Chapter 8
We have seen an example of how public Relations science is
used to manipulate a commercial preference. You will have noticed
how, with this technique, the paid agent was usually one or two
steps removed from the innocent who actually persuaded the
citizen that velvet was the fashion of the times.
Events indicate that it was nearly 200 years ago when elitists
began to fear world population and began to plan to take-over the
world (Malthus, Principles of Population, 1798).
At this point I think we should go back into the 19th century,
fifty or sixty years before Bernays began his career, to see the
first controls being set in place. Whether the people used were
consciously working for the plan is doubtful, but certainly they
would most likely be influenced in some way.
These people of interest are:
Charles Darwin, 1809-82; main writings 1859-71.
Purpose: base for new religion.
Karl Marx, 1818-83; main writings 1848-67.
Purpose: base for mechanist ideology.
Sigmund Freud, 1856-1939; main writings 1900-23.
Purpose: Motivation to sexual irresponsibility.
Benjamin Spock, 1903- ; main writing 1946-.
Purpose:motivation to non-human, nature nurture.
Although both Darwin and Spock are known to have withdrawn
from their most damaging teachings, the belief fads they led
continue to be promoted by the establishment propaganda machine.
Karl Marx was the only one of these four known to have been paid
to write his book; however the elitists are both subtle and
opportunistic. People who produce work suited to elitist
ambitions are promoted and publicized. If the pawn finds that he
has made a mistake and if to reveal this would cause disadvantage
to elitist ambitions, then the correction is ignored by the PR
machine.
The writing of Marx became the base for a fanatical and
fanciful idealism that would motivate the disadvantaged classes
even including many well-off idealists. It proposed an equality
which, at best, could only be a forced equality for the slaves
and a different equality for the masters.
However it was Darwinism that did the more critical damage in
promoting an educated class who denied man's humanity and induced
"the common educated" to see ourselves as animals. This
led easily to the violent culling of people seen to have a
"not politically correct" attitude wherever communism
has reigned. It also allowed easy acceptance of Freud's sex
beliefs and worship of self.
After this it was quite a natural progression to Dr. Spock's
advocacy that released children from parental discipline.
The combined influence on moral imperatives by Marx and Darwin
laid the foundation for the sexual revolution; the work of Dr
Spock consolidated this and all was set into the public mind by
public education and PR. Thus a false base of history was
established for nurture and nature. A 'history' was set in place
for control of future generations all in accord with theory:
'He who controls the past controls the future'.
All people outside of the elitist sub-culture were enticed to
believe that mankind was nothing more than a common animal
related to apes and that any that any disciplinary restraint on
animal nature was an injustice to mankind.
This led naturally to the time (today) where young teenagers
are stimulated to a sex motivated attitude that is encouraged by
other teenagers with the aid and funding of government. An
excellent example of this was recently available in the form of a
book called "The Fact And Fantasy File" written
by an indoctrinated teenager and supported by a phone-in sex
advice service staffed by young teenagers. Although this
'service' was discontinued after a short time because of a high
level of public protest, the damage is already done by subtle
means and continues without further publicity.
Government (both parties) have encouraged and forced this
trend against public resistance. Let's have an example of how
this imposition is promoted.
In an article, "Condom Culture" (The
BULLETIN" 28/1/1992) Lucy Sullivan, an experimental
psychologist working with the Australian Institute of Health,
argues that the campaign to stop the spread of AIDS has
turned into propaganda for the promiscuous. She opens her article
with the following paragraph; quote:
Over the course of the last two decades, Germaine Greer
moved from advocating sexual liberation of the male model for
women to arguing that this version of sexual freedom has made
women more, not less, subject to male sexual dominance. A
promiscuous mode of sexuality, which suits men better than women,
has been preached and imposed and has left women alienated from
their real modes of sexuality, which are far more entwined with
reproduction and personal, family relationships than are those of
men. Women's bodies and health have increasingly been put at risk
in order to dissociate copulation from reproduction, as a
necessary concomitant of sexual freedom. EQ
There is little doubt that AIDS is being used as a cover
promoting the social acceptance of teenage promiscuity; e.g. this
report in The Australian (13/3/1992); quote:
Explicit sex education courses should be taught in the
first three years of primary school, according to new research on
AIDS awareness presented to education authorities in all states
and the territories. EQ.
The promotion of sex, under the banner of a 'safe sex' that is
not at all safe, is now epidemic. However the more important
message in the Sullivan article relates to the paragraph quoted.
What the quote says, in brief, is that (what is seen as) a
male level of sexual freedom is neither suited to or beneficial
to the female.
Whether male promiscuity was as liberal as it was promoted in
mid-century propaganda as being, or if that belief was mainly a
figment of female imagination, is not worth arguing here although
it is somewhat difficult to see how men can be promiscuous
without female help.
The point is, and it is reasonably obvious, that image of the
promiscuous male cannot be realistically promoted as a feminine
ideal without introducing great distress to the female population
and destroying cultural cohesion.
It is gratifying that a leading feminist has at last had the
courage to look honestly and speak honestly. Although no-one in
the present cultural environment would have believed me had I
said it, nevertheless it must be very obvious that a great
confidence trick has been played on women.
A promiscuous culture is a common male fantasy, it allows his
natural instincts to run wild and, at the same time, removes from
him all responsibility for the consequences. Anyone can see why
women's liberation is really about men's liberation.
In real life, if we stop to think about it, promiscuity is
clearly not a civilized social option but the destruction of
"common" culture is to the benefit of an elitist world
takeover. It is to elitist benefit to create confusion between
animal responses and the human self-control - or to hide from
'common people' that self-control is the price of adding love to
sex.
Both male and female have been tricked by a mass seduction
which, to a male - not female - advantage. We should never forget
that, in the New World Order, the Ministry of Peace promotes war.
The United Nations is unable to wage war; when it drops bombs
they are peace offerings. Common meanings are reversed.
In practice, it becomes apparent that promiscuity is highly
destructive of both male and female ego and a total disaster for
children.
Brainwash is directed mainly at children (give me a child for
the first seven years and you can do as you like after that).
destroy the critical perceptions of the children and you destroy
the family; cripple the family and the world is yours.
Could people in high places have really planned the moral
disintegration of common culture? Could they be doing things
right now to bring to fruition that plan?
To introduce pornography to a culture is an obvious move to
hurry the destruction of mental freedom by undermining the moral
fabric of a society. This will have added effect in a society
already weakened by confused thinking, an amoral attitude and a
fatalistic idea of origins.
An example of how deliberately hard core pornography was
smuggled into Australia by political design is found in the
following segments from The Report of the Joint Select
Committee on Video Material. Vol.l. Canberra 1988, p15-17.
Quote:
.. in order to understand more accurately the operation of
the censorship laws from 1973 to 1984 it is necessary to refer to
the year 1973 when the number of video tapes entering Australia
was insignificant.
In that year the then Attorney-General announced a policy
on censorship ... which in its original form read as follows:
#.. federal laws to conform with the general principles
that adults should be entitled to read, hear and view what they
wish in private and in public and that persons - and those in
their care - be not exposed to unsolicited material offensive to
them. (Statement by the Attorney-General of Australia, Censorship
- A Question of Balancing Individual Rights 19/73, Canberra, Feb.
26, 1973).#
[Here is a common self-contradiction; there can be no freedom
of pornography without exposure. It is like saying people should
have freedom to steal but must not take anything from others. The
thinking is adolescent.]
May 1973:
#"Although the proposed legislation is
self-regulating it may be considered desirable to set up a
tribunal to establish what publications are to be
"restricted" and what are not. This takes
responsibility away from the trade and gives the
appearance at least of community involvement.#
The document also noted that for the policy to become law,
amendments would be required to the Customs (Prohibited Imports)
Regulations and the Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations and
a new law drafted to cover advertising, display, distribution and
sale to adults of obscene material. However the document warns
that such legislative measures would meet resistance
and could lead to the negation of the policy and
commented that:
#It is considered that almost all the States would be
hostile to a policy which could lead to the circulation of
so-called hard core pornography and
material dealing with hard drugs and extreme
violence, anarchy and sedition. #
The document raised for consideration the question of
whether the policy announced by the Attorney-General should be
brought fully and immediately into effect or by stages. It
stated:
#You would need to have regard to
repercussions in the electorate; the Australian
public is notoriously conservative, whatever its political
affiliations.
The Government's policy might best be achieved by a
strategy of hastening slowly - gradually broadening
the standards of imported material so that public opinion can be
developed to embrace the principles embodied in the policy.#
EQ. EA.
So much for changing attitude being the satisfaction of public
demand or interaction between the public and public authorities.
There is an ongoing, cold and intentional subversion of public
morality and public standards. In the event it seems the policy
was brought in by administrative direction and customs were told
to ignore offenses involving pornography. The end plan is to
create a situation where government can openly fund pornography
for children.
This is to the design: create social anarchy, blame the family
and bow to public clamour for more government custody and control
of children.
It is significant that ordinary public servants appeared
prepared to go along with importation of pornography. These same
people, who want to watch sex and related violence on TV, are the
loudest to complain when their children are raped and mass
killings occur. Those responsible never admit it.
Radical feminism and porn are deliberate products of the PR
propaganda being inflicted on our world, but I fear that those
who follow 'isms' will suffer for their blind loyalties.
Why, when I think of radicals do I think of death row and the
poem that is said to have been found on a cell wall in that sad
resting place. That poem is called:
THE MAN IN THE MIRROR; quote:
When you get what you want in your struggle for self,
And the world makes you king for a day;
Then go to the mirror and look at yourself,
And see what that man has to say.
For it isn't a man's father, mother or wife
Whose judgment upon him must pass:
The fellow whose verdict counts most in his life,
Is the man staring back from the glass.
He's the fellow to please; never mind the rest,
For he's with you clear up to the end;
And you've passed your most dangerous, difficult test
If the man in the glass is your friend.
You can fool the whole world down the pathway of years,
And get pats on the back as you pass:
But your final reward will be heartache and tears
If you've cheated the man in the glass. EQ.
It is not only male criminals who will come to the time when
they have to face their own conscience and question the use they
have made of life. I think that among those for whom this will be
a hard time will be many blind fanatics.
When the radical feminist comes to judge her life how
important will it be to her that she has made a million dollars;
been chief executive of a company; had a thousand and one love
affairs or traveled around the world many times?
Pain and pleasure are such fleeting impressions. How little
they matter. Yesterday's toothache or last nights party; what are
they worth today? What pleasure or pain will they give next month
or next year unless they are associated with some other value?
The real values are never considered by the young unless they
have the discipline and guidance of good parents and a caring,
responsible social environment.
It is interesting that since the years of limitless porn, the
economy has degenerated from fair to disaster, massacres have
begun to occur in our cities and rape has become so common as to
be rarely considered worth reporting (in some reports one-third
of university girls claim to have been raped). This is the result
of New World Order corruption yet all turn a blind eye to the
obvious cause.
Is it not strange that people do not see that laws cannot
substitute for morals and business cannot prosper in dishonesty?
That lies and trickery lead inevitably to self delusion and
disaster? That personal immorality leads to family breakdown,
hate and suffering? That business immorality is a cost to
everyone?
Why is it so hard to admit the "immorality" is just
a word meaning "crime against human nature"?
All crimes of lust are crimes against the family; therefore
against children. They attack human freedom, political democracy
and social justice. These crimes exhibit even greater selfishness
and lack of concern for others that do other forms of crime.
To better understand this we need to know a little about what
is commonly called "bonding". Most alert people will
have heard of bonding in relation to mothers and babies. Bonding
may go under a variety of names such as "imprinting".
Human bonding is far less mechanistic than is the usual animal
bonding and humans have features very different from those of
animals. Although the word "mankind" refers to a kind
of man it also refers to a kind of animal, human is something
more than a manlike-animal.
The common ideas taught by the brainwash of today might have
us believe that we are no more than intelligent animals; but to
believe that is not intelligent. A healthy calf or foal, kitten
or puppy will, if fed and cared for, grow up to be a normal
creature of its kind. A human baby, if institutionalized and
given no more than food and care may grow up physically healthy
but in human responses be little better than a farm animal and,
in fact, may be far more inhuman and dangerous than any animal
because it does not have a behaviour imprint to its human
potential.
To create a human the baby must be given a sense of
responsibility, social behaviour example, input of human
experience and access to past human history. To create a human
requires giving the human baby a discipline to maintain its
dignity, along with an understanding of the need to study and to
maintain its natural desire to learn. The consequence of this
will take up most of its formative life and continue to give
intellectual growth for as long as life allows.
Mother/baby is not the only form of bonding. The most
important bonding of all, from a human point of view, is never
now taught as part of public education. That bonding is
"marriage bonding"; you can see why the
mind-manipulators do not encourage human education.
Marriage bonding has a lot to do with sex. To begin let us
assume an ideal human situation where both partners are sexually
innocent at marriage and not living in a community that has
degenerated to sexual exploitation as a way of life.
In this circumstance both first experience the joy of sex with
each other and their expectation is to remain together and raise
a family.
This is an ideal that has been learned over generations of
human experience and is the base for all advanced cultures. On
the other hand the failure of family begins with the AIDS-like
progress called cultural disintegration.
First love, when it comes from a loving commitment, is the
most strongly remembered love. Two innocent people adapt to each
other like two pieces of soft clay pressed together and form the
mold of a lasting relationship because they have no expectation
of anything other than what each provides.
Marriage bonding in good circumstances, is very strong and in
almost all cases the partnership could be expected to last. They
believe in this ideal and are bonded by mutual conditioning and
adaptability. That we have never had a perfect situation has not
stopped the family ideal being the foundation of great
civilizations.
Had we not been misled by propaganda, human ideals and
relationships could have developed and improved. Had people
understood the importance of marriage bonding and been allowed to
learn from human experience why crimes of lust practiced by
consenting adults are the worst of all crimes against humanity,
we would now live in a far more exciting world.
The pleasures of promiscuity also imprint a lust for change.
The "Pavlovian imprint" of promiscuity leads to an
expectation that is unable to be satisfied by any later
relationship.
Promiscuous sex induces a passion for change but the innate
desire for the ideal remains! Many continue a desperate search
for the ideal mate - seeking to satisfy a desire that, having
wasted the passionate attachment of marriage bonding, can never
be satisfied. This may then turn to a bitter jealousy, family
violence, hate for those living in harmony and a desire to
destroy that harmony.
There should be no doubt about the influence of sex. In a
promiscuous environment young minds tend to become obsessed with
sex. As time goes on and the new exciting challenges disappear,
young adults become frustrated. Poor parenting makes the next
generation more vulnerable to all manner of temptation.
Self-discipline gives way to animal impulse and the community
loses its ability to either prosper or defend itself.
Deprived of moral imprinting, our animal instincts, driven by
human mental capacity, become the dominant urge in mankind and
result in the deformed pair-bonding found in late twentieth
century. Frustrations lead to drug addiction, suicide, rape,
murder, mindless violence, homosexuality, robbery together with
business and political corruption.
Today a man's word is no longer his bond and in politics we
expect and accept lies as a matter of course. We are governed by
political parties who have sold us out to international tyrants -
crime syndicates that rob us of our heritage and our future. This
is the price of promiscuity that has been promoted by public
relations techniques.
Mental confusion ensures that many people can no longer
understand what is happening to them and cannot make effective
decisions in their own defence. The community is open to
manipulation and needs more and more laws to regulate every
detail of life.
As Tacitus (Roman historian) put it: the more corrupt the
State the more laws it has. As the family disintegrates,
national-will crumbles and the enemy plunders. Let's look at this
in more detail.
The mass marketing of seduction was begun early in this
century, as we saw, Bernays took an early lead in this. In my own
youth I recall there was "MAN" and then "MAN
JUNIOR" to be followed by an increasingly more disreputable
bunch. Apparently the 'sex & violence' type of comic book
made its appearance in the 1940s and the first large scale public
protest against this seduction of youth was led by Dr Fredric
Wertham M.D., author of Seduction of the Innocent.
However there was always too much money and too much high
level pressure for the public to ever win, comic book porn or
school classroom porn, the people were always resisted to
bankruptcy or exhaustion.
Not surprising my first insight into this matter was provided
by a 'girlie' magazine. This would have been in the 1930s when
this kind of literature was probably more sedate than is common
to everyday mass media now. I was about twelve years of age at
the time and reading by the light of an Alladin light at the
kitchen table.
The story was about a rich man who hated women. Why? That was
not part of the story. The point was that he had decided to make
as many women as possible suffer and the way he chose to gain
this result was to install a bevy of attractive young call girls
on his estate and invite young bachelors as guests.
He reasoned that as the young men were seduced and mentally
conditioned to the joys of promiscuity, they would then find it
very difficult to settle-down for long with one woman.
These men would marry but the result would be extra-marital
affairs, dispute, distress and most likely the break-up of the
family to leave the wife with young children and no income. This
was the rich man's planned revenge.
Although this story was fiction I saw that the principle
behind the plot was sound. However it was some years before I
found that this basic principle of social conditioning was
neither understood by, nor impressed on, the general public. Even
longer before I saw that the whole world was being seduced by
hidden persuaders to achieve a similar result.
There may have been a million men who read that story without
either wanting to see its meaning or consequences. And how many
million mothers (the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world)
have felt a secret pride in the philandering of their sons while
complaining about the inattentiveness of their husbands? The
great crime of humanist manipulation is not confined to selfish
people. A great number of lives are destroyed by well-meaning
people who, so innocently, serve evil ideals.
The effect surrounds us! What is the sex crime most in the
news?
The ideologues and PR experts, those who use exaggerated
examples of problems such as child abuse, nuclear power,
greenhouse and other emotion-stirring issues to lead people into
their moral cesspools, are very keen that most child abuse should
be seen as incest and a product of family life.
By accusing the family they need to direct public disgust
against the legitimate family.
Knowing that the legitimate family is the kind of family that
most people still associate with the word "family",
manipulators carefully avoid distinctions between the legitimate
family and the kind of 'family' where most social abuse does
occur .. the illegitimate family.
Let us look at some of the elementaries of sex crimes.
Incest is not an uncommon word today but is usually used to
attach child abuse to the legitimate family unit. The
humanist/socialist ideology, is not opposed to incest or its more
abusive brother pedophilia (see item next chapter). Nor is it
opposed to other abuses of the sexual kind such as promiscuity,
homosexuality and adultery.
To this primitive religion - as taught in our schools it is
religion - any form of mutually agreed sex is natural, normal,
desirable and approved no matter how unnatural the technology and
science used to promote abnormal appetites.
The attack on incest is not out of concern for the welfare of
children but is merely a device to instill in the minds of moral
people the idea that incest is a family failing and that it is
the legitimate family that has failed.
It is claimed that there are tremendous emotional traumas
inflicted on the children involved but there is reluctance to
attribute these same consequences to the sick and less loving
relationships of pedophilia or the promotion of pornography.
Pornographers ignore totally the great damage caused to
children by the selfish pursuit of promiscuity and parental
adultery.
Incest, though becoming more common because of sex promotion,
is probably not nearly so widespread as is made out. It is a
age-old problem and banned in most cultures. The educated reason
given for banning incest is because inbreeding tends to multiply
family genetic problems.
The more serious and unmentioned problem of incest is that it
is a cause of family jealousy, disloyalty and the injustices that
lead to family breakdown.
Incest is a social crime in the same bracket as adultery,
homosexuality, prostitution and promiscuity, no better - no
worse. Homosexuality comes within this group in the present
social climate because its main practice is the result of social
deformity rather than genetic deformity.
Sex crimes are crimes of lust as against crimes of sadism
(abuse/violence) or avarice (robbery/usury). However lust and
violence seem mutually attracted to each other.
Some claim that non-violent crimes of lust should not be
classed as crimes at all? The humanist/socialist
"politically correct" attitude is that sex crimes are
"victimless".
The perceptions of people blinded by the PR brainwashing to
socialist/humanism (Fabianism) totally ignore the evident
consequences of sex crimes and only direct abuse at these crimes
if, in so doing, they can heap discredit on the legitimate family
as opposed to the fantasy of 'free love' and supports responsible
social order. Legitimate family is therefore a danger and
stumbling block to elitist control.
Porn and crimes of lust do not cause immediate social pain but
undermine the family and create a growing "child to
child" sex abuse problem.
Whereas violent robbery, rape and murder are cruel crimes they
do not have the very 'Pavlovian' conditioning flow-on enticement
common to crimes of lust. Crimes that are ego=pleasing create a
seductive desire in the community.
With the destruction of the family comes breakdown of
childcare and encouragement to government childcare with all its
well-known evils.
Crimes of lust undermine community morals to become the social
AIDS that penetrates all social and business behaviour. Such
crime is of far greater social importance than the murder and
violence which follows as its natural result.
The problem with the socialist/humanist ideal of a
mechanically organized society is:
1. that it serves no human purpose;
2. that it causes great human distress;
3. that it can never work as a human social order.
Socialist order is a pretty picture of insect-like
orderliness, equality and freedom from strife that lives more in
the imagination than it ever, in real-life, could.
In the meantime the elitist vision of owning the world which
can be made into their own playground, a 'Garden of Eden-like'
perfection with its nest of human ants to keep it tidy - is just
as fanciful and impractical as the communism they offer the
workers and the capitalism offered leaders.
Arrogant dreams of glory, like all past dreams of conquest,
are doomed to the trash can of history. The challenge is in the
conquest, but when it is achieved, ah, where do you go from
there? How do you satisfy those specialized to ambitions of sex
or power when the goal is achieved? It is in the nature of things
and history proves it, when wolves have destroyed all prey they
then turn on each other.
The people who plan world government are criminals, perhaps
not common criminals but undoubtedly criminal. There is no
scientific support for the theories and ideologies they promote.
There is no reason to believe that a world government, enforced
by a world army, restricted to a world money, compulsory pagan
religion and supervised by a world surveillance system, would be
capable, even with the best of intentions, of creating human
satisfaction or progress.
Even if the plan was not installed by dictators there is
nothing to stop dictators gaining control.
If a world government is to do good then it needs no fearsome
capacity to force submission, it will lead with a gentle example
and evidence of benefit.
Do you want to live in a world where you will be killed if you
do not have the latest 'politically correct' opinion that has
been decided by an ego-maniac dictator? Or because some committee
decides that the world is over-populated? Or just because someone
in petty authority does not like you?
.../Next Page
.../Back to Contents Page