Tuesday, June 17, 2014

Can Social Control Be Denied? (Part 3)

Progressive Chains and "Liberating Tolerance"
We have been, and are being, manipulated by globalist social engineers who have foisted on us a humorless demand that we live our lives their way...or else
June 19, 2014
Slow and methodical over the last century was the march of socialists / communists / fascists / progressives / collectivists / liberals (they have so many names it is even hard to keep up with that), until Obama’s election when the gears went into overdrive.
...Prior to now it has been incremental, the slippery slope, the inch by inch erosion of unalienable rights. Like a slow developing disease, they have gradually weakened the main body of country, so as now the disease can just finish it off in big bites at a time; socialized health care, energy restrictions, political correctness, executive edicts without the consent of the governed, continual reductions of property rights, illegal immigration - amnesty, etc. The centralized power of the Federal government is in full tilt, while individual rights to pursue life, liberty and happiness are becoming a distant dream.—Cheryl Pass "Classical Progressivism Vs American Exceptionalism"
"Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."—Samuel Adams (1722-1803)
Freedom…. [cont.]
Sometimes I feel just like I’m almost gone
Sometimes I feel like I’m almost gone
Sometimes I feel just like I’m almost gone
A long… way…from my home
Richie Havens (1941-2013) "Freedom" ("Motherless Child")
It is an obvious truism that the larger the government, the smaller the amount of personal freedom. When I recently wrote that I concur with Thoreau’s axiom "That government is best which governs least," it was simply another way of saying that I value my freedom. That government is best that robs you of the least amount of freedom.
It’s not rocket science folks—the bigger your government, the smaller your freedom. As a government’s bureaucracy grows, so does the amount of concomitant rules and regulations that constrict freedom—as night follows the day.
That is why America’s Founding Framers (who valued freedom) created the US Constitution. It was designed specifically to rein-in and control government, and thereby protect the freedom of "we the people." The Framers saw the form of government that they invented as being a necessary evil—a compromise between the chaos of anarchy and the oppression of tyranny. Today we find ourselves far, far removed from what they intended for us, and what they intended our government to be. Our government "representatives" (and military brass) consistently ignore their oaths to "protect and defend" the US Constitution, and treat their "solemn" oaths as if they were irrelevant jokes.
The social engineering types that favor big government have zero interest in freedom. They are interested in forcing you to live your life their way, and only their way. If you value your freedom, then you must, as a matter of course, stand in opposition to them.
Those of us who were shocked out of our "boiled frog syndrome" daze by the stunning overreach of the Obama Administration, were often dismayed by how far along "the road to serfdom" we awoke to find ourselves ("When did this happen?").
If you have done your homework, you know that it didn’t happen overnight. "We the people" find ourselves in our current predicament because we were asleep at the wheel (at least many of us were—all too many still are). Also, of course, the longtime tireless efforts of the enemies of freedom must be taken into account.
This article is not so much concerned with the chains that have been oh so cleverly, slowly, and gently laid on "we the people" over the last century or so. It is mainly about one particular link in those chains.
I am speaking of "liberating tolerance" (also called "partisan tolerance"). "Liberating tolerance" is a term coined by Frankfurt School Marxist extraordinaire, Herbert Marcuse. He meant for it to be used as an antidote to tolerance. That is, as an anti-tolerance stratagem hidden in plain sight under an innocuous (even uplifting) sounding name. It was designed to replace classical (i.e. "repressive") tolerance.
"Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left." Herbert Marcuse [emphasis mine]
"Liberating tolerance" is actually the height (or depth) of hypocrisy and intolerance—and it is increasingly being used to silence dissent and steal our freedoms.
The way it works is this: They talk, and you agree or shut up. That’s it in a nutshell. Anything that serves to advance the Progressive agenda is to be encouraged, and anything that conflicts with it is to be scorned, muzzled, mocked and silenced (if that sounds similar to political correctness, there is a reason for that). So much for honest debate; so much for freedom of speech and the First Amendment. Welcome to the brave new world (that has such people in it).
[Sidebar: In this article I am using the label "Progressive," but as Cheryl Pass suggests in this article’s opening quote, "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet," or more to the point, a tyrannical government by any other name would smell as foul. The name "Progressive" will do for our purposes here.
It is worth noting that while it is true that various social engineering ideologies have hastened the exponential growth of our federal bureaucracy, there is little, if any, doubt that human nature and the nature of government itself would have eventually resulted in a bloated tyrannical government in any event—it’s the nature of the beast (as the Founding Framers knew all too well).]
Do you doubt that "liberating tolerance" is at work? You might want to look at the plethora of speakers who have been denied access to our colleges and universities because their viewpoints differ from the official narrative handed down from on high (check out Ayaan Hirsi Ali for a recent episode).
Another example: we have been told ad nauseum that "the science is settled" as concerns global warming. Au contraire mon frérethe science is not settled regarding global warming. It is anything but settled. But state that opinion out loud in any venue "where the elite meet and greet" and you will probably be shunned like a drunk at an Amish barn raising. A not-so-subtle message will be conveyed that you might want to "Shut Up!" Good old "liberating tolerance" at work. Speaking truth to power (forgive the cliché) is not for the faint of heart, it takes courage.
I could go on and name many more examples of "liberating tolerance," and I imagine that you can too, but my chief aim in this article is simply to draw attention to the fact that there is a term for dogmatic, arrogant, bullying intolerance—and it is a freedom stealing ploy that "we the people" should be aware of. (It is also worth observing that after stifling freedom of speech, the next logical step is "thought crimes," and the loss of freedom to think as you will).
As others have noted before, what we are dealing with here is not so much a conflict between the left and right of the political spectrum, but between up and down—up to freedom, or down to enslavement.
We have been, and are being, manipulated by globalist social engineers who have foisted on us a humorless demand that we live our lives their way…or else. They refuse to learn from the bloody history of their favored ideologies (both communism and fascism are big government ideologies), and insist on force-feeding their bland cookie-cutter uniformity on "we the people"—jamming square pegs into round holes; round pegs into square holes, and freedom be damned.
Their corruption, dishonesty, and arrogant elitism are directly at odds with free enterprise, free speech, and free choice (and I don’t mean "choice" in its limited partisan sense). In short, behind their snake-oil salesman charm they are busily engaged in destroying freedom (while all the time raking in big bucks—our bucks). You had better believe that they fully intend to chain us in bondage—one link at a time. Most of the links are already in place.
Perhaps the grand experiment of an American "government of the people, by the people, for the people" was doomed to fail from the start. Perhaps it will be remembered, if it is remembered at all, as a historical aberration—I don’t know. I do know that if "we the people" continue to allow our government "representatives" and judges to tweak, ignore, and flout the US Constitution, then whatever freedoms we have left will soon vanish…as if they never existed. Truth.
Born June 4, 1951 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Served in the U.S. Navy from 1970-1974 in both UDT-21 (Underwater Demolition Team) and SEAL Team Two. Worked as a commercial diver in the waters off of Scotland, India, and the United States. While attending the University of South Florida as a journalism student in 1998 was presented with the "Carol Burnett/University of Hawaii AEJMC Research in Journalism Ethics Award," 1st place undergraduate division. (The annual contest was set up by Carol Burnett with money she won from successfully suing a national newspaper for libel). Awarded US Army, US Navy, South African, and Russian jump wings. Graduate of NOLS (National Outdoor Leadership School, 1970). Member of Mensa, China Post #1, and lifetime member of the UDT/SEAL Association.
Jim can be reached at: lausdeo.jim@gmail.com
Edward Bernays & The "Engineering of Consent"
By Kenneth Anton
June 16, 2014

Edward Bernays (1891-1995) provided the Illuminati with tools for persuasion and control of the masses. Ken Anton describes how tactics developed in wartime are used against us.
"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."

--Edward Bernays Propaganda
Edward Bernays, the godfather of modern public relations, says "the invisible government which dictates our thoughts, directs our feelings and controls our actions." He combined individual and social psychology, polls, political persuasion and advertising to construct 'necessary illusions' which cabalistically became 'reality' for the gullible masses.

President Woodrow Wilson was re-elected to his second term in 1916 as a peace candidate. On the hustings, Wilson said, "this is a government of the people, and this people is not going to choose war." But soon after winning the election he led America decisively into World War I shocking and bewildering his peace-loving supporters.
So, why would Wilson revert from a Peace platform to a policy of engaging in a brutal War on another continent? The truth is that he was under the strong influence of the Jewish banker elite who engineered his first election for the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. After his second election, they wanted to profit from arms exports and ensure that England wins the war, a bargain they made in return for the Balfour Declaration.
However, convincing the peace-loving public was another matter. Wilson utilized Bernays' propaganda techniques to reverse public sentiment by stirring up anti-German fervor. In fact, it was Bernays who concocted the slogan, "Make the World Safe for Democracy".
In April 1917, the President created the Committee on Public Information (CPI) to carry out a nationwide campaign of propaganda. Spearheaded by journalist, George Creel, the CPI comprised members from business, media, academia, writers and artists. Utilizing mass psychology, it disseminated pro-war propaganda based on emotional appeals and demonization of the enemy on a scale normally associated with totalitarian regimes. Although the CPI offered 'voluntary guidelines' to the news media, these guidelines became mandatory. Pacifists and dissenters were silenced through threats and accusations of being traitors. Hence a majority of Americans embraced the war with fervor and dedication.
The US involvement was short. On November 1, 1918, the Allies won the 'War to End all Wars' with the signing of the Armistice. The tools and Bernays and the CPI used to manipulate the public thru the mass media in wartime would continue to be used in peacetime and again during WWII and the many wars that followed.
Bernays from his book "Propaganda":
"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."
Bernays from "Psychology of Public Relations":
"...the group mind does not think in the strict sense of the word. In place of thoughts it has impulses, habits and emotions. In making up its mind its first impulse is usually to follow the example of a trusted leader [an icon or celebrity]. This is one of the most firmly established principles of mass psychology. But when the example of the leader is not at hand and the herd must think for itself, it does so by means of cliches, pat words or images which stand for a whole group of ideas or experiences."
From Edward Bernays' 'The Institute for Propaganda Analysis'
*Name-calling (ad hominem)
Links a person or idea to a negative trait or concept: e.g. commie, fascist, yuppie, bum, terrorist, anti-Semite, conspiracy theorist (usually without evidence).
*Glittering Generalities
Positive associations used to enhance a person or concept: e.g. civilization, democracy, religion, patriot, motherhood, science, medicine, health, love
Used to water-down strong negative associations: e.g. collateral damage instead of civilian casualties. Post war: PTSD instead of shell shock.
Use of authority or prestige from a symbol like church (cross), democracy (statue of Liberty), our nation (uncle Sam) to support a program or campaign. Also medicine or science used to back a concept: e.g. "More doctors smoke camels..."
Citing a reputable source (NY Times), celebrity (Angelina Jolie) or sports figure (Mohammed Ali) to endorse a product or concept by association
*Plain Folks
Politicians, wealthy entrepreneurs pose as ordinary citizens to attract popular support
Appeal to join the crowd, follow the herd: everyone else is doing it, so should you.
Disaster just around the corner, cold war is back, 9/11 = fear of terrorism. (Note: patriots and dissenters are now called terrorists by Homeland Security.)
*Phoney Polls
Used to back a platform or concept but the results can be biased depending on the parameters and questions
*Peer reviewed Studies
Can be fraudulent within a system controlled by powerful entities like Big Pharma
*Lies become Believable by Repetition
Thru power of the media, lies are made believable after continuous repetition and reinforcement by other channels of the consolidated media.
*A modern day example of Name-calling: "Conspiracy"
The elite bankers attained their wealth and power by establishing central banks in the UK and the US. Naturally, they don't want the public to look too closely at their nefarious plots such as starting endless wars, so one tactic is to label 'conspiracy theorists' as people to be shunned. Such is the immense power of the controlled media that they can establish parameters for acceptable behavior and the masses who want to be accepted by their peers tend to conform. Hence this phrase now carries a strong pejorative association.
Today, the banker elite (TPTB or Illuminati) hold majority interests in the six mega corporations that own 90% of the mainstream media. Thus, they control the news and influence our perceptions, even how we think and judge others. One cannot underestimate the power of a consolidated media because it signifies controlling reality itself as Bernays has stated.
Having a small elite group directly control the media, represents a serious threat to American democracy and culture. It directly influences the minds of all age groups and how they perceive the world. Consolidation in business, banking, the media and politics over the last hundred years has allowed the Federal Government to be taken over by an oligarchy of elites with unlimited assets, influence and psychological control of the minds of Americans. The media also serves as a protective shield, isolating the elite bankers from scrutiny and challenge.
Also See:
The New World Order is Getting Closer!
(Part 1)
10 November 2008
(Part 2)
28 June 2009

The End of the United States!
02 January 2009
Humanity Caught in a Diabolical Conspiracy! 

30 April 2009
ID Cards - Soon Everyone will have One!

03 September 2009
"New World Order/One World Government" is for Real! It's on Our Doorstep!
20 November 2009
Religion of the New World Order 

16 December 2009
Is There a New World Order?

18 November 2011
What do You Know About the Power Elite?

24 November 2011

Can Social Control Be Denied?
(Part 1)
18 June 2013
(Part 2)
28 October 2013
Also See: "Media"
Who Controls the Media!
25 February 2014
 The Media is Controled by Mega-Corporations!
(Part 1)
31 July 2013
(Part 2)
19 December 2013
Manchurian Candidate - Is It for Real?
20 September 2011
Social Engineering - Really?
28 May 2011
Are You a Victim of Mind Control?
(Part 1)
21 September 2007
(Part 2)
03 June 2013
What Really Happened at the Boston Marathon?
22 April 2013
Silenced by Execution, FBI Responsible!
31 May 2013
What's Not Being Told About Newtown, Sandy Hook Elementary School?
(Part 1)
19 December 2012
(Part 2)