The inside story of mind-manipulation has never before been made public; how many are willing to face it I do not know but we need to find out.
Human behaviour has been scientifically investigated and this information put in the service of amoral academics, public relations industries and political social engineers.
These are established facts but the general population is not educated to know how despotically it is being manipulated and used.
Today many people fear technology; we are terrorized by stories of nuclear war and greenhouse, and the implied culprit is technology. Children are conditioned to fear technology but the real danger is from their educators!
Mankind has always been able to handle technology; 'future shock' is a myth, educated man can live with his inventions.
From the beginning of civilization man has used advancing technology to his own delight. From pyramid technology to nuclear reactors it has been man who has decided the use, or misuse, of technology. And the misuse may be charged to the INEQUALITY of man!
The inequality of man is something that mankind has always understood; it is so obvious. The EQUALITY of man! .. AH! That concept came only with civilization - equality is a far more difficult concept.
We had to learn abstract reasoning. Equality was clearly not a physical thing. Equality is about JUSTICE (equality before the law)! POLITICAL EQUALITY (equal rights to knowledge)! These were new and more difficult concepts to appreciate; only access to many generations of human experience could give us that.
And so we came to mass education for, without equality of access to knowledge, the equality of man could never be realized.
But IN-equality, MlS-education, NON-education - a majority kept subservient to hide that the emperor has no clothes - that had become comfortable for us. We, the people, must now learn to KNOW OURSELVES!
It may help us to know ourselves if we study the knowledge of us gathered by our oppressors and used for our manipulation. Here are a few quotes from Bernays' works; I assure you that if there has been any change during the intervening years it has been for the worse.
Bernays, Crystallizing Public Opinion, p122; quote:
The average citizen is the world's most efficient censor. His own mind is the greatest barrier between him and the facts. His own "logic-proof compartments," his own absolutism are the obstacles which prevent him from seeing in terms of experience and thought rather than in terms of group reaction. EQ. EA.
I am proud of all readers who have had the courage and tenacity to come this far. I would clearly have liked to give more examples and evidence but I know well that in the present state of the national mind too much is worse than too little.
Because we have become so confused by long term deceit we now prefer to live by peer-group responses rather than by reason. Group reaction is of course influenced by group habits so let's look at an item, p115; quote:
The relative importance your newspaper gives to an occurrence affects your thought, your character, and your children's thought and character. For few daily habits are as firmly established as the habit of reading the newspaper. EQ. EA.
The above is a quote by Bernays from another author and, although we have now transferred much of this habit to TV watching, that has only intensified the effect. The next item another very relevant quote by Bernays from another author; REMEMBER they are talking about us. p108-9; quote:
He is more sensitive to the voice of the herd than any other influence ... It can inhibit or stimulate his thought and conduct It is the source of his moral codes, of the sanctions of his ethics and philosophy. It can endow him with energy, courage, and endurance, and can as easily take these away. It can make him acquiesce in his own punishment and embrace his executioner submit to poverty, bow to tyranny, and sink without complaint under starvation. Not merely can it make him accept hardship and suffering unresistingly, but it can make hint accept as truth the explanation that his perfectly preventable afflictions are sublimely just and gentle. It is this acme of the power of herd suggestion that is perhaps the most absolutely incontestable proof of the profoundly Gregarious nature of man.
He is subject to the passions of the pack in his mob violence and the passions of the herd in his panics. EQ. EA.
All such crippled-mind responses are subtly led by mass media stirred emotions and misinformation.
The evidence indicates that when raised in the present environment of deceit mankind has little ability, desire, or too much pride to distinguish fact from fiction.
We may think all that a little extreme, but think of the farmers who have committed suicide. some even killing their families in their despair.
Think of the inability of betrayed groups of people and industries to look for the cause and see the clear evidence that their plight is entirely artificial - situations created and correctable. We commit suicide rather than admit and deal with, what is going on around us.
Think of the mindless frenzy of protesters who, even when their cause is just, are unable to distinguish between reason and unreason. Yes, there are exceptions but, in the overall result, the findings of social research in the early part of this century (confirmed by later research) are not only fitting today but more accurate today - successful use proves the point.
On pages 129-30 Bernays gives three ways to obtain national cohesive force; one is called "patronage and pork" which, in Australia is usually referred to as "You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours". The second method is "government by terror and obedience". However it is the third given that is interesting; quote:
The third method is "government based on such a highly developed system of information, analysis and self-consciousness that the knowledge of circumstances and reasons of state is evident to all men". EQ. EA.
This shows that they know what should and can be done. Relating this to what happened during the 1914-18 war Bernays says "the method least relied on by any of the belligerent countries" was the third method and; quote:
This breakdown did not occur among small, inefficiently organized groups [nations]. It occurred among the representatives of the highest development in social organization.
If this is the fate of the most highly organized social groups, consider then the problem which confronts the social, economic, educational or political groups in peace time, when they attempt to obtain a public hearing for new ideas. EQ.
And so it goes on; he remarks on our futilities in trying to start new political parties or awaken new understandings. He says (as do most apologists for public manipulation) that public opinion is not created by manipulation but is an interaction between public and media (i.e., pornography never degrades, lies never mislead, and crime is the fault of the victim.
In nature it may be true that filth can become fertilizer but, when vested interests deliberately smother the delicate flower of reason, it is not true. Is it not strange that such knowing people do not know that? Bernays' book, like most such literature, reads like the insensitive comment of an amoral investigator.
When they talk of "herd mentality" they are not meaning "street mobs" but peer group associations that may be complex. A lot of work has been done in recent years on "Human Behaviour" and "Psychology". It is well confirmed that the 'common herd' is now far more swayed by opinion than fact.
The reason for this apparent illogic is that when a mind has been confused to distrust its ability to reason it then ignores fact and evidence (unwanted) and is content to rely on weight of opinion or 'authority'.
That is why reformers in the public arena generally find that their evidence is ignored but a good speaker may sway the mob with emotionally stated opinions.
Knowing this, the manipulators do not, in general, need secret codes or private research service. So long as each fact or evidence of research is accompanied by comforting words and bland opinions the student or general reader will 'read over' the evidence to accept the conclusions offered.
Critical readers of social sciences literature will find well-written self-contradictions quite evident.
In other words we always hear what they tell us but never know what they say.
I learned at a very young age that opinions were of no real value; that only fact or evidence had value. I feel I should be ashamed that for years I have noted these contradictions between fact and opinion in social sciences literature and not seen that this simple device allows a lot of elitist research and literature to be openly displayed.
That insight only reached me in the course of this writing and again demonstrates the value of re-assembly of knowledge and experience.
The importance of knowing how the manipulators communicate openly and yet secretly is equal to breaking an enemy wartime communications code. More so in this case, because it is now too late for the manipulators to change codes. If we can still reason a little the evidence is there for all to see.
By our cultural cringe we have fortressed ourselves into a protective cocoon that allows no logical assessment of fact. They, the superior ones, want us to believe that this is our nature and cannot be changed.
You may, at present, believe you are helpless. You may doubt that what I have shown you here is true. You may even feel insulted.
Or you may believe that it confirms your own suspicions but doubt that it is as bad as I say. You think you will show this evidence to your friends; they will help spread the word and we will soon straighten things out.
Well? I have been trying to present information that would do that for about twenty years and, though I have undoubtedly improved the clarity and force of my submissions, you can see that I have reason to be less confident.
What you may find is that your friends seem strangely reluctant to listen or believe. You are one of a peer group. Why are you being different? Why should you be acting like a leader? You are just 'old Harry' or 'old Maud' or 'young Jim' or 'young Judy'. If you actually get their attention they will almost certainly want the problem referred to 'an authority'.
Peer groups attach to political parties or other leader groups. Members of any sub-group may not approve the activity of their party but will agree on some person in the party they approve of.
The same applies to mass media. We all agree that the media lies but each sub-group has its media 'hero'. It will be sad if, rather than act on your own intelligence, your best result is that either you, or someone else in your immediate group, only sends the material to an accepted authority. The result of that you can almost guarantee, will be negative - the more convincing the evidence the more soothing the response of those who fear exposure.
Try it, let me know the result, eh!
We behave like animals that have been long frustrated and abused; we huddle, and are encouraged to huddle, in like-minded peer groups. We make mountains out of beer cans (mole-hills are old hat). We refuse to seek knowledge and think for ourselves - thinking is for the leaders.
Well, in an age of science, technology and tyranny - a world where population is exploding and natural resources shrinking, that leaves us naked and defenseless. For the sake of humanity and our personal soul, we must do better than that.
For final reference to the head waters of power I would like to give quotes from a talk given by an American, Dr. E. Vieira, about unlawful money but it would like us beyond the space allowed for this book. However I can tell you that the situation in the USA is not better than here. What Vieira, as a lawyer, explains is that it would take the power of a foreign nation to take the money manipulators to court and expose that they are operating outside, and contrary to, the USA Constitution.
World problems are common. Had the Australian people not been deceived to allow the political parties control of parliament, and had not the parties then handed control of the money over to private banking interests, we would never need have a depression and everyone would know the secrets of government and finance.
In Australia, as in the USA, to expose unconstitutional government in the courts is impossible for ordinary citizens. It would take one of the major religious denominations to uphold the Christian faith in defence of its flock; or one of the major trade unions to demand political justice for its contributors; or a major industry to defend free enterprise if the Constitutional rights of a free people are to be revealed and upheld.
That is the kind of force it would take to by-pass mass media and get such public support as would force the legal system to uphold our constitutional law and declare all government decisions, those made since the party hi-jack, unconstitutional and illegitimate.
Yes, that is what it would take!
But then .. on the other hand, THAT'S ALL IT WOULD TAKE! Why do we not make our so-called leaders an offer they can't refuse?
Consider this .. quote:
The present order of our lives is governed and controlled by the governors and controllers of money ...
If an economist from Mars or a little child of ordinary intellect were told of the present position they would rock with laughter at the blind stupidity of mankind. EQ.
That was said by V C Vickers, one-time Deputy Lieutenant of the City of London, a Director of Vickers Limited and, from 1910 to 1919 governor of the Bank of England. He knew what he was talking about.
But did he know what he was talking about?
Do I know what I am talking about?
Perhaps the little children he knew were all part of the elite! Perhaps we common people have different brains to those of the Vickers and Rothschilds and cannot understand the simple basics of finance or social order - perhaps we are a sub-human species that REALLY MUST be treated like cattle!
Perhaps! But if that is so will you please explain to me why it is then necessary that we brainless ones have to be lied to, miseducated, deceived and brain-washed? Why is it that a whole industry has to be set in place to keep us in the dark? Why science delivers no evidence that two distinctly different human races inhabit our earth?
If you can explain that then I will apologize to myself for wasting my time.
(in order of first appearance)
Matthew Arnold p 2
Benjamin Disraeli p 16
Bertrand Russell p 16-17
Multi-Function Polis p 17
Edward L Bernays p 17-18, 24-38, 120-1-2
The Humanist Magazine p 18
Sir Herbert Gepp p 18
The Sydney Sun p 18
Stanley Allen p 19
Lloyd George p 19
Machiavelli p 20
Jesus of Nazareth p 20
Radhakrishnan p 21
George Orwell p 21
Hegelian Dialectic Process p 21
Frank Anstey p 39-40
D J Amos p 41-44
Rothschild p 45
C H Douglas p 45
Gary Johns MP p 47-8
Constitutional Commission p 48
Bob Hawke p 49
High Court Judge Wilson p 49
Crimes Act p 49
Professor Dunhoff p 51-2
The Australian p 54, 71, 87-8
G Edward Griffin p 56
Barry Cohen p 58
Dr David Mitchell p 61-2
John Howard p 62
Fundamental Rights p 63-7
Edmund Burke p 68
Lord Shaw p 68
Wilberforce p 68
Professor David Myers p 72-3
Dame Leonie Kramer p 73-4
Bettina Arndt p 74-5
Howard Coxon p 75
Dr J W Smith p 77-8
Drs FE &M Emery p 81
Home & Away p 81
Fact & Fantasy File p 87
Lucy Sullivan p 87
Report Joint Select Committee p 89-90
Man in the Mirror p 91-2
Tacitus p 95
Dr Frederic Wertham p 96
P & C Association p 102
LEAN (surveillance) p 104
Dr Susan George p 109-11
World Health Organization p 112-4
Sydney Morning Herald p 113-4
V C Vickers p 126
"The inside story of mind manipulation has never before been made public; how many are willing to face it I do not know but we need to find out.
Human behaviour has been scientifically investigated and this information put in the service of amoral academics, public relations industries and political social engineers.
These are established facts but the general population is not educated to know how despotically it is being manipulated and used." brain10.htm