“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”
― Edward L. Bernays, Propaganda
The clever technocratic agenda is such that it has sought to control the minds of men. A powerful police force is not only being organized by the state, but a system of control is being created that encourages people to police themselves with self-censorship through ‘political correctness’. This is apparent in the manner in which it operates through the ‘progressive’ movement. It appeals to everyone in an emotional sense, and the rational elements of arguments are conveniently neglected, or outright demonized, to deter any type of attention is focused on the merits of certain issues that are weighed to determine the proper course of action.
the constitution is viewed as an inconvenience in the way of progressive legislation to give certain groups enhanced rights. The brunt of the trauma inflicted on this country’s founding documents, which ensure the individual’s god-given rights has been modified by allegedly egalitarian organizations supposedly fighting for civil rights, to aid in the fight against the oppression of certain groups that have been marginalized.
Modern examples of ‘progressive’ legislation include ‘hate crimes’ and the claim of ‘hate speech’, also affirmative action, the theory of ‘leveling the playing field for all races’ was implemented quite aggressively in the workplace. The initial justification for these laws was to create an atmosphere where everyone would be treated equally, to guarantee everyone had the same opportunities.
Sometimes more racism is espoused from the alleged proponents of civil rights than the supposed ‘racists’ who just want to move on from those dark times. Supreme court justice Clarence Thomas recently said that society is too focused on race, more so in fact than in the 1960’s where he saw segregation first hand. Justice Thomas was brutally attacked by liberal pundits with callous remarks on social media sites, one comment suggesting, Justice Thomas wanted to return to the old Jim Crow era, and another stating he was an ‘uncle Tom’ for saying such a thing.
It is often forgotten that the democratic party was involved with the Ku Klux Klan. President Lyndon B. Johnson who signed the civil rights act into law in 1964 had ulterior motives for his ‘altruistic endeavors’. In letters to colleagues during that time he admitted that the civil rights legislation was merely an attempt to gain further control over the blacks.
Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood attended, and gave speeches at Klan rallies. She wrote letters to colleagues expressing her desire to infiltrate the ‘leftist black’ movement, in an attempt to control it. She was very outspoken about the application of eugenics and its ability to be utilized for depopulating those she deemed as the ‘lesser’ races.
Pat Buchanan, in his World Net Daily article from February 2014, discusses the issue of repealing the civil rights act, because it is essentially antiquated when one considers the progress society has made with race relations. He references the recent bill in Arizona, which would recognize a business’ right to refuse service to gay couples based on religious grounds; the assumption, of course, postulated by the ‘progressive idealists’ is that there is some deep-seated homophobic hatred underlying the true motivation for their refusal. The media spins this proposal as an ‘anti gay’ bill, it neglects the absurdity of forcing someone to perform a service against their will.
Buchanan argues that in a free society we sometimes have to deal with the fact that we can’t always get along with everyone, and that businesses do in fact have the right to refuse service to particular people. Buchanan referenced a case of a photographer who, on religious grounds refused to shoot a lesbian commitment ceremony, and the issue becomes blatant bigotry, the propagandists projecting their hatred onto a person who simply refuses to provide a service.
The speculation that this is some call for the ‘good old Jim Crow Klu Klux Klan days’ is short-sighted when one considers an obvious example of the election of the country’s first black president; the call to repeal the civil rights act is merely the disregarding of superfluous legislation–it is a redundancy, especially when the constitution of this country already guarantees the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The civil rights movement was an attempt for those who were regarded as less-than-human to be elevated to the same level as ‘regular people’, but it does not guarantee the privilege for a select group to deny others’ rights, as civil rights activist Tammy Bruce mentioned on her radio program.
The LGBT community didn’t need a radical transformation of the United States constitution to access the same marriage privileges afforded to straight couples, this was always a state’s rights issue as Rand Paul said. The tenth amendment, which affords the states the opportunity to fight for the rights denied by the federal government has recently been invoked, (and the same amendment has also been heavily demonized by so-called ‘liberals’ in regards to NSA state nullification–a conspiracy, they claim to reintroduce segregation) and hence individual rights–not some arbitrary ‘group rights’ were upheld.
The intricate system of social engineering orchestrated by a small but powerful elite has been able to repeatedly manufacture a crisis and benefit from it, and all under the nose of the average person. The true genius of these ‘progressive’ initiatives, is how well these psychological operations actually work.
There are external influences which can manipulate behavior, take for example the navy yard shooting, where a man went on a shooting rampage in an area with disarmed soldiers, a stand down was ordered and after many were killed his weapon was found with a message carved on the butt of the rifle: ‘this is my ELF weapon’; and they can alter the dynamic of the situation in such a way that violence can be provoked, like situations where black operatives are used to overthrow governments who refuse to cooperate with corrupt oligarchs, after the coup a puppet regime is installed, much like the Ukraine.
In 1984, the protagonist, Winston discovers the true purpose behind the new language in Oceania, called Newspeak, it allows the public to be easily controlled. New editions of the official state dictionary are published frequently, and with every new edition the language shrinks, and consequently the scope of one’s thoughts gradually begins to narrow. The consequence of the Newspeak dictionaries compromises the ability to think, it is diminished to the point where any kind of debate, let alone a discussion, is impossible.
The technocrat’s psychological manipulation through political means toward a totalitarian end via the constant barrage of ‘progressive’ bills which promise to enhance the human condition, and grant rights to the ‘oppressed’ classes of people. Discussion of these ideas almost always are labeled ‘racist’ or ‘bigoted’ because when a valid intellectual counter-argument fails to manifest, personal attacks are used to discredit the skeptical inquiry into the matter.
In 1984 Winston mentions how people even feel hyper self-aware in public places, where every movement is scrutinized by the ubiquitous surveillance equipment. Their thought crimes, he fears, will manifest as some unconscious physical action, like a nervous tick, giving them away to the voyeuristic omnipotent eyes of Big Brother, making their guilt apparent. Contemporary examples of this can already be seen in the emerging panopticonic society we find ourselves in where pervasive surveillance coupled with advanced biometric profile cataloging will lead to determining if someone is a threat based on their walk or even the look on their face, in 1984 Winston says this is called a ‘face crime’.
The corporate-controlled media is very selective about the events it chooses to cover as far as assault and murder in these matters, and the manner in which items are discussed is instructive to say the least. There are incidents of black on white crime, ‘the knock-out game’, ‘polar bear attacks’ that are under the radar of the mainstream press.
The Southern Poverty Law Center has suggested that white racism against blacks has increased in the time between 2008 and 2012, the catalyst they offer, is the inauguration of the first black president, the inconvenient fact, of course is that he was elected by the white majority in the country, but that is ignored especially by the president himself when he recently blamed his low approval rating on ‘racism’.
Historical context is the key to this strange situation. The cliché rings true in this case that one must learn from history lest they repeat it. and it seems like the biggest culprit causing history to repeat itself is an agonizing ignorance of not only past historical circumstances, but a complete lack of knowledge about the world, literally. In a recent poll, 25% of people were confused when asked what the earth’s relationship to the sun was in regards to orbit, if the earth went around the sun or vice versa.
The German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche claimed democracy would lead to a new slavery, and since the public’s ignorance of our current government runs rampant, Democracy not being mentioned once in the constitution, everyone seems fine subscribing to a system where the majority can vote the minority’s rights away. Democracy is two wolfs and one sheep voting on what’s for dinner to borrow the famous Thomas Jefferson analogy.
In Soviet Russia, the doctrine of ‘correct thought’ reigned supreme and everyone had to be careful to keep tabs on the state’s official version of reality, dictated to them through the daily paper. It was believed that social progress, the rising up of the proletariat could only be achieved by striving for the correct political attitude, this meant having the correct position on all political matters. If anyone happened to deviate from the accepted norm, if they implied for example the ration of goods at the time was a horrible thing, when the state had clearly made a point of the fact that the current ration shortage was a marvelous time for the people to come together and endure for the motherland in emaciated glory, then anyone who made the initial contradiction would suffer imprisonment or death.
The intricate indoctrination and manipulation has blinded the masses to true injustices by offering them diversions, inciting conflicts based on race and select group interests. If the people are properly distracted by placing themselves into cliques, they will willingly ignore the obvious acts of aggression against their personal liberties, the inalienable rights bestowed on us by the creator. The collective obsession with protecting minorities neglects the world’s largest and most oppressed minority, the individual.