Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by darksidZz, Apr 10, 2015.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Debate and opinion aren't passive, knowledge is. Knowledge is meek.
Darkness is overcome with revolution.
If the majority of blacks were not under mind control, they would begin to look at the Republican party blacks to see if their average life style and level of opportunity is better.
For example, almost all the marches for black rights, spawned by the shooting in Ferguson, that occurred last summer, were in Democrat controlled cities, like NY, Chicago, Los Angeles, Boston, etc. The most emotional protests were within cites controlled by the Democratic party; blacks and sympathetic white felt the most racism by the police.
The mind control is so skillfully done, this perception of racism by the police is blame on the republicans, who have little power in those cities. The republicans would do things differently, but they have no power to do so in those democratic party strong holds. Yet they are called the boogey man to be feared.
The question is how can you get so may people to ignore the obvious? One way is to keep them dependent on you so they are beholden to you. If a mother does everything for her son, he will learn to love the comfort and ease. This is nice but it impacts his own self reliance. He may love the way mom cooks, but he has to wait for mom to cook, before he can eat. He can't control when he and what he eats, unless he can control mom, which the blacks do not.
Because the son is dependent on his mom and can't control her, she can set conditions, before she will cook his favorite meal. This tactic works better the hungrier the son becomes. If the son is always full and satiated, he will become less dependent on her for food. This is why after 50 years of the war against poverty, the poverty rates have not change; the mind control needs hunger and need to remain for better leverage. The republican are not allowed to tamper with the formula for mind control success.
The republican party is more about self reliance, which requires the son do more for himself. The son may not be able to cook as well as mom, but if he learns to cook he be full and then he gets to control his life.
We can't even control our own minds properly, or not for very long.
The mind often goes where we don't want it to, and doesn't do what we do want it to.
Yet people are only worried about other people controlling their minds. Or controlling the minds of others.
Control your own mind, then you won't have to worry about the ' mind control' of others
The republican party is about self-reliance about as much as a communist believes in social classes...
I believe there is a need to clearly differentiate between the terms "control" and "influence".
I recall a friend of mine saying "simple things amuse simple minds".
Edit: I don't mean the OP.
Indeed... or put another way:
"The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded"
I'd say there's little difference between the two because if you influence people by advertising lets say then you'd be, in a sense, mind controlling them at the same time. People are easily influenced lets say in buying a new shirt because they always need a new one every now and then. The companies know this and with that in mind roll out shirt adds that influence people into buying a new shirt, not just any new shirt but that companies new shirt. Seen enough times on TV, magazines, newspaper and heard on the radio people are being influenced into buying a new shirt but not just any new shirt but the companies new shirt that it was advertising about.
So people have that shirt in mind when they go out shopping and when they see it along side other new shirts the pick it out as a better new shirt because they were influenced by the commercials which were also controlling their minds about which shirt was better for them. This technique has been done for centuries with just about anything that companies have to sell.
You can use the same analogy with politics. People are influenced and thereby mind controlled by the media as to which political party is better for them. That's mind control at its best. Today politics is more based on how much money you'll get for voting for the "right" party rather than what's best to help everyone out. One party will tell you they will increase your welfare checks and if you are on welfare just hearing that will influence you to vote for that party no matter what the other party tells you unless they will give you more money which they never do.
If proponents of one way of looking at things can come to dominate K-12 and higher education, journalism and the entertainment industry, they will have tremendous power to shape the broader intellectual and social agenda. I think that's what we are seeing now.
The New York Times actually brags about its power in that regard, with its 'Join the Conversation' ad campaign, suggesting that if somebody doesn't know and adopt the NYT editors' view of things, they will be outsiders and left out of the national discussion on important issues.
If you ask somebody on the street what the important issues are, they will probably list those issues that society's opinion leaders tell them are important. What's more, people will typically espouse views on those issues that the opinion leaders suggest are the 'correct' views.
That's why it's so important that alternative sources of opinion continue to exist.
Who here has seen BRANDED
I understand your point. Do you think this touches upon the philosophical subject of whether Free Will exists or not?
"I control what influences I accept, that in turn, effect my ability to control what influences I accept."
A life time of self corruption can only lead to a state of self corruption....which is why I believe education especially directed towards critical thinking and self awareness are essential.
However the more you know your self the greater your capacity to self determine. The more ignorant you are of yourself and your subtle feelings the more easily influenced you are...( Examples that acknowledge this: Laws on age of maturity, age of consent etc)
and here I believes is a clue.
"Is it the politician that is controlling the voter or is it the voters craving for more money (greed) that is "controlling" (using your definition) the voter?
Is the politician merely capitalizing on the inherent "more" factor that exists in all humans?
Therefore working on the "more factor" can reduce the influence that money (politicians) can have....
*see Forer ( Barnum effect) for info on one approach to inherent attributes.
But everyone is limited to what they want by what's available to them today. My example of shirts come to mind. There are only x amount of shirts that are made and only X amount of them are sold where you live in the stores that surround you. So if you can only choose what is in your area you are limited as to what they can influence you with to buy. You don't know of designer shirts because no one there carries them and aren't available to you. It isn't that your ignorant it is because many companies don't sell certain shirts everywhere. So you how can you choose if you don't have all the information?
You raise a valid point I feel.. and one that can be added to all the others.
Expanded a little you could use the Movies like Logan's Run or Matrix for example, where by people are controlled by their ignorance and presumptions.
"Your presumptions are my greatest weapon" someone I read ages ago said.
So ...what stops a person from questioning the status quo and looking beyond or outside the box? ( now that's mind control using your definition IMO)
There are many examples of this blocking of the "questioner" here at sciforums for example...as there are every where in societies around the world.
Hard to find answers when no one wants to tell you the truth but only lies.
In direct response to the threads OP. yes I believe mind control ( as in spooky action at a distance - manipulative entanglement) is self evident in the insane activities demonstrated by ISIL in the Iraq and other places. In fact if there was ever going to be a clear and comprehensive demonstration of mind control, then this crazy , brutal, and totally self defeating dependency on their particular version of a God is an excellent example.
They have declared their allegiance to carrying out their Gods wishes. (they declare there is no free will)
They act as a hive mentality.
They demonstrate control over their victims that indicates serious mind control ( the victims never resist their own executions )
Their behavior defies normal expectations of what it means to be a free-thinking and caring/empathic human being.
They are able to recruit disaffected young people world wide with the view of traveling all the way to Iraq/Syria just to become a "suicide bomber" or other wise die in a futile war.
So yes, "mind control" does in deed exist, and can be proven to do so, either from an individual as its main source or from a "collective culmination" of violent Jihad-ist mentalities.
By "spooky action at a distance" are you directly referring to quantum entanglement?
If so, how is any of what you example evidence of such occurring, and that any "mind control" that you may wish to infer within the examples is caused by / the result of such entanglement?
And what do you mean by "manipulative entanglement"?
All your examples, as far as I can see, are merely demonstrations of indoctrination, "group-think", peer pressure, and clever marketing, wrapped up in some extreme religious fervor.
Why do you consider it self-evident that they are caused by quantum entanglement?
Do you even know what the phrases mean that you seem to throw around so casually, such as "quantum entanglement", and "self-evident"?
Before one can answer such a question as in the OP, one must first define what one means by "mind control" as there are a number of varieties of influence ranging from hypnosis, indoctrination, chemically induced control, to the more fanciful direct manipulation of matter through thought etc.
Sarkus, perhaps if you do some serious research into the experiences of those persons who have managed to escape serious cultism and the post traumatic stress disorders they suffered we might be able to entertain a more useful discussion.(*)
One common theme appears to be that they all "felt they were freely members, volunteers" at the time of being members and that it was only when they attempted to leave the "cult", "hive" that they realized that their voluteer-ism was a delusion, a fraud that they were seduced into allowing.
Of course this phenomena is not uncommon in every day life... however it is a question of extreme and how effective the control is that may be a significant qualifier.
There are reports ( currently unsupportable ) that persons wishing to leave the ISIL movement are saying the same thing,"that it is almost impossible for them to remove themselves" from the entanglement of the ISIL mentality.
*(You could also include in your research the extraordinary and essentially inexplicable, suicide rates of Armed Forces members, after returning from the Middle Eastern conflicts.)
USA stats indicate 22 per day,
A rate that is approx. 16% higher than the general public rates (per 100,000)
Mind control is based on verbal magic tricks. In a real magic show, the magician might have a physical apparatus that allows him to levitate his lovely assistant. The audience sees her fly, across the stage, with no apparent wires in sight. We all know this is magic, because we paid to be there. This offers a level of objectivity. Some will marvel, while others remain skeptical, trying to figure out how the trick works.
Mind control works the same way, except one is not told they are at a magic show. They assume what is being said and done is real, with some of the audience marveling and some skeptical, trying to see if it adds up.
Political rhetoric, for example, blows warm smoke up skirts, to make people feel good. Once you are distracted with the good feeling of the utopian vision, the other hand, of the magician is doing the trick. He will attempt to associate others things, he is selling, with the induced feeling.
The reason this works is, when the brain writes memory to the cerebral matter, the core regions of the brain add an emotional tag. Our memory has thought and feeling. The induced feeling is there to bias the writing process. Without the emotional smoke, the writing process is more distributed.
The male lounge lizard, will use this trick. He will ask a few test questions to show interest. He is trying to figure out what the women likes, and then he will tell a women what she wants to hear, so she feels good. The next step is he will try to tailor himself under the umbrella of her good feelings. This allows pond scum to levitate via her warm feelings.
These magic tricks work best with the scaffolding of emotions, and therefore tend to impact liberals the most. Rational magic tricks are much harder to do. The democratic party mind control magic makes use mostly of fear and resentment. This divides people in the audience, with them able to trick half the audience, who will not try to think it through.
Perhaps if you answer my questions instead of progressing along without defining what you actually mean by "mind control"?
And you haven't responded to my criticism of your claim that such "mind control" examples as you raise are "self-evident" examples of "spooky action at a distance" (presumably you mean quantum entanglement?) and "manipulative entanglement" (whatever it is you mean by that phrase). Please do so.
As said, all your examples, and your following post, are just mere examples of indoctrination, "group-think", peer pressure, and clever marketing, wrapped up in some extreme religious fervor.
I don't doubt that it can be strong, with people feeling helpless but to follow the cult or whatever it is they belong to.
So I ask again, what is it you mean by "mind-control"?
And how are your examples self-evidence of "spooky action at a distance" (remembering that this was coined in reference to quantum entanglement).
Separate names with a comma.