Friday, March 28, 2014

Your Guide to Monarch Mind Control - Chapter Four

The Illuminati Formula Used to Create an Undetectable Total Mind Controlled Slave
By Fritz Springmeier and Cisco Wheeler

Introduction
Chapter One
Chapter Two

CHAPTER 4. HYPNOSIS

As we get farther into the book, it's remarkable to think that this is used as a reference by conspiracy theorists. The tangents are very close to the ramblings of a schizophrenic, diving deep into excessive detail and referencing assumed "facts" that are suspect.

For example, the first fifteen pages of this chapter is a block-text proof that hypnosis exists and how it works. I'm willing to stipulate that hypnosis exists just for the sake of moving on. For summary, let's just acknowledge that hypnosis unlocks and augments the victim's talents. Because of this, the programmers can use each victim for several unrelated conspiratorial uses.

Before we move forward, let's recap. This book describes the complete process of programming an Illuminati slave, so it begins before birth. The victim is taught to dissociate through an elaborate and bizarre gauntlet of tortures. When the victim dissociates, an alter personality is formed. That personality is programmed with cues to call it forth, tasks and skills and a position within an interior mental hierarchy called a "system." Should the Illuminati require that the slave perform sexual services, commit murders or deliver mail, there is a personality that is called to control the victim's body and fulfill the required role. When the "front" personality, the victim's day-to-day personality, re-assumes the body, she does not remember the acts she has done for the programmers.

S&W tell us that the parents of children who are being programmed are given homework like locking the victims in the dark for several hours, sticking them with needles and raping them once a day. This keeps the victims dissociative.

At last we begin to learn about the programming that is referenced so often in the conspiracy theories, like "Wizard of Oz" programming and "Beta" programming. However, the weaknesses of the authors still apply--what we need to know about these programs have to be figured out from context clues.
MONARCH MIND-CONTROL CODES
A. ALPHA (basic)
B. BETA (sexual)
C. CHI (return to cult)
D. DELTA (assassination)
E. EPSILON (animal alters)
F. OMEGA (internal computers)
G. GAMMA (demonology)
H. HYPNOTIC INDUCTIONS
I. JANUS-ALEX CALL BACKS (end-times)
J. THETA (psychic warfare)
K. TINKERBELLE (never grow up/alien)
L. TWINNING (teams)
M. SOLEMETRIC MILITARY
N. SONGS (reminders)
0. ZETA (snuff films)
P. Sample alter system codes
Q. Catholic programming
R. MENSA programming
S. HAND SIGNALS
T. Programming site codes (used for slave model codes, etc.)
"Alpha" programming is basic mind control, made up of commands like calls to attention or demands to speak. These are used to access the internal system of alters. They are comprehensive programs to which most of the alters respond.

Access to the system can be achieved by verbal commands like "On your toes," through color coding in a controlled environment, subliminally with "high speed codes" over the phone--any sort of cue that's been anchored through hypnosis. Emergency programs are also created, like "Code 911," which may be used to command a slave to contact his programmer, or "Code White," which allow slaves to access code words and information that will allow them to escape arrest.

Aficionados of the theories may be disappointed to learn that the pop culture references that are bread-and-butter to the theorists--things like the "Wizard of Oz" or "Alice in Wonderland" programs--are simply metaphors used to cause the victim to go into a dissociative state. The mental space of "over the rainbow" or "through the looking glass" is simply the internal place where the system of personalities reside.

The references to Emerald City or the Mad Hatter's tea party are used to organize the internal system. There are other ways of organizing the system, as well, often in combinations. In addition to the colors mentioned above, programmers may use zodiac signs, gemstones or other sets. To call for a diamond, for example, may call for a set of personalities created from the same trauma, or have the same tasks, or call for a set of programs with a common theme.

To clarify:  Think of the programs and alters as individual notes in a system like Evernote or as blog posts with a tagging system. There's no limit to the number of tags that may be applied to an alter and the alter may be called forth by any single one of those tags. To call forth tag "A" brings forth every alter tagged that way. Calling for tags "A" and "G" brings forth only those alters that belong to groups A and G. The use of gemstones or tarot cards are simply tags for the personalities and programs, sorting them into categories.

With that in mind, we can run through many of the above list quickly. Beta programming is a set of sexual behaviors and attitudes. These can be used for the pleasure of the Illuminati or those they wish to bribe or blackmail. 

S&W give an example of how a Beta program may be called up:  “BETA TWO MARY A=4, B=3, C=2, D=1” "Beta" is the type of programming, "Two Mary" may be the personality called forth, and the rest refers to specific acts, behaviors and attitudes the programmer wishes the slave to exhibit. Less clinical cues are used as well, like “COME HERE MY KITTEN, AND LET ME PET YOU. PURR FOR ME NOW...THAT’S A FLUFFY KITTEN. PURR DEEP.” Again, this phrase is attached to a very specific command.

Chi programming compels the slave to return to his programmer or another cult authority. Delta programming is used for assassinations. We're told that not every slave is capable of murder and the only way to find out if he is capable is to let him kill someone while under hypnosis.

Epsilon programming is used for creating and using personalities that believe they are animals. Omega programs are sort of "machine code" for personality systems. Gamma programming is induced with occult rituals and tied to demonology. 

Hypnotic inductions are the stereotypical hypnosis techniques seen in the media, like "You're going deeper, deeper, deeper into sleep." 

Slaves are programmed to perform certain acts when Armageddon comes. These are called Janus-Alex Call Backs.

(Please note that S&W don't always tell us what, exactly, the slaves are expected to do. They are content to give us a broad idea.)

We were told in Chapter Three that certain drugs give slaves telepathic powers. Once developed, these powers can be accessed through Theta programming.

Alters who have been programmed to remain children or think of themselves as aliens are given Tinkerbell programming. Paired teams of slaves are given Twinning programming.

Solemetric military programming, we are told later in the book, results in less personality fragmentation. This is needed for slaves who have complex responsibilities, such as those in the armed forces. I suspect that Springmeier believes that he has been subjected to this. We're told that this programming, because it creates more independent slaves, requires demonic assistance to maintain control over the victim.

 We're told that programmers are fond of using songs and nursery rhymes, sometimes as codes to access personalities and sometimes just as ways of reinforcing the programming. Nearly all of The Beatles' songs are used, as is AC/DC's "Back in Black" and James Taylor's "Fire and Rain."

Zeta programming is used when a slave is going to be sacrificed and/or used in a snuff film.

After running down the list of generally-known programming categories, S&W then give us an example of how this might be enacted within a slave called Mary. For edification, a section more or less at random:
A mirror image of each of these alters exists too. The mirror images can be pulled up via a three step process.The birth memory in our example will be coded as A5 10 79. The spider torture memories that are attached to these alters is A5 10 79. The reader will notice the following on the hypothetical chart on the previous page for the first Section (which is numbered 6 to be deceptive): This section is front alters. Basic code pattern = color + Genesis + no. [1 thru 13] + letter [a thru m]. Individual codes 1st section general-”N.I.F.6”, 1st section mother Eve “EV.E5 10 51 ACE” (Eve is the balancing point & the ace code is high or low). The alter Explorer is “EI.G7”, Mammy “MI.H8”, Angel “Red, AI.19 Jack Genesis 4” (or it could be done “red, AI.J10 Genesis 4”), George “Silver, GI.K11 ”, Zsa Zsa “gold, ZI.L.12”, and Shadow “Clear SI.M13”. You won’t find on the main chart codes such as: Eve’s memory “EI.D5.2.1952 ACE” or the Infant alters -- “1-000 10-49 REJECTS 3-9” The master may say for example: “Green GENESIS 1-A” (3 times) to get this alter which is the balancing point. Fragments/dead alters were dumped into areas named concentration camps and given the names of the famous german concentration camps. The camps were placed under the Mt. of Olives. Fire or Bomb children are found throughout the system and are triggered to come up by programming.
 What S&W are trying to communicate is that there may be hundreds of alters and hundreds of programs within the victim. These are managed through attaching them to various codes which are recorded. The codes may be systematized but the programs cannot because they work via human psychology, needing metaphors and imaginary constructs. S&W are also mentally disturbed--but they are right when they say, "the honest truth is that trauma-based mind-control is messy."

Finally, we're told that Jesuits and the high-IQ association MENSA have their own programming code words. Oh, and sometimes hand signals are used to induce trances and allow access to the interior system.

In order to bring the various information we have gleaned into focus, let's attempt a hypothetical. An individual has been trained as a slave since birth. He has been traumatized repeatedly in order to induce dissociation. The dissociation has been used to create alter personalities. These personalities have been programmed to act in specific ways.

This individual appears to have a normal life known as "John." He may have a job and a family. The personality "John" has no memory or understanding of his programming, instead believing false memories of a past that never happened.

One day, his phone rings and he answers. The voice on the other end says something in code--maybe a set of numbers or a phrase about a gemstone or a quote from Alice in Wonderland--and hangs up. John's programming is triggered and, in a trance, he goes someplace he has never been before. A car--chosen for its particular colors--pulls in front of him. The driver says another code to him and John gets in.

John is taken to a location that triggers further programming, through music or color or patterns--anything that might be significant to one's mind. Another personality emerges and a programmer enters the room. The programmer recites a number of codes that allow further programming. He activates an internal program then closes the system. The victim is returned to his previous location and the personality "John" is reactivated.

John has no memory of anything that has happened. Three days later, he murders his boss and disappears from his previous life.

We can easily understand the concept of brainwashed "sleeper" agent, a la The Manchurian Candidate. S&W are trying to tell us how the system of brainwashing works.

In Chapter Five, we examine the specifics of "Wizard of Oz" and "Alice in Wonderland" programming as well as the larger use of deception.

Thursday, March 27, 2014

On Technological Salvation

Michael Anissimov tweeted links to a couple of my rants yesterday. I appreciate it.

On the matter of "neoreaction=neocameralism," we've been thinking along the same lines. Take this piece, Neocameralism is Autism:
A common rejoinder to criticisms against neocameralism is the simple phrase, “Robot drones”. First of all, for a hypothetical system of government to have to rely on technology that barely exists yet is already a sign of obvious weakness. It’s like coming up with a form of government based on abundant nuclear fusion energy.
This is true and it makes me wonder as to the ages of the neoreactionary true believers. Live long enough and you'll go through cycle after cycle of "technological revolutions" and rapturous predictions about the techno-heavenly future. After the new gadgets arrive, they simply become tools for the same old human behavior, only faster and with a wider reach.

What attracted me to the DE--even where I disagreed--was that it was a community about coming to conclusions. We've run through advances in weaponry, communication, calculation and transportation. When, exactly, are we allowed to decide "Technology isn't going to save us?" After the iPhone 6 fails to have a "Anti-Venality" function? After the next major programming language fails to prevent carnality? Or should we just wait until a week after the (latest) projected date for the Singularity?

The same day, Outside In published this:
Increasingly, there are only two basic human types populating this planet. There are autistic nerds, who alone are capable of participating effectively in the advanced technological processes that characterize the emerging economy, and there is everybody else. For everybody else, this situation is uncomfortable. The nerds are steadily finding ways to do all the things ordinary and sub-ordinary people do, more efficiently and economically, by programming machines. Only the nerds have any understanding of how this works, and — until generalized machine intelligences arrive to keep them company — only they will. The masses only know three things:
(a) They want the cool stuff the nerds are creating
(b) They don’t have anything much to offer in exchange for it
(c) They aren’t remotely happy about that
 I'll reference Poe's Law here but take the post at face value.

It's precisely this nerd-power attitude that got us into the global mess we're in now. Armed with delusions of competence, nerds created a financial system so abstract and interrelated that a handful of greedy idiots could crash markets around the world, and so complex that no one can fix them. Ability to understand does not equal ability to manage.

The ability to understand is usually an illusion, anyway. To autify it, there are plenty of "unknown unknowns" and always will be--at least, to assume otherwise is setting up for a fall.

To drag the subject back to novel forms of governance, the goal shouldn't be a "more perfect union" but a more robust organization. If we accept that rot sets into even the most elegant of structures--and we must--then our design goal is to minimize the possible damage and maximize the ability to repair.

The fundamental error I'm seeing here is the idea that our conditions today--in the West and globally--is somehow the natural state of things. "The future will be filled with nerds creating cool gadgets and the great unwashed wanting to play with them and nothing can stop it." Nothing except that which stopped every other civilization:  famine, disease, invasion, corruption, complaisance.

The natural state of things is at Sudan's southern border. None of those folks are clamoring for smart watches.


Wednesday, March 26, 2014

Tesla Motors, the Big Three and Subsidiarity

New Jersey recently denied Tesla Motors the ability to sell its cars directly to its residents. Tim Worstall at Pando Daily quotes the NYT:
But most states have some limits on direct sales by auto manufacturers, according to the National Automobile Dealers Association. These rules are generally meant to ensure competition, so that buyers can shop around for discounts from independent dealers, and to protect car dealers and franchises from being undercut by the automakers.
Worstall comments:
[T]hese regulations are simply the exertion of political power in order to gain cash (aka, screw the consumer) for those wielding the political power. There is no other justification or cause here. 
For those who might wonder about the future of the car dealers if the manufacturers are allowed to bypass them, the correct answer is “so fucking what?”
The manufacturer-to-dealer model is an old one. When the Big Three became behemoths, it wasn't cost effective to manage thousands of salesmen and local inventories. Better to franchise it out and let the local guys handle it.

It's a better model, generally speaking. Centralization is to human organization like entropy is to energy--the natural tendency. And, just as heat death is not a happy conclusion, a completely centralized organization is ultimately a mistake.

I might as well continue the metaphor. Mankind--and the proverbial Life, Itself--is an anti-entropic force. Humans, trees, microbes don't let things fall apart; they put things together. If anyone is wondering what position to take on the forces of universe, let me say this:  Our team opposes the forces of the universe.

This is the principle to take when looking at human organizations (speaking secularly):  What forces occur naturally should be generally opposed. On the right, bureaucracy is a known evil. Bureaucracy grows without legislation or dictate--the default position should always be against growth of bureaucracy. We should be thinking of it like ornamental shrubbery; without constant pruning it will grow beyond its intended use.

Likewise, we should always resist centralization. The weaknesses of centralization is a subject for another time. If power tends towards the center on its own, then our efforts should be toward dispelling it.

So, am I saying that the Big Three's manufacturer-to-dealership model is right and Tesla is wrong? Not the way things are set up today. Clearly, the laws are in place to protect the status quo, the status quo being that only the Big Three can sell cars nationwide.

The laws force upstart manufacturers to either partner with the Big Three for distribution or invest capital in developing a dealership system of their own. They've created a barrier against going to market, a barrier only the largest companies can overcome. That's oligopoly.

When No One Can Be Believed

Outside In quotes Jim:
The climategate files not only give us reason to disbelieve “Climate Science”, but discredit all peer reviewed science. Peer review means you don’t get the actual evidence, but rather the consensus about what the evidence should show if it was not so wickedly prone to evil heresy. Peer review means that a consensus is quietly established behind closed doors, and then the evidence is corrected to agree with the consensus. This maximizes the authority and prestige of official science, at the expense of disconnecting it from reality.
This principle has been on my mind lately. At my day job, our industry has just gone through another federally-mandated materials change. Without getting too specific, one of the materials has had a tiny amount of a toxic substance. The "safe" level of this substance was set most recently about twenty years ago. This year, the manufacturers were forced to include an even smaller amount of that substance.

I won't go into the hours of conversation I've heard about how the old level is no more dangerous than the new level. What has happened is that, due to the law's specificity, parts with the old level are still available for sale. They can't be used in all applications, but they are still out there.

Naturally, the change in materials required a lot of research and development, followed by retooling. The new parts are more expensive than the old. I'm sure that there are a large number of end-users who continue to use the old products in now-prohibited applications--it's just cheaper.

Here's the thing:  Now we have a product that the government has labeled "Unsafe." A year ago, it was "Safe." Scientifically, there's no real difference in the dangers between the two levels. Those in the know have no problem using the products labeled "Unsafe."

The sign saying, in effect, "Danger! Danger!" is now meaningless. The line between "safe" and "dangerous" is so far within the safety zone that no one is paying attention to it. Which means that the real danger is unmarked. If people have no hesitation using "unsafe" products that are actually safe, how will they know when they come across something that really is dangerous?

Jim's quote points to this from a different direction. If scientific consensus is so easily manipulated, then what scientific information can we believe?

I've been trying to project what this phenomenon becomes. I think that America's most prominent example is vaccine truthism.

This brand of skepticism comes from progressives. Hippie values say that the medical industry's goal is to pump us full of chemicals, driven by profit and unconcerned with the long-term consequences. Some parents still believe there's a link between vaccinations and autism. Others are concerned with the particular chemicals used to preserve the vaccines.

If a significant portion of the population rejects vaccination, then the public becomes a breeding ground for vaccine-proof diseases. The disease always has a safe zone from which it can mutate and re-attack the general public--and re-attack as many times as it takes to be successful. The danger is increased for all.

But we should be distrustful of the medical industry and the government that regulates it. The days of WASP paternalism are over; persuasion is no longer accomplished by cautious logic but by hysteria and/or money.

This is end-stage democracy--no authority can be trusted. Not just because they are dishonest but also because they don't know what they're talking about. The warning signs are meaningless--the whole terrain is wilderness.

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

Scott Walker: Through the Walker Brothers

(Repeating myself) One of the best music documentaries out there is Scott Walker: 30 Century Man. It's also something close to necessary if one is looking to gain an appreciation for the artist. His career is so extremely varied that no one album gives a good idea of what his work is about.

Not covered much in the film is Walker's earliest work. He had a run as a would-be teen idol in the late 50s, as Scotty Engel (his real name is Noel Scott Engel). The following are presented more for historical value than entertainment:
For fans, these bring a chuckle just to hear a youthful version of Walker's baritone. They also lay some groundwork for understanding his modus operandus.

Walker was a performer in the style of Bobby Darin in that he was a pop artist, assuming all the styles in the pop world from rock to cabaret. This makes his early albums puzzling to modern ears.

At the end of his first stab at stardom, Walker lived in Los Angeles. He supported himself as a musician-for-hire, playing at Whisky-A-Go-Go-style clubs among other things. He met John Maus, and then Gary Leeds, and formed The Walker Brothers, each taking the "Walker" surname.

The band settled in Britain in the mid-60s and became a big hit playing songs by professional songwriters. For a time, they were one of the many bands lauded as "bigger than The Beatles." Here's their first big hit, "Make It Easy on Yourself:"

After an uninteresting follow-up single, "My Ship is Coming In," The Walker Brothers had their second and last number one hit, "The Sun Ain't Gonna Shine Anymore."
These two songs show what vein the band was mining, the Righteous Brothers/Wall of Sound style. There are a couple of differences. For one, where the Righteous Brothers are dramatic, The Walker Brothers are bombastic. For another, Scott doesn't have an ounce of soul in his body.

So, it makes sense that The Walker Brothers found success in Britain when they couldn't in the States. The British pop audience doesn't make a fetish of authenticity--a trait that has made their musical output more interesting. If they worried about how "real" a performer was, The Rolling Stones couldn't have played old Chicago blues songs and David Bowie couldn't have assumed so many personas and rock history would be a lot less inspired than it is.

One of the most amusing parts in the documentary is when he tells us that he came to Britain excited that he could now discuss the Ingmar Bergman and French New Wave films. When he arrived, he found that all anyone wanted to talk about was Hollywood westerns.

Scott was a post-beatnik intellectual, full of existential philosophy, avant-garde film and wine. Just as early Dylan dazzled the press with his absurdity and hostility, Walker did the same with his earnest discomfort and good looks. Here's an interview from somewhere around that time:
The substance is less important than watching him self-consciously consider the interviewers questions and answer them as truthfully as he could, all the while with an air of quiet desperation. We can apply red-pill wisdom here:  the more Scott looks unwilling to engage with the public, the more the public wanted to engage with him.

The band was formed by John Walker (nee Maus), who was its original lead singer. The public, though, found Scott fascinating and the power shifted within the band. You can see why in the video for "The Sun Ain't Gonna Shine Anymore." John, though he appears to think he's hot stuff, isn't nearly as interesting as the slightly uncomfortable moptop with the huge voice.

However, it's unfortunate that so little footage of that period remains, because Scott, while the urbane intellectual that appeared to be above all the hoopla, was deeply enmeshed in the pop idol business. Within a couple of years of his Walker Brothers' time, he had a variety show on the BBC.

It's even more strange to consider Scott as an entertainment figure when one thinks about his material, especially his original work. As The Walker Brothers grew more popular, Scott took a larger role behind the scenes, contributing to the arrangements and song selection. He began writing his own songs, as well.

The only one released as a single was the title track for the film Deadlier Than the Male:
This isn't Scott's typical sound which points to his skill as a songwriter. Tasked with creating a James Bond sound for an action film, he hits the nail right on the head.

The B-side "Archangel" is another Scott original and an unfiltered version of what he was getting at:
It appears that Scott's original Walker Brothers songs are revisions of other tunes they recorded. "Archangel" has the same themes as this great one, "After the Lights Go Out:"
The latter, written by John Stewart, is about facing the night while missing a lover, colored with a lot of mundane details about living in an apartment building.

"Archangel" is the same, only the misery and drama levels have been cranked high. The woman in question is no longer "just a girl/Whose memory will be wiped away with time"--now she's an archangel, whose arrival will "save me from this tomb."

Likewise, Scott's "Mrs. Murphy" is similar in subject matter to the brothers' version of Randy Newman's "I Don't Want to Hear it Anymore:"
Where the former is about a man unwilling to hear the neighbors gossiping about his woman's infidelity, Scott's piece starts with the gossiping, includes a cuckoo-egg baby and quotes the neighbor,"Poor Mr Johnson being married to a wife who should be caged."

In his earliest songs, we already see Scott's perspective emerging. Sex, death, pain and misery are his subjects, and they all ooze forth in everyday life. He takes the perspective of a pump-and-dump lothario in "Orpheus," telling his target, a Mrs. Blear, that he will "harpoon you like a whale / With a bent and rusty nail." When the dalliance is over, "I've already forgotten you."
The band broke up for the usual reasons. Scott's new leadership, co-producing and choosing the songs as well as being the band's face, caused tension with John, the original frontman. Scott went solo. It's there that he made his name.

Saturday, March 22, 2014

No ADHD?

Via Vox Day:
A doctor with more than 50 years of medical practice asserts that ADHD is an umbrella of symptoms, not a disease in itself. And he also declares that the treatment can be considerably worse than many of the underlying causes.
They're on the right track here. It seems clear that something is wrong around the prevalence of ADD and ADHD. Arguments have been made that the diagnosis is medicalizing boy behavior in an increasingly femininized world. Day's source has an example in which the misbehavior was due to a nutritional deficit.

Day himself has this theory:
One boy with a supposed case of it was magically cured and never had any trouble controlling his behavior around me after I picked him up by the throat and told him that if he ever kicked me again, I'd rip his balls off and feed them to him.
All of these focus on acting-out behavior--kids who don't follow directions and are disruptive. That's certainly a sign of ADD but it doesn't mean that the child has ADD.

I'm a typical Internet ADD patient--self-diagnosed, so I don't offer myself as an expert or Certified Victim, but here's my perspective:

I think we'd all be better off thinking of ADD as an alternative cognitive strategy. That is, the minds of people with ADD work slightly differently than those without it. It's similar to how some people learn visually while others learn kinesthetically, etc.

Adam Dachis wrote a piece for Lifehacker in which he shares what he thinks are ADD-friendly tips for being a good listener. In fact, he's explaining ADD coping mechanisms.
When you can't pay attention like everyone else, you wind up getting bits and pieces of sentences. Fortunately, most people follow similar speech patterns and say a lot of the same things. The more you get to know someone, the more you can easily fill in the blanks and guess what they've said.
Most of the time I hear the beginning of a sentence, but things start to break up from there. For example: 
So did you want to ____ Mexican _____ _______ _______, or ___ ___ _____ __ ________ ___ __________ new for once? 
I blanked out most of that sentence, but kept in the parts that are easy to hear even if you can't pay attention for five seconds. Generally speaking, I'll hear the first part of the sentence, anything coming after a pause (e.g. or/and), and a few words at the end. There isn't much information, but I bet you can tell from tiny pieces what's happening in this example.
Dachis tells us to use context clues and our knowledge of the other person to figure out what is said. The thing is, most of us have been doing that our whole lives.

ADD isn't necessarily having a short attention span; in fact, "hyperfocus" is one of the symptoms. ADD is more a low tolerance for old information. Too many space-filler phrases in a conversation and one starts looking at the person's nostril hair or thinking about something that's actually interesting. ADD is about uncontrollable attention, not lack of it.

That's why I always say that ADD means that sometimes you have to take the long way. For example, I've tried to read the Monarch Mind Control book I'm outlining many times before. Each time, I've gotten bogged down in the long block paragraphs detailing brain chemicals and secret airstrip locations. But by breaking it down into chapters, skimming it then reading it to make notes then going over it again to write about it, I've been able to get a handle on the information. The issue hasn't been that I'm uninterested in the subject but that the format is at odds with my cognitive strategies. The block text in particular is a real obstacle; the sight of it puts my brain into first gear.

The reason why I have no compunction about announcing my self-diagnosis is that being certified by a doctor is irrelevant to me. Not because I'm so sure I'm right but because my life and productivity improved once I started thinking that I had it. I adopted ADD-centered approaches to what I wanted to accomplish, knowing that I had a tendency to get bored and find something else more immediately exciting. I learned how to manage distraction and how to break down tasks, among other things. It allowed me to think, "Oh, this is my problem and it will always be a problem. I'd better figure out a workaround." Thinking of myself as someone with ADD--and thus someone who has to make adjustments for the way my mind works--has improved my life greatly.

The lesser reason why I don't mind saying "self-diagnosed," like the proverbial basement-dweller is that I did attempt to see a doctor about it.

I called a local psychiatrist who specialized in ADD. I had no insurance and wanted to get an idea of how much I'd be spending to get the Official Stamp. The doctor asked me, "What makes you think you have ADD?"

I answered, "Well, I've had eight jobs in the past two years and it took me nine years to get my bachelor's degree."

"Yeah, maybe you'd better come in."

And, of course, I didn't go. I just never got around to it.

Your Guide to Monarch Mind Control - Chapter Three

The Illuminati Formula Used to Create an Undetectable Total Mind Controlled Slave
By Fritz Springmeier and Cisco Wheeler

Introduction
Chapter One
Chapter Two

CHAPTER 3 - THE USE OF DRUGS


Chapter Three is short but it's thankfully the last of the groundwork chapters. After this, we'll be examining the scripts, like the "Wizard of Oz" program, that are taken as common knowledge among Monarch Mind Control theorists.

It's also the beginning of the real craziness. The theory of the mind presented previously and the arrangement of alter personalities within the system are bizarre, but here we start to see just how much the authors are willing to believe.

The drugs are used just as one would imagine. Some are used for programming and some are used for trauma. A drug might be timed to create intense pain just as a predetermined situation arises, in order to provoke dissociation. Another might be timed to give the victim the impression that the programmer has control over his internal state.
The drugs are at times used with elaborate light, sound and motion shows that produce whatever effect the programmer wants to produce. They can make a person believe he is shrinking, or that he is double (with mirrors), or that he is dying.
The majority of the chapter is devoted to a tedious list of drugs programmers often use. We're told that they have access to 600-700 drugs and this is just a sampling. The drugs range from the expected psycho-pharmaceuticals to the mundane, like caffeine.

A few are strange. We're told that some, like 2-GB, are "a strong hallucinogenic which also helps telepathic communication." Ayahuasca, the South American drug touted as an overnight cure for addiction over the years, has the same effect, producing "a telepathic state where the recipient can see through people like glass and read their minds."

One drug not useful to programmers is marijuana. We're told that " it IMPEDES mind control." Which tells us that Springmeier probably lights up often in order to "clear his mind" of the programming he received in the military. He may be a paranoiac but he knows how to party.

All the drugging is done under careful medical scrutiny (and informed by Mengele's tests of human limits in Nazi concentration camps). When the victim has been over-saturated with drugs, programmers turn to natural herbs, like cayenne pepper and kava kava.

The cracks in S&W's ideas start showing through. They tell us that some alter personalities aren't effected at all by the drugs. This is akin to saying that some alters don't require oxygen so they can live underwater. We start to see that this theory has an uncommon idea of the relation between mind, body and the physical world.

For example, we're told that programmers use "high tech harmonic machines, which implant thoughts." If you are skeptical, S&W have an elaborate argument as to how this is possible. I present it, not for reading pleasure or edification, but for a glimpse into the rationalization of the concepts:
The neurons in the hippocampus which is part of the memory process use acetylcholine. Drugs that block acetylcholine interfere with memory. The neurons and the chemical neural transmitters are understood much better today. Where and how a thought is created in the brain is understood by the programmers in detail. No one is in a position to physically prevent the Illuminati and others from taking their children and others to labs where chemicals and harmonics can be used in sophisticated computer guided ways to implant thoughts into the children’s minds. As the child’s brain is shaped according to its environment, the level of everyday brain chemicals and the shape of the various areas of the brain can be determined by the programmers. 
Basically, "some science stuff" and "our understanding has advanced" and "programmers know this very well and have mastered it." This formula is repeated throughout the book. Hey, it makes perfect sense to them.

A recurring theme in all conspiracy theories is the unfailing mastery of the evil-doers. We're told that the programmers have "the antidote for AIDS. Monarch slaves are routinely given the antidote for AIDS and have been since the 1960s-1970s." This is necessary because of how many slaves are programmed for sexual roles, as we'll see in Chapter Four. (Note also the word "antidote" and not "cure.")

Finally, we see how the all the drug work plays out once the slave has been sent into the world.
One victim of government mind control tried to get free. The first psychiatrist the person tried to go to was cooperating with U.S. Intelligence and gave her Stelazine,which aggravated the victim’s situation. When the victim spied a general’s uniform in the closet of this psychiatrist, she got another psychiatrist, who unfortunately turned out to be an ex-DoD employee. He placed her on Haldol Decanoate, Klonopin, and Benzatropine. The combined effect of these drugs is to erase memory, and create a dissociative disorder. All of the drugs were highly addicted. [sic]
Chapter Four is next, dealing with hypnosis. We'll begin to discuss the codes and types of slaves that are referenced by conspiracy advocates.

Friday, March 21, 2014

Prudence is Our Greatest Virtue

Adam Gurri at The Umlaut tells us Prudence is a Virtue:
If you assume a notion of justice, or an extremely other-directed moral philosophy, in which the entire purpose of our lives is to provide for other people, prudence is still a crucial virtue. If you cannot provide for yourself, you cannot hope to provide for others. Au contraire; the selfless and imprudent saint becomes nothing more than a sinking ship, who is more likely to pull those he wishes to help to the bottom of the ocean with him, rather than improving their lot. If you cannot provide for yourself, how can you hope to provide for others?
In my foot-dragging path back to Catholicism, contemplating prudence was a major step. To hear progressive Christians and holier-than-thou leftists tell it, there is no martyrdom too stupid to avoid. Better to open one's borders to foreign cultures and endanger one's neighbors than to be intolerant. Better to allow all manner of sexual deviance at one's doorstep than to be judgmental. It's no virtue to allow one's children to be slaughtered because one is a pacifist. A pacifist is not what the children need.

As Gurri points out, prudence is the balance by which all moral judgments must be measured.

When thinking about human society, my starting point is the isolated village of the pre-modern age. The population and resources are small. Travel to the nearest city takes days. The monarch's army is nowhere close.

Assume you are the patriarch of that village and a stranger has come into town and murdered a resident. He is captured and brought to you for justice. He swears that, given a chance, he will kill again, and will do so as long as he is able.

What is the appropriate action? There is no prison in the village--the crimes committed there don't require major penalties. It's impossible to confine the man for the rest of his life--the necessary resources aren't there nor is there a way to keep him permanently locked away. The prudent action is to execute him.

But isn't taking a life a sin? Yes, but the patriarch has an obligation to his village, who look to him for protection and guidance. Is it better to let the man loose to wreak violence on them? Say he is escorted out of the village--is it moral to sentence a stranger to certain death?

No. The patriarch's obligations to the dependent and the innocent outweigh his obligations to the murderer as a fellow human. So he orders an execution and prays for forgiveness.

The progressive evolution described by Moldbug as an outgrowth of Quakerism and Unitarianism is really just Christianity stripped of prudence. There is no hierarchy of virtues or vices--every moral failing or achievement can be thrown into an enemy's face, like when Alec Baldwin discovered that his years of championing liberal poverty and environmental policies meant nothing because he was thought homophobic.

Prudence tells us how to make the best of the world as it is. That's why it's the highest of virtues man can achieve without God's intervention.

John Waters' Hairspray

Noel Murray of The Dissolve reviews John Waters' Hairspray via its new home video release:
While it’s corny by design, Hairspray also aims to get at something truthful, about the various kinds of prejudice weighing down the city circa 1963, and how youthful optimism and music made a difference, if only in the lives of those kids craving some kind of diverse, progressive community.
If I'm not mistaken, Murray is close to my age (near 40), so I expect the normal Gen-X level of irony, all the more so when discussing Waters.

This interpretation is colored with the Millennial think-happy-thoughts vision that made the recent musical reboot far removed from the original.

Waters shares with Morrissey a perspective of being empathetic without being sympathetic. They understand their characters' desires and actions but don't necessarily agree with them, all the while generally liking them. I'm having a hard time thinking of straight artists that did the same but the point-of-view doesn't seem inherently gay, even though it's a major element of camp.

It seems to me that Hairspray is a continuation of this attitude. Pink Flamingos was about the triumphs of an insane-but-principled woman aspiring to be the Filthiest Person Alive; Hairspray is about the triumphs of a silly little fat girl in the mid-60s.

In the film, Tracy usurps the snobby rival who is the most popular girl in Baltimore. She snags the city's most eligible young bachelor. She earns the respect of her parents. She becomes a style-setter and she changes the world for the better. And she does it by dancing and being her wonderful self.

Waters likes Tracy and, like a fairy godmother, waves a wand to make all her dreams come true. But he hints at his feelings for how valuable her goals are. Tracy's rise as Baltimore's princess for the masses is shown by making her the spokesmodel for a ladies big-and-fat store. When she introduces Baltimore to her new dance, she's wearing a dress patterned with cockroaches. When she visits the record store where black teens dance, everyone is grinding against one another in an overtly sexual manner. What Tracy thinks are the greatest things in the world are at best pointless and usually grubby.

That's what makes Waters' work so much fun to watch. He's saying, "Isn't this girl cute? She's so sweet and doesn't even care that she's fat. Oh, look, she's got a boyfriend now--he's gorgeous! Look how happy she is!"

Contrast Waters' attitude with that of Todd Solondz. In Welcome to the Dollhouse, he focuses on a girl only a bit younger than Tracy. Maybe Solondz doesn't actively dislike Dawn but he definitely has no illusions as to who she is. His story shows bluntly what happens to girls like that. He doesn't make her dreams come true--in fact, he dashes them, as when her hated sister was kidnapped, only to be treated like a princess during and after the abduction. Solondz takes a loser and shows just how badly she loses. Waters takes a loser and makes her queen for a day.

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

Sonic Youth, Infidelity and Powering Through

Righteous Gen-Xers might remember the public weeping when Thurston Moore and Kim Gordon, of Sonic Youth, announced their split a couple of years back. The couple were the king and queen of Alternative Rawk and, I guess, a model for marriage-minded hipsters.

You know what? I've never met anyone--or read anyone--who said that Sonic Youth was their favorite band. Daydream Nation is always in the mix when talking about "best albums" of one stripe or another but their tracks don't often turn up in the legion of Spotify mixes out there. For as respected as they are, they get a lot more lip service than accolades.

Thurston Moore recently poked his head from the rarefied air of genius to make an ass of himself. The AV Club has the rundown.

Moore had an interview in The Fly in which he said that he'd been in a relationship with his current flame for nearly six years, which significantly overlaps with the time he was officially married. Needless to say, the usual suspects lambasted him for dickishness. Moore lashed back, accusing Jezebel, which is normally the most level-headed and understanding of maniacs, with "gender fascism."

Moore is in the same situation that Alec Baldwin recently found himself:  "B-but, I thought we were all cool with each other." Note that mid-80s tone in the "gender fascism" slur. And like the straight white man that he is, he was angry. He probably should have taken the self-flagellating tack that Ani DiFranco (eventually) used; sobbing and admitting that there's so much to learn, so much to repair, God help me.

But Moore is right about one thing:  "[W]hen they grow up, maybe they’ll glean the complexities of real life and love."

Moore's apparent infidelity isn't necessarily understandable and definitely not praiseworthy. Leaving aside his crybaby defense and the stupidity of assuming that no one would do the math, he has a right to take a look at his life and make a bad decision.

But, by God, he should have to walk through the fire if he's so sure he's right. I don't doubt that Kim 'n' Thurston were much like John 'n' Yoko and Bill 'n' Hillary--relationships that became more usefully symbolic than personally meaningful. There's a good chance that the last years of their marriage were public appearances together and separate lives privately, all in support of Sonic Youth, Inc and their image. Their image of authenticity.

None of that means that he shouldn't be subject to ridicule and shaming. That's more or less the entirety of my societal thinking:  You can't be subversive and applauded at the same time. If you're right, you're still right even after you've been thrown to the lions.

Law & Order: SVU in Resurgence?

The AV Club announces that L&O: SVU is TV's most improved crime drama:
But more often than not, the SVU of today is a markedly different show than it once was, which would be a given for most scripted dramas to produce over 300 hours of television, but is a profound compliment for a spin-off of a show that prided itself on its slavish devotion to a meticulous formula. SVU’s willingness to evolve is what left it standing among the rubble of the once-impregnable L&O franchise.
Or maybe the longevity is because SVU has always been the most prurient of the L&O franchises.

The original L&O was a long-time TV staple for me and, for a time, I was a devotee of all the spin-offs. Criminal Intent's first few seasons were the best of the franchise. SVU was the show that I got into last and got tired of first.

As usual, I was in the minority and probably for the very reasons that writer Joshua Alston finds exciting in the new era of SVU. He enjoys the serialization of the stories and the increased attention to the lives of its characters.

My slowness in appreciating SVU and the subsequent loss of that appreciation came from the show's insistence that every case had to be someone's Worst Case Ever. I didn't like having to watch the actors grimace and ask each other, "What's going on with you?"-- I wanted to see the case play out.

That was the original's strength. Thankfully, every story wasn't jerry-rigged with a "shocking twist," but you knew that the case would take at least a couple of turns before the verdict came in. By splitting the focus between investigation and prosecution, the writers had more moving parts to play with, which I think was the secret to its extended freshness.

Certainly something had to change in the SVU formula. I've been catching up with the series thanks to constant marathons on USA and the most recent seasons have been just terrible. I like to think that I can see disgust on Christopher Meloni's face in his last seasons; procedural dramas are notoriously boring for actors and Meloni has enough respect in the industry to do a lot more interesting work. When the work went from dull to dull and stupid, it's time to renegotiate one's salary.

But I'm curious about Alston's automatic assumption that "serialization=better." I suppose I can chalk it up to The AV Club's new, young staff--they simply believe that each season of a show should be a an extended film.

They're not in the minority, at least among the chattering classes. I think, like everything else in America, there's a polarization within the mass audience that wasn't nearly so pronounced as it is now. The youngsters writing online these days think that entertainment is life, that the advances to the televisual arts supplied by Mad Men and Breaking Bad are monumental.

Well, I'm a grown man with a job and a family and a million interests. When the television is on, I'm not interested in dropping everything else in my life and sitting with rapt attention, lest I miss a knowing look or a subtle clue. The cult of serialization is not for me.

It's not for the general public, either:  take a look at the top shows of the 2012-2013 season. Of those, I only recognize two, The Walking Dead and The Following, as serialized dramas. The rest non-reality shows are episodic.

I think we'll see a return to episodic television among the chatterers eventually. That's where the money is and money draws talent.

Television has the ability to tell long, multi-hour stories but that's not its strength. The television, in case you haven't noticed, is a piece of furniture, even with a Chromecast attached.

Thursday, March 13, 2014

I didn't go into detail about the documentary Scott Walker: 30 Century Man the other day because I knew I had the following in my stack:  from The Guardian, 10 of the best: Scott Walker and 10 of the best: Scott Walker – readers' choice.
But here's the key question posed by anyone looking at Scott Walker's career. How (and why) does a teen idol go from crooning pop hits to making some of the most extreme and original music of the last two decades? 
Between The Guardian and its readers, one gets a fairly good impression of Walker's progression. I started writing about him but it's going to take more than a single post to get through it. Stay tuned.

Wednesday, March 12, 2014

The Non-Existent Meaning of the White Whale

Via Isegoria, Randall Collins' piece about violence referencing Moby-Dick:
Moby Dick is a thought-experiment. Melville imagines what it would be like if a whale were as intelligent as a human. Instead of running away it would turn and fight. Moby Dick, the white whale, is scarred with harpoons still tangled on his back; these are wounds or trophies from previous encounters with humans, but he always turned and wrecked the harpooners’ boats. As literary critics have generally recognized, he is white to indicate he is nearly human. But no one in the novel explicitly recognizes wherein his humanness lies — that he recognizes the tactic humans rely on to kill whales. The limits of humans’ perceptiveness of animals come out in their seeing Moby Dick only as supernatural or diabolical (and in the case of the critics, as symbolic). Moby Dick is not necessarily malevolent, but he is intelligent enough to see that running away will kill him, and that his only chance is to turn and counter-attack.
Moby-Dick is famous for proving true the maxim that great art can always be interpreted in different ways. It's a cliche of entertainment to have a professor ask his class, "What does the white whale represent?"

It's my favorite novel and one that I've read many times. I think Melville's point is clear:  The novel is about man's capacity for reading into the world around him. Moby-Dick, in the life of the book, doesn't represent anything but himself. As a literary device, the whale is a sideways MacGuffin, the object that the characters observe and draw personal meaning from.

In other words, Moby-Dick is a Rorshach test. The theme is encapsulated in the scenes in which all of the major characters examine the gold coin that Ahab has offered to the first sailor to sight the whale. Each one examines the same object and takes a vastly different meaning from it.

The theme of attaching meaning to the external is repeated throughout the book. Ishmael creates a panic when he believes Queequeg has died in bed when it turns out he is simply a deep sleeper. The ominous coffin that Queequeg has constructed--he believes his illness means death but he survives--saves Ishmael's life at the end.

Ishmael himself sets out to see whenever he goes "hazy about the eyes"--life on the ocean resets his attitude toward life on land. In a scene that won't be mimicked in contemporary literature, Ishmael enters town so morose that every black-colored item fixes his attention until finally, he enters a church for relief. To his (comic) horror, it is an African-American church and every face that turns toward him is as black as what he's trying to escape.

Melville includes several chapters outside of the book's narrative that are usually excised from the abridged editions. They are puzzling upon first read--all about the different types of whales, and other objective and scientific essays. But they have a purpose and that is to emphasize the trap into which Collins has fallen. We can know what the largest whale is. We can know where they migrate. We can know how other cultures regard them. But their interior life we can never know.

Collins surmises that Moby-Dick is "as intelligent as a human," that he is perceptive enough to understand the methods by which he's hunted. He says that the characters see the whale as "supernatural or diabolic" and sneers that critics see him as symbolic, but Collins sees him as a person. A fiction, sure, but a fiction of a whale with a human mind.

But Melville isn't pointing at some interior quality of Moby-Dick--in fact, he shows us through Ahab that believing that one knows the whale's character is the path of madness and destruction. Melville is pointing at a mirror and everyone thinks he's pointing at their own reflection.

Collins tells us that literary critics agree that Moby-Dick's coloring is an indication of his humanity, but Melville devotes a whole chapter to "The Whiteness of the Whale." In it, Ishmael ponders white as a color of purity and majesty, then turns to consider it as an element of terror, as a hint of something demonic that's unseen. This mystical fear, Melville takes pains to tell us, is how Ismael regards whiteness, but he does not stop there.
But not yet have we solved the incantation of this whiteness, and learned why it appeals with such power to the soul; and more strange and far more portentous- why, as we have seen, it is at once the most meaning symbol of spiritual things, nay, the very veil of the Christian's Deity; and yet should be as it is, the intensifying agent in things the most appalling to mankind.
"[T]he wretched infidel gazes himself blind at the monumental white shroud that wraps all the prospect around him," Melville writes.

Most importantly, he concludes:

"And of all these things the Albino whale was the symbol. Wonder ye then at the fiery hunt?"


Thinking about Charlton's Theory of Mass Media

One would think that as a former journalism student, I'd have an easier time understanding what Bruce Charlton means here:
But at a more proximate level; the way the Left works can be seen by the one-and-only example of an institution which has actually grown in power, wealth, effectiveness and efficiency over the past three decades: the modern Mass Media.  
I have argued that the modern Mass Media is in fact the centre of Leftism and the central power in modern society - the Mass Media is the primary social system; and dominates all other social systems.  
And the modern Mass Media has zero social function - it is overwhelmingly destructive in its net effect - it destroys cohesion, it destroys all other social systems, it encourages a psychological state and social mechanisms which are intrinsically and open-endedly anti-functional. 
I certainly agree with that last paragraph but I'm having trouble marrying the whole of the Left to the whole of mass media. Charlton doesn't tag his posts, so I'm just going to have to stay tuned.

I do think that it has something to do with the idea I've been trying to articulate that leftism is the degenerative force of democracy and is intrinsic to democracy. Democracy, in theory and practice, is about mobilizing and amassing the desires of individuals. This, in itself, is a weakness that encourages selfish, anti-social political action. Democracy, in its demand for constant activity, will push until it has universal suffrage.

The left is the democratic force that stokes political individualism--that is, selfishness. It accomplishes this by framing issues as win-lose scenarios and pits groups of individuals against one another. As universal suffrage is achieved, it's necessary to create further divisions among society.

What we've seen in the past half-century is a relentless shaving of the majority bloc into tiny, single-issue blocs. These smaller blocs are amassed into a mob agitating against the majority. The advocate for slavery reparations has little in common with the feminist--except for their enemy, the average American.

I don't have it all worked out but the mass media is an integral part of the equation. The hottest issues--gay marriage, trans rights--are about increasingly small slivers of the population, but the introduction of each new issue equals another handful of voices shouting in the mob. The momentum grows stronger, even as there is less and less resistance.

I'll be thinking about it. And don't think that my distributist eye didn't catch the "mass" in "mass media."

Subsidiarity Recommends Itself

James Kalb at The Catholic World Report has an article discussing a fundamental principle of distributism, subsidiarity:
The principle tells us that lower level associations such as families and local communities should carry on the greater part of the life of society, and higher level associations such as the state should facilitate their efforts. The point is to make social life more truly human, since face to face communities are more human than the stock market or the Code of Federal Regulations.
I'm not yet an expert in distributism but one of the elements that appeals to me is the understanding that every system has the potential to be corrupted. Knowing that we cannot eliminate corruption (in both the political and sinful sense), we must work to minimize it.

Subsidiarity--the principle of assigning responsibility to the lowest, smallest and most decentralized authority--attacks the problem from two angles. When corruption occurs, it is confined to the smallest area possible. At the same time, the corrupted are in direct contact with those they harm.

The latter I find the most exciting. The same bankers that have no problem vacuuming the funds out of Cyprian accounts probably could not stand to face a man and wrestle away his wallet. Subsidiarity forces the victimizer to face his victims and this alone does much to prevent corruption.

In the cases of the severely disordered, subsidiarity limits their ability to inflict mass harm by keeping the scope of their possible power small. He will be a member of the very community he damages and will face whatever consequence develops.

But that smallness has another benefit--it creates a dynamic larger society. With one hundred counties facing similar municipal issues, subsidiarity allows one hundred solutions. Out of those one hundred, several are bound to be more effective than others and, because smaller communities can change policies more quickly, those solutions are likely to be adopted.

Contrast that to our current system. Mega-corporations have no qualms about abandoning the communities that rely on them and relocating across the globe. A world-wide economic crisis was triggered by a small cohort of greedy, short-sighted and incompetent financiers. The federal government dictates education but doesn't care what your child finds interesting or how he learns best.

But most important is the fact that subsidiarity realigns the social and administrative worlds with that from which they came:  the interactions of individuals. It allows the people of a community to support what they believe is important and not simply submit to the designs of a distant authority.
Ordinary human beings don’t look at the world in the radically simplified terms the official outlook requires. It takes a great deal of training, and an innate or acquired lack of imagination, to do so. Untutored views bring in distinctions—man and woman, God and man, what is good and what is preferred—that motivate institutions other than the state, but have no official standing and therefore count as prejudiced and even bigoted. For that reason the people have to be propagandized, re-educated, and subjected to ever closer supervision to eradicate the effects of such views.
There is much more to be said, and to be learned, about distributism. I feel that it is the only political philosophy that tries to manage humanity's enormous capacity for evil while cultivating its equally-enormous capacity for good.

Kalb asks how we can advance subsidiarity, both as a principle and as a reality. As the idea arises from Catholicism, he answers:
Like other aspects of Catholic social teaching, what subsidiarity requires most of all is that Catholics live as Catholics.
I do not work myself up over political wrangling, or poli-sci arguments or the end of government as we know it. It's because of this--we are already surrounded by our communities and, though the edifice of the USG looms far above us, that sweeping power is really an illusion. If it disappeared tomorrow, our world would still be us, our families and our neighbors.

Your Guide to Monarch Mind Control - Chapter Two

The Illuminati Formula Used to Create an Undetectable Total Mind Controlled Slave
By Fritz Springmeier and Cisco Wheeler

Introduction
Chapter One

CHAPTER 2 - THE TRAUMATIZATION & TORTURE OF THE VICTIM


The chapter headings aren't descriptions. They are wishes and S&W's muse doesn't always lead them where they hope. This chapter is a continuation of the first, a mixture of technique and internal mental arrangement laced with down-the-rabbit-hole tangents. Chapter Four is where we begin learning about the programming and not the theory behind it.

The information here is useful, though. It sheds more light on how we are supposed to conceive of the mental interior of the mind-controlled slave. That doesn't mean it's believable.

Keep in mind that the information contained throughout, but particularly in the description of how the system of alter personalities work, is sourced in the reports of people diagnosed with Multiple Personality Disorder. I've been frank about my belief that the majority of these people are victims not of programming but reckless therapists and their own imaginations.

The technique used to "uncover" these memories is faulty. Even if the therapist doesn't ask leading questions--"Did you see a satanic symbol?"--he is still conjuring more and more detail with each inquiry.

A network developed of therapists and patients diagnosed with Multiple Personality Disorder. Since their world is already cockeyed, many of them created an amplification loop. Their stories became more gruesome and expansive, starting to appear more like horror movies than reality. The result is this complex and elaborate world in which all roads lead to the Illuminati and no one is who they seem.

Here's an America Undercover documentary from 1993 about MPD. Note the appearance of play-acting when the subjects go into their child alters--experts point out that these people don't speak like children but speak how adults think children speak. The grammar and pronunciation issues that children have as they learn language are not the same as what adults do when mimicking children.


The theory of the mind and the conspiracy are thus offered in a dream logic that's meant to be understood from the inside. The conflicting arguments about what constitutes a "core" personality, for example, don't always make sense.

Likewise, the book seems to be written while in the midst of a fever. The book is obviously written by two people as each author has a special brand of obsession. Wheeler will go into a long, unbroken tangent about the world inside the slave's mind; Springmeier does the same with locations, dates and secret agent-style information. The book is less co-written than stitched together.

At least the authors are aware of the difficulty:
To describe the complexity of what is happening with someone’s mind which has been messed with so dramatically for years, means that at times only an approximate model is presentable.
Thankfully, every so often they throw a bone to neurotypical readers:
If we pause to consider that a non-multiple person will experience struggles in their mind when simultaneous, overlapping but conflicting desires meet in conflict--i.e. “should I lay in bed, go to work, or go fishing today?” A particular part of the brain (a Synthesizing Self) is capable of ordering such a conflict--it transcends all these conflicting ego states. A single Synthesizing Self in the brain is likewise responsible for the de-synthesizing of the ego states.
The Synthesizing Self is called the "core" here, even though we've been told that the core can be eliminated completely, if the victimization starts early enough.

More fundamental than the core is a sense of pure awareness within the mind:
First, researchers have discovered that deep within a person, the brain truly understands in a pure awareness all about itself. This is true for everyone. This pure awareness has been named various names, including Hidden Observer.
If the "Hidden Observer" term is used, one should be wary. This is typically a "demonic entity" who commandeers the mind's pure awareness in order to monitor the System and to assist in programming. We're told that the Observer will only tell the truth to its master. Therapists who believe they've found the pure awareness should beware.

Just as there is an underlying awareness within the mind of the slave, so his talents and abilities will be available to all alter personalities. This is phrased by S&W as being "areas of the mind," highlighting again their concept of inner space being almost a literal landscape.

When trauma induces a split, the victim, or one of the victim's personalities, dissociates by imagining that the trauma is happening to someone else, which creates an(other) alter. The creation of the alter is simultaneously met with programming:
The programmer will ask the alter being tortured to create something in the mind when the split is created--such as “I want 12 white fluffy kittens.” The programmer, demons, and the child’s creativity work together with the dissociation to create alters. Those 12 white fluffy kittens will have the characteristics and memories of what they were made from. 
These twelve kittens each represent a separate alter. Each share the triggering trauma and hypnotic suggestions are added that call up the set of personalities like files in a Windows folder.
Another better way of looking at what happens is to understand that the part of the brain that records personal memory--that is the personal history memory section, is divided up into little pieces by amnesia walls built to protect itself from the repeated traumas. Each section is walled off from another section by amnesia...That walled off section is a piece of memory that will be identified, and a hypnotic cue attached by the programmers that will pull it up to the conscious mind. And further, if the programmers so desire, it can be given a history, a name, a job, and developed into a full-blown personality.
From S&W's reports, it appears that maintaining a system requires dozens upon dozens of internal alters. These spy from within:
Reporting alters can always reach the Network of abusers via 1-800 telephone numbers which change every 2 weeks. They can also call their handler. Reporting alters are very unemotional and serve as tape recorders which mechanically report any developments that might threaten the programming to their handler. Alters programmed to commit suicide are also built into the Systems.
The general idea is to create an intolerable situation for the victim and then program her mind so that the traumatic elements are hidden and the stress is never experienced as a whole:
The PTSD in Monarch victims is masked by the MPD/DID and the programming. Then in turn, the programming masks the MPD. When the programming is complete, front alters have been created which can function with smiles and cheerful attitudes, while underneath, the mind is full of shattered hurting alters, who the slave is unaware of...Certain alters end up holding the anger, the fear, the social withdrawal, the guilt, and the desire for self-punishment. 
S&W tell us about--in great detail--the various secret locations where programming is done, including an area around conspiracy-fave Bohemian Grove. The billionaire playground is said to be a place where the elite can perform infant sacrifice, practice necrophilia and other assorted perversions, and hunt slaves for sport.

They tell us more about from whom slaves are procured:
Catholic adoption agencies (which are many), nuns who get pregnant, third world parents, and parents who will sell their children were all sources of children for programming. When one thinks about how many corrupt people there are and how many towns and cities are on the West Coast, and how many children are produced by Satanic breeders, illegal aliens and other parents who’d rather have the money than children and the reader begins to realize how procuring batches of 1,000 or 2,000 children was no problem for the Illuminati working through intelligence agencies such as the CIA, NIS, DIA, FBI, and FEMA.
If one can ignore the specifics of the programming, one's mind boggles at the thought of the logistics. We're told that survivors report that infant programming takes place in airplane hangars. The children are housed in cages stacked from floor to ceiling which are wired to shock them at intervals timed with a light pattern. Periodically, they are raped.

Here we begin the nightmare portion of our journey. The elaborate networks, the clandestine flights and the arcane history are all just window dressing for the core of the theory:  abuse of children so extreme and surreal we can only view conspiracy proponents as fantasists with disturbed minds. (A reminder: these testimonials came out of therapy which coaxes patients to concoct and mentally enact their worst fears. I don't believe that most of the people who claim to be witnesses take any delight from these stories.)

I'll leave the worst out, offering only this summary:  "A fishhook in the vagina is a popular one." Some of the methods of inducing trauma are uncomfortably reminiscent of Abu Ghraib but most are bizarre.

We're told that needles are poked into the victims while voices say, "Love me. Love me not." As we'll see in later chapters, hypnotic phrasing is a major element of the programming and the source of much creepiness. "Good girls ride the silvery wings," is whispered to encourage splitting during shocks. The victims are forced into a splayed position during some rapes and told they've become Monarch butterflies.

All manner of phobias are triggered. Victims are forced to eat excrement and their own flesh as well as others'. They are locked in boxes with snakes and spiders.

The victims are put through private horror shows, with programmers dressing as figures of authority or of assistance and victimizing them. They are drugged into unconsciousness and told they are dying. They witness others their own age being murdered, sometimes while tied to them. They are forced to participate in occult rituals which involve sacrifice and sexual abuse.

We are told that, at one programming site, three trained chimps, Gabie, Rastice and Zoro, were used to torture victims.
The child soon learns that he is at the mercy of crazy people who can only be satisfied by total submission, and the willingness to allow someone else to think for you. The child will be made to eat faeces, blood, other disgusting things, while the programmer eats good meals.
 Though all of this is horrifying, the acts are not the product of crazed viciousness. We're told that they are carefully planned:  "Goals are set which are six month programming goals."
As a child of the Illuminati progressed through its programming, three people had oversight over its programming: its Grande Mother, its Grande Dame, and the Programmer. The Illuminati functions off a chain of command similar to the military. (In fact a big secret is that Satan’s realm actually served as the model for military and political structures.) 
The traumas are paired with specific programming, both to perform tasks the Illuminati requires or to maintain the programming. One that is referenced frequently by theorists combing the mass media is porcelain face programming:
This is done by using wax masks upon the victim, and giving them fire 60 torture. The person actually thinks that their face has melted. At that point, the programmer pretends to be a god & a hero, and tells the person he will give them a new face, a porcelain mask. These new faces by the way, look like the ones sold in so many stores.

Chapter Three is a short description of the drugs used in programming. Coming up.

Monday, March 10, 2014

The Music Documentary Returns to the Mean

Jason Heller at The AV Club examines the music documentary through the lens of Searching for Sugarman:
[T]he documentary’s subject: Detroit native Sixto Rodriguez, better known as simply Rodriguez, a singer-songwriter who recorded two obscure albums in the early ’70s before effectively disappearing from the music scene.
---
[T]he gist of Searching For Sugar Man is how the forgotten Rodriguez experienced a huge revival—unbeknown to Rodriguez himself—in, of all places, South Africa.
Heller's argument is against the trend of music documentaries over-lionizing their subjects. In this case, the talking heads describe Rodriguez as being on par with Dylan.
The next Dylan: It’s a whopping claim that’s been made so many times about so many singer-songwriters, it’s become a cliché.
One would hope that by we as a culture would be tired of searching for a novelty that changes everything. For one, it's not realistic. For another, it causes a lot of ballyhoo that inevitably disappoints.

Take this year's most-hyped rediscovery, featured in A Band Called Death:
But the narrative that resulted from the film was that Death invented punk, which is as overreaching a claim as saying Rodriguez was second only to Dylan. Proto-punk, as it became retroactively known, was embodied by many bands that formed slightly before, or at roughly the same time, as The Ramones in the early ’70s. That fact doesn’t make Death less interesting—it makes the band more so, part of a proto-punk continuum rather than lone outliers. 
I got wind of the band a couple of years ago. I now assume that this was a bit of underground advance publicity, leaking a digital copy of their album to the grey-market mp3 blogs. I wasn't especially impressed. Heller sums it up nicely; if you like that sort of thing, Death is the sort of thing you'd like.

The larger issue is that the media documentary in general is in decline after a great run. It's mainly because of this tendency to present their subjects as the greatest whatever you've never heard of. The reason these subjects are obscure is because--can you figure it out?--they deserve to be obscure.

That's not to say that they're bad but that they don't fit into mainstream tastes. The greats of music are fascinating because their progressions could be said to dictate changes in the mainstream. Dylan going electric or The Beatles becoming a studio band, for example. But this kind of narrative isn't appropriate for an also-ran whose work wasn't appreciated when it came out.

Heller highlights an older documentary that got it right, the Klaus Nomi doc The Nomi Song. I found it enjoyable because it places Nomi in his context as a part of the New York New Wave scene that broke out, however briefly.

New Wave was driven less by philosophy, like hippie or punk culture, and more by the thought, "Hey, we're a new generation. We should be doing something different!" Nomi was a male soprano and had a fey and alien look and presence that was heightened by his foreignness. He was presented in manner that emphasized his strangeness and had some success on the pop charts.

The Nomi Song does it right. There's no reason to pretend that Nomi changed music forever or that he's a neglected genius. He had unique body of work and sprung from a unique movement. The best music documentaries give us an understanding of the artist, his goals, influences and life. This lifts them out of footnote status and gives potential new fans a way to think about them.

One of my favorite artists is Scott Walker but I wouldn't have pursued his work if I hadn't seen Scott Walker: 30 Century Man. He's the perfect subject for a rediscovery-style music documentary because his work and career went through so many changes that it's difficult to find an entry point for newcomers. In the same respect, Who Is Harry Nilsson (And Why Is Everybody Talkin' About Him?) is good as well.
The problem with this kind of hyperbolic filmmaking, ironically, is that it overshadows the best qualities that obscure artists truly possess. While these artists sometimes live tragic lives, their obscurity isn’t a tragedy in and of itself. They’re usually obscure for a reason: They didn’t make music that was palatable to people at the time, or they weren’t able to devote the relentless energy it takes to become famous, or they simply did what millions of musicians do every day: create music for the love of it. By elevating them to the dubious status of noble losers, this new wave of documentaries perpetuates an empty myth that doesn’t do them justice.

Patton Oswalt on Bill Hicks

On the anniversary of Bill Hicks' death, Patton Oswalt published the introduction he wrote to a new edition of Hicks' biography that never saw print.
Which is what makes Bill Hicks’ achievement all the more miraculous, when you put his comedy into the context of the time he did it. Lenny Bruce had to punch through an icy wall of Eisenhower-era repression. But Bill Hicks had to make his voice heard through the amorphous, ever-shifting fog of Reagan-era comfort and complacency. Comedy club audiences in the 80’s actually thought they were being revolutionary and dangerous, listening to a sport-coated, sleeves-rolled-up comedian railing against the absurdities of airplane food, the plot holes on Gilligan’s Island and the differences between cats and dogs. Like Kurt Vonnegut’s Kilgore Trout, laying down world-saving truths in the pages of disposable stroke magazines, Bill Hicks was trying to light the way into the 21st century – on the stained-carpet stages of strip mall chuckle huts, usually following a juggler.
I wrote about Hicks and lot more in this rambling piece (that I consider a sea change in what I am trying to accomplish here). I said,
Hicks talking about inbred Southerners in a black duster was just a flip of your standard Eighties comic in shirtsleeves and a square-bottomed tie talking about the fags. Even the stereotypical comic might end his set with a bit of maudlin talk, maybe about the unhappiness in the world and his chance to brighten everyone’s day, just as Hicks would pepper his act with syncretic references to a cosmic consciousness.
Oswalt says that audiences in the 80s thought they were seeing something "revolutionary and dangerous" but I think he's being blinded by stand-up comedy's own bullshit.

For one, did 80s audiences go out looking for something revolutionary and dangerous? Not in comedy clubs. Comedy clubs are the last vestige of the old dinner-and-a-show supper clubs--they were a mainstream pursuit.

For another, Oswalt doesn't remember that the 80s was the last era in which America had a mass audience. The urge to find something alternative, revolutionary, counter-cultural was a tiny part of the landscape. It wasn't until the 90s that the attitude of disdaining the mainstream landed in the mainstream. The comic with his sport coat's sleeves rolled up was taking on the image of what the mass audience thought was cool and was trying to entertain and win over that mass audience with twists on experiences everyone shared.

Hicks' innovation was in polarizing the audience, on the premise that it was better to have half the audience adore you rather than have the whole audience think you're just okay. What he did was turn to the progressives in the audience and said, "Aren't those non-progressives stupid?" One half of the room said, "Hell, yes!" while the other half said, "We paid money for this?"

The result is that the stand up world is still divided between traditional comics and the descendants of the alt-comedy scene. The latter, especially Oswalt, are dominant in the media but it appears that the mainstream comics make the most money. Stand-ups are not entirely polarized within the industry and usually have respect for whoever has built an audience but you can draw a line between those you might imagine guesting in an Adam Sandler movie and those that might show up on Adult Swim. The division was already on its way--Hicks was just the loudest, angriest and came first.