We have seen an example of how public Relations science is used to manipulate a commercial preference. You will have noticed how, with this technique, the paid agent was usually one or two steps removed from the innocent who actually persuaded the citizen that velvet was the fashion of the times.
Events indicate that it was nearly 200 years ago when elitists began to fear world population and began to plan to take-over the world (Malthus, Principles of Population, 1798).
At this point I think we should go back into the 19th century, fifty or sixty years before Bernays began his career, to see the first controls being set in place. Whether the people used were consciously working for the plan is doubtful, but certainly they would most likely be influenced in some way.
These people of interest are: Charles Darwin, 1809-82; main writings 1859-71. Purpose: base for new religion. Karl Marx, 1818-83; main writings 1848-67. Purpose: base for mechanist ideology. Sigmund Freud, 1856-1939; main writings 1900-23. Purpose: Motivation to sexual irresponsibility. Benjamin Spock, 1903- ; main writing 1946-. Purpose:motivation to non-human, nature nurture.
Although both Darwin and Spock are known to have withdrawn from their most damaging teachings, the belief fads they led continue to be promoted by the establishment propaganda machine. Karl Marx was the only one of these four known to have been paid to write his book; however the elitists are both subtle and opportunistic. People who produce work suited to elitist ambitions are promoted and publicized. If the pawn finds that he has made a mistake and if to reveal this would cause disadvantage to elitist ambitions, then the correction is ignored by the PR machine.
The writing of Marx became the base for a fanatical and fanciful idealism that would motivate the disadvantaged classes even including many well-off idealists. It proposed an equality which, at best, could only be a forced equality for the slaves and a different equality for the masters.
However it was Darwinism that did the more critical damage in promoting an educated class who denied man's humanity and induced "the common educated" to see ourselves as animals. This led easily to the violent culling of people seen to have a "not politically correct" attitude wherever communism has reigned. It also allowed easy acceptance of Freud's sex beliefs and worship of self.
After this it was quite a natural progression to Dr. Spock's advocacy that released children from parental discipline.
The combined influence on moral imperatives by Marx and Darwin laid the foundation for the sexual revolution; the work of Dr Spock consolidated this and all was set into the public mind by public education and PR. Thus a false base of history was established for nurture and nature. A 'history' was set in place for control of future generations all in accord with theory:
'He who controls the past controls the future'.
All people outside of the elitist sub-culture were enticed to believe that mankind was nothing more than a common animal related to apes and that any that any disciplinary restraint on animal nature was an injustice to mankind.
This led naturally to the time (today) where young teenagers are stimulated to a sex motivated attitude that is encouraged by other teenagers with the aid and funding of government. An excellent example of this was recently available in the form of a book called "The Fact And Fantasy File" written by an indoctrinated teenager and supported by a phone-in sex advice service staffed by young teenagers. Although this 'service' was discontinued after a short time because of a high level of public protest, the damage is already done by subtle means and continues without further publicity.
Government (both parties) have encouraged and forced this trend against public resistance. Let's have an example of how this imposition is promoted.
In an article, "Condom Culture" (The BULLETIN" 28/1/1992) Lucy Sullivan, an experimental psychologist working with the Australian Institute of Health, argues that the campaign to stop the spread of AIDS has turned into propaganda for the promiscuous. She opens her article with the following paragraph; quote:
Over the course of the last two decades, Germaine Greer moved from advocating sexual liberation of the male model for women to arguing that this version of sexual freedom has made women more, not less, subject to male sexual dominance. A promiscuous mode of sexuality, which suits men better than women, has been preached and imposed and has left women alienated from their real modes of sexuality, which are far more entwined with reproduction and personal, family relationships than are those of men. Women's bodies and health have increasingly been put at risk in order to dissociate copulation from reproduction, as a necessary concomitant of sexual freedom. EQ
There is little doubt that AIDS is being used as a cover promoting the social acceptance of teenage promiscuity; e.g. this report in The Australian (13/3/1992); quote:
Explicit sex education courses should be taught in the first three years of primary school, according to new research on AIDS awareness presented to education authorities in all states and the territories. EQ.
The promotion of sex, under the banner of a 'safe sex' that is not at all safe, is now epidemic. However the more important message in the Sullivan article relates to the paragraph quoted.
What the quote says, in brief, is that (what is seen as) a male level of sexual freedom is neither suited to or beneficial to the female.
Whether male promiscuity was as liberal as it was promoted in mid-century propaganda as being, or if that belief was mainly a figment of female imagination, is not worth arguing here although it is somewhat difficult to see how men can be promiscuous without female help.
The point is, and it is reasonably obvious, that image of the promiscuous male cannot be realistically promoted as a feminine ideal without introducing great distress to the female population and destroying cultural cohesion.
It is gratifying that a leading feminist has at last had the courage to look honestly and speak honestly. Although no-one in the present cultural environment would have believed me had I said it, nevertheless it must be very obvious that a great confidence trick has been played on women.
A promiscuous culture is a common male fantasy, it allows his natural instincts to run wild and, at the same time, removes from him all responsibility for the consequences. Anyone can see why women's liberation is really about men's liberation.
In real life, if we stop to think about it, promiscuity is clearly not a civilized social option but the destruction of "common" culture is to the benefit of an elitist world takeover. It is to elitist benefit to create confusion between animal responses and the human self-control - or to hide from 'common people' that self-control is the price of adding love to sex.
Both male and female have been tricked by a mass seduction which, to a male - not female - advantage. We should never forget that, in the New World Order, the Ministry of Peace promotes war. The United Nations is unable to wage war; when it drops bombs they are peace offerings. Common meanings are reversed.
In practice, it becomes apparent that promiscuity is highly destructive of both male and female ego and a total disaster for children.
Brainwash is directed mainly at children (give me a child for the first seven years and you can do as you like after that). destroy the critical perceptions of the children and you destroy the family; cripple the family and the world is yours.
Could people in high places have really planned the moral disintegration of common culture? Could they be doing things right now to bring to fruition that plan?
To introduce pornography to a culture is an obvious move to hurry the destruction of mental freedom by undermining the moral fabric of a society. This will have added effect in a society already weakened by confused thinking, an amoral attitude and a fatalistic idea of origins.
An example of how deliberately hard core pornography was smuggled into Australia by political design is found in the following segments from The Report of the Joint Select Committee on Video Material. Vol.l. Canberra 1988, p15-17. Quote:
.. in order to understand more accurately the operation of the censorship laws from 1973 to 1984 it is necessary to refer to the year 1973 when the number of video tapes entering Australia was insignificant.
In that year the then Attorney-General announced a policy on censorship ... which in its original form read as follows:
#.. federal laws to conform with the general principles that adults should be entitled to read, hear and view what they wish in private and in public and that persons - and those in their care - be not exposed to unsolicited material offensive to them. (Statement by the Attorney-General of Australia, Censorship - A Question of Balancing Individual Rights 19/73, Canberra, Feb. 26, 1973).#
[Here is a common self-contradiction; there can be no freedom of pornography without exposure. It is like saying people should have freedom to steal but must not take anything from others. The thinking is adolescent.]
#"Although the proposed legislation is self-regulating it may be considered desirable to set up a tribunal to establish what publications are to be "restricted" and what are not. This takes responsibility away from the trade and gives the appearance at least of community involvement.#
The document also noted that for the policy to become law, amendments would be required to the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations and the Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations and a new law drafted to cover advertising, display, distribution and sale to adults of obscene material. However the document warns that such legislative measures would meet resistance and could lead to the negation of the policy and commented that:
#It is considered that almost all the States would be hostile to a policy which could lead to the circulation of so-called hard core pornography and material dealing with hard drugs and extreme violence, anarchy and sedition. #
The document raised for consideration the question of whether the policy announced by the Attorney-General should be brought fully and immediately into effect or by stages. It stated:
#You would need to have regard to repercussions in the electorate; the Australian public is notoriously conservative, whatever its political affiliations.
The Government's policy might best be achieved by a strategy of hastening slowly - gradually broadening the standards of imported material so that public opinion can be developed to embrace the principles embodied in the policy.# EQ. EA.
So much for changing attitude being the satisfaction of public demand or interaction between the public and public authorities.
There is an ongoing, cold and intentional subversion of public morality and public standards. In the event it seems the policy was brought in by administrative direction and customs were told to ignore offenses involving pornography. The end plan is to create a situation where government can openly fund pornography for children.
This is to the design: create social anarchy, blame the family and bow to public clamour for more government custody and control of children.
It is significant that ordinary public servants appeared prepared to go along with importation of pornography. These same people, who want to watch sex and related violence on TV, are the loudest to complain when their children are raped and mass killings occur. Those responsible never admit it.
Radical feminism and porn are deliberate products of the PR propaganda being inflicted on our world, but I fear that those who follow 'isms' will suffer for their blind loyalties.
Why, when I think of radicals do I think of death row and the poem that is said to have been found on a cell wall in that sad resting place. That poem is called:
THE MAN IN THE MIRROR; quote:
When you get what you want in your struggle for self, And the world makes you king for a day; Then go to the mirror and look at yourself, And see what that man has to say. For it isn't a man's father, mother or wife Whose judgment upon him must pass: The fellow whose verdict counts most in his life, Is the man staring back from the glass. He's the fellow to please; never mind the rest, For he's with you clear up to the end; And you've passed your most dangerous, difficult test If the man in the glass is your friend. You can fool the whole world down the pathway of years, And get pats on the back as you pass: But your final reward will be heartache and tears If you've cheated the man in the glass. EQ.
It is not only male criminals who will come to the time when they have to face their own conscience and question the use they have made of life. I think that among those for whom this will be a hard time will be many blind fanatics.
When the radical feminist comes to judge her life how important will it be to her that she has made a million dollars; been chief executive of a company; had a thousand and one love affairs or traveled around the world many times?
Pain and pleasure are such fleeting impressions. How little they matter. Yesterday's toothache or last nights party; what are they worth today? What pleasure or pain will they give next month or next year unless they are associated with some other value?
The real values are never considered by the young unless they have the discipline and guidance of good parents and a caring, responsible social environment.
It is interesting that since the years of limitless porn, the economy has degenerated from fair to disaster, massacres have begun to occur in our cities and rape has become so common as to be rarely considered worth reporting (in some reports one-third of university girls claim to have been raped). This is the result of New World Order corruption yet all turn a blind eye to the obvious cause.
Is it not strange that people do not see that laws cannot substitute for morals and business cannot prosper in dishonesty? That lies and trickery lead inevitably to self delusion and disaster? That personal immorality leads to family breakdown, hate and suffering? That business immorality is a cost to everyone?
Why is it so hard to admit the "immorality" is just a word meaning "crime against human nature"?
All crimes of lust are crimes against the family; therefore against children. They attack human freedom, political democracy and social justice. These crimes exhibit even greater selfishness and lack of concern for others that do other forms of crime.
To better understand this we need to know a little about what is commonly called "bonding". Most alert people will have heard of bonding in relation to mothers and babies. Bonding may go under a variety of names such as "imprinting".
Human bonding is far less mechanistic than is the usual animal bonding and humans have features very different from those of animals. Although the word "mankind" refers to a kind of man it also refers to a kind of animal, human is something more than a manlike-animal.
The common ideas taught by the brainwash of today might have us believe that we are no more than intelligent animals; but to believe that is not intelligent. A healthy calf or foal, kitten or puppy will, if fed and cared for, grow up to be a normal creature of its kind. A human baby, if institutionalized and given no more than food and care may grow up physically healthy but in human responses be little better than a farm animal and, in fact, may be far more inhuman and dangerous than any animal because it does not have a behaviour imprint to its human potential.
To create a human the baby must be given a sense of responsibility, social behaviour example, input of human experience and access to past human history. To create a human requires giving the human baby a discipline to maintain its dignity, along with an understanding of the need to study and to maintain its natural desire to learn. The consequence of this will take up most of its formative life and continue to give intellectual growth for as long as life allows.
Mother/baby is not the only form of bonding. The most important bonding of all, from a human point of view, is never now taught as part of public education. That bonding is "marriage bonding"; you can see why the mind-manipulators do not encourage human education.
Marriage bonding has a lot to do with sex. To begin let us assume an ideal human situation where both partners are sexually innocent at marriage and not living in a community that has degenerated to sexual exploitation as a way of life.
In this circumstance both first experience the joy of sex with each other and their expectation is to remain together and raise a family.
This is an ideal that has been learned over generations of human experience and is the base for all advanced cultures. On the other hand the failure of family begins with the AIDS-like progress called cultural disintegration.
First love, when it comes from a loving commitment, is the most strongly remembered love. Two innocent people adapt to each other like two pieces of soft clay pressed together and form the mold of a lasting relationship because they have no expectation of anything other than what each provides.
Marriage bonding in good circumstances, is very strong and in almost all cases the partnership could be expected to last. They believe in this ideal and are bonded by mutual conditioning and adaptability. That we have never had a perfect situation has not stopped the family ideal being the foundation of great civilizations.
Had we not been misled by propaganda, human ideals and relationships could have developed and improved. Had people understood the importance of marriage bonding and been allowed to learn from human experience why crimes of lust practiced by consenting adults are the worst of all crimes against humanity, we would now live in a far more exciting world.
The pleasures of promiscuity also imprint a lust for change. The "Pavlovian imprint" of promiscuity leads to an expectation that is unable to be satisfied by any later relationship.
Promiscuous sex induces a passion for change but the innate desire for the ideal remains! Many continue a desperate search for the ideal mate - seeking to satisfy a desire that, having wasted the passionate attachment of marriage bonding, can never be satisfied. This may then turn to a bitter jealousy, family violence, hate for those living in harmony and a desire to destroy that harmony.
There should be no doubt about the influence of sex. In a promiscuous environment young minds tend to become obsessed with sex. As time goes on and the new exciting challenges disappear, young adults become frustrated. Poor parenting makes the next generation more vulnerable to all manner of temptation. Self-discipline gives way to animal impulse and the community loses its ability to either prosper or defend itself.
Deprived of moral imprinting, our animal instincts, driven by human mental capacity, become the dominant urge in mankind and result in the deformed pair-bonding found in late twentieth century. Frustrations lead to drug addiction, suicide, rape, murder, mindless violence, homosexuality, robbery together with business and political corruption.
Today a man's word is no longer his bond and in politics we expect and accept lies as a matter of course. We are governed by political parties who have sold us out to international tyrants - crime syndicates that rob us of our heritage and our future. This is the price of promiscuity that has been promoted by public relations techniques.
Mental confusion ensures that many people can no longer understand what is happening to them and cannot make effective decisions in their own defence. The community is open to manipulation and needs more and more laws to regulate every detail of life.
As Tacitus (Roman historian) put it: the more corrupt the State the more laws it has. As the family disintegrates, national-will crumbles and the enemy plunders. Let's look at this in more detail.
The mass marketing of seduction was begun early in this century, as we saw, Bernays took an early lead in this. In my own youth I recall there was "MAN" and then "MAN JUNIOR" to be followed by an increasingly more disreputable bunch. Apparently the 'sex & violence' type of comic book made its appearance in the 1940s and the first large scale public protest against this seduction of youth was led by Dr Fredric Wertham M.D., author of Seduction of the Innocent.
However there was always too much money and too much high level pressure for the public to ever win, comic book porn or school classroom porn, the people were always resisted to bankruptcy or exhaustion.
Not surprising my first insight into this matter was provided by a 'girlie' magazine. This would have been in the 1930s when this kind of literature was probably more sedate than is common to everyday mass media now. I was about twelve years of age at the time and reading by the light of an Alladin light at the kitchen table.
The story was about a rich man who hated women. Why? That was not part of the story. The point was that he had decided to make as many women as possible suffer and the way he chose to gain this result was to install a bevy of attractive young call girls on his estate and invite young bachelors as guests.
He reasoned that as the young men were seduced and mentally conditioned to the joys of promiscuity, they would then find it very difficult to settle-down for long with one woman.
These men would marry but the result would be extra-marital affairs, dispute, distress and most likely the break-up of the family to leave the wife with young children and no income. This was the rich man's planned revenge.
Although this story was fiction I saw that the principle behind the plot was sound. However it was some years before I found that this basic principle of social conditioning was neither understood by, nor impressed on, the general public. Even longer before I saw that the whole world was being seduced by hidden persuaders to achieve a similar result.
There may have been a million men who read that story without either wanting to see its meaning or consequences. And how many million mothers (the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world) have felt a secret pride in the philandering of their sons while complaining about the inattentiveness of their husbands? The great crime of humanist manipulation is not confined to selfish people. A great number of lives are destroyed by well-meaning people who, so innocently, serve evil ideals.
The effect surrounds us! What is the sex crime most in the news?
The ideologues and PR experts, those who use exaggerated examples of problems such as child abuse, nuclear power, greenhouse and other emotion-stirring issues to lead people into their moral cesspools, are very keen that most child abuse should be seen as incest and a product of family life.
By accusing the family they need to direct public disgust against the legitimate family.
Knowing that the legitimate family is the kind of family that most people still associate with the word "family", manipulators carefully avoid distinctions between the legitimate family and the kind of 'family' where most social abuse does occur .. the illegitimate family.
Let us look at some of the elementaries of sex crimes.
Incest is not an uncommon word today but is usually used to attach child abuse to the legitimate family unit. The humanist/socialist ideology, is not opposed to incest or its more abusive brother pedophilia (see item next chapter). Nor is it opposed to other abuses of the sexual kind such as promiscuity, homosexuality and adultery.
To this primitive religion - as taught in our schools it is religion - any form of mutually agreed sex is natural, normal, desirable and approved no matter how unnatural the technology and science used to promote abnormal appetites.
The attack on incest is not out of concern for the welfare of children but is merely a device to instill in the minds of moral people the idea that incest is a family failing and that it is the legitimate family that has failed.
It is claimed that there are tremendous emotional traumas inflicted on the children involved but there is reluctance to attribute these same consequences to the sick and less loving relationships of pedophilia or the promotion of pornography.
Pornographers ignore totally the great damage caused to children by the selfish pursuit of promiscuity and parental adultery.
Incest, though becoming more common because of sex promotion, is probably not nearly so widespread as is made out. It is a age-old problem and banned in most cultures. The educated reason given for banning incest is because inbreeding tends to multiply family genetic problems.
The more serious and unmentioned problem of incest is that it is a cause of family jealousy, disloyalty and the injustices that lead to family breakdown.
Incest is a social crime in the same bracket as adultery, homosexuality, prostitution and promiscuity, no better - no worse. Homosexuality comes within this group in the present social climate because its main practice is the result of social deformity rather than genetic deformity.
Sex crimes are crimes of lust as against crimes of sadism (abuse/violence) or avarice (robbery/usury). However lust and violence seem mutually attracted to each other.
Some claim that non-violent crimes of lust should not be classed as crimes at all? The humanist/socialist "politically correct" attitude is that sex crimes are "victimless".
The perceptions of people blinded by the PR brainwashing to socialist/humanism (Fabianism) totally ignore the evident consequences of sex crimes and only direct abuse at these crimes if, in so doing, they can heap discredit on the legitimate family as opposed to the fantasy of 'free love' and supports responsible social order. Legitimate family is therefore a danger and stumbling block to elitist control.
Porn and crimes of lust do not cause immediate social pain but undermine the family and create a growing "child to child" sex abuse problem.
Whereas violent robbery, rape and murder are cruel crimes they do not have the very 'Pavlovian' conditioning flow-on enticement common to crimes of lust. Crimes that are ego=pleasing create a seductive desire in the community.
With the destruction of the family comes breakdown of childcare and encouragement to government childcare with all its well-known evils.
Crimes of lust undermine community morals to become the social AIDS that penetrates all social and business behaviour. Such crime is of far greater social importance than the murder and violence which follows as its natural result.
The problem with the socialist/humanist ideal of a mechanically organized society is:
1. that it serves no human purpose;
2. that it causes great human distress;
3. that it can never work as a human social order.
Socialist order is a pretty picture of insect-like orderliness, equality and freedom from strife that lives more in the imagination than it ever, in real-life, could.
In the meantime the elitist vision of owning the world which can be made into their own playground, a 'Garden of Eden-like' perfection with its nest of human ants to keep it tidy - is just as fanciful and impractical as the communism they offer the workers and the capitalism offered leaders.
Arrogant dreams of glory, like all past dreams of conquest, are doomed to the trash can of history. The challenge is in the conquest, but when it is achieved, ah, where do you go from there? How do you satisfy those specialized to ambitions of sex or power when the goal is achieved? It is in the nature of things and history proves it, when wolves have destroyed all prey they then turn on each other.
The people who plan world government are criminals, perhaps not common criminals but undoubtedly criminal. There is no scientific support for the theories and ideologies they promote. There is no reason to believe that a world government, enforced by a world army, restricted to a world money, compulsory pagan religion and supervised by a world surveillance system, would be capable, even with the best of intentions, of creating human satisfaction or progress.
Even if the plan was not installed by dictators there is nothing to stop dictators gaining control.
If a world government is to do good then it needs no fearsome capacity to force submission, it will lead with a gentle example and evidence of benefit.
Do you want to live in a world where you will be killed if you do not have the latest 'politically correct' opinion that has been decided by an ego-maniac dictator? Or because some committee decides that the world is over-populated? Or just because someone in petty authority does not like you? brain8.htm
.../Back to Contents Page