The clever programming of society

There’s nothing wrong with putting a viewpoint strongly in a fair forum but it crosses the line when clandestine tactics are used to push it, including dishonest subterfuge and nobbling the other side.

If you attack something quite clearly bad, suddenly you’re cast as an “authoritarian”, not a conservative, as a “hater”. Manipulation of language is a critical ploy, one exploited, for example, by NLP:

http://nourishingobscurity.blogspot.co.uk/2008/02/groupthink-gentle-art-of-persuasion.html

NLP relies completely on people’s willingness to blindly accept one side’s language in the argument, the frame of reference put by the more powerful side, plus an unwillingness to accept that our “betters” would ever do anything dastardly, particularly when their guff is couched in feelgood terms and then healthy thickhead heroes are roped in to promote it, e.g. Lineker.

And as mentioned, people objecting are cast as a minority of haters whom the society is constantly warned about.

Organizations like Twitter get into this by changing their rules of tweeting. Gab, the Twitter alternative, comments:

We’ve made some incredible progress this month on the product in preparation for Twitter’s strict new enforcement rules that will be going live on December 18th. Twitter will be judging user behavior both on and OFF of their website. Meaning if you visit another website that they don’t like or show “support” for groups they don’t like, you can get banned. This unprecedented level of censorship and blacklisting of groups from the public square is unlike anything in history and will be a huge opportunity for Gab.

Let’s look at NLP:

For example, Grinder and Bandler stated that there were a few common traits expert communicators – whether top therapists, top executives or top salespeople – all seemed to share:

1. Everything they did in their work, was pro-active (rather than reactive), directed moment to moment by well-formed outcomes rather than formalized fixed beliefs.

“Well-formed outcomes”, yes:

WF Outcomes [are] the goal [in themselves], rather than acting from belief in something:

A Well-formed outcome is a term originating in neuro-linguistic programming for an outcome one wishes to achieve, that meets certain conditions designed to avoid (1) unintended costs or consequences and (2) resistance to achieving the goal resulting from internal conflicting feelings or thoughts about the outcome.

Note that the word used is “programming”, for this is what it’s all about. Manipulating opinion on a mass scale, e.g in a Common Purpose training course, the vetted participants are already a bit thick, very ambitious and susceptible to being told that they, themselves, are going to make an enormous difference in society. It’s by no means a new thing:

“You do not know the force of German propaganda. It appeals to something in man, some desire or lust for power. These people were ready to betray their country, not for money, but in a kind of megalomaniacal pride in what they, they themselves, were going to achieve for that country.

In every land it has been the same. It is the Cult of Lucifer – Lucifer, Son of the Morning. Pride and a desire for personal glory!” [Agatha Christie, N or M]

There is a practical example below. One Australian football club [equivalent of a Premier League side], does not just play football nor visit clubs and groups in the local area, as all clubs do, but has now taken a sinister turn, in return of course for federal and state funding for their stadium building.

This is from its annual report:

It’s a dead giveaway when a professional organization uses child’s scribble or pictures in its official publication. The Scottish mentoring programme, designating a “named person” to every Scottish citizen, [that is, advisor and mentor on how to think correctly], used precisely that tactic, as do any UK government programmes rolling out ideology today.

Of course, the nasties are well hidden within the torrent of feelgood, do-gooder biz-speak.

Anyone with a sense of history dismayed by that?

Four strategic aims, 10 flagship programmes – remind you of any national push in the Asian region, post 1949? Mao’s heirs were very keen on “the three virtues”, “the five aspects of wrongthinking” and so on. The “the” is a major part of it, assuming everyone, of course, knows that these are settled science, never to be questioned but everyone just accepts them.

And the way it went was to list three or four feelgood/dogooder virtues – love everyone, be equal and so on – and then bundle in the one they really wanted to introduce without demur.

Indeed. Now, this “progress” they speak about, a clue is here – learn to love the New Citizens foisted on the community with zero vetting, and on the benefits system:

The reality is a lot less warm and fuzzy:

Sigh:

That’s before the club’s gay and gay “marriage” agenda. It’s not mentioned in this quote but it was very much part of a parallel, oft-quoted agenda.

The CEO has been a major voice for gay “marriage”, quite vocal about “all members of the Geelong community” being right behind the abomination. Anyone not embracing it is “not welcome” at the club.

Pardon me but surely those welcome at the club should be people who support the team, who pay their dues and who behave at games? Since when did political views come into it?

Though the CEO pushed it directly in quotes on the club site, it’s toned down and hidden, using bundling, in this annual report and in meeting parents and children.

They go on about not drinking alcohol until 18, eating healthy foods, just like their heroes and being nice to aborigines, all very responsible, whether you’re a “New Australian”, gender fluid etc. etc. Also aboriginal “land rights”, meaning pay us for land we never owned but now want billions for.

For a start, they blithely accept govt figures, then there is the definition of “mental health” itself, now a major industry – everyone has a mental health problem which needs govt money.

If there actually IS such an issue swamping the land, then why? What has caused such a huge increase? To answer this, look at all your old clippings you’ve filed away, for example, on females not coping today with feminist demands that they MUST have everything and are failures if they don’t.

It’s the lies which are the issue with these programmes – for example, with girls’ football. The CEO made a statement that men’s and women’s football has equal status at the club. That is utter bollox, as Geelong is an AFL team, meaning it’s a men’s game.

Nothing wrong with the girls having a bit of a kick about of course. And there are countless netball organizations and leagues, women are catered for in hockey for example.

So why lie to girls that they too can become AFL players when they never will? Why does the CEO even talk this guff about the club working towards a situation in a few years when the women’s game is equal and part of the great landscape for the club?

The whole thing stinks because it is false, it’s built on falsehoods interwoven with genuine things everyone accepts. That’s the blueprint of the global left UN programming.

And if any one objects, they are ready to turn around and ask, “Why are you against girls playing the game they want? Why are you against gays having opportunities to play football just as much as those of other choices?”

Which is begging all the real questions in the first place.

They get to the kids early. Hero meatheads get up and deliver prepared scripts, mothers sit along the side:

Imagine I even managed to be allowed to speak at that meeting, to speak of the things in this post, to warn people about what is happening? Well, for a start, I would leave the kids out of it and just speak with the parents.

Can you imagine me ever being allowed to do that? Or you?

4 comments for “The clever programming of society

  1. The Jannie
    December 13, 2017 at 12:03

    In their spirit of community inclusiveness I’m sure you’d be welcomed . . . .

  2. tomsmith
    December 14, 2017 at 08:18

    The marks of this brave new world can be seen, sometimes quite obviously, as here. Or for example watching a BBC news programme, or listening to LBC radio, or reading the Guardian.

    But what is the over arching goal of all of this? It slowly destroys us and our culture for sure. It leaves us weak and open to peoplewho hate us.

    It removes genuine choice and leaves a rigid and fearful society where right-think is required and non-compliance is punished.

    Who benefits from this? Why do our national leadership think it is themselves? Who is above them in the chain of command, the one or ones actually directing this? That is what we need to work out. That is who we need to stop. And we need to do it soon.

    Either that or we need to withdraw completely, maintain resilient social networks, refuse to pay to support the machine (in fact claim benefits), and wait for things to collapse.

    • December 14, 2017 at 08:58

      So much in this comment. Have to go now, will get back later and internalize.

Leave a Reply to tomsmith Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *