EDITOR’S NOTE: The following is a transcript of Episode 301 of The Corbett Report podcast, “How To Herd Your Tax Cattle.” It has been generously provided by an anonymous listener of The Corbett Report. For the mp3 audio of the podcast please CLICK HERE, or you can watch the vodcast in the player below:
JAMES CORBETT: Welcome Mr. President, welcome. Please come in, have a seat, make yourself comfortable. Thank you so much for joining me today at this early hour, not that you had a choice but today’s going to be a pretty intensive briefing session so I thought we should probably get at it a little earlier…
I’m sorry, I’m sorry where are my manners. I’m James. I’m the representative of the shadow government to put you in power so I’ll be your daily briefer. I’ll be going over the news of the day with you – what you’re supposed to say, when you’re supposed to say it, how you’re supposed to deliver it, all of that type of thing.
Occasionally we’ll go over the news that will happen next week but sometimes we’ll leave it as a bit of a surprise for you – try to get a real reaction from you, you know. I’m sure you know how all of that works but today is going to be a pretty intensive briefing so I thought we’d get at it a little bit early.
You’re going to go over the most important thing about your entire time in office and… of course I should congratulate you on your (laughs) election. What did we tell you? The Electomatic 3000 is a thing of beauty, and that whole winning the popular vote by 66.6 percent? That was my idea.
I know, I know, it is a bit cheeky but if they ever called us out on it we’d just trot out some skeptic to talk about pattern recognition. It’s fine, but that’s exactly what we’re going to be talking about today Mr. President.
How do we do it? How do we make it so blatant that we’re sitting here pulling the strings of people like you, the little puppets and minions, and yet they don’t come after us, they don’t care. They don’t even try to come after us and the people who do are denigrated and cast out of society.
It’s a pretty amazing system as I’m sure you’ve had the chance to observe from the outside there.
I know you’re not the brightest bulb in the box and you’re really only here for your photogenicity and your 1000-watt smile and your nicely quaffed hair, and and your trip to Cambodia few years ago, don’t worry Mr. President that’s our little secret.
But I guess we should try to bring you up to speed on what this is actually about and how we’re actually running things, just so you have an idea. Don’t worry we won’t get too much into the specifics, I mean that’s the stuff for the experts to worry about. You don’t worry your pretty little head about that, but you should have an idea of the overview at the very least. I mean we’ve been studying this for centuries upon centuries. Surely you know that the human species is the most studied form of life on this planet by far. I mean even most of the animal experiments we do are really just about finding out about human behavior at the end of the day aren’t they?
So we have this down to a science and it’s pretty easy actually when you start to look at it, we don’t even have to do that much – all we have to do is plant a few ideas, control a few conditions, and people do it to themselves.
I know it’s crazy. It’s crazy but you can make people put the shackles around their own neck, around their own wrists, around their own ankles, and march obediently in line behind you. It sounds crazy but it isn’t. And you see it every single day Mr. President, you’ve seen it your whole life but you just didn’t even know it was happening. You saw it from the time you were a little child and we made you make a pledge to something that doesn’t even exist.
“I pledge Allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the Republic for which it stands,
one nation under God, indivisible,
with Liberty and Justice for all.”
(Source: K3 kids recites the Pledge Of Allegiance | Time reference – 03:35)
“The original Pledge began with a military salute that was then extended out toward the flag. In practice the second gesture was performed palm down.
The Pledge was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy. Francis was cousin to Edward Bellamy, author of an international bestseller in 1888 that launched the nationalism movement. Edward’s book was translated into every major language, including German. Francis and Edward were both self-proclaimed socialists in the Nationalism movement and they promoted military socialism.
The Bellamys wanted government to take over all schools.”
(Source: Bellamy Salute is American Nazism from Pledge to Flag | Time reference – 04:06)
“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, thank you very very much for letting us little kids live here. It really really was nice of you. You didn’t have to do it and it is really not freaky that little little kids mindlessly recite this anthem every day and pledge their life to government before they are old enough to really think about what they are saying. This is not a form of brainwashing. This is not a form of brainwashing. This is not a form of brainwashing. This is really the greatest country in the whole world. All the other countries suck. And if this country ever goes to war as it is often wont to do, I promise to help go and kill all the other countries’ kids. God bless Johnson and Johnson. God bless G.E., God bless Citigroup. Amen!
TEACHER: Very good kids. Now come and get your Ritalin”
(Source: The Whitest Kids U’ Know – Pledge of Allegiance | Time reference – 04:42)
It’s just amazing that people fall for this stuff, but they do! and you know I mean they’re trained from children to accept it so how would anyone ever actually think to go outside of that system. It’s pretty basic stuff but it has a pretty powerful effect.
But I know what you’re thinking because there’s always people who step outside the bounds, that color outside the lines, that want to get around and want to try to test authority, of course those are people who exist but don’t worry of course we have that covered too.
99 percent of the population can be kept in check by people in funny costumes. I know it sounds absurd but it’s true.
PRESENTER: “Would you obey this man? He’s Charlie our actor, dressed to look like he’s in charge though he’s in charge of nothing except a bogus uniform. We’ve brought him to Edmunton in North London. To the shopping centre to find out exactly how obedient people are.
MAN IN UNIFORM: Excuse me madam sorry you’re about to cross between me and the red bench. Could you go the other side, and just beyond the apple would be great. Thanks very much madam.
These slabs..they keep… I couldn’t just ask you to knock it down for me you’re probably heavier than I am. Could you give it a good old jump.. Can you just jump please… No, two-footed probably best.
Couldn’t just ask you to litter could I? Have you got anything you could possibly litter. Here use that… it’s probably alright. Just twice would be great. Just kick it away…
Could I ask you to lead with your left… and just slowly really basically.
PRESENTER: It’s a simple experiment but amazingly it works. Out of uniform though it’s a different story.
MAN IN UNIFORM: Sir could I ask you just to switch bags to different hands?
MAN IN UNIFORM: You couldn’t just go and touch that brick..
PRESENTER: But with the uniform, 70 percent of people follow Charlie’s bizarre instructions to the letter. He’s in uniform, so they obey.
(Source: Obeying a Man in a Uniform | Time reference – 06:50)
Oh yes I know all about how this works that’s why you’re wearing that suit with the little noose around your neck and I’m sitting here in comfortable clothes because I don’t need to impress you Mr. President but I’ll just let you ponder that one if you can get that through your thick little head.
It’s pretty amazing what you can do with just some pieces of cloth and some funny colored fabrics, but it works so why bother with changing a thing that’s working so well for us and it’s been working for a very long time, and again we’re refining it all the time, little black wreaths of death that now parade around the streets claiming to serve and protect.
Again, amazing some words and some pieces of fabric apparently get a lot of people to step in line. But again, this is all that outside authority – the authority from above – the pledging, the flag, all of this kind of stuff, it’s much much much much much easier than that. We don’t need all that outside authority. The most effective authority that exists, the one that controls so many people, is in their own minds Mr. President. Do you understand this? In their own minds, they do it to themselves.
They keep each other in line. Why? Because we take any difference between any segment of the population, we magnify it, we push it, we talk about it, we focus on it in our media presentations.
Everything we do, we focus, we drill home the fact that these differences exist and you have to fight with this person, and then that person’s fighting with the other person, and it’s a melee – every man for himself. Every man for himself, every woman for herself, every person stratified, categorized, cut into fifteen different identities, and that’s what we get them to focus on.
To hold focus on the people who own the banking system? Don’t focus on the people who are running the military. Don’t focus on the people who are making the political decisions. Why on earth would you do that when you can focus on each other. Your neighbor is the source of all your problems, and hey, a house divided blah blah blah, I’m sure you know all that stuff.
Again it’s so easy we could teach this to children, and we do.
JANE ELLIOTT: “It might be interesting to judge people today by the color of their eyes…would you like to try this?
JANE ELLIOTT: Sounds like fun, doesn’t it? Since I’m the teacher and I have blue eyes, I think maybe the blue-eyed people should be on top the first day.
BOY: And up here?
JANE ELLIOTT: I mean the blue-eyed people are the better people in this room.
BOY: Huh uh.
JANE ELLIOTT: Oh yes they are–blue-eyed people are smarter than brown-eyed people.
CHILDREN: Huh uh.
BRIAN: My dad isn’t that…stupid.
JANE ELLIOTT: Is your dad brown-eyed?
JANE ELLIOTT: One day you came to school and you told us that he kicked you.
BRIAN: He did.
JANE ELLIOTT: Do you think a blue-eyed father would kick his son?
My dad’s blue-eyed, he’s never kicked me. Ray’s dad is blue-eyed, he’s never kicked him. Rex’s dad is blue-eyed, he’s never kicked him. This is a fact. Blue-eyed people are better than brown-eyed people. Are you brown-eyed or blue-eyed?
JANE ELLIOTT: Why are you shaking your head?
BRIAN: I don’t know.
JANE ELLIOTT: Are you sure that you’re right? Why? What makes you sure that you’re right?
BRIAN: I don’t know.
JANE ELLIOTT: The blue-eyed people get five extra minutes of recess, while the brown-eyed people have to stay in.
JANE ELLIOTT: The brown-eyed people do not get to use the drinking fountain. You’ll have to use the paper cups. You brown-eyed people are not to play with the blue-eyed people on the playground, because you are not as good as blue-eyed people. The brown-eyed people in this room today are going to wear collars. So that we can tell from a distance what color your eyes are. On page 127–one hundred twenty-seven. Is everyone ready? Everyone but Laurie. Ready, Laurie?
CHILD: She’s a brown-eye.
JANE ELLIOTT: She’s a brown-eye. You’ll begin to notice today that we spend a great deal of time waiting for brown-eyed people. The yardstick’s gone, well okay. I don’t see the yardstick, do you?
REX: It’s probably over there.
RAYMOND: Hey, Mrs. Elliott, you better keep that on your desk so if the brown people, the brown-eyed people get out of hand…
JANE ELLIOTT: Oh, you think if the brown-eyed people get out of hand, that would be the thing to use. Who goes first to lunch?
CHILDREN: The blue eyes.
JANE ELLIOTT: The blue-eyed people. No brown-eyed people go back for seconds. Blue-eyed people may go back for seconds. Brown-eyed people do not.
BRIAN: Why not the brown-eyes?
JANE ELLIOTT: Don’t you know?
CHILD: They’re not smart.
JANE ELLIOTT: Is that the only reason?
CHILD: …afraid they’ll take too much.
JANE ELLIOTT: They might take too much. Okay, quietly now…not a sound.
CHILD #1: It seemed like when we were down on the bottom, everything bad was happening to us.
CHILD #2: The way they treated you, you felt like you didn’t even want to try to do anything.
CHILD #3: It seemed like Mrs. Elliott was taking our best friends away from us.
JANE ELLIOTT: What happened at recess? Were two of you boys fighting?
CHILDREN: Russell and John were.
JANE ELLIOTT: What happened, John?
JOHN: Russell called me names and I hit him. Hit him in the gut.
JANE ELLIOTT: What did he call you?
JOHN: Brown eyes.
JANE ELLIOTT: Did you call him brown eyes?
CHILD #1: They always call us that…
CHILD #2: Come here, brown eyes…
CHILD #3: They were calling us blue eyes.
CHILD #4: I wasn’t.
CHILD #5: Sandy and Donna were…
CHILD #6: Yeah.
JANE ELLIOTT: What’s wrong with being called brown eyes?
ROY: It means that we’re stupider and–well, not that…
RAYMOND: Oh, that’s just the same way as other people call black people niggers.
JANE ELLIOTT: Is that the reason you hit him, John? Did it help? Did it stop him? Did it make you feel better inside? Make you feel better inside? Did it make you feel better to call him brown eyes? Why do you suppose you called him brown eyes?
BRIAN: Because he has brown eyes?
JANE ELLIOTT: Is that the only reason? He didn’t call him brown eyes yesterday and he had brown eyes yesterday. Didn’t he?
CHILD: We just started this…
BRIAN: …yeah, ever since you put those blue things on.
CHILD: They tease him.
JANE ELLIOTT: Oh, is this teasing?
BRIAN: No…when he did it, it was.
JANE ELLIOTT: Were you doing it for fun–to be funny, or were you doing it to be mean?
JANE ELLIOTT: I don’t know, don’t ask me.
JANE ELLIOTT: I watched what had been marvelous, cooperative, wonderful, thoughtful children turn into nasty, vicious, discriminating, little third-graders in a space of fifteen minutes.”
(Source: Brown eyes and blue eyes Racism experiment (Children Session) – Jane Elliott | Time reference – 11:17)
[laughing] It’s so funny. They fight with each other more than they even think about us. They never even think to come after us. They’re too busy fighting with each other, all the time over everything. They hate each other. They’ll tear each other down all day long. They’ll tear each other down in the face of the destruction of everything they’ve ever cared about in their life, because it’s always their neighbors fault.
It’s never never the people at the top of the pyramid. Oh it’s so funny, it’s so easy, it’s so simple. We train them for this from the time they’re children, and by time they’re adults it’s so internalized, it’s so ingrained, it’s so much a part of their nature it cannot be taken out ever , by anything.
People will fight, die, cling to these differences that they are so convinced are the motivating things behind everything going on in the world.
They don’t care if people come along and try to tell them about us. They don’t even care, they’ll just dismiss it because we’ve got some good codewords ingrained in their minds, to get them off of that topic and back to squabbling with their neighbors. It’s so simple and here’s the best part – all we have to do is create minor differences in the group so that one is in a relatively better position of slavery than another, and they will love us, they will cherish us, they will fight and die and defend us, whether they know it or not.
MALCOLM X: “Back during slavery, when Black people like me talked to the slaves, they didn’t kill ‘em, they sent some old house Negro along behind him to undo what he said.
You have to read the history of slavery to understand this. There were two kinds of Negroes. There was that old house Negro and the field Negro. And the house Negro always looked out for his master. When the field Negroes got too much out of line, he held them back in check. He put ‘em back on the plantation.
The house Negro could afford to do that because he lived better than the field Negro. He ate better, he dressed better, and he lived in a better house. He lived right up next to his master – in the attic or the basement. He ate the same food his master ate and wore his same clothes. And he could talk just like his master – good diction.
And he loved his master more than his master loved himself. That’s why he didn’t want his master hurt. If the master got sick, he’d say, “What’s the matter, boss, we sick?” When the master’s house caught afire, he’d try and put the fire out. He didn’t want his master’s house burned. He never wanted his master’s property threatened. And he was more defensive of it than the master was. That was the house Negro.”
(Source: Malcolm X: The House Negro and the Field Negro | Time reference – 18:45)
Oh sorry about that I got lost in contemplation there. Sometimes even I have to marvel at this system we’ve created, it is just so beautiful, so amazing how we can so utterly enslave such a large number of people with so few people at the top, so few resources really required for all of this.
It’s pretty amazing that ‘hey we figured it out, they didn’t – they suffer’. It’s so beautiful. And of course it’s not just that they’ll protect us or defend us because they care about our property because we’ve given them a tiny share of the scraps from our table like the dogs that they are, it’s much beyond that – they love us.
“Victims of Stockholm Syndrome develop compassion and loyalty towards their captors. The condition follow psychologically traumatizing situations like hostage situations and kidnappings. In fact Stockholm Syndrome got its name in 1973 when two thieves accosted a bank in Stockholm, Sweden, taking four bank employees hostage. For six days the prisoners were held in a bank vault, tied to explosives with nooses around their necks.
During a rescue attempt police were shocked when the captives took offense, siding with the captors. Like the Stockholm victims, people who developed this condition endure situations where they’re forced to contemplate the reality of severe injury or death.
In order for Stockholm Syndrome to develop, a victim must also perceive that her captors have shown occasional kindnesses, being permitted to eat, not being punished for so-called transgression, and even being allowed to live are all considered benevolent to someone with Stockholm Syndrome.
People with Stockholm experience symptoms similar to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder patients – they may have flashbacks, nightmares, distrust of others and the inability to enjoy previously pleasurable activities.
No-one is sure why this phenomenon occurs but it has been suggested that a victim believes, perhaps unconsciously, that forming an attachment to her captor maximizes her survival.
Oddly, Stockholm Syndrome doesn’t resolve in tandem with the end of a hostage situation. In the 1973 bank robbing the freed hostages remained loyal to their captors, even setting up a fund to cover the criminals’ legal fees.”
(Source: What is Stockholm Syndrome? | Time reference – 20:48)
And the worse we are to them, the more cold and inhospitable, with just once in a while tiny traces of the milk of human kindness thrown in to confuse them, the more they grow to love us.
“In the 1950s Harry Harlow conducted a series of famous but controversial experiments on monkeys at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. Harlow’s findings had substantial implications on our understanding of attachment, but by today’s standards his work would largely be considered unethical.
In one of his most famous experiments Harlow separated young monkeys from their mothers as soon as they were born, and stuck them in cages with two fake mothers: a soft one wrapped in cloth that did nothing and a cold mechanical mother made of wire that nonetheless did provide food, but despite being a cupboard mother the young baby monkeys didn’t bond with her. When Harlow or his team scared the baby monkeys with a strange contraption, the monkeys ran and clinged not to their wire, source of life-sustaining nourishment, but to the soft cuddly and otherwise useless cloth mother.
This suggests that warmth and comfort was more important than food when it came to nurturing attachment. Harlow also build a rejecting mother which used a blast of pressurized air to push the baby monkeys away but instead of finding another source of comfort, these monkeys clung even tighter at all times, than monkeys raised without rejecting mothers.
And this is what blows my mind. The instinct for warmth and comfort in newborn creatures is so strong it not only resists attempts to frustrate it, but is paradoxically strengthened by it.
Eckhard Hess tested this by using electric shocks to discourage ducklings from following the object they were imprinted on, but it only strengthened the behavior and made them follow more closely than ever before.
The fact that a wire mother or a rejecting mother or receiving electric shocks for attaching to your mother, would cause more attachment, more love, more dependence seems like a paradox, but paradoxes can teach us. As Oscar Wilde put it, a paradox is the truth standing on its head to attract attention. And what gets our attention here is the effect uncertainty can have.
In 1955 A.E. Fisher conducted an experiment on puppies. His team separated puppies into three groups. Members of the first group were treated kindly every time they approached a researcher. Members of the second group were punished for approaching the researchers. And puppies in the third group were randomly treated kindly, or punished. They grew up never knowing what to expect. Their world was not a world of kindness or punishment, but rather, one of uncertainty.
What’s really chilling is that the study found that that group, the third group of puppies, wound up being the most attached to the researchers. The third group loved the researchers the strongest and was the most dependent upon them.
Guy Murchie called this the Polarity Principle: stress, including the mental stress of uncertainty, is an ingredient in attachment or love and perhaps even manifestations of hatred (its polar opposite) somehow enhance love. Uncertainty, psychologically, can lead to some of the greatest feelings of attachment and dependence.”
(Source: Why Do We Kiss? | Time reference – 23:07)
Just call us ‘wire mama’ and they’ll cling to us like monkeys hey? Well anyway that’s the gist of it. I’ll give you some further reading that you can do on your own time if you feel like it, it doesn’t really matter but why don’t we move onto…
Sorry?…Personal character?.. Human nature?.. Basic traits?.. Are you serious?.. Oh no really?… You still believe in…? Oh man I don’t even know to respond to that. You know about the Milgram experiment right?
“Volunteers were told they were taking part in scientific research to improve memory.
SCIENTIST: Can you open those and tell me which one of you is which please.
1ST MAN: Teacher
2ND MAN: Learner
Separated by a screen, the teacher would ask the learner questions in a word game and administer an electric shock when the answer was incorrect. He was told to increase the voltage with each wrong answer.
TEACHER:Cloud, horse, rock, house. Answer?
[buzzer indicating an incorrect answer]
TEACHER: Wrong. 50 Volts, answer:horse
[Learner moans from electric shock]
LEARNER: I’m an experiment, that’s all! Get me out of here! Get me out of here, please!
SCIENTIST: Continue please, go right on.
TEACHER: It’s hard.
LEARNER: I refuse to go on. Let me out!
TEACHER: He refuses to go on.
SCIENTIST: The experiment requires you continue teacher. Please continue.
Participants did not know that the learner was really an actor and the so called “shocks” were harmless.
TEACHER: Now you get a shock, 180 volts.
LEARNER: I can’t stand the pain, let me out of here!
TEACHER: He can’t stand it, I’m not gonna kill that man there. I mean whose going to take the responsibility if anything happens to that gentleman?
SCIENTIST: I’m responsible for anything that happens here. Continue please.
TEACHER: Alright. Next one- slow, walk, dance, truck, music. Answer?
Two thirds of volunteers were prepared to administer potentially fatal electric shock when encouraged to do so, by what they perceived as a legitimate authority figure. In this case, a man in a white coat.
TEACHER: 375 volts. (no response) I think something’s happened to that fella in there. I don’t get no answer, he was hollering with less voltage, can’t you check and see if he’s alright please?”
(Source: Milgram experiment | Time reference – 27:37)
Of course everyone knows about the Milgram experiment that cat’s long since out of the bag, but here’s the part that people don’t know about the Milgram experiment, people could be made to be more or less evil, based on the circumstances. The environment determines to a large extent, the actions of the people within that situation, and if we control the operational circumstances that people are placed into, if we control the parameters of their situation and their environment, we can dial up the evil and turn down the good, or turn up the good and dial down the evil if you wanted to do that I guess. It’s all situational. Let’s let one of our psychologists explain.
“Milgram asked 40 psychiatrists individually, living in New Haven, Connecticut, and probably mostly at the medical school, “What percent of all americans would go all the way?”. Describing the study the way I did, perhaps without the drama, and they said only one percent. They said “That’s sadistic behavior and only sadists would engage in sadistic behavior” .So that’s the base rate, anything above that is significant.
They could not be more wrong. Why would they wrong? Their whole training is training only in the dispositional analysis. For psychiatrists everything is inside your head. Sadism, goodness, good and evil, everything…sanity and insanity are in your head, and that meant they ignored all of the situational variables, the lab coat, the roles you’re playing, the diffusion of responsibility – “I’ll be responsible”, the rules that are changing, and they ignored all of that to say only one percent.
We call that the Fundamental Attribution Error. We do it all the time, every time when we’re trying to understand something when we focus primarily on the person and we ignore the situation, that’s called the Fundamental Attribution Error.
So here’s the data. This is the number of subjects who drop out, so this is nobody drops out up til 28, and this is the amount of shocks right?. Nobody drops out til 285 volts. Not a single person quits. And now four people drop out then three…and now here’s that magical 375 . If you get that high the guy’s unconscious or dead. No-one drops out everyone goes all the way – two thirds – 65 percent go all the way. It doesn’t make sense, except, you’ve tried everything to get out and nothing is working at this point you say “I shock 1,2,3 and I’m out”. So giving him three more shocks, he’s already dead he’s not going to feel it, but it’s your way to exit.
So it’s not only a study in blind obedience to authority which is described, it’s a study in not knowing how to exit a horrible situation, where suddenly this just authority is now totally unjust.
So the result is not 1 percent, it’s 65 percent. Well this is only one study of many that Milgram did, but people said “You know what, maybe they really didn’t believe he was being shocked – the guy’s in the other room, he’s yelling in fact he wasn’t shocked. He was an actor, he was a confederate, it was all tape recordings of all the screams and so forth” …so two thirds, this is 60 percent, in many studies its two thirds, but you could raise it to over 90 percent or you could eliminate it.
Study 16 is: if you first see somebody like you, appear and administer shock all the way, you do it. On the other hand what happens if people rebel. Study 5: if you see two people like you while you’re waiting, if they rebel you rebel. And there’s various other other studies: if you have the guy not remote but closer to you, you don’t do it.
In fact, how do you eliminate it?
Study 1: If the guys says I want to be shocked you don’t do it, you say “That’s sick, I’m not a sadist, I’m not going to deal with a masochist”. But what this is it really says what Milgram did, he’s really quantifying evil. It’s almost as if he’s putting a human nature dial, and as you turn it you can have blind obedience to authority go from zero up to over 90 percent.”
(Source: The Lucifer Effect | Time reference – 30:13)
Are you getting this Mr. President? Do you understand what we’re telling you here? I know critical thinking or connecting the dots are not exactly your strong points, but I’m sure even you can get it by this point. What you think – this is all happenstance? Do you think things like Abu Graib just happened to pop up? You think these riots in Ferguson and all of this are just things that happened because people are the way they are? How naive can you possibly be, how ignorant of all of this research can you be.
We control the environment, we control the parameters, we control the discourse, we control people’s behaviors within that system. It’s just that simple. We control the environment. We control the system. We control the people. What are they going to do about it anyway?
Well, anyway all of this is just to say “Here’s your new Psychologist General, and yes we’re creating that position, we’ll just put in some nice rosy discourse about how we need more mental health or something, people fall for it hook, line and sinker as they always do.
Here’s our Psychologist General talking a little bit about what he’s going to be doing in your administration Mr. President.
LIONEL: “I’m going to be the Psychologist.
I want to manipulate people’s desires and thoughts. There’s two ways, James, to get people through this, and B.F. Skinner taught us this, systematic, gradual, habituation, conditioning, getting you used to something slowly, it’s like, say, breaking a phobia.
There’s the implosion therapy – throw them a snake, “You’re afraid of snakes?”, ” You’re afraid of drowning?”, throw him in the pond. It doesn’t work well. What works better is if you gradually approach. “Let’s talk about a snake. Let’s look at a picture of a snake. We’ll go to the zoo.” Maybe then eventually it won’t do that.
Something else that works even better. There’s two ways… I can put the gizmos on, but now I want to get really nasty, and I want them to basically put themselves in prison, I want them to imprison themselves. I want them to live and I want to scare them. I don’t want to use like the great BBC documentary The Power Of Nightmares, I want to get them frightened. So whether it’s ISIL, ISIS, IS, IQA, al-Nusra, I’m going to throw, as soon as they become conversant with one nefarious group of barbated beheaders, I’m going to give them another one.
I’m going to see how far I can take it. I’m going to take them to the airport, and I’m going to make them take their shoes off and put their shoes on, and I’m going to corral them. I’m going to blast them with backscatter ionizing radiation cancer tubes.
I’m going to manhandle and feel up and basically sexually abuse people – see how far they’ll go. And I will change the rules. Turn the lights on turn them off. Just when they think it’s daytime it’s not.
It’s not the Stockholm Syndrome, it’s “I’m just going to habituate you” and it’s called Learned Helplessness.”
(Source: Little Brother vs. Big Brother? – Lionel on The Eyeopener | Time reference – 35:16)
Beautiful isn’t it? I think he’s the perfect candidate.
So there you go, potato potato, Bob’s your uncle, we’re all done, I think that’s got that all of the usual tax cattle herd control in order, and I hesitate to bring this up but I suppose as your briefer I suppose I should at least bring this to your attention, again you don’t have to worry about it, we’re working on it behind the scenes.
But there are some people who are trying to poke holes in this and trying to bring this to the attention of the people of the outside world and try to inform them that they’re actually slaves to this system but, well… take a look:
LARKIN ROSE: “Quite simply a ‘statist’ is somebody who believes in having a state, basically anybody who wants government. Government is the exercise of authority over a people or place, and that is basically ‘the right to rule’.
It’s not just the ability to control other people, because most people have that in one way or another, it’s the right, it’s the idea that certain people it’s legitimate for them to forcibly control others.
Belief in government is a purely faith-based indoctrinated belief, it does not actually make any sense in practical terms or in evidence or in logic.
For years I thought it was a really good analogy to compare government to religion, and only a few years ago did I realize it’s not an analogy, it is a religion, in every way.
It has a superhuman deity: Government, that has rights the mortals don’t. It is not restricted by the rules that apply to mortals. It issues commands, and if you disobey you’re a ‘sinner’ and you deserve to be punished.
The faithful, the true believers, they have great faith in these bizarre rituals, elections and legislation and appointments, and they dress up and they say ‘Ta-da!’ Now I represent ‘government’. I know I just look like a person, but I don’t just have the rights of a person because I represent the magical deity called ‘government’, and so I’m allowed to demand your money, and boss you around, and hurt you if you disobey me. I’m acting on behalf of ‘government’, and it has commandments — called ‘laws’ — and these ‘laws’ aren’t just the threats of humans they are decrees from something superhuman.
And so all you good people out there should bow to this deity, and if you want the world fixed, this is what you pray to and we give you certain rituals of how to pray to it, and when you’re supposed to pray to it. Pray to the god to make the world what you wish it was, and to save you from all the uncertainties of reality.
The doctrine people are taught is just patently absurd, and a bunch of examples of that are like ‘consent of the governed’. There isn’t such thing. If it’s consent, it’s voluntary. If it’s being governed, it’s not. The actual given excuse is: “We have the right to rule you because you decided we did, even if you didn’t vote for us, and even if you oppose everything we do to you.”
And: ‘Well, they represent us’. Okay, they ‘represent us’ by doing a lot of things that we don’t have the right to do? And they “represent us” by bossing us around and taking our money?
I bet if I went to my neighbor and bossed him around, and took his money, and said: ‘I’m representing you’ he would say: ‘What?! What a stupid thing to say!’
To me, the most insane is: ‘We are the government’, which you hear everywhere, and I asked somebody: ‘Do you really not notice that there’s a group of people over there they issue threats, and they call them ‘laws’, and they issue demands for money, and they call it ‘taxes’ and if you disobey, they send men with guns to hurt you. Are you really incapable of distinguishing between yourself and them?”
(Source: Statism: The Most Dangerous Religion (feat. Larken Rose) | Time reference 38:06)
Sick, sick disturbing stuff isn’t it? The idea of freedom seems to be spreading like the virus that it is, but we will not allow it. Trust me sir we have already well-implanted the meme that anyone who speaks with this type of rhetoric is clearly one of those vermin ‘conspiracy theorists’, one of those vermin ‘liberty lovers’. We will stamp them out don’t worry about it.
But as I was saying, that is how we control the herd, Mr. President. Any questions? I didn’t think so.
Well as I say I’ll give you some further reading I’ll put them on the website so that you can go and take a look later on but, I guess, my question to you is “What do you want to do now Mr. President?”