It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Most Important Essay on the Internet

page: 1
20

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 15 2011 @ 11:33 PM
link   
I urge all of you to read this essay in its entirety. It is "A Brave New World Revisited" by Aldous Huxley. In it, Huxley explains how his vision of "A Brave New World" was happening much faster than he anticipated. This man was talking about "Big Business and Big Government" back in the 1950s! While this essay isn't conspiratorial in nature, I'm sure if you take this essay into consideration with all of your previous knowledge of conspiracies, you'll see they are closely related, and that Huxley hints at a conspiracy, ever so subtly.
This essay describes our society in such detail, that you may very well consider Aldous Huxley a prophet after reading it.
I'll try to give a brief summary of each section of the essay, and I'll quote some of the more fascinating passages.
Remember, he wrote this in 1958.

Foreword:



The soul of wit may become the very body of untruth. However elegant and memorable, brevity can never, in the nature of things, do justice to all the facts of a complex situation. On such a theme one can be brief only by omission and simplification. Omission and sim­plification help us to understand -- but help us, in many cases, to understand the wrong thing; for our compre­hension may be only of the abbreviator's neatly formu­lated notions, not of the vast, ramifying reality from which these notions have been so arbitrarily abstracted. But life is short and information endless: nobody has time for everything. In practice we are generally forced to choose between an unduly brief exposition and no exposition at all. Abbreviation is a necessary evil and the abbreviator's business is to make the best of a job which, though intrinsically bad, is still better than nothing.He must learn to simplify, but not to the point of falsification.


I. Over-population

Huxley begins this chapter by saying how the events he envisioned in 1931 in "A Brave New World" were coming true much faster than he imagined. He explains how the future is heading more towards "A brave New World," rather than "1984."




In the light of what we have recently learned about animal behavior in general, and human behavior in particular, it has become clear that control through the punishment of undesirable behavior is less effec­tive, in the long run, than control through the rein­forcement of desirable behavior by rewards, and that government through terror works on the whole less well than government through the non-violent manip­ulation of the environment and of the thoughts and feelings of individual men, women and children.

This passage is entirely true. I have a degree in psychology, and this was something I was taught. Huxley was a very educated man. He discusses a lot of scientific advancements in this paper. Besides thinking DDT was still a great pesticide(He wrote it before they realized it was extremely harmful to humans), all of the scientific theories he discusses are absolutely correct.




Meanwhile impersonal forces over which we have almost no control seem to be pushing us all in the direction of the Brave New Worldian nightmare; and this impersonal pushing is being consciously acceler­ated by representatives of commercial and political organizations who have developed a number of new tech­niques for manipulating, in the interest of some minor­ity, the thoughts and feelings of the masses. The tech­niques of manipulation will be discussed in later chapters.


The rest of the chapter is devoted to explaining how overpopulation is a threat to democracy. He doesn't do it in a "Eugenics is good" kind of way. He does it the opposite way. He just points out how it is a threat that we can't really deal with.




On the first Christmas Day the population of our planet was about two hundred and fifty millions -- less than half the population of modern China. Sixteen cen­turies later, when the Pilgrim Fathers landed at Plym­outh Rock, human numbers had climbed to a little more than five hundred millions. By the time of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, world pop­ulation had passed the seven hundred million mark. In 1931, when I was writing Brave New World, it stood at just under two billions. Today, only twenty-seven years later, there are two billion eight hundred million of us. And tomorrow -- what?

He explains how the death rate has dropped drastically, while the birth rate stayed steady leading to this massive increase.
He predicts the population will reach 5.5 billion by the turn of the century. Pretty good prediction, he actually underestimated it.




A new age is supposed to have begun on October 4, 1957

This sentence stood out to me after having read all the stuff on this forum about the New Age starting soon. Surprise! It's already started.




The United States is not at present an over-popu­lated country. If, however, the population continues to increase at the present rate (which is higher than that of India's increase, though happily a good deal lower than the rate now current in Mexico or Guatemala), the problem of numbers in relation to available resources might well become troublesome by the begin­ning of the twenty-first century. For the moment over­population is not a direct threat to the personal free­dom of Americans. It remains, however, an indirect threat, a menace at one remove.

If over-population should drive the underdeveloped countries into totali­tarianism, and if these new dictatorships should ally themselves with Russia, then the military position of the United States would become less secure and the preparations for defense and retaliation would have to be intensified. But liberty, as we all know, cannot flour­ish in a country that is permanently on a war footing, or even a near-war footing. Permanent crisis justifies permanent control of everybody and everything by the agencies of the central government. And permanent crisis is what we have to expect in a world in which over-population is producing a state of things, in which dictatorship under Communist auspices becomes almost inevitable.

Words of prophecy right there. Especially the second paragraph.


II. Quantitiy, Quality, Morality.



In this second half of the twentieth century we do nothing systematic about our breeding; but in our random and unregulated way we are not only over-populating our planet, we are also, it would seem, mak­ing sure that these greater numbers shall be of biologically poorer quality.

If you've read "A Brave New World" you know that babies are grown in test tubes. He says that in the real world this won't happen.




"Un­der conditions that are both soft and unregulated," writes Dr. W. H. Sheldon, "our best stock tends to be outbred by stock that is inferior to it in every respect. . . . It is the fashion in some academic circles to assure students that the alarm over differential birth­rates is unfounded; that these problems are merely economic, or merely educational, or merely religious, or merely cultural or something of the sort. This is Pollyanna optimism. Reproductive delinquency is biologi­cal and basic." And he adds that "nobody knows just how far the average IQ in this country [the U.S.A.] has declined since 1916, when Terman attempted to standardize the meaning of IQ 100."




edit on 16-11-2011 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 15 2011 @ 11:33 PM
link   


And now let us consider the case of the rich, industrialized and democratic society, in which, owing to the random but effective practice of dysgenics, IQ's and physical vigor are on the decline. For how long can such a society maintain its traditions of individual liberty and democratic government? Fifty or a hundred years from now our children will learn the answer to this question. Meanwhile we find ourselves confronted by a most disturbing moral problem. We know that the pursuit of good ends does not justify the employment of bad means. But what about those situations, now of such frequent occurrence, in which good means have end results which turn out to be bad? For example, we go to a tropical island and with the aid of DDT we stamp out malaria and, in two or three years, save hundreds of thousands of lives. This is obviously good. But the hundreds of thousands of hu­man beings thus saved, and the millions whom they beget and bring to birth, cannot be adequately clothed, housed, educated or even fed out of the island's availa­ble resources. Quick death by malaria has been abol­ished; but life made miserable by undernourishment and over-crowding is now the rule, and slow death by outright starvation threatens ever greater numbers.


III. Over-Organization



The shortest and broadest road to the nightmare of Brave New World leads, as I have pointed out, through over-population and the accelerating increase of human numbers -- twenty-eight hundred millions to­day, fifty-five hundred millions by the turn of the cen­tury, with most of humanity facing the choice between anarchy and totalitarian control. But the increasing pressure of numbers upon available resources is not the only force propelling us in the direction of totali­tarianism. This blind biological enemy of freedom is allied with immensely powerful forces generated by the very advances in technology of which we are most proud.


He goes on to explain how freedom is threatened by this ever increasing over-organization.

And then,



more and more economic power comes to be wielded by fewer and fewer people. Under a dic­tatorship the Big Business, made possible by advanc­ing technology and the consequent ruin of Little Busi­ness, is controlled by the State -- that is to say, by a small group of party leaders and the soldiers, police­men and civil servants who carry out their orders. In a capitalist democracy, such as the United States, it is controlled by what Professor C. Wright Mills has called the Power Elite. This Power Elite directly employs several millions of the country's working force in its factories, offices and stores, controls many millions more by lending them the money to buy its products, and, through its ownership of the media of mass communication, influences the thoughts, the feel­ings and the actions of virtually everybody. To parody the words of Winston Churchill, never have so many been manipulated so much by so few.

Is he talking about today, or 1958?




We see, then, that modern technology has led to the concentration of economic and political power, and to the development of a society controlled (ruthlessly in the totalitarian states, politely and inconspicuously in the democracies) by Big Business and Big Govern­ment. But societies are composed of individuals and are good only insofar as they help individuals to real­ize their potentialities and to lead a happy and creative life.





The really hopeless victims of mental illness are to be found among those who appear to be most normal. "Many of them are normal because they are so well adjusted to our mode of existence, because their human voice has been si­lenced so early in their lives, that they do not even struggle or suffer or develop symptoms as the neurotic does." They are normal not in what may be called the absolute sense of the word; they are normal only in relation to a profoundly abnormal society. Their per­fect adjustment to that abnormal society is a measure of their mental sickness. These millions of abnormally normal people, living without fuss in a society to which, if they were fully human beings, they ought not to be adjusted, still cherish "the illusion of indi­viduality," but in fact they have been to a great extent deindividualized.

This is where that quote "It's no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society" comes from. That quote can be found in "Zeitgeist."

He goes on to explain how Organization is good, but over-organization is extremely dangerous to individual freedom.
This section ends with,



The impersonal forces of over-population and over-organization, and the social engineers who are trying to direct these forces, are pushing us in the direction of a new medieval system. This revival will be made more acceptable than the original by such Brave-New-Worldian amenities as infant conditioning, sleep-teaching and drug-induced euphoria; but, for the majority of men and women, it will still be a kind of servitude.


IV. Propaganda in a Democratic Society
In this section he explains methods of propaganda that were known at the time. You will find nearly all of them in effect today.



There are two kinds of propaganda -- rational propa­ganda in favor of action that is consonant with the enlightened self-interest of those who make it and those to whom it is addressed, and non-rational propa­ganda that is not consonant with anybody's enlight­ened self-interest, but is dictated by, and appeals to, passion.

It's this second kind of propaganda that is ever so common today.
This is a chapter that I especially urge you to read. It's complex and I can't even begin to summarize everything. But there are a few great quotes, two from Thomas Jefferson, that I want to quote.




"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free," said Jefferson, "it expects what never was and never will be. . . . The people cannot be safe without information. Where the press is free, and every man able to read, all is safe."





"Nothing," he declared, "can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper." And yet, he insisted (and we can only agree with him), "within the pale of truth, the press is a noble institution, equally the friend of science and civil liberty."





In the totalitarian East there is political censorship, and the media of mass communication are controlled by the State. In the democratic West there is economic censorship and the media of mass communication are controlled by members of the Power Elite. Censorship by rising costs and the concentration of communication power in the hands of a few big concerns is less objectionable than State ownership and government propaganda; but certainly it is not something of which a Jeffersonian democrat could possibly approve. In regard to propaganda the early advocates of uni­versal literacy and a free press envisaged only two possibilities: the propaganda might be true, or it might be false. They did not foresee what in fact has happened, above all in our Western capitalist democra­cies -- the development of a vast mass communications industry, concerned in the main neither with the true nor the false, but with the unreal, the more or less totally irrelevant. In a word, they failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions.

This is probably the most important quote in the whole essay.

V. Propaganda under a Dictatorship
He describes how Hitler used Propaganda to control the masses.
It mostly deals with group think, and how it is easy to manipulate people when they are in groups.

VI. The Arts of Selling
How propaganda is used to sell goods.

He explains everything you'd ever want to know about how corporations sell you goods that you don't need.
One example:


To most people music is intrinsically attractive. Moreover, melodies tend to ingrain themselves in the listener's mind. A tune will haunt the memory during the whole of a lifetime. Here, for example, is a quite uninterest­ing statement or value judgment. As it stands nobody will pay attention to it. But now set the words to a catchy and easily remembered tune. Immediately they become words of power. Moreover, the words will tend automatically to repeat themselves every time the mel­ody is heard or spontaneously remembered. Orpheus has entered into an alliance with Pavlov -- the power of sound with the conditioned reflex.





Children, as might be expected, are highly suscepti­ble to propaganda. They are ignorant of the world and its ways, and therefore completely unsuspecting. Their critical faculties are undeveloped. The youngest of them have not yet reached the age of reason and the older ones lack the experience on which their new-found rationality can effectively work. In Europe, con­scripts used to be playfully referred to as "cannon fodder." Their little brothers and sisters have now be­come radio fodder and television fodder. In my child­hood we were taught to sing nursery rhymes and, in pious households, hymns. Today the little ones warble the Singing Commercials. Which is better -- "Rheingold is my beer, the dry beer," or "Hey diddle-diddle, the cat and the fiddle"?




edit on 16-11-2011 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2011 @ 11:33 PM
link   
VII. Brainwashing
There's a lot in this section about Pavlov and conditioned responses, and more importantly how they are being used on us.



Pavlov's findings were confirmed in the most dis­tressing manner, and on a very large scale, during the two World Wars. As the result of a single catastrophic experience, or of a succession of terrors less appalling but frequently repeated, soldiers develop a number of disabling psychophysical symptoms. Temporary unconsciousness, extreme agitation, lethargy, functional blindness or paralysis, completely unrealistic responses to the challenge of events, strange reversals of lifelong patterns of behavior -- all the symptoms, which Pavlov observed in his dogs, reappeared among the victims of what in the First World War was called "shell shock," in the Second, "battle fatigue." Every man, like every dog, has his own individual limit of endurance.





Most men reach their limit after about thirty days of more or less continuous stress under the conditions of mod­ern combat. The more than averagely susceptible suc­cumb in only fifteen days. The more than averagely tough can resist for forty-five or even fifty days. Strong or weak, in the long run all of them break down. All, that is to say, of those who are initially sane. For, ironically enough, the only people who can hold up indefinitely under the stress of modern war are psychotics. Individual insanity is immune to the consequences of collective insanity.

TPTB, in an attempt to improve their influence, actually researched how to do this on non-combatant humans. They learned how to push people to the brink in order to manipulate their minds effortlessly.




Psychological stresses can be produced in many ways. Dogs become disturbed when stimuli are unu­sually strong; when the interval between a stimulus and the customary response is unduly prolonged and the animal is left in a state of suspense; when the brain is confused by stimuli that run counter to what the dog has learned to expect; when stimuli make no sense within the victim's established frame of ref­erence. Furthermore, it has been found that the de­liberate induction of fear, rage or anxiety markedly heightens the dog's suggestibility. If these emotions are kept at a high pitch of intensity for a long enough time, the brain goes "on strike." When this happens, new behavior patterns may be installed with the great­est of ease.

Every wondered why there's so much fear mongering being done on the media? It's to break us down, and make us easily manipulated. This was known back in the 1950s.




Conditioned from earliest infancy (and perhaps also biologically predestined), the average middle- or lower-caste indi­vidual will never require conversion or even a re­fresher course in the true faith. The members of the highest caste will have to be able to think new thoughts in response to new situations; consequently their training will be much less rigid than the train­ing imposed upon those whose business is not to rea­son why, but merely to do and die with the minimum of fuss. These upper-caste individuals will be mem­bers, still, of a wild species -- the trainers and guard­ians, themselves only slightly conditioned, of a breed of completely domesticated animals. Their wildness will make it possible for them to become heretical and rebellious. When this happens, they will have to be either liquidated, or brainwashed back into orthodoxy, or (as in Brave New World) exiled to some island, where they can give no further trouble, except of course to one another. But universal infant condition­ing and the other techniques of manipulation and con­trol are still a few generations away in the future. On the road to the Brave New World our rulers will have to rely on the transitional and provisional techniques of brainwashing.

What did that lady say about the Skull and Bones society again?

VIII. Chemical Persuasion
He discusses how drugs can be used to keep the population in check. This is a really fascinating chapter. It mentions that at the time 1 million Japanese people were addicted to amphetamine.
It discusses how even back then, anti-depressants were being given out like hot-cakes, but not nearly to the extent of today.
This chapter is borderline against the TOS, so I'll just let you read it for yourself. It does NOT advocate drug use, btw.

IX. Subconscious Persuasion
He explains their current understanding of subliminal messaging. It's a little more complicated than just flashing some words on a screen; the words have to be associated with a good emotional stimulus to be effective. They knew this back in 1958, I'm sure their methods are even better today.

X. Hypnopaedia(Sleep persuasion)
There's some interesting facts in this chapter, but this chapter is probably the least important.
Example of said facts:



Meanwhile the fact remains that in the American Army during the Second World War (and even, experi­mentally, during the First) daytime instruction in the Morse Code and in foreign languages was supple­mented by instruction during sleep -- apparently with satisfactory results.


Basically, Hypnopaedia and hypnosis actually work, but they aren't very effective for widespread use.


















edit on 16-11-2011 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-11-2011 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 12:07 AM
link   
Finally, Huxley offers some solutions.
And in case you haven't realized by now, no one has listened to him. Except maybe to further exacerbate these problems.

XI. Education for Freedom
(These last two chapters are going to be difficult to summarize, I fear my words will never do his justice, nor summarizing any of it will give his entire message justice.)



Education for freedom must begin by stating facts and enunciating values, and must go on to develop appropriate techniques for realizing the values and for combating those who, for whatever reason, choose to ignore the facts or deny the values.





All the available evidence points to the conclusion that in the life of individuals and societies heredity is no less significant than culture. Every individual is biologically unique and unlike all other individuals. Freedom is therefore a great good, tolerance a great virtue and regimentation a great misfortune. For prac­tical or theoretical reasons, dictators, organization men and certain scientists are anxious to reduce the maddening diversity of men's natures to some kind of manageable uniformity.


Huxley is a strong supporter of freedom, and he regognizes there is a very real threat to freedom. That was in 1958. I fear it may already be too late...
Everything he wrote about in 1958, over-population, over-organization, the two biggest things which threatened freedom, have occurred at an even more outlandish pace. In my opinion, it has been intentionally progressed by a conspiracy involving Big Business and Big Government.




Such an education for freedom should be, as I have said, an education first of all in facts and in values -- the fact of individual diversity and genetic unique­ness and the values of freedom, tolerance and mutual charity which are the ethical corollaries of these facts. But unfortunately correct knowledge and sound princi­ples are not enough. An unexciting truth may be eclipsed by a thrilling falsehood. A skilful appeal to passion is often too strong for the best of good resolu­tions. The effects of false and pernicious propaganda cannot be neutralized except by a thorough training in the art of analyzing its techniques and seeing through its sophistries


Yes, he suggests that we need to be taught how to analyze propaganda. There was actually a society in 1939 that suggested this, and even developed a curriculum, but after the war started in 1941, that was pushed to the back burner indefinitely.



In their anti-rational propaganda the enemies of freedom systematically pervert the resources of lang­uage in order to wheedle or stampede their victims into thinking, feeling and acting as they, the mind-manipulators, want them to think, feel and act. An education for freedom (and for the love and intelli­gence which are at once the conditions and the results of freedom) must be, among other things, an educa­tion in the proper uses of language. For the last two or three generations philosophers have devoted a great deal of time and thought to the analysis of symbols and the meaning of meaning. How are the words and sentences which we speak related to the things, per­sons and events, with which we have to deal in our day-to-day living? To discuss this problem would take too long and lead us too far afield. Suffice it to say that all the intellectual materials for a sound education in the proper use of language -- an education on every level from the kindergarten to the postgraduate school -- are now available.


XII. What Can be Done?



We can be educated for freedom -- much better edu­cated for it than we are at present. But freedom, as I have tried to show, is threatened from many directions, and these threats are of many different kinds -- demographic, social, political, psychological. Our disease has a multiplicity of cooperating causes and is not to be cured except by a multiplicity of co­operating remedies. In coping with any complex hu­man situation, we must take account of all the rele­vant factors, not merely of a single factor. Nothing short of everything is ever really enough. Freedom is menaced, and education for freedom is urgently needed. But so are many other things -- for example, social organization for freedom, birth control for free­dom, legislation for freedom. Let us begin with the last of these items.


He goes on to explain how habeus corpus was a legislation for freedom of body, but there can't really ever be a habeus mentem, "for no sheriff or jailer can bring an illegally imprisoned mind into court."
He offers some solutions to prevent minds from being controlled, not a one has ever been implemented.




No, I repeat, there can never be such a thing as a writ of habeas mentem. But there can be preventive legislation -- an outlawing of the psychological slave trade, a statute for the protection of minds against the unscrupulous purveyors of poisonous propaganda, modeled on the statutes for the protection of bodies against the unscrupulous purveyors of adulterated food and dangerous drugs. For example, there could and, I think, there should be legislation limiting the right of public officials, civil or military, to subject the captive audiences under their command or in their cus­tody to sleep-teaching. There could and, I think, there should be legislation prohibiting the use of subliminal projection in public places or on television screens. There could and, I think, there should be legislation to prevent political candidates not merely from spending more than a certain amount of money on their election campaigns, but also to prevent them from resorting to the kind of anti-rational propaganda that makes non­sense of the whole democratic process.

The exact opposite has happened with his suggestions for legislation restricting politicians from doing this. Now they have unlimited funds, and say the most anti-rational propaganda they can think of, that does indeed make a mockery of our democratic process.




Under the relentless thrust of accelerating over­population and increasing over-organization, and by means of ever more effective methods of mind-manip­ulation, the democracies will change their nature; the quaint old forms -- elections, parliaments, Supreme Courts and all the rest -- will remain. The underlying substance will be a new kind of non-violent totalitari­anism. All the traditional names, all the hallowed slo­gans will remain exactly what they were in the good old days. Democracy and freedom will be the theme of every broadcast and editorial -- but democracy and free­dom in a strictly Pickwickian sense. Meanwhile the ruling oligarchy and its highly trained elite of sol­diers, policemen, thought-manufacturers and mind-manipulators will quietly run the show as they see fit.

Prophecy much?





To find a solution to the problem of over-organiza­tion is hardly less difficult than to find a solution to the problem of natural resources and increasing num­bers. On the verbal level and in general terms the an­swer is perfectly simple. Thus, it is a political axiom that power follows property. But it is now a historical fact that the means of production are fast becoming the monopolistic property of Big Business and Big Government. Therefore, if you believe in democracy, make arrangements to distribute property as widely as possible. Or take the right to vote. In principle, it is a great privilege. In practice, as recent history has repeatedly shown, the right to vote, by itself, is no guarantee of liberty. Therefore, if you wish to avoid dictatorship by referendum, break up modern society's merely func­tional collectives into self-governing, voluntarily cooperating groups, capable of functioning outside the bureaucratic systems of Big Business and Big Govern­ment. Over-population and over-organization have pro­duced the modern metropolis, in which a fully human life of multiple personal relationships has become almost impossible. Therefore, if you wish to avoid the spiritual impoverishment of individuals and whole societies, leave the metropolis and revive the small country community, or alternately humanize the me­tropolis by creating within its network of mechanical organization the urban equivalents of small country communities, in which individuals can meet and co­operate as complete persons, not as the mere embodi­ments of specialized functions.


yes, one of the solutions is to distribute property. Of course, "distribution of property" is a swear word these days. It's because TPTB know it's one of the few ways to stop them.




"In the end," says the Grand Inquisitor in Dostoevsky's parable, "in the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, 'make us your slaves, but feed us.' " And when Alyosha Karamazov asks his brother, the teller of the story, if the Grand Inquisitor is speaking ironically, Ivan answers, "Not a bit of it! He claims it as a merit for himself and his Church that they have vanquished freedom and done so to make men happy." Yes, to make men happy; "for nothing," the Inquisitor insists, "has ever been more insupportable for a man or a human society than freedom." Nothing, except the absence of free­dom; for when things go badly, and the rations are reduced, the grounded dodos will clamor again for their wings -- only to renounce them, yet once more, when times grow better and the dodo-farmers become more lenient and generous. The young people who now think so poorly of democracy may grow up to become fighters for freedom. The cry of "Give me television and hamburgers, but don't bother me with the re­sponsibilities of liberty," may give place, under altered circumstances, to the cry of "Give me liberty or give me death." If such a revolution takes place, it will be due in part to the operation of forces over which even the most powerful rulers have very little control, in part to the incompetence of those rulers, their inability to make effective use of the mind-manipulating instru­ments with which science and technology have sup­plied, and will go on supplying, the would-be tyrant. Considering how little they knew and how poorly they were equipped, the Grand Inquisitors of earlier times did remarkably well. But their successors, the well-in­formed, thoroughly scientific dictators of the future will undoubtedly be able to do a great deal better.

edit on 16-11-2011 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 

Huxley had access to insiders and I am sure was well aware of what was going on.

He started taking '___' in 1955, not long after it was made available to psychiatrists and significantly before the CIA took it to the streets.



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   
No one else has any comments on this?
There's so many topics to discuss with this.



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost375
No one else has any comments on this?
There's so many topics to discuss with this.


Four full pages are intimidating.



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost375
No one else has any comments on this?
There's so many topics to discuss with this.


This doesn't have anything to do with how much info you've presented. It has more to do with how accurate you are and how much the real message of Huxley has been twisted. Charles Darwin was greatly misunderstood too, and now we have "evolutionism" as the foundation science in both the public and private school systems.

I generally have found that the more important postings on this site get crowded out by the tabloids. Maybe when the Occupiers are shifted from the jails into FEMA camps, you'll have more real estate here. By then the provocateurs should have another assignment.

By the way, much of the exerts you've mentioned have been regurgitated by many of your main stream provocateurs that are really making bank on this. It's no different than getting rich on a crashing economy by reversing your position.

You'll recognize the message. A Brave New World is a "window into hell" as it were. A person is to be frightened into submission or encouraged to join their ranks. The malcontent never make good slaves. All the bread crumbs you leave will one day be tracked back to you - unless you've been paid to leave them there. In which case, carry on.



edit on 16-11-2011 by CodeRed3D because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 


I have always found this book to be fascinating on many levels. I have encouraged, and lent my original
Hardcover out to many readers. This book along with 1984,Animal Farm,The Catcher in the Rye,Siddhartha,
The Sea Wolf, and more, were REQUIRED reading when I was in Middle School/High School. I am amazed at how many
young people in that age group today have not even heard of these books. Even College level students in
some instances.

Ignorance is Bliss my "Alpha" friend. I know I havent addressed your angle on this subject, so please
forgive my fleeting reply. I must say however that this book is so conducive to Point/Counterpoint
discussion as well as its relativity to Society today and in the near future that I would rather accept the
tome "As Is". Truly a Classic. Great Topic, S&F to you and your efforts.



posted on Nov, 16 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Thanks for the link it was an interesting read. My only grumble is this: Though it may seem one is cornered with not a moment of clarity highlighting opportunity, if one looks to the universe it demonstrates for every lock there is a key, for every knot there is a sword.

I ponder the day of reckoning when those who have paid the price of generations to those who kept them from illumination is upon us, each day it seems closer, and yet the memories are but embers still awaiting stoking.



posted on Nov, 17 2011 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Fools.

Huxley (and his family) are one-world-government Luciferians.

They are enabling the freak show that is coming (WW III very soon, followed by one-world religion).

What is described in BNW and BNW Revisited are simply the "utopia" that these freaks are bringing in. See: first "commandment" of the Georgia Guidestones.

There is only one way out..... repent and follow Jesus Christ of Nazareth. That is it.

Life is not a playground. It's a battleground...against the forces of evil.

Pick up your free word of God (the King James Cambridge Edition) here:

www.bibleprotector.com...

Do it now. Today may be your last day.



posted on Nov, 17 2011 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by DissentFromDayOne
Fools.

Huxley (and his family) are one-world-government Luciferians.

They are enabling the freak show that is coming (WW III very soon, followed by one-world religion).

What is described in BNW and BNW Revisited are simply the "utopia" that these freaks are bringing in. See: first "commandment" of the Georgia Guidestones.

There is only one way out..... repent and follow Jesus Christ of Nazareth. That is it.

Life is not a playground. It's a battleground...against the forces of evil.

Pick up your free word of God (the King James Cambridge Edition) here:

www.bibleprotector.com...

Do it now. Today may be your last day.

Wow. Just wow.
I don't even know where to begin with this.
You clearly didn't read what I wrote or what he wrote; you probably just read the word "over-population" and bugged out.
You're just spouting some nonsense propaganda you no doubt read somewhere.




What is described in BNW and BNW Revisited are simply the "utopia" that these freaks are bringing in. See: first "commandment" of the Georgia Guidestones.

wtf, Huxley was warning us about this "utopia." He doesn't support the things laid out in BNW or revisited. He was warning us about them! How are you going to call the man who laid out TPTB plans(in an attempt to warn us of their plans), a luciferian and a freak?




Life is not a playground. It's a battleground...against the forces of evil.

Yeah, and this essay is a huge tool in the fight against evil. If you'd bother to read it. It would help you to protect yourself against propaganda, and many other things going on today. And you need this protection most of all.


You know how I know for a fact you are just spouting off anti-rational propaganda that you read somwhere?

Because you said "Huxley (and his family) are one-world-government Luciferians."
You no doubt read this somewhere on the internet, and not the actual source. If you'd bother to read Huxley's works, you'd find that he does support a one-world government. But his reasons for this are outstanding. A one-world government is necessary. I'm not going to argue why it is so, but it is. Read "The Human Situation" if you want to know why.
But he would have no doubt been opposed to how it's being done today. He would easily be against TPTB today. Because he wasn't a luciferian, and he was opposed to what they were doing, even back then. TPTB kept doing what he was opposed to. He'd be outrage by what's going on today.

Please tell me where you read that Huxley and his family are one-world-government luciferians? Because that website is no doubtedly run by TPTB and it's pure propaganda against the writings of the one man that can actually put a dent in their plans.

Do you know what would happen if people could recognize propaganda, as Huxley teaches in A Brave New World revisitied? Their control would fall apart.



posted on Nov, 17 2011 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by DissentFromDayOne
 


I think you misread something....his family may indeed have been insiders with TPTB...but everything I just read clearly states that Aldous Huxley wasn't evil. Read your sources again. His family might've been, but not him.

I really had no clue he was such an insider. It increases the importance of this essay even more. Please read his essay.

I found a source for Huxley's family being insiders.

not bad

wow, this site isn't bad. It talks about some things that I know are true(verifiable facts learned in college), that the vast majority of people don't know.

E.G. Darwin wasn't the only person who thought of evolution. There was this guy named Alfred Wallace who also thought of it. Wallace actually sent his paper to Darwin to ask him for advice on it(Yes, Darwin was famous before his theory of evolution)...hehe funny story. Darwin was nice and agreed that they both present their theories at the same conference.

The site also says that "Aldous Huxley wasn't that evil."

Ugh, I hope I don't get merc'd.


edit on 17-11-2011 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-11-2011 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2019 @ 04:04 AM
link   
Although that is a totally strong message that Huxley conveys, there is one this is a whole lot stronger. John’s struggles are lots extra because he is an awful lot special from the relaxation of society. More information about this essay you can read on studymoose.



posted on Mar, 13 2019 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Wildmanimal

Globally, education curricula has changed. Teachers are no longer permitted to teach, they have become mere instructors, pushing pupils/students to meet performance criteria and learners are not taught or encouraged to think.

In addition, Nazi Brown Shirt policies have shown control freak governments all over the world how easy it is to exploit natural rebellion in youth toward limiting parental influence and making it far harder for many parents to provide balance so their child can achieve true autonomy.



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 03:56 AM
link   
a reply to: teapot

It is all "Changed" now.
We have hit them in the wallet.

We have made a difference.
Now the "Educational Indoctrinators"
will have to put their money where their
mouth is.

Watch how quickly they react to
any expense of their own money.



posted on Oct, 25 2019 @ 07:07 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 25 2019 @ 06:03 PM
link   
CodeRed3D:

A person is to be frightened into submission or encouraged to join their ranks.


I agree. The fear-mongering is merely to have one prick up one's ears, in order to open up the subliminal channels whereby one is indeed encouraged to join ranks, or in the least give compliance directly or indirectly through non-action on the behalf of others, and/or non-protest.


The young people who now think so poorly of democracy may grow up to become fighters for freedom.


Never a more truer statement. Democracy is not (in itself) freedom, but a political process practised by a society in which its people, with a modicum of individual freedom, may participate. In theory, democracy can bring about its own end when its participants vote, perhaps through a misguided or misinformed rationale, for benign tyranny which will always (without exception) lead to a totalitarian state. In this somewhat ironic way, the participants aid in closing down their own individual freedoms. A perfect example of such participants are the 'remainers' in the Brexit debacle here in Britain.

It amazes me how our American cousins across the pond have always shouted the loudest about freedom, but are the laziest to come to its (their) defence. They don't mind their big government and big businesses shutting down the freedoms of individuals in other countries, but as long as their big government and big businesses maintain the illusion that they live in a 'free' country, most Americans are happy to go along with it, even as their freedoms have been closed down and diluted, because the illusion of having freedom is sweeter than the reality of the responsibility that comes with having freedom. Real freedom means compromise and self-censorship and cooperation and correct moral and ethical thinking, areas in which Americans have always generally lacked.

So, be under no illusion, the developed western nations are being synchronistically steered towards firstly a benign tyranny through an analogous twisted idea of Huxley's Brave New World, but ultimately, it will become an over-arching totalitarian state, which is the real goal. To be honest, I can see no way in which it can be stopped without destroying the whole edifice around ourselves. That is how great the reset we need to make, and who knows, maybe our species has already reset itself a few times in the past?



new topics

top topics



 
20

log in

join