A Common Misconception Yesterday I saw a comment by one smaragdus (#252) on our post on Unz Review “The Protocols Revisited.” To summarize, he said he was too intelligent than many of the other White people he knew, and this idea that Whites were of high intelligence was false. He says:
trying to talk to my daughter about vaccines is so difficult because she's been indoctrinated in college I just send her books...Dissolving Illusions and Turtles all the way down and hope she reads them...the university's are indoctrinating these kids with big pharma propaganda...and race propaganda...and homosexuality propaganda...and of course holohoax propaganda
It is unfortunate. Parent/child dynamics, even adult children, can be challenging especially when the dynamic is no longer or never was mutually respectful and loving. Adult children can find every opportunity to oppose their parents, including adopting dangerous and destructive ideologies, such as Communism and Vaxism, in order to establish an opposed identity.
This is very challenging and agonizing for both parties in a family. It may help to know it was deliberately engineered to divide families. It might be helpful to convey that. But above all it is best to establish or re-establish the loving, caring, respectful relationship, and this is the responsibility of the parent.
I thought to add: With adult children, recognizing and honoring their autonomy of thought and decision-making is important. She cannot even suspect that you are trying to influence her thoughts and decisions. That will polarize and bring up the entrenched conflict. Instead your influence must be indirect. As in recovery, maybe best to simply share your own experiences, leading to your own thoughts and decisions, and allow your personal story to reflect in her at her own volition. As always, convey that you maintain care and love for her, whatever her thoughts and decisions.
I have spent a lifetime discussing and debating the Jewish question. Most of the people I've engaged were highly educated. However, what always gave me the advantage in discussions was that I knew both sides of the argument. Before refuting them, I could often improve their own arguments with facts they were unaware of. After all, I, too, received my formal education at a university and am capable of following the mainstream narrative. Knowing the other side of an argument is imperative in such discussions. That removes the mistaken impression that you've wrapped your brain around a particular belief system and that you're the one who needs to be informed and educated. Most importantly, you won't be blindsided when confronted with verifiable information that, on the surface, refutes your own argument.
Don't waste your time with academics who are still employed. Their livelihood depends on disagreeing with you. Intelligence is no defense since the conclusions of the indoctrinated may be totally logical based on the information they have. Our greatest asset against indoctrination is not intelligence, but instinct, which is innate intelligence passed on through generations. And, like intelligence, instinct is not distributed equally among people. From my experience, how persuasive your arguments are on something like the Jewish question depends more on speaking to the good instincts of people rather than to their intelligence. Our education system works overtime to drown peoples' good instincts in out-of-context information and, at other times, by pretending that their information is scientific and objective and that no intelligent alternative explanation exists. How well they succeed in this effort depends on how strong the individual's instincts are. The sad truth is that the average person performs better in the intelligence category than the instinctual one.
Since I was a teenager, my understanding of the Jewish problem has not changed. I did not need the truth explained to me because I discovered it myself, by an instinctive understanding of what was happening. The only thing that did change was the multitude of facts and information I've since discovered in my research that supported what my instincts initially gravitated toward. After spending much time listening to and reading what the advocates of the other side's perspective had to offer, it became easy to refute their best arguments with verifiable information they were unfamiliar with, which negated their argument.
Good points Reno. I addressed the subversion of instincts as the first weapon in the psy-war in a recent essay.
We have situations where it is worth debating and conversing with those who are unlikely to change their views. That is, when others are listening and lurking. This is why the Jews refuse to debate us openly before an audience. They know they will lose even while they remain committed to their own view, and the audience will turn. And this is why they try to control online content and commentary. It is worth engaging an intractable debating opponent when others can witness the debate.
Your idea of supplying the other with some of their own best talking points is a good one. It might be tactic #11. We do it in order to show we understand both sides even better than they know their own, as you say. We must do it in such a way as to always convey that we don't agree with such talking points and hold them as false, but are part of the other side. We set them up in order to take them down.
Most appeals to our instincts are moral. Our strategy is to show that their appeals are in fact immoral, and ours are truly moral. Justice is on our side.
"Don't waste your time with academics who are still employed. Their livelihood depends on disagreeing with you. "
Amen. I have tried countless times to get Malone, Kirsch, and whomever virologists (and virology believers) to sit down with Bailey, Cowan and Kauffman to debate the no-virus theory (even tho I am sure that Kauffman and maybe Cowan are jews), but I have found that they refuse to do so and will even ban your comments as did Kirsch did to me. Kirsch, too, is a jew.
Who is going to debate something that might discount or eliminate the very reason for your vocation?
When I saw Kirsch selling SSRI's to treat "covid" I denounced him as another drug-peddling money grubbing Jew and have ignored his work since. Too many I know still follow him, even after I showed them Kirsch pushing brain chemicals to treat "covid."
I know Kaufman is a Jew, and has a patent on wearable prison anklets. He's pretty salesy with his health programs, even though he is a psychologist, not a naturopath or anything.
The bad news is that I'm often working against decades of indoctrination, multi-layered. Most issues so internalized would require a steady exchange of information to reach a mind resistant to change, in other words, a reeducation. Many issues are complex and not easily addressed in even the most elaborate discussion, and few individuals are intellectually curious enough to spend time with information that makes them uncomfortable.
Yes, I agree. That is why if we can establish even one fact in their mind in a single discussion, we should consider it a success. It's a process, not an event. It acts like a grain of irritating sand in their brain, that draws attention to it. It can lead to their entire edifice collapsing and they adopt the opposite view. We must be willing to become a long-term mentor, especially if they return with questions. Have answers ready. Make not just proteges, but friends.
I would add, the emotional tone of our interaction with them will be more attractive than the intellectual content. Let the facts flow to them on a carrier wave of love and respect and care. Life in our cult is better! Many people are seeking not truth, but belonging, love, inclusion. Give it to them.
We come from quite different experiences re JQ. I marvel that your native instinct alerted you to trouble so early on. Mine didn't. I had 12 years of (post Vatican 2) Catholic education and 4 years of secular Jewish college and 2 decades of living in a secular Jewish milieu before I picked up that socially dangerous fork in the middle of the road. That was when I discovered Historical Revisionism. My belated awareness of the concomitant Jewish social agenda only came after I was first freed from the paralyzing myth of White racial guilt.
So your advice to be conversant w/ the other side's talking points is something I honestly lack. I don't read their woke propaganda and try to minimize my exposure to it generally. Yes, I could talk their talk 30 years ago, but their talk has progressed by leaps and bounds since. Yet what you're saying sounds true. Preparation as to their current arguments seems like a really good idea for engaging in debate or conversion. What to do?
Billy, I am posting my life story leading to truth now as a series of audio talks. I'm not sure my instincts alerted me early, it took the educational influence of a mentor to do that. Or maybe there was something in me that allowed the revisionism to change me, when others remain untouched. It sounds as if you had a heavy Jew influence for a long time. I suppose we all have since the Jewish influence is all around us all the time. Yours sounds more direct.
How did you come the fork in the road? Was it a book? Documentary? Another person?
I was pushed down the hole of White racial guilt too for a short time, but was rescued by my introduction to White identity studies along with the JI. They do go together. You might be younger than me and so have more poisoning in White guilt. These things look so absurd once we debunk them.
It may not be necessary to be conversant with the other side's points. It would be enough to reflect them back to them as they say them. Then say ours. It could be enough to have a general cursory understanding of their points, but have a deep clear detailed command of ours. Always present as if trying to help, not to win.
12 years of Catholic school was not direct. Judaism was barely mentioned, but never criticized which I think would have been different 10-20 years previously. The only direct influence was NYU where half of the teaching and student bodies was Jewish.
I'd been truth seeking for 15 years, tho 15 years w/o the internet; so I remained in a liberal conspiracy mindset which shunned conspiracy views that didn't coincide w/ liberal ideology. Curiosity about the H came to a head because I began to notice some right-wing conspiracy types weren't the dumbos and haters they were being portrayed as. Thought I'd take the plunge if only to be able to refute what I read. I had assimilated a smarter than thou attitude along the leftist way. Immediately I saw the revisionists were more direct and truthful than their opposition.
But I think there was a deeper impetus. I'm not naturally psychic, but I had weird, romantic feelings about the Eastern Front, seeing newsreels, The World at War. Eventually imagining I'd died there as a German soldier. My birth was In England just after the war. (I think I'm older than you.) So I came to it on my own but maybe w/ supernatural prompting.
I see. I have to consider that Catholicism is in some significant way Judaic, from my perspective. NYU must have been crazy. Half the population Jews = 99% influence.
H Revisionists rock!
I remember as a kid watching The World At War sitting at the dinner table on Sunday nights. My father was very interested. Even though it depicted the Americans as the heroes and Germans as villains, it was all so grim in black and white that I felt sorry for all the soldiers on either side. War is hell.
IDK about reincarnation, but it sounds as if you have some of the German spirit in you. The Brits certainly do in their heritage. Hitler said so and tried to ally with them. Churchill may have been part Jewish though.
My English uncle fought the "Jerries" for 6 years in N. Africa and then transferred to Palestine after the war for another year. Like a typical Brit he despised the French for their culture more than any of their national enemies. Brave yes, nationalistic yes, politically aware no.
NYU wasn't hard core. Wasn't like there were Holocaust courses or Noahide orgs. I think the average tv/movie junkie nowadays gets more conditioning because hasbara's been ramped up for everyone over the years. What I remember was my friends were mostly Jews and I joined a Jewish fraternity because the WASP one wouldn't take my friends. But everything was secular unlike Catholic HS. Even the 67 Israeli War wasn't a big deal on campus. Everyone including SDS protesters was concerned about Vietnam and getting drafted if you dropped out. Nobody young was pro-Israel at that time.
Excellent and well written but I agree more with the fellow you mentioned at the beginning of this article. It has been my direct experience that the majority of our people are hopelessly programmed and beyond reach, no matter how you approach or converse with them, the facts, evidence, and documentation you present notwithstanding. They tune you out, ignore you, change the subject, get overtly hostile, or any combination thereof. I've witnessed some of them giggling like psychopaths as they cavalierly dismiss my contentions. It is truly a waste of time so pardon my French but, fuck them.
I think you may be largely right. It could be hopeless with most of them no matter how we approach them. Have you tried the 10 tactic approach? I think it may be best for us to examine ourselves and our motivations before we declare them hopeless. And even if it is hopeless with most of them, we should still approach them as if they are convertible, and practice the 10 tactics on them so that we are more effective when we encounter someone who Is open to our views.
Are you yourself an example of a person who has changed your views on significant issues? I am. I am living proof that some factors outside myself have influenced me to change (along with inside factors too). I expect almost everyone has had this experience. I wonder if what keeps us locked in our rigid beliefs is mostly polarization against anyone who challenges those views. Personally, I mean. We see them as threats, and they see us as threats.
So how would it go if we presented ourselves not as threats, but as supporters? Advocates? Allies? Our only way to influence others is to avoid the polarized conflict, and to cozy up to them as concerned friends. Are we up to it? Can we find that genuine place of care for others, beyond our own self-caring defenses?
I didn't say it, but humbleness is another trait we need. We must admit we don't know everything, and they may have a few good points too. To be open to their influence too (however small) would do a lot to help us get them to be open to our influence as well. IOW, approach them as equals, each with something meaningful to share. We tend to guard our self-doubt. If we just admit it while asserting our self-confidence, we win trust.
When we dismiss them as hopeless, we are really protecting ourselves from disappointment and possibly even from our own self-doubt that we can be persuasive. We tend to dismiss others in order not to dismiss ourselves. We don't have to do either. Accept ourselves, doubt and all, and accept them too. We are exploring mysteries together. Invite them to share their understanding of the mystery, and share our own in a spirit of humble inquiry. We are bound to win because our answers to the mystery are rooted in truth. Truth rings.
Yours is a common reaction. It is understandable. We have to ask ourselves, what are our intentions truly in such discussions? Do we really want what is best for the other person? Or do we want to be right and elevate our weak ego self-conception by making them wrong? This is a common approach too, however blind we are to knowing it about ourselves. It takes a strong sense of self (ego) to adhere to this strategy. We don't need to argue or convince anyone else of anything when we are sure of ourselves. We only want to help those we love avoid a terrible mistake. Do we really love them? How capable are we of love? This strategic approach asks us to examine ourselves and become better people. Almost no one is resistant to love, understanding, acceptance, even attention. Most people have not had near enough in their lives, and will cling to it when they find it. Offer it. To do that, we first have to find it in ourselves, or maybe among ourselves. We might convene groups to meet these needs in support of our conversion drives.
Oct 15, 2023·edited Oct 15, 2023Liked by Karl Haemers
Karl,
Excellent points, all. But are they hard to do.
This is the entire reason for my moniker "BuelahMan" or B'Man. Of course my name is not Buelah, for heaven's sake. But that is my Incredible Hulk personality that takes these miss-directionists to task. Sure, there is stupid and ignorant, then there are those intentionally lying. B'Man cannot put up with those and when encountering them, all bets are off with civility.
But in Real Life, I have a totally different tact, mainly because in Real Life I don't run into mis-directionists often. Mostly ignorant and a few stupid.
Oct 15, 2023·edited Oct 15, 2023Liked by Karl Haemers
Excellent Dutch documentary that just came out titled, 'The Mystery of Israel Solved.' It's in English with Dutch subtitles!
In the documentary, they use some footage from the interview with Ronald Bernard from 2017. If you haven't watched that interview yet Karl, I suggest you do. I posted the original interview, but I also posted an interview he did with Ole Dammegard in 2018 which is much more thorough and a bit better, in my opinion.
I watched the Mystery of Israel solved docu. It provided a good summary of key points, though the end became too preachy of the Christ is King doctrine. Still, good to know we have some Anti-Zionist Christians to counter-act all the Christian Zionists. I'm glad it included the Scofield Bible Supplement information. That is one of the most remarkable and idiotic developments in the history of religion. The Jews really pulled off a miracle mind rape there. How could Aryans be so ignorant? Our greatest weapon in the conversion program for Christian Zionists may be Scofield.
Oct 20, 2023·edited Oct 20, 2023Liked by Karl Haemers
Perfect summary of the video! I still remember the first time I listened to you on an interview; I said to myself, "This guy simply gets it!"
A little less than two years ago, this chief surgeon of an organ transplant team of one of the newest, and largest, hospitals here in Salt Lake City died in a skiing accident. He was 38 Karl! Seemed like a great guy, with a healthy-looking family. I remember thinking, you just don't replace guys like that! I kind of feel the same way about you. So, don't go skiing!😁And it goes beyond just having a lot of knowledge, it's about the overall importance of it towards life- a healthy life.
The Greeks had a word called "phronesis"- it basically translates into "practical wisdom," but like "logos," means so much more than that. It encapsulates the proper application and use of knowledge towards a healthy way of life.
Completely agree with your statement on the Scofield Bible. Heck, most people aren't even aware that it even exists. People would look at biblical history with much more of a critical-eye if they understood ALL of the various versions of the Bible, from the Septuagint and Vulgate to the Wycliff and King James. Most people see it as this sacred and immutable "one book" that has never undergone any alterations or interpretations through history. As Monty Python's 'The Life of Brian' said, "It is written!" But yes, the Scofield Bible has done inestimable damage to how Christians see their history- their "Judeo-Christian" history! Lol!
This is way too rational. Most people only pretend they follow reason and are unaware they are not.
It is a rationale not reason. Most of us are captured by ideology not reason. The moral effort to lie is beyond most people. It is much easier to deceive oneself. So, ideology must be kept distinct from lying, deception and propaganda. The liar knows by definition he is lying. The ideologist does not.
American normies love Jews because of the Christian admonition to do so. They are taught this in the form of Christianity that has been grafted into Judaism. Judaism grafted itself into the Christian scriptures and the Christians never caught on.
What it will take to wake up Christians captured by Judaism is deconversion from their Judeo-Christianism. One way to engage them might be to point out that Marcion assembled the First New Testament comprised of Paul's Letters and Gospel of Luke and it became the adopted scripture spreading event to Rome. That First New Testament was not corrupted with Judaism (Book of Acts says "The Way to Salavation is from the Jews" - not Jesus - and the Christians swallowed this). But then the Jews burned all copies of Marcion's scriptures and wrote Matthew and Mark gospels to graft Christianity into Judaism.
Florida Governor DeSantis is arranging to help 20,000 Americans to get back to the US who are allegedly trapped in Israel because of the phony war with Hamas. What are they doing there? Religious tourism of Bethlehem, Jerusalem, and the Sea of Galilee. But Christianity did not originate in Jerusalem it began in Antioch, Turkey. But few people visit there.
I should have mentioned an important but unknown book that is a sort of antidote to American Judeo-Christianism - Christ Was Not A Jew - An Epistle to the Gentiles (1935) by Jacob Elon Conner, PhD, former US diplomat to Viet Nam. It explains how Christ came from Galilee, an area not part of the 12 Tribes of Israel and Galileans were not of the same ethnicity as Israel. The Galileans came from Russia. Conner was apparently a half Jew
Karl, I read this column with particular interest. Although, for obvious reasons, I disagree with some of the key tenets of your "cult," the question of how to deprogram people from normative messaging is one I've been exploring too.
As I've mentioned before, I am appalled by the stranglehold that leftist ideology has on the majority of my fellow Jews. This past week, as many leftist organisations (BLM, Harvard, etc.) have openly applauded last weekend's mass rape and murder of Israelis by Hamas terrorists, I have wondered whether this cognitive dissonance would shake some of my leftist co-religionists from their stupor. So far, the jury is out.
You see, we're approaching the same issue from different angles. Your perspective is that the problems we see with GAME are the results of Jewish influence. I see the problems as being the result of leftist elitist influence, including on Jews. If you haven't already, you should read KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov's "Love Letter to America" from 1984. It's available at archive.org for free, and it explains how the West was ideologically subverted by Marxist-Leninist proxies during the Cold War.
In any event, just as poor whites and poor blacks have more in common with each other than with the elites of either race, you and I have more in common ideologically than either of us do with the elites of our race. We disagree on who's pulling the levers, but we agree on the harm that the lever-pulling is causing.
To return to the subject at hand; some very interesting research has been done on beliefs and self-identity. Bernard Kelman, Stanley Milgram, Solomon Asch (all Jewish, of course) and a number of other psychologists and sociologists have looked into why people do what they do and believe what they do.
Unfortunately, the news is not good. Once people believe something, there is a high likelihood that they will continue to believe it, even when confronted with irrefutable evidence that their original premise was wrong. This was proven in experiments in which the experimenter, after convincing the test subjects of something, then ltold them it was false. A significant percentage of them CONTINUED to believe it. Along the same lines, once people have done something - especially if it was morally reprehensible, such as supporting mask or shot mandates - they refuse to believe they were wrong, because to do so would be to admit moral culpability.
There are a number of other psychological phenomena that have been observed, but they all add up to the same thing: it's VERY hard to deprogram people, even when it's blindingly obvious that their beliefs are contrary to their own self-interest.
Thank you Wes for sharing your thoughts here. I always want to know your perspective, since it adds important insights where I might not see as clearly.
I understand you see the normative cult programming messaging as more Leftist, and I see it as more Jewish (given the Jewish dominance of the GAME Complex). I agree to disagree for now. In some sense, normative cult programming is both, to some degree.
The example of today's news reporting on Palestine/Israel is difficult, since the Leftist organizations (not all of them entirely Jewish, such as BLM, but certainly Harvard) applaud (if that's the right word) the Hamas action (if it was even real and not a false flag of some kind) as retaliatory justice for recent Israeli atrocities against Palestinians and Muslims (desecration of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, for one), within a historical context of savage ongoing lethal injustice against the Palestinians for over 120 years since the Nakbah. And since 1967 this Israeli injustice has been supported and even made possible by military, financial, technical and political (UN vetoes) from the US--while Palestine gets hardly any aid from anyone, notwithstanding the accusation that Iran, Hezbollah and Syria support Palestinians.
So your hope that the current news (Hamas atrocities upon fellow Jews in Israel, left or right) could influence leftist Jews to see the Israeli side, is challenged by leftist Jews' ability to fall back on this history. Some leftist Jews even think a pro-Palestinian position could be good for Israel and Jews generally, an argument which has merit at least from their perspective. How would you find ways to agree with them, validate their views, then introduce facts that might get them thinking, all while maintaining a benevolent respectful caring demeanor toward them?
I also see plenty of right-wing Jews in America, such as Ben Shapiro, and of course the entire right-wing establishment in Israel such as Likud, polarizing with their standard historical vehemence and hatred and promises of mass violence against Palestinians. It would be good to know how many leftist Jews think the Hamas action is an atrocity story, the 40 decapitated babies another fake war propaganda piece (I'm told it comes 33 years to the day of the "babies thrown out of incubators" story tearfully told by the Kuwaiti minister's daughter at the UN which justified Israel's war against Iraq fought with US blood and money). Listening to leftist Jews' answer to this question would tell a lot.
To call Hamas "terrorists" and never to label the IDF, Mossad, Unit 8200 and all the rest of the Israeli political apparatus and in large sense the entire nation of Israel "terrorist" as well would be discrediting, especially to leftist Jews and Palestinians and their supporters. Where can you find common ground to agree upon and points of theirs to validate? I didn't say it in my essay, but I assumed it was clear that the facts have to be on our side for the strategy to work. That would be true with vax issue, covid more generally, Jewish power (in my view), but not with Israel/Palestine. You might have other facts though, but wouldn't it be hard to assert them as more credible than the Palestinian/Leftist Jew side?
I have not studied the Bezmenov (Thomas Scheider, Jewish) book you reference, but I have seen videos of his speeches and lectures. I am not convinced he was truly a KGB defector; he may have continued to be an active agent. He explains the 4 stages of communist revolution, and that it was ongoing at the time in America. You say the Soviet agents were Marxist-Leninist proxies, I would say they were primarily Communist Jews. Most communists are/were.
Poor Whites may have more in common with poor blacks than either do with the Power Elite (and especially with the Jewish Power Elite). I agree with you there. Poor Whites have more in common with middle class Whites than they do with poor blacks. On a level below the ideological cult programming, Whites have most in common with other Whites, as blacks with blacks and Jews with Jews. In the late 1950s, middle class blacks had more in common with middle class Whites than either did with poor Whites or blacks (maybe). This is the question of race vs. class, and we might agree that it's both/and. For Jews, race dominates every time, especially under perception of outside threat--always seen to be threat against All Jews! The current widespread rallying behind Israel (with leftist Jews a significant partial exception) may be a good example. I used to have a copy of the Charter of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist League, which would be another partial exception. True Torah Jews denounce the nation of Israel as religiously illegitimate and call for its peaceful dismantling, but they are still pro-Jewish. I would think the leftist Jews you hope to convert or at least influence by applying the 10 tactics might still be pro-Jewish as well, just not pro-Zionist. The current IHRA definition of Anti-semitism says anti-Zionism is anti-semitic, making anti-Zionist Jews anti-semitic, which is a tautology.
I appreciate that you have studied the psychology of belief and behavior. I trust that you have formed a well-education view of it. Your views would tend to invalidate my 10 tactics as unlikely to succeed. I am predisposed to be skeptical of Jewish psychologists, given the damage that Freud did to the White Christian West with his depraved and perverse "psychoanalysis" and prescriptions for cocaine to treat depression and other mental illness while extorting grift payments from his patients/victims. Experiments showing people don't change their beliefs could be weapons in the culture war, to instill the hopelessness I advise us to overcome. I think a better study would be to look into how and why people Do change their beliefs, and apply the principles distilled. In fact, that must be what advertising does: study what makes people change their beliefs and values, and apply them. How did the beliefs of the huge majority of the US population change from "isolationist" from both WWI and II, to inverventionist almost overnight in a wild extreme swing of opinion? The Jews Edward Bernays and advertising mogul Albert Lasker had something to do with it, so how? I am exploring the methods how in my series 6 Weapons in the Psychological Warfare series. In the case of WWI and II, fear instinct subversion, and attention must have been foremost. Or how is it that the almost total majority of the Jewish people anywhere in the world started out opposed to the creation of the nation of Israel for 3 main reasons (they were content living where they were, they were concerned Jews would look bad displacing and genociding the Palestinians, and Judaism as a religion did not provide for creating Israel until the Mossiac came. Only then would it be right to displace and genocide the Palestinians), but then quickly changed their beliefs and opinions to favor the nation of Israel? Jewish psychologists should study that, because it happened and it was real and something specific and detailed caused the shift.
Likewise, one example of people who had done something morally reprehensible but then admitted they were wrong is Breaking the Silence. These are former IDF soldiers who committed atrocities on helpless innocent Palestinians, but had an attack of conscience and are now speaking out--breaking the silence--about ongoing Israeli-committed atrocities against Palestinians. I'm sure we can think of many more. But I agree with you on one example: None of the Jews at the Nuremberg Trials ever admitted their wrongs in conducting such a "travesty of justice" (the words of Robert Taft at the time) against the National Socialist leaders, hanging them on exaggerated and fake charges in a Jewish act of revenge which was itself a war crime, carried out on Purim when the 10 Sons of Haman were hanged by the ancient Israelites (another false name). I'm sure we can find other examples for each. It seems difficult for mothers of vax-damaged children to admit their own decisions mangled their own children, but I personally know many, and have read and heard about many more, who have managed to admit it. So certain psychological factors overcome our tendency to protect ourselves from guilt, and I trust that some of my tactics can make that easier.
I agree with you that it's difficult to deprogram people. In fact it may be impossible. I am not advising that approach. I say we help people deprogram themselves. It must not be obvious to them that their beliefs are against their own self-interest, in fact they must think their beliefs are in their self-interest. On a deeper unconscious level, they may Want to believe and act against their self-interest. That is a strange but pervasive phenomenon I expect we have both seen in ourselves and others. Why? I think the answer comes down to: this is the way they have learned to get love and attention and care and respect. We all know chronic complainers (this is a Jewish stereotype) who get attention for it. They are rewarded for believing and acting against their own self-interest. If we know this, we can work with it. Give them attention for acting in favor of their own self-interest, according to our beliefs, and they can change.
I'm convinced of it. I myself am an example of a person who has profoundly changed my beliefs and behaviors, and I think you are too. I have also had success influencing others using these tactics. Sometimes I fail, but it is not because the tactics are ineffective, but because I lacked the inner mind and heart state to effectively enact them. Basically, that inner state is love. No one is resistant to love. I am convinced of it.
I really appreciate you sharing your always cogent and relevant thoughts here with us all. I think you are right, you and I have some basic fundamental similarities in our thinking, believing and even being. We might just come at them from different angles. I'm glad whenever we meet in our commonality, and inspired when we can engage in respectful discussion of differences. I learn from you Wes. Tell us more.
Correction: Uri Bezemonv's real name was Thomas Schuman, not Scheider.
Scheider was the name of the sadistic Jewish doctor at the heart of the MK Ultra trauma-based mind control program that went by the name Sydney Gottlieb. The FDA Commissioner until 2019 was another Jewish Gottlieb, Scott, who wrote the book Uncontrolled Spread, disease-mongering over the fake covid virus. The FDA Commissioner during the disease scare of 2020 was Stephen Hahn, who we must presume is Jewish, and who passed the new vax clot shots as EUA. Hahn also worked at the Perelman School of Medicine where Drew the Jew Weissman also worked to develop the mmRNA tech for the vax. Hahn was chief medical officer at the venture capital firm that launched Moderna, Flagship Pioneering. Another Jew who got wealthy off covid vax.
I didn't include Jews of the FDA in my book, but I need to write a new essay on it. The Jewish FDA was crucial to the covid scamdemic.
Karl, you are exactly right about propaganda. We saw this happen in real time during 2020 and 2021, when entire populations acceded to ideological and behavior modification efforts.
You may already be familiar with Robert Cialdini's research into persuasion. If not, you will find it fascinating, and you will recognize how all six principles were used extensively during the COVID pysop. https://worldofwork.io/2019/07/cialdinis-6-principles-of-persuasion/
One of the issues that both of us have, however, is that propaganda depends on CONSENSUS (one of Cialdini's principles of persuasion). In the Asch conformity experiments, about 1/3 of the subjects would publicly agree with a false statement when all the other people in the room agreed with it. If even one of the other people disagreed with the false statement, almost all of the test subjects found the courage to also disagree.
This is why censorship is the vital companion to propaganda; it would not have been sufficient to have celebrities and authority figures shilling for the poisonous COVID shots if TPTB had not also silenced all the doctors and scientists trying to warn the public. This is why authoritarian regimes always prioritize narrative control as a key factor in maintaining power: "the truth will set you free," at least in your mind, and that's the last thing tyrants want.
A while ago, I wrote about Czech dissident Vaclav Havel's excellent tract, "The Power of the Powerless." You may find it interesting, as it is relevant to the idea that truth can spread as a contagion and undermine totalitarian propaganda. https://dystopianliving.substack.com/p/the-power-of-the-powerless-is-more
In short, I don't disagree with you about the possibility of helping people deprogram themselves. People are certainly capable of sudden and radical shifts in thinking. Look at all the Taylor Swift fans who are suddenly learning about football and watching Kansas City Chiefs games, because Taylor is dating one of the players. (That's LIKING, another of Cialdini's principles of persuasion).
I don't think I have the time or space here to respond in detail to your questions about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Suffice it to say that, while I do consider myself a Zionist in the sense that I believe the Jewish people have historical sovereignty over the Holy Land, and have every right to defend it against other groups, I do not think that the Israeli government is necessarily honest or humane. It would not surprise me if they had advance warning of the Hamas attack and allowed it to occur, but I do not think it was a false flag attack. Hamas has been dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the extermination of Jews since it was founded. There's no need to orchestrate a murderous rampage against yourself when you already have people trying to do it.
When Israel was founded, the Arab countries ethnically cleansed themselves of their Jewish population, forcibly displacing approximately 900, 000 Jews. A roughly equivalent number of Arabs (who at that time did not yet call themselves "Palestinians") fled or were expelled from Israel in 1947-1948, leaving less than 150,000 behind.
Here, Karl, is where you and I likely have another "commonality," as you put it. I'll put it very bluntly: you can't have an ethno-state without ethnic cleansing. Israel letting those 150,000 Arabs stay was a huge mistake, tantamount to letting a family of vipers breed under your bed. By 1995, the "Palestinian" population had grown to over one million. In what is perhaps the worst example of "apartheid and genocide" in history, it is now over 9 million, outnumbering the 7 million Jews.
Also worthy of note: Egypt and Jordan shoot Palestinians at the border, rather than allowing them to cross. They know well that "Palestine" is not a country, it is a philosophy of terrorism; they found this out quickly, when the "Palestinians" they let into their countries tried to overthrow THEIR governments too.
Now, with all that said, I do hate the fact that innocent people suffer. Children born in Gaza or the West Bank don't have to be radicalized and turned into vessels for hatred. But, after Israel withdrew unilaterally from Gaza in 2005, the population elected Hamas, which is basically the Taliban. They've lived under a terrorist dictatorship ever since. Israel is in a catch-22: they can't do nothing and let themselves be attacked by terrorists, but they also can't fight the terrorists without hurting civilians. There is no easy answer.
Yes, the covid/vax hoax was among the best example of behavior modification persuasion in the industrial age (although Hitler bad holohoax surpasses even covid, and not just because it has been effective for over 80 years now). That was based on one of my 6 Weapons, Fear, with a few others playing in, such as Attention, Confusion, Instinct Subversion...
I'm eager to compare my 6 Weapons with Cialdini's 6 principles.
In Asch experiments, that means 2/3 of people could not be persuaded by consensus. That seems a lot. To what extent does consensus depend on majority? Or more importantly, Perception of majority? We have the Silent Majority, which is not nearly so persuasive because it is not Perceived to be majority? We need a loud majority. That is why public demonstrations are so important: to show consensus.
I have already added Division as a 7th weapon. We could add Perception and Authority (which confers consensus by majority "expert" opinion). This is why some people such as Peter McCulouch, Sheryl Nass, RFKJ, the 3 signers of the Great Barrington Declaration and others were important in the counter-persuasion to the covid narrative. We have to be careful that all of them may have been Controlled Opposition and Limited Hangout (COLH). For instance, the 3 GBD signers were all pro-vax, and at least one was Jewish, Kuldorff.
So TPTB/Jews did not silence all the doctors and scientists. They controlled and limited some as they put them forward in control of the counter-narrative. Robert Malone was another. The worst from my perspective was that fake holohoaxster Vera Sherav. The main control/limit point was "vaccines are deadly," with a close second being "infectious disease is not." Almost anything else could be debated, seemingly from a counter-narrative perspective (the "dissidents" and "disinformation agents") so long as these two truths were avoided.
I agree with your basic premise, narrative control is key for totalitarians. I would ask us to add that the control includes managing, controlling and limiting the counter-narrative as well. This is why Lenin said "we will defeat the enemy because we will create it." (or similar). And it is why Goebbels said "The people can learn the truth. It just has to be presented to them in a way they can understand."(or similar) This may be why Fascists persisted in spreading Samisdat (secret printed material) in Communist E Germany even though it was very dangerous, and why White Nationalists persist in sneaking around putting up little stickers on stop signs and light posts in the US, also very dangerous. It may be why I don't post my essays on Facebook or TwiX, and why I may be reckless posting on Unz. Honeytraps and Operation Trust programs abound.
Havel's writings are sure to be excellent and I hope to review the source you have provided. Goebbels is another who spoke and wrote about truth as a liberator of the people, as opposed to the Big Lie which the British and moreso the Soviets employed. Like you, no time and attention now to provide the source. Later hopefully.
I certainly have no awareness of the dating life of Taylor Swift, nor her sportsball beau. To me, that is another Attention trap to distract us from more meaningful "news." Yet I do have awareness of Swift disclosing the Jews (not by name alas) who dominate the music industry and who dominate her. She basically disclosed that she is treated like a slave and cash cow of the Jews, and was very upset about it. That was meaningful "news" to me and many others. Yet it did not get near enough Attention. Wasn't it Swift who made a public statement saying she trusted the President, so get vaxxed?
Interestingly, I watched a video of Jason Christoff exposing the techniques of subliminal mind control in media. It didn't work on me, because I didn't know the names of any movies with Tom Hanks. It did work on me though when I had to pick a time on a clock. So my counter-strategy of Avoidance may have merit.
Thank you for the answers you have provided on the Palestine/Israel genocide (titles, names and labels are important to establish narrative control, and spacial, temporal and rank order matter to meaning. Changing them from the standards changes meaning). Like you, I'll continue to discussion in necessarily concise replies. Much more must be said, as we both know. Brevity may be still another weapon. Or Simplicity.
Preface everything hereafter with "In my view..."
Believing the Jewish people have any historical sovereignty (right of occupation) over the Holy Land (alternatively Palestine, Land of Cannan, the Levant, territory of the Babylonian, Persian and Roman empires, etc.) is believing in the very propaganda and mass mind control we are trying to escape. Even the identity of the Jewish people is a fiction and fabrication promoted by propaganda mass mind control. I know that is challenging for you to hear, since attacks on identity may be the knowledge we all resist the most, perhaps especially Jews, who cling to their perceived identity more than any other tribe, especially when under perceived outside threat.
I might agree with you if you said Jews had a right to seize any land anywhere in the world by right of conquest and force of arms and racial/tribal superiority, as European White tribes did in their colonies including N. America, or the Romans did including in Palestine, but I find a weak justification that Palestine was originally the Jews' "Holy Land" reprehensible dirty war propaganda. Almost no people on Earth originated in the lands they inhabit, nor do they need to to lay claim to them. Life on Earth is a struggle, a survival of the fittest, and resource acquisition of part of the struggle. Let the fittest thrive. Jews today appear to have achieved the most resource access, including Israel as a base of operation for their world domination plan, at the expense of everyone else. The White empires such as the Romans, and colonial period Europeans, brought many benefits to the lives of their subjects. Jews only bring ruin (except to the capitulator and colluder race traitors). I'd respect the Jews more if they just admitted they took Palestine because they could and wanted to, rather than all this propaganda justification about some historical "Chosen People" and "Holy Land" mythology.
This was very excellent and another revelation deeper into the identity of Jews:
In my view, if the IDF/Mossad had advance knowledge of any Hamas "attack" and allowed it to occur, that IS a false flag attack. I know of three kinds of FF: total fabrication and fiction (Gulf of Tonkin, Assad gassing Syrians), Let It Happen (LIH) (Pearl Harbor, 911) and Do It Yourself (DIY) (Lavon Affair, Bombing of King David Hotel). Some FFs are both LIH and DIY combined, such as 911 (an Israel job).
Hamas was founded by Israel itself, as an openly-stated "counter-weight" to the PLO. It has been at least partially an Israeli operation and control structure over Palestine ever since. To think that Hamas is truly fighting against Israel is to succumb to the war propaganda we are fed. Hamas is Israeli controlled opposition. There IS need to fabricate a murderous rampage against yourself when no one else can or would do it, in order to justify another "mowing the lawn" of the Palestinian civilian population in their Gaza reservation. The "murderous rampage" was fabricated both in at least incitement and allowance if not direct arrangement, and in gross exaggeration. We have some hard work to do in liberating people from mass mind control, if they believe the 40 beheaded baby meme. Or Hamas busting through their prison wall with bulldozers, flying attack gliders, destroying Israeli tanks, taking hostages, and retreating in good order back to Gaza city virtually untouched. Oh yes, and launching thousands of home-made rockets. All with Israel totally unaware of the preparations and operations themselves despite the most sophisticated technological surveillance system in the world, delaying emergency response for 5 hours, and claiming to be surprised, all with Hamas knowing thousands of their people will be slaughtered and millions displaced in reprisal for their little adventure ("murderous rampage") against their reservation overlords. This narrative cannot be true. And we've seen it played before in Operation Cast Lead and Operation Protective Edge. Same story, same result.
When Israel was founded, it needed Jews to go and live there, and so got them from surrounding Arab nations. This was like the NS/Zionist Transfer Agreement, where some people wanted to get rid of their troublesome Jews, and Zionists wanted them in Palestine/Israel. They cooperated.
I appreciate your blunt honesty. Yes, Israel can't have an ethno-state without ethnic cleansing. Many European, African and Asian nations can have ethno-states without ethnic cleansing however, so long as they keep migrants including Jews out, because those nations were theirs from the beginning. Germany re-achieved its original ethno-state by expelling Jews (not exterminating them). The Jewish claim to Palestine/Roman colony/Levant/etc. as their original ethno-state appears a lie, deception and propaganda to me and many others.
I'll ask you to consider that the founding Israeli state may have not made a mistake allowing the remnant Palestinians to remain. It may have been strategic. The current Palestinians are very useful to frighten the Israeli Jewish population and control them, fund arms sales, justify the ongoing Israeli occupation, depict the Jews as victims (again. still.), requisition gold and blood from the US, and confer all the strategic benefits of a useful captive foreign other sub-population. Boogey-men! The Israeli Jews may not have bargained on the Palestinians breeding so largely, and their efforts to restrict Palestinian resources in order to limit population may not have succeeded. Then again, a large Palestinian population limited to a tiny land area may serve the Israeli plan even better. For now. Ultimately Israel wants them dead and fled, and we all know it.
Egypt used to allow the tunnels out of Palestine so they could get some humane aid supplies into Gaza, but once the Jews installed Al Sisi, that stopped. My immediate pre-conceived response to the "news" that Palestinians tried to overthrow the Egyptian government after given asylum is total skepticism. Jews, however, are notorious for overthrowing the governments of whatever nation lets them in, and Weimar Germany and today's Jewish State of America are the best examples of many. Therefore news of Palestinians trying to overthrow governments of their asylum states is likely classic Jewish projection. Israeli propagandists are also notorious for demonizing their enemies with lavish propaganda. "By way of deception, thou shalt do war," is the Mossad motto. Or is that propaganda too? Above all, such news as Palestinian coup d'etat attempts is absurd on its face, given their almost total lack of resources and power to succeed. Jews, however, are loaded with resources and power, and Israel's ongong occupation of Palestine is a great example of a successful coup d'etat (against the Turkish administration, the British administration, and the Palestinian self-government) using access to huge resources and power Palestinians never had.
Palestinians can only be said to have a "philosophy of terrorism" if we forget that they have almost no means of self-defense, no freedom of movement, limited access to resources especially military, and little hope. "Terrorism" is asymmetrical war by another name, and Palestinians must use it when they are so much more weak and vulnerable. In fact, they are so weak and vulnerable that to use "terrorism" as a strategy in their asymetrical war against Israel is so counter-productive and destructive to themselves-- why use it? No, I think Israel provokes/incites/engineers Palestinian "terrorism" for Israel's strategic us. It is of no strategic value to Palestinians, and is in fact counter-strategic.
Remember, Israel attacked and deposed the Egyptian government of Al Nassar in 1967 in the so-called "Six Day War"--let's call it the Egyptian Coup War. Nassar had proposed a Pan-Arab League of cooperation in economics (oil), politics, religion (islam) and cultural exchange, which Israel saw as a threat. Jews are pananoid, and Israel had a plan to keep Arab nations divided from each other, and even sub-divide them into smaller weaker nations, so Nassar's proposal ran counter to that plan. Thus Israel launched a sneak attack and bombed the Egyptian air forces on the ground, and launched a ground invasion of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan. They seized control of the Sinai peninsula from Egypt, and the Golan Heights from Syria. The US made Israel give Sinai back, but Israel still holds the Stolan Heights today. Israel also contributes to the ongoing coup attempt in Syria, as well as the regime change operation in Yemen. Israel has invaded and attacked Lebanon a number of times, slaughtering many thousands of Lebanese innocent civilians. Jews commit coups, not Palestinians.
I meant to say above, just as the Israeli strategic planners may have kept some Palestinians in the new Israel as useful boogey-men, Jewish bankers kept blacks in the US after the War Between the Jews Bankers (Civil War) in order to use them as a wrecking ball against White Christian America. Lincoln had announced plans to "repatriate" blacks back to Africa in a new nation owned by the US, Liberia, but Jewish bankers, primarily the Rothschilds, had Lincoln killed to stop his no-interest money supply (greenbacks) and removal of the useful blacks. That was a kind of coup engineered by Jews too.
Interesting points and ideas, as usual, Karl. The concept of controlled opposition is inherently a difficult one, because it creates suspicion even among allies, which is something that always benefits the oppressor. In fact, the key purpose of Russian "active measures" for the last 80 years has been simply to exacerbate divisions between groups in the target countries. Divide and conquer really is the oldest trick in the book.
It amuses me to observe that, given our viewpoints - wildly divergent in certain key respects though they are - we would probably find ourselves in the same gulag, if TPTB had their way.
Good point Les. Yes, suspicion within groups that someone is a mole or spy creates distrust and disrupts the functioning of the group, even if no real mole exists. The concept of controlled opposition controls opposition through distrust. It appears to me that most controlled opposition is real however, given COINTELPRO infiltration operations, ongoing in different forms today, and such incitement/entrapment operations as the abduction Whitmer. In writing Part 4 of my History of National Socialism in America, it seems most NS groups in America today are infiltrated in one way or another, some of them possibly turned completely into useful boogey-men of the kind I am claiming Hamas to be.
Some CO can be 80% truth/20% lie. I see CHD as such, 80% truth on covid/vax, and 20% lie on climate change. The one gives credibility to inflict the other lie. Even perceived "anti-semitism" such as Kanye West may be controlled opposition, since Jews need "anti-semitism" for their purposes, and if they don't have enough of it, they create it.
Karl, ABSOLUTELY we should hold training sessions. This is currently a fluid idea, but we could really add to our core skills, knowledge, and abilities by refining this area.
It’s always a huge letdown when we fail to make inroads with hopefull candidates.
Thank you. It is a particularly vile term. We aspire to a level of discourse well above the degradation imposed by today's extreme cultural marxism. We welcome your participation.
Do you denounce our small echo chamber? Do you think it is ineffective or pointless? I'm open to understanding your critique, if you can be specific and offer improvements.
OK, a critique. Many responded to this essay with hopelessness, frustration, and challenges in getting the 10 Tactics to work. I agree, it's challenging. I feel that this essay in particular is not preaching to a choir. Most of us here have never considered the 10 Tactics and so cannot be part of the choir. This essay may more accurately be called teaching the choir, so it can go out and sing to others.
Great stuff, Karl, especially resonant for me is Tactic for Conv. #6. Personally been thru a number of cults and glad to have found Taboo Truth. That you're willing to describe it as a cult is disarming and empowering too. Rurik hints at his cult in a humorous way: the Slavland Stalkers. Neither requires exclusivity which might be considered decidedly uncult-like.
Coincidentally, I came across a term "egregore" (book Mark Stavish) which refers to a psycho-spiritual entity created by people devoted to a cause. The entity is not materially real, but it feeds the energy of the devotees as they bolster its energetic existence w/ their devotion. A mutual feedback loop, tho one not w/o danger. It seems related to Steiner's concept of folksouls. Just saying, folks.
Good for you recognize cults when you see them. I studied the difference between cults and communities, and it was crucial to know. Yes, I would say a real cult requires exclusivity. One of the strangest and in some ways funny was Kieth Rainere of NXIUM. He claimed to be the smartest man in the world, prophecying stock prices (often wrong), and was a holocaust denier. He claimed his female devotees were reincarnations of National Socialist leaders such as Goebbels and Goering and Borman, and he had other devotees brand his initials with a cauterizing pen into his women's thighs and hips. Two Bronfman women were in this cult, until their father broke them out. LOL.
I've seen the word egregore but never knew what it meant. Fascinating. I wonder if the ghost of Adolf Hitler is an egregore to some NS folks today. I like Folksouls. Probably not good to mix them.
Some followers of AH have taken him to be an avatar: Miguel Serrano, Chilean diplomat and Savitri Devi, English woman are the most famous writers. I know, nutty but harmless, Canadian Brian Ruhe has that tendency among contemporaries.
In studying Devi's The Lightning and the Sun (Devi was Hindu), along with hard historical revision on AH and NS, I can see the validity in the "Esoteric Hitlerists." I don't like that term, and don't believe in special spiritual entities or "avatars" in the way they mean. But it is also interesting that some Catholic clergy at the time proclaimed Hitler a kind of Christian spiritual leader in his fight against violently atheist Communism. Slowly and reluctantly, I have come to conceive of AH as some form of Archetype figure, certainly the Return of the King but possibly something more "spiritual." He was a mortal man, yet played a part in history and expressed an Aryan energy that elevated him to something more.
I'm assuming your info on some Catholic clergy praising AH is in reference to the rather academic Holy Reich book, a factual but unenjoyable read for me. Yet I think it was a needed reference Jim Rizoli lacked in his recent debate w/ EM Jones. https://www.bitchute.com/video/KP4UYo4zWcW4/
Love Rizoli for his working class doggedness re the H, but he's not an intellectual and couldn't articulate to Jones that liberal priests were subverting their flock thru their sermons and actions and were consequently deserving of incarceration under a nationalistic authoritarian regime. Jones favors the same sort of authoritarian Catholic regime for all nations. I can't help but dislike Jones when I see him act the bully part in his debates w/ anyone who doesn't genuflect to the authority of traditional Catholicism.
I can't recall where I read or heard about clergy praise. Maybe one of the Dennis Wise docuseries.
As I said in the 6 Weapons essay, enjoyment is not my goal. Then we might fall into Hoffman's occult trap. I still think I need to make my writing engaging and interesting though as a carrier wave for the knowledge.
I hear your critique of Jones. Many have critiques of Jones. He is the most outspoken person at his level on the JI, and I am always impressed by that. When he said if we are not discussing the JI (my paraphrase), we are not relevant, I almost jumped up and shouted, because I had just come to the same conclusion. Almost no one else says it. For that, and his new book The Holocaust Narrative--which I probably won't need to get, since I have most of the Rudolf HH series and much else--I praise Jones.
trying to talk to my daughter about vaccines is so difficult because she's been indoctrinated in college I just send her books...Dissolving Illusions and Turtles all the way down and hope she reads them...the university's are indoctrinating these kids with big pharma propaganda...and race propaganda...and homosexuality propaganda...and of course holohoax propaganda
It is unfortunate. Parent/child dynamics, even adult children, can be challenging especially when the dynamic is no longer or never was mutually respectful and loving. Adult children can find every opportunity to oppose their parents, including adopting dangerous and destructive ideologies, such as Communism and Vaxism, in order to establish an opposed identity.
This is very challenging and agonizing for both parties in a family. It may help to know it was deliberately engineered to divide families. It might be helpful to convey that. But above all it is best to establish or re-establish the loving, caring, respectful relationship, and this is the responsibility of the parent.
I thought to add: With adult children, recognizing and honoring their autonomy of thought and decision-making is important. She cannot even suspect that you are trying to influence her thoughts and decisions. That will polarize and bring up the entrenched conflict. Instead your influence must be indirect. As in recovery, maybe best to simply share your own experiences, leading to your own thoughts and decisions, and allow your personal story to reflect in her at her own volition. As always, convey that you maintain care and love for her, whatever her thoughts and decisions.
Excellent post, Karl.
I have spent a lifetime discussing and debating the Jewish question. Most of the people I've engaged were highly educated. However, what always gave me the advantage in discussions was that I knew both sides of the argument. Before refuting them, I could often improve their own arguments with facts they were unaware of. After all, I, too, received my formal education at a university and am capable of following the mainstream narrative. Knowing the other side of an argument is imperative in such discussions. That removes the mistaken impression that you've wrapped your brain around a particular belief system and that you're the one who needs to be informed and educated. Most importantly, you won't be blindsided when confronted with verifiable information that, on the surface, refutes your own argument.
Don't waste your time with academics who are still employed. Their livelihood depends on disagreeing with you. Intelligence is no defense since the conclusions of the indoctrinated may be totally logical based on the information they have. Our greatest asset against indoctrination is not intelligence, but instinct, which is innate intelligence passed on through generations. And, like intelligence, instinct is not distributed equally among people. From my experience, how persuasive your arguments are on something like the Jewish question depends more on speaking to the good instincts of people rather than to their intelligence. Our education system works overtime to drown peoples' good instincts in out-of-context information and, at other times, by pretending that their information is scientific and objective and that no intelligent alternative explanation exists. How well they succeed in this effort depends on how strong the individual's instincts are. The sad truth is that the average person performs better in the intelligence category than the instinctual one.
Since I was a teenager, my understanding of the Jewish problem has not changed. I did not need the truth explained to me because I discovered it myself, by an instinctive understanding of what was happening. The only thing that did change was the multitude of facts and information I've since discovered in my research that supported what my instincts initially gravitated toward. After spending much time listening to and reading what the advocates of the other side's perspective had to offer, it became easy to refute their best arguments with verifiable information they were unfamiliar with, which negated their argument.
Good points Reno. I addressed the subversion of instincts as the first weapon in the psy-war in a recent essay.
We have situations where it is worth debating and conversing with those who are unlikely to change their views. That is, when others are listening and lurking. This is why the Jews refuse to debate us openly before an audience. They know they will lose even while they remain committed to their own view, and the audience will turn. And this is why they try to control online content and commentary. It is worth engaging an intractable debating opponent when others can witness the debate.
Your idea of supplying the other with some of their own best talking points is a good one. It might be tactic #11. We do it in order to show we understand both sides even better than they know their own, as you say. We must do it in such a way as to always convey that we don't agree with such talking points and hold them as false, but are part of the other side. We set them up in order to take them down.
Most appeals to our instincts are moral. Our strategy is to show that their appeals are in fact immoral, and ours are truly moral. Justice is on our side.
"Don't waste your time with academics who are still employed. Their livelihood depends on disagreeing with you. "
Amen. I have tried countless times to get Malone, Kirsch, and whomever virologists (and virology believers) to sit down with Bailey, Cowan and Kauffman to debate the no-virus theory (even tho I am sure that Kauffman and maybe Cowan are jews), but I have found that they refuse to do so and will even ban your comments as did Kirsch did to me. Kirsch, too, is a jew.
Who is going to debate something that might discount or eliminate the very reason for your vocation?
When I saw Kirsch selling SSRI's to treat "covid" I denounced him as another drug-peddling money grubbing Jew and have ignored his work since. Too many I know still follow him, even after I showed them Kirsch pushing brain chemicals to treat "covid."
I know Kaufman is a Jew, and has a patent on wearable prison anklets. He's pretty salesy with his health programs, even though he is a psychologist, not a naturopath or anything.
I never imagined Cowan was a Jew, but maybe...
The bad news is that I'm often working against decades of indoctrination, multi-layered. Most issues so internalized would require a steady exchange of information to reach a mind resistant to change, in other words, a reeducation. Many issues are complex and not easily addressed in even the most elaborate discussion, and few individuals are intellectually curious enough to spend time with information that makes them uncomfortable.
Yes, I agree. That is why if we can establish even one fact in their mind in a single discussion, we should consider it a success. It's a process, not an event. It acts like a grain of irritating sand in their brain, that draws attention to it. It can lead to their entire edifice collapsing and they adopt the opposite view. We must be willing to become a long-term mentor, especially if they return with questions. Have answers ready. Make not just proteges, but friends.
I would add, the emotional tone of our interaction with them will be more attractive than the intellectual content. Let the facts flow to them on a carrier wave of love and respect and care. Life in our cult is better! Many people are seeking not truth, but belonging, love, inclusion. Give it to them.
We come from quite different experiences re JQ. I marvel that your native instinct alerted you to trouble so early on. Mine didn't. I had 12 years of (post Vatican 2) Catholic education and 4 years of secular Jewish college and 2 decades of living in a secular Jewish milieu before I picked up that socially dangerous fork in the middle of the road. That was when I discovered Historical Revisionism. My belated awareness of the concomitant Jewish social agenda only came after I was first freed from the paralyzing myth of White racial guilt.
So your advice to be conversant w/ the other side's talking points is something I honestly lack. I don't read their woke propaganda and try to minimize my exposure to it generally. Yes, I could talk their talk 30 years ago, but their talk has progressed by leaps and bounds since. Yet what you're saying sounds true. Preparation as to their current arguments seems like a really good idea for engaging in debate or conversion. What to do?
Billy, I am posting my life story leading to truth now as a series of audio talks. I'm not sure my instincts alerted me early, it took the educational influence of a mentor to do that. Or maybe there was something in me that allowed the revisionism to change me, when others remain untouched. It sounds as if you had a heavy Jew influence for a long time. I suppose we all have since the Jewish influence is all around us all the time. Yours sounds more direct.
How did you come the fork in the road? Was it a book? Documentary? Another person?
I was pushed down the hole of White racial guilt too for a short time, but was rescued by my introduction to White identity studies along with the JI. They do go together. You might be younger than me and so have more poisoning in White guilt. These things look so absurd once we debunk them.
It may not be necessary to be conversant with the other side's points. It would be enough to reflect them back to them as they say them. Then say ours. It could be enough to have a general cursory understanding of their points, but have a deep clear detailed command of ours. Always present as if trying to help, not to win.
12 years of Catholic school was not direct. Judaism was barely mentioned, but never criticized which I think would have been different 10-20 years previously. The only direct influence was NYU where half of the teaching and student bodies was Jewish.
I'd been truth seeking for 15 years, tho 15 years w/o the internet; so I remained in a liberal conspiracy mindset which shunned conspiracy views that didn't coincide w/ liberal ideology. Curiosity about the H came to a head because I began to notice some right-wing conspiracy types weren't the dumbos and haters they were being portrayed as. Thought I'd take the plunge if only to be able to refute what I read. I had assimilated a smarter than thou attitude along the leftist way. Immediately I saw the revisionists were more direct and truthful than their opposition.
But I think there was a deeper impetus. I'm not naturally psychic, but I had weird, romantic feelings about the Eastern Front, seeing newsreels, The World at War. Eventually imagining I'd died there as a German soldier. My birth was In England just after the war. (I think I'm older than you.) So I came to it on my own but maybe w/ supernatural prompting.
I see. I have to consider that Catholicism is in some significant way Judaic, from my perspective. NYU must have been crazy. Half the population Jews = 99% influence.
H Revisionists rock!
I remember as a kid watching The World At War sitting at the dinner table on Sunday nights. My father was very interested. Even though it depicted the Americans as the heroes and Germans as villains, it was all so grim in black and white that I felt sorry for all the soldiers on either side. War is hell.
IDK about reincarnation, but it sounds as if you have some of the German spirit in you. The Brits certainly do in their heritage. Hitler said so and tried to ally with them. Churchill may have been part Jewish though.
My English uncle fought the "Jerries" for 6 years in N. Africa and then transferred to Palestine after the war for another year. Like a typical Brit he despised the French for their culture more than any of their national enemies. Brave yes, nationalistic yes, politically aware no.
NYU wasn't hard core. Wasn't like there were Holocaust courses or Noahide orgs. I think the average tv/movie junkie nowadays gets more conditioning because hasbara's been ramped up for everyone over the years. What I remember was my friends were mostly Jews and I joined a Jewish fraternity because the WASP one wouldn't take my friends. But everything was secular unlike Catholic HS. Even the 67 Israeli War wasn't a big deal on campus. Everyone including SDS protesters was concerned about Vietnam and getting drafted if you dropped out. Nobody young was pro-Israel at that time.
"But I think there was a deeper impetus. I'm not naturally psychic," ........What you call a deeper impetus, I call instinct.
Excellent and well written but I agree more with the fellow you mentioned at the beginning of this article. It has been my direct experience that the majority of our people are hopelessly programmed and beyond reach, no matter how you approach or converse with them, the facts, evidence, and documentation you present notwithstanding. They tune you out, ignore you, change the subject, get overtly hostile, or any combination thereof. I've witnessed some of them giggling like psychopaths as they cavalierly dismiss my contentions. It is truly a waste of time so pardon my French but, fuck them.
I think you may be largely right. It could be hopeless with most of them no matter how we approach them. Have you tried the 10 tactic approach? I think it may be best for us to examine ourselves and our motivations before we declare them hopeless. And even if it is hopeless with most of them, we should still approach them as if they are convertible, and practice the 10 tactics on them so that we are more effective when we encounter someone who Is open to our views.
Are you yourself an example of a person who has changed your views on significant issues? I am. I am living proof that some factors outside myself have influenced me to change (along with inside factors too). I expect almost everyone has had this experience. I wonder if what keeps us locked in our rigid beliefs is mostly polarization against anyone who challenges those views. Personally, I mean. We see them as threats, and they see us as threats.
So how would it go if we presented ourselves not as threats, but as supporters? Advocates? Allies? Our only way to influence others is to avoid the polarized conflict, and to cozy up to them as concerned friends. Are we up to it? Can we find that genuine place of care for others, beyond our own self-caring defenses?
I didn't say it, but humbleness is another trait we need. We must admit we don't know everything, and they may have a few good points too. To be open to their influence too (however small) would do a lot to help us get them to be open to our influence as well. IOW, approach them as equals, each with something meaningful to share. We tend to guard our self-doubt. If we just admit it while asserting our self-confidence, we win trust.
When we dismiss them as hopeless, we are really protecting ourselves from disappointment and possibly even from our own self-doubt that we can be persuasive. We tend to dismiss others in order not to dismiss ourselves. We don't have to do either. Accept ourselves, doubt and all, and accept them too. We are exploring mysteries together. Invite them to share their understanding of the mystery, and share our own in a spirit of humble inquiry. We are bound to win because our answers to the mystery are rooted in truth. Truth rings.
Yours is a common reaction. It is understandable. We have to ask ourselves, what are our intentions truly in such discussions? Do we really want what is best for the other person? Or do we want to be right and elevate our weak ego self-conception by making them wrong? This is a common approach too, however blind we are to knowing it about ourselves. It takes a strong sense of self (ego) to adhere to this strategy. We don't need to argue or convince anyone else of anything when we are sure of ourselves. We only want to help those we love avoid a terrible mistake. Do we really love them? How capable are we of love? This strategic approach asks us to examine ourselves and become better people. Almost no one is resistant to love, understanding, acceptance, even attention. Most people have not had near enough in their lives, and will cling to it when they find it. Offer it. To do that, we first have to find it in ourselves, or maybe among ourselves. We might convene groups to meet these needs in support of our conversion drives.
Karl,
Excellent points, all. But are they hard to do.
This is the entire reason for my moniker "BuelahMan" or B'Man. Of course my name is not Buelah, for heaven's sake. But that is my Incredible Hulk personality that takes these miss-directionists to task. Sure, there is stupid and ignorant, then there are those intentionally lying. B'Man cannot put up with those and when encountering them, all bets are off with civility.
But in Real Life, I have a totally different tact, mainly because in Real Life I don't run into mis-directionists often. Mostly ignorant and a few stupid.
Excellent Dutch documentary that just came out titled, 'The Mystery of Israel Solved.' It's in English with Dutch subtitles!
In the documentary, they use some footage from the interview with Ronald Bernard from 2017. If you haven't watched that interview yet Karl, I suggest you do. I posted the original interview, but I also posted an interview he did with Ole Dammegard in 2018 which is much more thorough and a bit better, in my opinion.
https://youtu.be/JiQSpbvhc08?si=N100E8BF2scl7XdF
https://rumble.com/v1ykdjk-2018-ex-dutch-banker-ronald-bernard-goes-into-more-detail-and-solutions.html
https://www.bitchute.com/video/k4LLJ0PR0SNI/
I watched the Mystery of Israel solved docu. It provided a good summary of key points, though the end became too preachy of the Christ is King doctrine. Still, good to know we have some Anti-Zionist Christians to counter-act all the Christian Zionists. I'm glad it included the Scofield Bible Supplement information. That is one of the most remarkable and idiotic developments in the history of religion. The Jews really pulled off a miracle mind rape there. How could Aryans be so ignorant? Our greatest weapon in the conversion program for Christian Zionists may be Scofield.
Perfect summary of the video! I still remember the first time I listened to you on an interview; I said to myself, "This guy simply gets it!"
A little less than two years ago, this chief surgeon of an organ transplant team of one of the newest, and largest, hospitals here in Salt Lake City died in a skiing accident. He was 38 Karl! Seemed like a great guy, with a healthy-looking family. I remember thinking, you just don't replace guys like that! I kind of feel the same way about you. So, don't go skiing!😁And it goes beyond just having a lot of knowledge, it's about the overall importance of it towards life- a healthy life.
The Greeks had a word called "phronesis"- it basically translates into "practical wisdom," but like "logos," means so much more than that. It encapsulates the proper application and use of knowledge towards a healthy way of life.
Completely agree with your statement on the Scofield Bible. Heck, most people aren't even aware that it even exists. People would look at biblical history with much more of a critical-eye if they understood ALL of the various versions of the Bible, from the Septuagint and Vulgate to the Wycliff and King James. Most people see it as this sacred and immutable "one book" that has never undergone any alterations or interpretations through history. As Monty Python's 'The Life of Brian' said, "It is written!" But yes, the Scofield Bible has done inestimable damage to how Christians see their history- their "Judeo-Christian" history! Lol!
This is way too rational. Most people only pretend they follow reason and are unaware they are not.
It is a rationale not reason. Most of us are captured by ideology not reason. The moral effort to lie is beyond most people. It is much easier to deceive oneself. So, ideology must be kept distinct from lying, deception and propaganda. The liar knows by definition he is lying. The ideologist does not.
American normies love Jews because of the Christian admonition to do so. They are taught this in the form of Christianity that has been grafted into Judaism. Judaism grafted itself into the Christian scriptures and the Christians never caught on.
What it will take to wake up Christians captured by Judaism is deconversion from their Judeo-Christianism. One way to engage them might be to point out that Marcion assembled the First New Testament comprised of Paul's Letters and Gospel of Luke and it became the adopted scripture spreading event to Rome. That First New Testament was not corrupted with Judaism (Book of Acts says "The Way to Salavation is from the Jews" - not Jesus - and the Christians swallowed this). But then the Jews burned all copies of Marcion's scriptures and wrote Matthew and Mark gospels to graft Christianity into Judaism.
Florida Governor DeSantis is arranging to help 20,000 Americans to get back to the US who are allegedly trapped in Israel because of the phony war with Hamas. What are they doing there? Religious tourism of Bethlehem, Jerusalem, and the Sea of Galilee. But Christianity did not originate in Jerusalem it began in Antioch, Turkey. But few people visit there.
I should have mentioned an important but unknown book that is a sort of antidote to American Judeo-Christianism - Christ Was Not A Jew - An Epistle to the Gentiles (1935) by Jacob Elon Conner, PhD, former US diplomat to Viet Nam. It explains how Christ came from Galilee, an area not part of the 12 Tribes of Israel and Galileans were not of the same ethnicity as Israel. The Galileans came from Russia. Conner was apparently a half Jew
Karl, I read this column with particular interest. Although, for obvious reasons, I disagree with some of the key tenets of your "cult," the question of how to deprogram people from normative messaging is one I've been exploring too.
As I've mentioned before, I am appalled by the stranglehold that leftist ideology has on the majority of my fellow Jews. This past week, as many leftist organisations (BLM, Harvard, etc.) have openly applauded last weekend's mass rape and murder of Israelis by Hamas terrorists, I have wondered whether this cognitive dissonance would shake some of my leftist co-religionists from their stupor. So far, the jury is out.
You see, we're approaching the same issue from different angles. Your perspective is that the problems we see with GAME are the results of Jewish influence. I see the problems as being the result of leftist elitist influence, including on Jews. If you haven't already, you should read KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov's "Love Letter to America" from 1984. It's available at archive.org for free, and it explains how the West was ideologically subverted by Marxist-Leninist proxies during the Cold War.
In any event, just as poor whites and poor blacks have more in common with each other than with the elites of either race, you and I have more in common ideologically than either of us do with the elites of our race. We disagree on who's pulling the levers, but we agree on the harm that the lever-pulling is causing.
To return to the subject at hand; some very interesting research has been done on beliefs and self-identity. Bernard Kelman, Stanley Milgram, Solomon Asch (all Jewish, of course) and a number of other psychologists and sociologists have looked into why people do what they do and believe what they do.
Unfortunately, the news is not good. Once people believe something, there is a high likelihood that they will continue to believe it, even when confronted with irrefutable evidence that their original premise was wrong. This was proven in experiments in which the experimenter, after convincing the test subjects of something, then ltold them it was false. A significant percentage of them CONTINUED to believe it. Along the same lines, once people have done something - especially if it was morally reprehensible, such as supporting mask or shot mandates - they refuse to believe they were wrong, because to do so would be to admit moral culpability.
There are a number of other psychological phenomena that have been observed, but they all add up to the same thing: it's VERY hard to deprogram people, even when it's blindingly obvious that their beliefs are contrary to their own self-interest.
Thank you Wes for sharing your thoughts here. I always want to know your perspective, since it adds important insights where I might not see as clearly.
I understand you see the normative cult programming messaging as more Leftist, and I see it as more Jewish (given the Jewish dominance of the GAME Complex). I agree to disagree for now. In some sense, normative cult programming is both, to some degree.
The example of today's news reporting on Palestine/Israel is difficult, since the Leftist organizations (not all of them entirely Jewish, such as BLM, but certainly Harvard) applaud (if that's the right word) the Hamas action (if it was even real and not a false flag of some kind) as retaliatory justice for recent Israeli atrocities against Palestinians and Muslims (desecration of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, for one), within a historical context of savage ongoing lethal injustice against the Palestinians for over 120 years since the Nakbah. And since 1967 this Israeli injustice has been supported and even made possible by military, financial, technical and political (UN vetoes) from the US--while Palestine gets hardly any aid from anyone, notwithstanding the accusation that Iran, Hezbollah and Syria support Palestinians.
So your hope that the current news (Hamas atrocities upon fellow Jews in Israel, left or right) could influence leftist Jews to see the Israeli side, is challenged by leftist Jews' ability to fall back on this history. Some leftist Jews even think a pro-Palestinian position could be good for Israel and Jews generally, an argument which has merit at least from their perspective. How would you find ways to agree with them, validate their views, then introduce facts that might get them thinking, all while maintaining a benevolent respectful caring demeanor toward them?
I also see plenty of right-wing Jews in America, such as Ben Shapiro, and of course the entire right-wing establishment in Israel such as Likud, polarizing with their standard historical vehemence and hatred and promises of mass violence against Palestinians. It would be good to know how many leftist Jews think the Hamas action is an atrocity story, the 40 decapitated babies another fake war propaganda piece (I'm told it comes 33 years to the day of the "babies thrown out of incubators" story tearfully told by the Kuwaiti minister's daughter at the UN which justified Israel's war against Iraq fought with US blood and money). Listening to leftist Jews' answer to this question would tell a lot.
To call Hamas "terrorists" and never to label the IDF, Mossad, Unit 8200 and all the rest of the Israeli political apparatus and in large sense the entire nation of Israel "terrorist" as well would be discrediting, especially to leftist Jews and Palestinians and their supporters. Where can you find common ground to agree upon and points of theirs to validate? I didn't say it in my essay, but I assumed it was clear that the facts have to be on our side for the strategy to work. That would be true with vax issue, covid more generally, Jewish power (in my view), but not with Israel/Palestine. You might have other facts though, but wouldn't it be hard to assert them as more credible than the Palestinian/Leftist Jew side?
I have not studied the Bezmenov (Thomas Scheider, Jewish) book you reference, but I have seen videos of his speeches and lectures. I am not convinced he was truly a KGB defector; he may have continued to be an active agent. He explains the 4 stages of communist revolution, and that it was ongoing at the time in America. You say the Soviet agents were Marxist-Leninist proxies, I would say they were primarily Communist Jews. Most communists are/were.
Poor Whites may have more in common with poor blacks than either do with the Power Elite (and especially with the Jewish Power Elite). I agree with you there. Poor Whites have more in common with middle class Whites than they do with poor blacks. On a level below the ideological cult programming, Whites have most in common with other Whites, as blacks with blacks and Jews with Jews. In the late 1950s, middle class blacks had more in common with middle class Whites than either did with poor Whites or blacks (maybe). This is the question of race vs. class, and we might agree that it's both/and. For Jews, race dominates every time, especially under perception of outside threat--always seen to be threat against All Jews! The current widespread rallying behind Israel (with leftist Jews a significant partial exception) may be a good example. I used to have a copy of the Charter of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist League, which would be another partial exception. True Torah Jews denounce the nation of Israel as religiously illegitimate and call for its peaceful dismantling, but they are still pro-Jewish. I would think the leftist Jews you hope to convert or at least influence by applying the 10 tactics might still be pro-Jewish as well, just not pro-Zionist. The current IHRA definition of Anti-semitism says anti-Zionism is anti-semitic, making anti-Zionist Jews anti-semitic, which is a tautology.
I appreciate that you have studied the psychology of belief and behavior. I trust that you have formed a well-education view of it. Your views would tend to invalidate my 10 tactics as unlikely to succeed. I am predisposed to be skeptical of Jewish psychologists, given the damage that Freud did to the White Christian West with his depraved and perverse "psychoanalysis" and prescriptions for cocaine to treat depression and other mental illness while extorting grift payments from his patients/victims. Experiments showing people don't change their beliefs could be weapons in the culture war, to instill the hopelessness I advise us to overcome. I think a better study would be to look into how and why people Do change their beliefs, and apply the principles distilled. In fact, that must be what advertising does: study what makes people change their beliefs and values, and apply them. How did the beliefs of the huge majority of the US population change from "isolationist" from both WWI and II, to inverventionist almost overnight in a wild extreme swing of opinion? The Jews Edward Bernays and advertising mogul Albert Lasker had something to do with it, so how? I am exploring the methods how in my series 6 Weapons in the Psychological Warfare series. In the case of WWI and II, fear instinct subversion, and attention must have been foremost. Or how is it that the almost total majority of the Jewish people anywhere in the world started out opposed to the creation of the nation of Israel for 3 main reasons (they were content living where they were, they were concerned Jews would look bad displacing and genociding the Palestinians, and Judaism as a religion did not provide for creating Israel until the Mossiac came. Only then would it be right to displace and genocide the Palestinians), but then quickly changed their beliefs and opinions to favor the nation of Israel? Jewish psychologists should study that, because it happened and it was real and something specific and detailed caused the shift.
Likewise, one example of people who had done something morally reprehensible but then admitted they were wrong is Breaking the Silence. These are former IDF soldiers who committed atrocities on helpless innocent Palestinians, but had an attack of conscience and are now speaking out--breaking the silence--about ongoing Israeli-committed atrocities against Palestinians. I'm sure we can think of many more. But I agree with you on one example: None of the Jews at the Nuremberg Trials ever admitted their wrongs in conducting such a "travesty of justice" (the words of Robert Taft at the time) against the National Socialist leaders, hanging them on exaggerated and fake charges in a Jewish act of revenge which was itself a war crime, carried out on Purim when the 10 Sons of Haman were hanged by the ancient Israelites (another false name). I'm sure we can find other examples for each. It seems difficult for mothers of vax-damaged children to admit their own decisions mangled their own children, but I personally know many, and have read and heard about many more, who have managed to admit it. So certain psychological factors overcome our tendency to protect ourselves from guilt, and I trust that some of my tactics can make that easier.
I agree with you that it's difficult to deprogram people. In fact it may be impossible. I am not advising that approach. I say we help people deprogram themselves. It must not be obvious to them that their beliefs are against their own self-interest, in fact they must think their beliefs are in their self-interest. On a deeper unconscious level, they may Want to believe and act against their self-interest. That is a strange but pervasive phenomenon I expect we have both seen in ourselves and others. Why? I think the answer comes down to: this is the way they have learned to get love and attention and care and respect. We all know chronic complainers (this is a Jewish stereotype) who get attention for it. They are rewarded for believing and acting against their own self-interest. If we know this, we can work with it. Give them attention for acting in favor of their own self-interest, according to our beliefs, and they can change.
I'm convinced of it. I myself am an example of a person who has profoundly changed my beliefs and behaviors, and I think you are too. I have also had success influencing others using these tactics. Sometimes I fail, but it is not because the tactics are ineffective, but because I lacked the inner mind and heart state to effectively enact them. Basically, that inner state is love. No one is resistant to love. I am convinced of it.
I really appreciate you sharing your always cogent and relevant thoughts here with us all. I think you are right, you and I have some basic fundamental similarities in our thinking, believing and even being. We might just come at them from different angles. I'm glad whenever we meet in our commonality, and inspired when we can engage in respectful discussion of differences. I learn from you Wes. Tell us more.
Correction: Uri Bezemonv's real name was Thomas Schuman, not Scheider.
Scheider was the name of the sadistic Jewish doctor at the heart of the MK Ultra trauma-based mind control program that went by the name Sydney Gottlieb. The FDA Commissioner until 2019 was another Jewish Gottlieb, Scott, who wrote the book Uncontrolled Spread, disease-mongering over the fake covid virus. The FDA Commissioner during the disease scare of 2020 was Stephen Hahn, who we must presume is Jewish, and who passed the new vax clot shots as EUA. Hahn also worked at the Perelman School of Medicine where Drew the Jew Weissman also worked to develop the mmRNA tech for the vax. Hahn was chief medical officer at the venture capital firm that launched Moderna, Flagship Pioneering. Another Jew who got wealthy off covid vax.
I didn't include Jews of the FDA in my book, but I need to write a new essay on it. The Jewish FDA was crucial to the covid scamdemic.
Karl, you are exactly right about propaganda. We saw this happen in real time during 2020 and 2021, when entire populations acceded to ideological and behavior modification efforts.
You may already be familiar with Robert Cialdini's research into persuasion. If not, you will find it fascinating, and you will recognize how all six principles were used extensively during the COVID pysop. https://worldofwork.io/2019/07/cialdinis-6-principles-of-persuasion/
One of the issues that both of us have, however, is that propaganda depends on CONSENSUS (one of Cialdini's principles of persuasion). In the Asch conformity experiments, about 1/3 of the subjects would publicly agree with a false statement when all the other people in the room agreed with it. If even one of the other people disagreed with the false statement, almost all of the test subjects found the courage to also disagree.
This is why censorship is the vital companion to propaganda; it would not have been sufficient to have celebrities and authority figures shilling for the poisonous COVID shots if TPTB had not also silenced all the doctors and scientists trying to warn the public. This is why authoritarian regimes always prioritize narrative control as a key factor in maintaining power: "the truth will set you free," at least in your mind, and that's the last thing tyrants want.
A while ago, I wrote about Czech dissident Vaclav Havel's excellent tract, "The Power of the Powerless." You may find it interesting, as it is relevant to the idea that truth can spread as a contagion and undermine totalitarian propaganda. https://dystopianliving.substack.com/p/the-power-of-the-powerless-is-more
In short, I don't disagree with you about the possibility of helping people deprogram themselves. People are certainly capable of sudden and radical shifts in thinking. Look at all the Taylor Swift fans who are suddenly learning about football and watching Kansas City Chiefs games, because Taylor is dating one of the players. (That's LIKING, another of Cialdini's principles of persuasion).
I don't think I have the time or space here to respond in detail to your questions about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Suffice it to say that, while I do consider myself a Zionist in the sense that I believe the Jewish people have historical sovereignty over the Holy Land, and have every right to defend it against other groups, I do not think that the Israeli government is necessarily honest or humane. It would not surprise me if they had advance warning of the Hamas attack and allowed it to occur, but I do not think it was a false flag attack. Hamas has been dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the extermination of Jews since it was founded. There's no need to orchestrate a murderous rampage against yourself when you already have people trying to do it.
When Israel was founded, the Arab countries ethnically cleansed themselves of their Jewish population, forcibly displacing approximately 900, 000 Jews. A roughly equivalent number of Arabs (who at that time did not yet call themselves "Palestinians") fled or were expelled from Israel in 1947-1948, leaving less than 150,000 behind.
Here, Karl, is where you and I likely have another "commonality," as you put it. I'll put it very bluntly: you can't have an ethno-state without ethnic cleansing. Israel letting those 150,000 Arabs stay was a huge mistake, tantamount to letting a family of vipers breed under your bed. By 1995, the "Palestinian" population had grown to over one million. In what is perhaps the worst example of "apartheid and genocide" in history, it is now over 9 million, outnumbering the 7 million Jews.
Also worthy of note: Egypt and Jordan shoot Palestinians at the border, rather than allowing them to cross. They know well that "Palestine" is not a country, it is a philosophy of terrorism; they found this out quickly, when the "Palestinians" they let into their countries tried to overthrow THEIR governments too.
Now, with all that said, I do hate the fact that innocent people suffer. Children born in Gaza or the West Bank don't have to be radicalized and turned into vessels for hatred. But, after Israel withdrew unilaterally from Gaza in 2005, the population elected Hamas, which is basically the Taliban. They've lived under a terrorist dictatorship ever since. Israel is in a catch-22: they can't do nothing and let themselves be attacked by terrorists, but they also can't fight the terrorists without hurting civilians. There is no easy answer.
Yes, the covid/vax hoax was among the best example of behavior modification persuasion in the industrial age (although Hitler bad holohoax surpasses even covid, and not just because it has been effective for over 80 years now). That was based on one of my 6 Weapons, Fear, with a few others playing in, such as Attention, Confusion, Instinct Subversion...
I'm eager to compare my 6 Weapons with Cialdini's 6 principles.
In Asch experiments, that means 2/3 of people could not be persuaded by consensus. That seems a lot. To what extent does consensus depend on majority? Or more importantly, Perception of majority? We have the Silent Majority, which is not nearly so persuasive because it is not Perceived to be majority? We need a loud majority. That is why public demonstrations are so important: to show consensus.
I have already added Division as a 7th weapon. We could add Perception and Authority (which confers consensus by majority "expert" opinion). This is why some people such as Peter McCulouch, Sheryl Nass, RFKJ, the 3 signers of the Great Barrington Declaration and others were important in the counter-persuasion to the covid narrative. We have to be careful that all of them may have been Controlled Opposition and Limited Hangout (COLH). For instance, the 3 GBD signers were all pro-vax, and at least one was Jewish, Kuldorff.
So TPTB/Jews did not silence all the doctors and scientists. They controlled and limited some as they put them forward in control of the counter-narrative. Robert Malone was another. The worst from my perspective was that fake holohoaxster Vera Sherav. The main control/limit point was "vaccines are deadly," with a close second being "infectious disease is not." Almost anything else could be debated, seemingly from a counter-narrative perspective (the "dissidents" and "disinformation agents") so long as these two truths were avoided.
I agree with your basic premise, narrative control is key for totalitarians. I would ask us to add that the control includes managing, controlling and limiting the counter-narrative as well. This is why Lenin said "we will defeat the enemy because we will create it." (or similar). And it is why Goebbels said "The people can learn the truth. It just has to be presented to them in a way they can understand."(or similar) This may be why Fascists persisted in spreading Samisdat (secret printed material) in Communist E Germany even though it was very dangerous, and why White Nationalists persist in sneaking around putting up little stickers on stop signs and light posts in the US, also very dangerous. It may be why I don't post my essays on Facebook or TwiX, and why I may be reckless posting on Unz. Honeytraps and Operation Trust programs abound.
Havel's writings are sure to be excellent and I hope to review the source you have provided. Goebbels is another who spoke and wrote about truth as a liberator of the people, as opposed to the Big Lie which the British and moreso the Soviets employed. Like you, no time and attention now to provide the source. Later hopefully.
I certainly have no awareness of the dating life of Taylor Swift, nor her sportsball beau. To me, that is another Attention trap to distract us from more meaningful "news." Yet I do have awareness of Swift disclosing the Jews (not by name alas) who dominate the music industry and who dominate her. She basically disclosed that she is treated like a slave and cash cow of the Jews, and was very upset about it. That was meaningful "news" to me and many others. Yet it did not get near enough Attention. Wasn't it Swift who made a public statement saying she trusted the President, so get vaxxed?
Interestingly, I watched a video of Jason Christoff exposing the techniques of subliminal mind control in media. It didn't work on me, because I didn't know the names of any movies with Tom Hanks. It did work on me though when I had to pick a time on a clock. So my counter-strategy of Avoidance may have merit.
https://video.icic.law/w/jL2fEVqRh2jDFKrJQc8VN5
Thank you for the answers you have provided on the Palestine/Israel genocide (titles, names and labels are important to establish narrative control, and spacial, temporal and rank order matter to meaning. Changing them from the standards changes meaning). Like you, I'll continue to discussion in necessarily concise replies. Much more must be said, as we both know. Brevity may be still another weapon. Or Simplicity.
Preface everything hereafter with "In my view..."
Believing the Jewish people have any historical sovereignty (right of occupation) over the Holy Land (alternatively Palestine, Land of Cannan, the Levant, territory of the Babylonian, Persian and Roman empires, etc.) is believing in the very propaganda and mass mind control we are trying to escape. Even the identity of the Jewish people is a fiction and fabrication promoted by propaganda mass mind control. I know that is challenging for you to hear, since attacks on identity may be the knowledge we all resist the most, perhaps especially Jews, who cling to their perceived identity more than any other tribe, especially when under perceived outside threat.
I might agree with you if you said Jews had a right to seize any land anywhere in the world by right of conquest and force of arms and racial/tribal superiority, as European White tribes did in their colonies including N. America, or the Romans did including in Palestine, but I find a weak justification that Palestine was originally the Jews' "Holy Land" reprehensible dirty war propaganda. Almost no people on Earth originated in the lands they inhabit, nor do they need to to lay claim to them. Life on Earth is a struggle, a survival of the fittest, and resource acquisition of part of the struggle. Let the fittest thrive. Jews today appear to have achieved the most resource access, including Israel as a base of operation for their world domination plan, at the expense of everyone else. The White empires such as the Romans, and colonial period Europeans, brought many benefits to the lives of their subjects. Jews only bring ruin (except to the capitulator and colluder race traitors). I'd respect the Jews more if they just admitted they took Palestine because they could and wanted to, rather than all this propaganda justification about some historical "Chosen People" and "Holy Land" mythology.
This was very excellent and another revelation deeper into the identity of Jews:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/IAubrmH3a5XM/
In my view, if the IDF/Mossad had advance knowledge of any Hamas "attack" and allowed it to occur, that IS a false flag attack. I know of three kinds of FF: total fabrication and fiction (Gulf of Tonkin, Assad gassing Syrians), Let It Happen (LIH) (Pearl Harbor, 911) and Do It Yourself (DIY) (Lavon Affair, Bombing of King David Hotel). Some FFs are both LIH and DIY combined, such as 911 (an Israel job).
Hamas was founded by Israel itself, as an openly-stated "counter-weight" to the PLO. It has been at least partially an Israeli operation and control structure over Palestine ever since. To think that Hamas is truly fighting against Israel is to succumb to the war propaganda we are fed. Hamas is Israeli controlled opposition. There IS need to fabricate a murderous rampage against yourself when no one else can or would do it, in order to justify another "mowing the lawn" of the Palestinian civilian population in their Gaza reservation. The "murderous rampage" was fabricated both in at least incitement and allowance if not direct arrangement, and in gross exaggeration. We have some hard work to do in liberating people from mass mind control, if they believe the 40 beheaded baby meme. Or Hamas busting through their prison wall with bulldozers, flying attack gliders, destroying Israeli tanks, taking hostages, and retreating in good order back to Gaza city virtually untouched. Oh yes, and launching thousands of home-made rockets. All with Israel totally unaware of the preparations and operations themselves despite the most sophisticated technological surveillance system in the world, delaying emergency response for 5 hours, and claiming to be surprised, all with Hamas knowing thousands of their people will be slaughtered and millions displaced in reprisal for their little adventure ("murderous rampage") against their reservation overlords. This narrative cannot be true. And we've seen it played before in Operation Cast Lead and Operation Protective Edge. Same story, same result.
When Israel was founded, it needed Jews to go and live there, and so got them from surrounding Arab nations. This was like the NS/Zionist Transfer Agreement, where some people wanted to get rid of their troublesome Jews, and Zionists wanted them in Palestine/Israel. They cooperated.
I appreciate your blunt honesty. Yes, Israel can't have an ethno-state without ethnic cleansing. Many European, African and Asian nations can have ethno-states without ethnic cleansing however, so long as they keep migrants including Jews out, because those nations were theirs from the beginning. Germany re-achieved its original ethno-state by expelling Jews (not exterminating them). The Jewish claim to Palestine/Roman colony/Levant/etc. as their original ethno-state appears a lie, deception and propaganda to me and many others.
I'll ask you to consider that the founding Israeli state may have not made a mistake allowing the remnant Palestinians to remain. It may have been strategic. The current Palestinians are very useful to frighten the Israeli Jewish population and control them, fund arms sales, justify the ongoing Israeli occupation, depict the Jews as victims (again. still.), requisition gold and blood from the US, and confer all the strategic benefits of a useful captive foreign other sub-population. Boogey-men! The Israeli Jews may not have bargained on the Palestinians breeding so largely, and their efforts to restrict Palestinian resources in order to limit population may not have succeeded. Then again, a large Palestinian population limited to a tiny land area may serve the Israeli plan even better. For now. Ultimately Israel wants them dead and fled, and we all know it.
Egypt used to allow the tunnels out of Palestine so they could get some humane aid supplies into Gaza, but once the Jews installed Al Sisi, that stopped. My immediate pre-conceived response to the "news" that Palestinians tried to overthrow the Egyptian government after given asylum is total skepticism. Jews, however, are notorious for overthrowing the governments of whatever nation lets them in, and Weimar Germany and today's Jewish State of America are the best examples of many. Therefore news of Palestinians trying to overthrow governments of their asylum states is likely classic Jewish projection. Israeli propagandists are also notorious for demonizing their enemies with lavish propaganda. "By way of deception, thou shalt do war," is the Mossad motto. Or is that propaganda too? Above all, such news as Palestinian coup d'etat attempts is absurd on its face, given their almost total lack of resources and power to succeed. Jews, however, are loaded with resources and power, and Israel's ongong occupation of Palestine is a great example of a successful coup d'etat (against the Turkish administration, the British administration, and the Palestinian self-government) using access to huge resources and power Palestinians never had.
Palestinians can only be said to have a "philosophy of terrorism" if we forget that they have almost no means of self-defense, no freedom of movement, limited access to resources especially military, and little hope. "Terrorism" is asymmetrical war by another name, and Palestinians must use it when they are so much more weak and vulnerable. In fact, they are so weak and vulnerable that to use "terrorism" as a strategy in their asymetrical war against Israel is so counter-productive and destructive to themselves-- why use it? No, I think Israel provokes/incites/engineers Palestinian "terrorism" for Israel's strategic us. It is of no strategic value to Palestinians, and is in fact counter-strategic.
Remember, Israel attacked and deposed the Egyptian government of Al Nassar in 1967 in the so-called "Six Day War"--let's call it the Egyptian Coup War. Nassar had proposed a Pan-Arab League of cooperation in economics (oil), politics, religion (islam) and cultural exchange, which Israel saw as a threat. Jews are pananoid, and Israel had a plan to keep Arab nations divided from each other, and even sub-divide them into smaller weaker nations, so Nassar's proposal ran counter to that plan. Thus Israel launched a sneak attack and bombed the Egyptian air forces on the ground, and launched a ground invasion of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan. They seized control of the Sinai peninsula from Egypt, and the Golan Heights from Syria. The US made Israel give Sinai back, but Israel still holds the Stolan Heights today. Israel also contributes to the ongoing coup attempt in Syria, as well as the regime change operation in Yemen. Israel has invaded and attacked Lebanon a number of times, slaughtering many thousands of Lebanese innocent civilians. Jews commit coups, not Palestinians.
I meant to say above, just as the Israeli strategic planners may have kept some Palestinians in the new Israel as useful boogey-men, Jewish bankers kept blacks in the US after the War Between the Jews Bankers (Civil War) in order to use them as a wrecking ball against White Christian America. Lincoln had announced plans to "repatriate" blacks back to Africa in a new nation owned by the US, Liberia, but Jewish bankers, primarily the Rothschilds, had Lincoln killed to stop his no-interest money supply (greenbacks) and removal of the useful blacks. That was a kind of coup engineered by Jews too.
Interesting points and ideas, as usual, Karl. The concept of controlled opposition is inherently a difficult one, because it creates suspicion even among allies, which is something that always benefits the oppressor. In fact, the key purpose of Russian "active measures" for the last 80 years has been simply to exacerbate divisions between groups in the target countries. Divide and conquer really is the oldest trick in the book.
It amuses me to observe that, given our viewpoints - wildly divergent in certain key respects though they are - we would probably find ourselves in the same gulag, if TPTB had their way.
Good point Les. Yes, suspicion within groups that someone is a mole or spy creates distrust and disrupts the functioning of the group, even if no real mole exists. The concept of controlled opposition controls opposition through distrust. It appears to me that most controlled opposition is real however, given COINTELPRO infiltration operations, ongoing in different forms today, and such incitement/entrapment operations as the abduction Whitmer. In writing Part 4 of my History of National Socialism in America, it seems most NS groups in America today are infiltrated in one way or another, some of them possibly turned completely into useful boogey-men of the kind I am claiming Hamas to be.
Some CO can be 80% truth/20% lie. I see CHD as such, 80% truth on covid/vax, and 20% lie on climate change. The one gives credibility to inflict the other lie. Even perceived "anti-semitism" such as Kanye West may be controlled opposition, since Jews need "anti-semitism" for their purposes, and if they don't have enough of it, they create it.
Excellent, Karl! I appreciate this. I will study this technique and apply it within the next 24 hours.
Check back with us afterward and let's discuss. It takes practice and consistency to apply the 10 Tactics. We should hold training sessions.
Karl, ABSOLUTELY we should hold training sessions. This is currently a fluid idea, but we could really add to our core skills, knowledge, and abilities by refining this area.
It’s always a huge letdown when we fail to make inroads with hopefull candidates.
Agreement is good
What do you mean? Please no profanity. Our circle here is respectful and attentive to traditional norms of discourse.
Apologies. I didn't know that was a profane term
Small echo chamber of self-pleasure
Thank you. It is a particularly vile term. We aspire to a level of discourse well above the degradation imposed by today's extreme cultural marxism. We welcome your participation.
Do you denounce our small echo chamber? Do you think it is ineffective or pointless? I'm open to understanding your critique, if you can be specific and offer improvements.
I'm not denouncing anything. Just commented on what seemed like preaching to the choir, or however that saying goes.
OK, a critique. Many responded to this essay with hopelessness, frustration, and challenges in getting the 10 Tactics to work. I agree, it's challenging. I feel that this essay in particular is not preaching to a choir. Most of us here have never considered the 10 Tactics and so cannot be part of the choir. This essay may more accurately be called teaching the choir, so it can go out and sing to others.
I was referring to the comments section.
The gist of the essay seemed pretty standard.
Great stuff, Karl, especially resonant for me is Tactic for Conv. #6. Personally been thru a number of cults and glad to have found Taboo Truth. That you're willing to describe it as a cult is disarming and empowering too. Rurik hints at his cult in a humorous way: the Slavland Stalkers. Neither requires exclusivity which might be considered decidedly uncult-like.
Coincidentally, I came across a term "egregore" (book Mark Stavish) which refers to a psycho-spiritual entity created by people devoted to a cause. The entity is not materially real, but it feeds the energy of the devotees as they bolster its energetic existence w/ their devotion. A mutual feedback loop, tho one not w/o danger. It seems related to Steiner's concept of folksouls. Just saying, folks.
Good for you recognize cults when you see them. I studied the difference between cults and communities, and it was crucial to know. Yes, I would say a real cult requires exclusivity. One of the strangest and in some ways funny was Kieth Rainere of NXIUM. He claimed to be the smartest man in the world, prophecying stock prices (often wrong), and was a holocaust denier. He claimed his female devotees were reincarnations of National Socialist leaders such as Goebbels and Goering and Borman, and he had other devotees brand his initials with a cauterizing pen into his women's thighs and hips. Two Bronfman women were in this cult, until their father broke them out. LOL.
I've seen the word egregore but never knew what it meant. Fascinating. I wonder if the ghost of Adolf Hitler is an egregore to some NS folks today. I like Folksouls. Probably not good to mix them.
Some followers of AH have taken him to be an avatar: Miguel Serrano, Chilean diplomat and Savitri Devi, English woman are the most famous writers. I know, nutty but harmless, Canadian Brian Ruhe has that tendency among contemporaries.
In studying Devi's The Lightning and the Sun (Devi was Hindu), along with hard historical revision on AH and NS, I can see the validity in the "Esoteric Hitlerists." I don't like that term, and don't believe in special spiritual entities or "avatars" in the way they mean. But it is also interesting that some Catholic clergy at the time proclaimed Hitler a kind of Christian spiritual leader in his fight against violently atheist Communism. Slowly and reluctantly, I have come to conceive of AH as some form of Archetype figure, certainly the Return of the King but possibly something more "spiritual." He was a mortal man, yet played a part in history and expressed an Aryan energy that elevated him to something more.
I'm assuming your info on some Catholic clergy praising AH is in reference to the rather academic Holy Reich book, a factual but unenjoyable read for me. Yet I think it was a needed reference Jim Rizoli lacked in his recent debate w/ EM Jones. https://www.bitchute.com/video/KP4UYo4zWcW4/
Love Rizoli for his working class doggedness re the H, but he's not an intellectual and couldn't articulate to Jones that liberal priests were subverting their flock thru their sermons and actions and were consequently deserving of incarceration under a nationalistic authoritarian regime. Jones favors the same sort of authoritarian Catholic regime for all nations. I can't help but dislike Jones when I see him act the bully part in his debates w/ anyone who doesn't genuflect to the authority of traditional Catholicism.
I can't recall where I read or heard about clergy praise. Maybe one of the Dennis Wise docuseries.
As I said in the 6 Weapons essay, enjoyment is not my goal. Then we might fall into Hoffman's occult trap. I still think I need to make my writing engaging and interesting though as a carrier wave for the knowledge.
I hear your critique of Jones. Many have critiques of Jones. He is the most outspoken person at his level on the JI, and I am always impressed by that. When he said if we are not discussing the JI (my paraphrase), we are not relevant, I almost jumped up and shouted, because I had just come to the same conclusion. Almost no one else says it. For that, and his new book The Holocaust Narrative--which I probably won't need to get, since I have most of the Rudolf HH series and much else--I praise Jones.
To balance my displeasure w/ Steigmann-Gall's The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, I offer his page at Amazon for those w/ scholarly interest in a controversial subject. https://www.amazon.com/Holy-Reich-Conceptions-Christianity-1919-1945/dp/0521603528/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1V89CPN8DEBSD&keywords=Steigmann-Gall&qid=1697628937&s=books&sprefix=steigmann-gall%2Cstripbooks%2C67&sr=1-1