Mind Control

Technocracy XIX: Huxley’s Warning

 “Our business is to be aware of what is happening, and then to use our imagination to see what might happen, how this might be abused, and then if possible to see that the enormous powers which we now possess thanks to these scientific and technological advances to be used for the benefit of human beings and not for their degradation.”

Aldous Huxley


Aldous Huxley gave a speech on what he called “The Ultimate Revolution” at U.C. Berkeley in 1962. As usual, he was remarkably prophetic in his statements. Whether he acted as the positive counter-weight to his brother Julian Huxley or was merely fulfilling his role as a telegrapher of Elite designs, is open to debate. Whatever his intentions, his words and writing remain powerfully relevant as we go forward into the 21st Century.

Huxley saw the ultimate revolution would come in exactly the same way he outlined a technocracy in his book Brave New World (BNW) which is an insightful doctrine on transhumanist philosophy and psycho-pharmaceuticals. He saw the development of these processes and techniques as firmly under a controlling oligarchy of the day whose overriding objective would be to get the mass mind to “love their servitude”.

Three years previously he stated:

“And it seems to me perfectly on the cards that there will be within the next generation or so a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing … a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda, brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods.”

It is from this basis that the Ultimate Revolution may emerge from a suitably standardised population where human differences have been ironed out and, as Huxley describes:

“… to create, … mass produced models of human beings arranged in some sort of scientific caste system”, and where “… a method of control by which a people can be made to enjoy a state of affairs by which any decent standard they ought not to enjoy.”

aldous-huxley
Aldous Huxley

Huxley told his University audience of his belief that “scientific dictatorships” of the kind advocated by Bertrand Russell, B.F. Skinner and so many others would exist in many parts of the world, marking out such a brand of totalitarianism by stealth, the type of gradualism favoured by Fabians, corporate-collectivists and the Global Occult Body. It is here that transhumanism offers itself as a more viable construct of seduction “not because of any humanitarian qualms of the scientific dictators but simply because the BNW pattern is probably a good deal more efficient than the other.” It is the constant striving for efficiency, sensation, economic and emotional certainty as a screen against a seemingly unstable world that makes techno-utopianism so appealing. It is the merging of the 4Cs and the 3Es into a global, interlocking State of unions with transhumanism as the glue.

Huxley continues:

“… I think that insofar as dictators become more and more scientific, more and more concerned with the technically perfect, perfectly running society, they will be more and more interested in the kind of techniques which I imagined and described from existing realities in BNW. So that, it seems to me then, that this ultimate revolution is not really very far away, that we, already a number of techniques for bringing about this kind of control are here, and it remains to be seen when and where and by whom they will first be applied in any large scale.”

We know that the application of the “scientific technique” in the order of the Three Establishment Model (3EM) employs a wide range of mind control and social engineering methods which have been extremely effective in shaping the individual and mass mind. Pavlovian techniques alongside, advertising, education, marketing, PR, propaganda and media influences; covert experimentation from military-intelligence with their psychotronic and bio-warfare have been used for many decades. All these could now be considered to be in a state of high advancement. Used in conjunction with a predisposition in the human make-up to acquiesce to authoritarian personalities and their power structures, as a consequence, using Huxley’s 1962 standards:

“… there can be no doubt that by the application of these methods a very large army of totally devoted people has been created. The conditioning has been driven in, so to say, by a kind of psychological iontophoresis [ * ] into the very depths of the people’s being, and has got so deep that it’s very difficult to ever be rooted out, and these methods, I think, are a real refinement on the older methods of terror because they combine methods of terror with methods of acceptance that the person who is subjected to a form of terroristic stress but for the purpose of inducing a kind of voluntary acceptance of the psychological state in which he has been driven and the state of affairs in which he finds himself.” [1]

Huxley then describes experimentation of rats and the manipulated mid-way point: “between the pleasure and the pain center,” and the behaviour which resulted in: “a kind of mixture of the most wonderful ecstasy and like being on the rack at the same time.” However, the rats would always press the bar for the same “hit” despite knowing it would result in an increase of discomfort. The pleasure was enough to eclipse the underlying pain. Fitting electrodes in chickens induced the complete control of their behaviour in way that is very similar to what we are facing now with humans, albeit on a vastly more complex and diverse set of responses. The result however, is just the same:

“… they can run about in the barnyard and you could press a button and this particular area of the brain to which the electrode has been screwed down to would be stimulated. You would get this fantastic phenomena, where a sleeping chicken would jump up and run about, or an active chicken would suddenly sit down and go to sleep, or a hen would sit down and act like she’s hatching out an egg, or a fighting rooster would go into depression.”  [2]

He then makes the most important point of all and asks us what might happen if such techniques were in the hands of unscrupulous people. We must learn the lessons of history and exercise our imagination and critical faculties in order to deduce what might occur in the future. Well, not only has there been a long process of mass mind control and a slow ponerogenic infection in the mass of humanity, these techniques are now wholly in the hands of technocrats. Have we even attempted to extrapolate the necessary information that lies behind this entrainment? Would that be pandering to “conspiracy theory” or casting a discriminating eye over repeating patterns of history that still echo their signs and portents?

It seems time is short to “get it”.

Huxley’s prediction is not only true but has gone way beyond his understanding in terms of how deep the pathology has become. He asks: “What might happen if these fantastically powerful techniques were used by unscrupulous people in authority, what on Earth would happen, what sort of society would we get?” A Global Pathocracy by stealth would be the inevitable answer.

He states further:

“…when looking back over history we have allowed in the past all those advances in technology which has profoundly changed our social and individual life to take us by surprise, I mean it seems to me that it was during the late 18 century early 19th century when the new machines were making possible the factory situation. It was not beyond the wit of man to see what was happening and project into the future and maybe forestall the really dreadful consequences which plagued England and most of western Europe and this country for sixty or seventy years, and the horrible abuses of the factory system and if a certain amount of forethought had been devoted to the problem at that time and if people had first of all found out what was happening and then used their imagination to see what might happen, and then had gone on to work out the means by which the worst applications of the techniques would not take place, well then I think western humanity might have been spared about three generations of utter misery which had been imposed on the poor at that time.

And the same way with various technological advances now, I mean we need to think about the problems with automation and more profoundly the problems, which may arise with these new techniques, which may contribute to this ultimate revolution. Our business is to be aware of what is happening, and then to use our imagination to see what might happen, how this might be abused, and then if possible to see that the enormous powers which we now possess thanks to these scientific and technological advances to be used for the benefit of human beings and not for their degradation.” [3]

And this is where we now find ourselves.

Do we indeed have the “wit” to marshal our resources against what seems to be the inevitable repeat scenario of psychopathic dominance?

Can we turn the tide of technology towards the creative principle and away from the closed door of transhumanist feudalism?

Perhaps the keys to understanding these answers lies in the event that was both a calling card of the Pathocrats and a potential global wake-up call to the nature of our reality here on Planet Earth. It was a crossroads that forced us all to choose which reality we prefer to inhabit, whether we realised it or not.  In the next series, we will look at possibly one of the most important “ritual” of the last two hundred years: September 11th 2001 and the World Trade Centre and Pentagon attacks and the engineering of its effects on the world population.


* Otherwise known as electromotive drug administration (EMDA). A technique using a small electric charge to deliver a medicine or other chemical through the skin.


Notes

[1] ‘The Ultimate Revolution’ By Aldous Huxley, March 20, 1962 Berkeley Language Center – Speech Archive SA 0269.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.

The Sex Establishment VI: False Memory?

“We propose that use of the term “false memory” to describe errors in memory for details directly contributes to removing the social context of abuse from research on memory for trauma. As the term “false memories” has increasingly been used to describe errors in details, the scientific weight of the term has increased. In turn, we see that the term “false memories” is treated as a construct supported by scientific fact, whereas other terms associated with questions about the veracity of abuse memories have been treated as suspect.”

― Jennifer J. Freyd; from Use of the Term “False Memory” for Errors in Memory for Details, Journal: Ethics & Behavior 14(3) pages 201-233, 2004”


imagesIt is curious how the deconstruction of psychoanalysis has led to the resurfacing of child abuse at this particular juncture in human history and precisely at the time of an overt sexualisation of children, in turn, drawn from a foundation of religiously-induced anti-sexuality!

An example of a strange Establishment-led “science” which is stirring the pot of both extremes is False Memory syndrome (FMS) where many genuine child abuse victims were denied justice on the basis that “recovered memories” were deemed unworthy of analysis due to alleged “suggestions” or verbal “cues” from mental health professionals. [1]

That doesn’t mean to say that FMS is wholly without merit. If a therapist is convinced that the patient has been sexually abused by her parents or by a Satanic Ritual Network then this bias can influence the subject – in some cases. Even if the client has no memory of it, it is possible to offer leading questions and subtle persuasion which can lead her away from objective recall to subjective assumptions. Not recalling the trauma means that the client is in denial which then becomes the “proof” which establishes a dangerous loop of confirmation. Memory is highly malleable, of that fact there is no question. The detection of false memories is an essential skill that not all therapists possess, nor is it immune to political interference.

There is danger from both directions. Yet, the more one digs into FMS the more reasons for disquiet can be found.

The False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF) founders are Peter Freyd and his wife Pamela, whose daughter had accused Peter of molesting her as a child and provides an interesting set of initial reasons why such a belief may have come into being. Moreover, the late psychologist and paedophile advocate Ralph Underwager was an original member of the FMSF Advisory Board and helped to create the foundation. He and his wife Hollida Wakefield used to publish a publish Issues in Child Abuse Allegations, a journal written by and for child abuse “skeptics.”

Dr. Ralph Underwager’s credentials as a paedophile apologist were well-known. Rather than call for preventative treatment Underwager was intent on campaigning for paedophile’s rights and to insist that the condition was simply another sexual preference that should be sanctioned. Underwager was interviewed in Paidika -The Journal of Paedophilia where he was asked the question: “Is choosing paedophilia for you a responsible choice for the individual?” Underwager: “Certainly it is responsible”…. Paedophiles need to … make the claim that paedophilia is an acceptable expression of God’s will for loved unity among human beings”. [2]

Whilst Underwager dismissed all ritual child abuse as fantasy and the rights of paedophiles as sacrosanct, his outspoken comments caused his resignation from the foundation in 1992. His wife Hollida Wakefield who remained a member despite similar views on paedophilia where she claimed:  “… a longitudinal study of, let’s say, a hundred twelve-year-old boys in relationships with loving paedophiles” would be a good starting point for research. [3]

Some of the other original board members – some of whom are now deceased – include:

Dr. David F. Dinges a Faculty head of the Unit for Experimental Psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania, is on the Scientific Advisory Board and used to work with the late Austrian-born Dr. Martin Orne. (More on him later).

Dr. Harold Lief was the Freyd family’s personal psychiatrist and was tasked with persuading the Freyd’s daughter Jennifer that no abuse took place. Another close colleague to Orne and a participant in hypnotic programming and behavioral modification experiments at the University of Pennsylvania. Past president of the Sex Information and Education Council and director of the Centre for Sexuality and Religion. Lief is credited with the introduction in the DSM of the “inhibited sexual desire” and a longtime supporter of Alfred C. Kinsey.

Dr. Elizabeth Loftus – A research psychologist who testified on behalf of serial killer Ted Bundy. Loftus also defended various individuals accused of child abuse and was ejected from the American Psychologist Association. Californian Clinical psychologist Catherine Gould an expert in the treatment of ritually abused children who stated at the September 1993 National Conference on Crimes Against Children in Washington, D.C., that the studies by Elizabeth Loftus ignore past research on trauma and its influence on memory. Gould voices her concern about Loftus pointing out that the nature of memory of traumatic events is not discussed in her data and yet:

“… she has failed to protest the misapplication of her findings by groups who are involved in discrediting the accounts survivors are giving of their traumatic history. I believe that Dr. Loftus, like other psychologists, has an ethical responsibility to do everything possible to ensure that her research findings are interpreted and applied accurately, and are not manipulated to serve the political agenda of groups like the False Memory Syndrome Foundation. I question whether she has met this ethical responsibility.” [4]

Michael A. Persinger – a Professor of Cognitive neuroscience and militant atheist. An expert in low frequency electromagnetic waves (ELF) he believes almost any experience can be produced whether by false memory or mind control by beaming specific frequencies at the temporal lobes of the brain. He has worked for the Navy and the National Security Agency and his been associated with military mind control research.

Others worth mentioning who were members of FSMF were Louis Jolyon “Joly” West who had a resume for mind control psychiatry as long as your arm. He worked with Orne, Persinger and others as key personnel in the CIA’s mind control programs. For example, Margaret T. Singer noted for her psychological brainwashing techniques in the military and her association with West and Dr. Martin Orne. “The Amazing” James Randi Luminary of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP). Randhi was also accused of being a serial paedophile. All of whom have made it their calling to deny the claims of those suffering from child sexual abuse.

In fact, the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF) board members offered a veritable hornet’s nest of CIA and military-intelligence connections.  And with a history of sexpionage manipulations and mind control operations a proven part of the agency’s past (and present) one has to question why it is that this grouping of connections exist. [5]

Martin Orne, a co-founder of FMSF had a particularly interesting history in this context. Researcher Colin A. Ross MD who obtained Freedom of Information documents regarding the origins and history of FSMF provides the needed background on the co-founder. He established that Orne not only had top secret clearance for and consultation status for Operation MK-ULTRA mind control programs conducted by the CIA but his C.V. is positively brimming over with military-intelligence funding and contracts, citing infamous centres of mind control research institutes the Office of Naval Research and Centre for Human Ecology. On FSM, Ross opines that:

“The FSMF Advisory board was a very diverse group with many personal, political and professional agendas,” yet the presence of  “a sub-group including Drs Orne and [Louis Jolyon] West were primarily interested in discrediting multiple personality and ‘recovered memories’ in order to protect the Manchurian Candidate programs [US mind control programs] During the 1990s when the false memory wars were at their peak, hundreds of lawsuits were filed against therapists inducing ‘false memories.’” [6]

Ross asks us to consider the following:

… a woman tells a psychotherapist that a psychiatrist working for the U.S. Air Force gave her LSD during an experiment conducted at the University of Minnesota, where he worked and she was a research assistant. He then made her sit in a specially constructed room that had leaves glued to its walls, floors and ceiling. In the 1990s a person who remembered this in therapy could have sued her therapist for implanting fantastic, impossible false memories. FMSF expert witnesses would have told the jury that these memories were false and implanted by the therapist who was guilty of malpractice. [7]

It was these exact experiments which were carried out at the University of Minnesota by Dr. Amedeo Marrazzi with funding from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research. [8]

Indeed, FMS experts believe that even the very idea of repressed memories of trauma have no empirical evidence, preferring to place the blame largely on the pseudo-science of various therapists implanting these memories. Despite this claim there are many examples that the mind does indeed repress authentic trauma and in the hands of an experienced psychologist or psychotherapist can be worked through.

According to Psychologist Ken Pope, in 25 studies of amnesia for childhood sexual abuse it was concluded that:

“… all demonstrate amnesia in a sub-population including recent studies with design improvements such as random sampling and prospective designs that address weaknesses in earlier studies. A reasonable conclusion is that amnesia for CSA [childhood sexual abuse] is a robust finding across studies using very different samples and methods of assessment. Studies addressing the accuracy of recovered abuse memories show that recovered abuse memories are no more or no less accurate than continuous memories for abuse.” [9]

The FMS crowd can just as easily be accused of producing an industry of denial where all abuse reports and trails are burdened with what author and sociologist Sara Scott describes as the “discourse of disbelief.” These industries of disbelief and the industry of survivors compete together to produce more suffering and more victims in the law courts.

Professor Ross E. Cheit, head of the Recovered Memory Project, suggest financial gain from recovering memories as the only driving force, stating: “… it is curious to note that critics who are quick to question the financial motives of anyone who might receive compensation for a recovered-memory claim never seem to raise the same concern when considering those who have recovered enormous financial payments in ‘false memory’ cases: the so-called ‘retractors.’ The one-sidedness of this scepticism can best be explained as politics, not science.” [10]

While FMS is not acknowledged by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders it is often included in mental health papers for public advisory guidelines. FMS “experts” can charge fees of over $450 per hour, thus contributing to an atmosphere of exploitation and vested interest far above the needs of truth. [11]

 


Notes

[1] “False memory syndrome” (FMS) is the term for the hypothesis describing a state of mind wherein sufferers have a high number of highly vivid but false memories, often of abusive events during their childhood, though this remains a highly contentious area of conjecture. It is not listed DSM-IV, though this in itself does not constitute a non-validation of this theory, being as the manual is less than objective in its criteria for mental illness.
[2] Paidika Winter Issue, 1993, pp. 3, 12.
[3] Ibid.
[4] ‘The False Memory Hoax’ By Alex Constantine, January 1996 | educate-yourself.org/mc/falsememoryhoax1996.shtml
[5] Ibid.
[6]Military Mind Control: A Story of Trauma and Recovery [Kindle Edition] Colin A. Ross M.D. Published by Manitou Communications 2008. | ASIN: B005ZJUXA8
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid. (introduction)
[9] ‘Science as Careful Questioning: Are Claims of a False Memory Epidemic based on Empirical Evidence?’ By Ken Pope appeared in the American Psychologist, vol. 52, #9, pp. 997-1006.
[10] ‘Response to Critics’ Professor Ross E. Cheit, Project Director Of the Recovered Memory Project Taubman Center for Public Policy & American Institutions at Brown University. Information can be found at recoveredmemory.org.
[11] op. cit. Scott (p.58)