the government, but so few of them actually stand up and do anything other than discuss it with others and get sucked into reading more about the "government secrets" online; unknowingly falling victim to the very scheme they are fighting against.Obviously as long as someone in the "higher-ups" could see that everyone was easily distracted--thanks to the great freedoms allowed to the First World citizens to progress science and create their own products, entertainment and businesses--it wouldn't be hard to come up with a plan from there.
If First-Worlders didn't have these luxuries, a revolution likely would have happened years ago. That being said, if they didn't have these luxuries, they may not be able to spread the word or learn as much about the crimes their government commits and the elite would be able to get away with so much more. And, to go even deeper, if First-Worlders didn't have these luxuries that subtly prevent them from revolting, it would in fact be these very luxuries that they would be fighting to have, much like the people in third-world countries are doing right now. Once the Third- and Second-Worlders get the same luxuries as the First-Worlders, they also will be too distracted and content to have the passion to care about the crazy things the government does.
The evidence of this enigma can be seen in all the newly developing Second and First World countries. These are areas where the people are being "liberated" from their Third-World status, but instead of going in what would be ideally the right direction, they are simply following in the footsteps of the dominant First World countries like America. What are the first things Third-World nations get when they're being liberated? McDonald's, iPhones, video games, Coca-Cola, and so on. Those are all wonderful things in theory, but it seems to be paving the way for the same problems First-Worlders face with being quietly poisoned with awful foods and successfully distracted with entertaining technologies, effectively tricked into thinking the government genuinely cares about them since the foods taste good and the technologies are pleasing.
It's like we are all stuck in some kind of paradox that will never allow us to defeat a corrupt government that controls its citizens so passively and brilliantly in the way countries like Iceland have in recent years, and what we see going on in the Middle East, South America and Africa every single day. The people First-Worlders "vote" into power unfortunately do not have the same morals as most normal citizens, and they definitely don't have the same plan for the world as we do. And sadly, it looks like the world is slowly but surely being shaped into their own personal utopia where they can do whatever wrongs they want as long as the citizens are sufficiently content and distracted with the few flashy freedoms they are allowed.