Digital TV: Mind Control by the Sound of Silence

[Al Today]

Yes, I agree that television does have the ability to provide educational information and healthy entertainment. The issue I have had for most of my adult life is television's potential to hypnotize and alter ones mindset. In light of all the issues of how television can be misused, I do think there is a negating value in that Knowledge Protects. As referenced below, I think we are stuck with the old saying that we must live in this world, but with knowledge and action we can attempt to not be of this world. What I mean is that we have to survive here with the ability to "see" what is possibly going on here. More knowledge acquired hopefully lends to a greater ability to react to situations and choose your path. What I think bothers me most of all is that if the PTB, whomever/whatever it/they is/are, targets me, they could probably destroy my capacity to think freely (forget) as I would "hopefully" choose to. I only hope that if that does happen, my previous choice is not wiped out.

I do not want to hijack this thread but I've looked and need to ask: has anyone seen a discussion of how one would "know" what one's true/real inner choice really is anyway? What if one is truly STS oriented and in Doing this Work and attempting to apply what one can, is merely a nudge in the direction of STO. Upsets me to come back here and start all over from scratch, ignorant and easier prey...

 

[PepperFritz]

What I think bothers me most of all is that if the PTB, whomever/whatever it/they is/are, targets me, they could probably destroy my capacity to think freely (forget) as I would "hopefully" choose to. I only hope that if that does happen, my previous choice is not wiped out....

It seems to me that you are less "worried" about what the PTB are capable of doing to you than you are of your own "vulnerability" or "susceptibility" to outside influence. As we have seen in the case of Laura (and I know I've certainly experienced it in my own life), when they decide to target you, STS forces and General Law can wreak serious and considerable damage and havoc in your life, and therefore must never be underestimated. But actually "undo" the Knowledge you have gained, and change your orientation against your will? I have trouble imagining that in my own case. I mean, once you know, you know. How can someone take that away from you?

...has anyone seen a discussion of how one would "know" what one's true/real inner choice really is anyway? What if one is truly STS oriented and in Doing this Work and attempting to apply what one can, is merely a nudge in the direction of STO. Upsets me to come back here and start all over from scratch, ignorant and easier prey....

Well, first off, we have to remember that we ALL are STS-oriented, as a condition of our 3rd-density existence, and are not capable of being STO-oriented while in this density. The most we can hope to become is an "STO-candidate". That having been said, no, I don't think that there's any way to objectively "measure" to what degree one is or is not "leaning" in an STO direction.

I would venture to say that the desire to reach the "required STO level" so that one can attain a "pay-off" -- e.g. transition to 4th-density so that one does not have to "do" 3rd-density all over again -- is in itself an STS desire. To be focussed on being "STO-leaning" as a means to an end, and to be "anxious" about whether one is "ready" if and when the Wave arrives, seems counter-productive to me. Personally, I have to work on the assumption that I am nowhere NEAR being ready and probably will have to "repeat my lessons". That way, the Work needed in order to see my STS motivations and behaviour objectively, and thus begin to reduce the degree to which I am STS-oriented, becomes an end in itself. All there is is lessons, and all we can do is learn them, no matter how long it takes....

Or that's how I see it, anyway, FWIW....

 

[Mountain Crown]

[quote author=PepperFritz]I would venture to say that the desire to reach the "required STO level" so that one can attain a "pay-off" -- e.g. transition to 4th-density so that one does not have to "do" 3rd-density all over again -- is in itself an STS desire. To be focussed on being "STO-leaning" as a means to an end, and to be "anxious" about whether one is "ready" if and when the Wave arrives, seems counter-productive to me. Personally, I have to work on the assumption that I am nowhere NEAR being ready and probably will have to "repeat my lessons". That way, the Work needed in order to see my STS motivations and behaviour objectively, and thus begin to reduce the degree to which I am STS-oriented, becomes an end in itself. All there is is lessons, and all we can do is learn them, no matter how long it takes....
[/quote]

As the Cs said, to work without anticipating the results – easier said than done, to put it mildly.

 

[Al Today]

It seems to me that you are less "worried" about what the PTB are capable of doing to you than you are of your own "vulnerability" or "susceptibility" to outside influence.

Seems to me that both go hand in hand. I wouldn’t worry about the PTB abilities if I thought myself invulnerable, yes? My point was that most if not all are vulnerable. Didn’t the C’s say something to the effect that if the bad dudes wanted to control/change us, there ain’t a damn thing we can do?

[quote author=PepperFritz] But actually "undo" the Knowledge you have gained, and change your orientation against your will? I have trouble imagining that in my own case. I mean, once you know, you know. How can someone take that away from you? [/quote]

There are references to a “veil of forgetfulness” being put up in front of us sometime after birth. This perhaps may be a tool for learning lessons that I do not understand fully. Many references are to some people being in such an advanced state upon “giving up the ghost”, for example, that the veil can be broken or is thin upon the next life. or even progressing to the "next level" in the "twinkling of an eye". I do not “see” myself that advanced…

[quote author=PepperFritz] Well, first off, we have to remember that we ALL are STS-oriented, as a condition of our 3rd-density existence, and are not capable of being STO-oriented while in this density. [/quote]
Very well probable, but then again is not ALL possible?

[quote author=PepperFritz] transition to 4th-density so that one does not have to "do" 3rd-density all over again -- is in itself an STS desire. [/quote]
[quote author=Mountain Crown] As the Cs said, to work without anticipating the results – easier said than done, to put it mildly. [/quote]
Yes, I want to agree and believe but I cannot prove this to be true. This is also part and portion of STS definition. I mean my desire to continue and not to become nothingness as being recycled into a black hole is a STS desire. But what the hey, that's what I yam, so I continue to accumulate information and see where all this goes, I hope...


edited for clarity and mis-spellings...

 

[PepperFritz]

I wouldn’t worry about the PTB abilities if I thought myself invulnerable, yes? My point was that most if not all are vulnerable.

Well, you seem to be thinking in terms of either/or polarities. Either one is "vulnerable" or "invulnerable". When, in fact, there are many degrees in between, according to the degree of one's Knowledge and Awareness. Part of our lessons is to become less and less vulnerable over time... via the acquisition and application of Knowledge.... Isn't that what the C's are telling us here:

Q: ...when a person is being hypnotized and
controlled from outside... they are hypnotized and controlled
until they learn to stop it?
A: Yes.
Q: (MM) ...Don't you get more free will by assimilating
Knowledge?
A: Yes!! Yes!!
Q: (L) So, in other words, Knowledge and Awareness makes
you aware that you have free will, and also makes you aware
of what actions actually ARE acts of free will, and therefore,
when you know or suspect the difference between the lies
and deception and truth, then you are in a position to be in
control of your life?
A: Yes.

Didn’t the C’s say something to the effect that if the bad dudes wanted to control/change us, there ain’t a damn thing we can do?

I don't recall them saying that, no. Wouldn't that completely refute their teaching that "Knowledge Protects, Ignorance Endangers"?

There are references to a “veil of forgetfulness” being put up in front of us sometime after birth. This perhaps may be a tool for learning lessons that I do not understand fully....

But I was not speaking about Knowledge gained before birth. I was speaking of the Knowledge and Awareness that you have consciously gained within this lifetime, as a result of being exposed to Laura's work and the Cassiopaea material, pursuing the Work, etc. Do you honestly believe that the PTB have the ability to take that Knowledge and Awareness away from you, as though you never had it to begin with? Do you honestly believe that your current level of Knowledge and Awareness provides you with no protection whatsoever?

Very well probable, but then again is not at ALL possible?

Not according to the C's. Any idea we might have about "being STO" or becoming STO within this density is illusionary, so why pursue it? Why not aim for what is achievable -- i.e. becoming less and less and less STS-oriented over time, so that we eventually become STO-candidates....?

Yes, I want to agree and believe but I cannot prove this to be true.

Sorry, you lost me. What is it that you "cannot prove... to be true"?

 

[Al Today]

Very well probable, but then again is not at ALL possible?

[quote author=PepperFritz] Not according to the C's. [/quote]
To be perfectly honest this is a view I am having a very hard time changing, if at all, but I do think that anything is possible, just because I know so very little.

[quote author=PepperFritz] Any idea we might have about "being STO" or becoming STO within this density is illusionary, so why pursue it? Why not aim for what is achievable -- i.e. becoming less and less and less STS-oriented over time, so that we eventually become STO-candidates....? [/quote]
I do understand about being “real” in the respect of knowing I am limited on what can be done. You are correct in being “real” and not falling into the fantasy island of wishful thinking.

[quote author=PepperFritz] [quote author=Al Today]
Yes, I want to agree and believe but I cannot prove this to be true.
[/quote]

Sorry, you lost me. What is it that you "cannot prove... to be true"? [/quote]

Sometime I just get depressed that I do not “KNOW” everything that I selfishly “want” to understand. Sometimes I try to put the proverbial horse in front of the carrot, don’t know why the buggy is not moving, and my brain goes into some type of shut down. I try to not use this statement, but I do. Maybe it’s some mechanism for selfish pity or an attempt at gaining attention. Hopefully I’ll get a handle on it eventually.

Thanks Pepperfritz. It’s good to have the mirror thrown in my face. It’s like a fellow in church asking the pastor why repeat those sermons. The pastor then told the fellow the sermons are repeated because you have a tendency to forget…

 

[PepperFritz]

Within this mortal body, yes I think I could be turned into a zombie.
But deep within there is a consciousness that will remember experiences, lessons learned and lessons not learned.

Okay, these two statements are completely contradictory. One the one hand, you believe that it doesn't matter how much Knowledge and Awareness you have acquired and applied in your life -- or how much you will acquire and apply in the future -- you are completely at the mercy of STS forces who could "turn you into a zombie" at any moment. On the other hand, you believe that there is a part of you "that will remember experiences, lessons learned and lessons not learned", and therefore prevent that from happening?

It would not be a stretch to suggest that those two opposing statements probably represent the views of two warring "I"s within you, and that such conflict is draining your energy and causing you to feel "ambivalent" and "conflicted" about many aspects of your pursuit of Knowledge. I would say that there is an "I" who wishes to pursue Knowledge and Awareness, but another "I" -- perhaps a stronger and louder "I" -- who continually says "What's the point? The PTB have the ability to undo all of your efforts at any time, and you are so far from being STO that there's no way you'll ever make it to 4th-density. So why bother?"

Am I close? Would I be correct in saying that you feel these two "I"s are at something of an impasse?

To be perfectly honest this is a view I am having a very hard time changing, if at all....

This suggests to me that you "need" the motivation of KNOWING -- beyond all doubt -- that you are capable of becoming STO and making the transition to 4th density if and when the Wave arrives. And that without such certainty, there is no motivation, not enough to make you pick up your shovel day after day and pursue the Work, not knowing if it is ever going to "get" you anywhere.

Am I close? Are you finding it difficult to find the motivation? Do you have an underlying fear that the Work will all be in vain?

 

[Buddy]

Hi Al Today;

I've looked and need to ask: has anyone seen a discussion of how one would "know" what one's true/real inner choice really is anyway?

Here's how it looks to me, if I can explain it without going off the deep end.

My current understanding is that any choice of this importance would have been made consciously at some point in your history, therefore, you "know" of it at some level and it's just a matter of uncovering it yourself.

Do you remember your first cigarette? Can you compare/contrast that experience with the last time you smoked?
The first time, you probably had to make a conscious decision (a choice) to implement the necessary steps. As you smoked, you were probably aware of every second of the experience (more or less) until you stubbed out the 'butt'. You had to 'choose' every moment of the time, to deliberately continue the action until 'done'. At that point you created a self-contained behavior cycle that can be repeated as desired.
Now, to me, that cycle of behavior (smoking a cigarette) is a behavior pattern. As a pattern, it is a particular vibration of energy. The vibration consists of nothing more than the moment of decision linked to the subsequent 'intent' to perform the action, which is then followed by the actions necessary to manifest the intent (the behavior). This second-by-second [combination of choice & movement, choice & movement, choice & movement - until done...] scenario can be repeated until, over time, it can become an unconscious habit to the extent that today, you can light one up without thinking much about it.

Thinking backwards, it looks like the way to find an answer to your question would simply be to start with observing the patterns of your overall behavior, looking for clues based on what behavior you think would be associated with a particular choice. And this all assumes you are referring to some covert choice to be "bad" or some such.

Otherwise, as PepperFritz pointed out, we're all STS anyway. The best we can do right now, is to work towards STO orientation.

To wind it up, that is how I look at the issue with regard to "true/real inner choice". Otherwise I don't think it matters. One can make a choice 'now'! and if that choice conflicts with an earlier contradictory choice, you will know from the inner friction and that can be a source of "heat for the crucible".

I think if we choose 'now' and 2 seconds from now and so on, to do the Work, do the Work, do the Work, maybe one day we can 'look back' and ask, "what was so hard about that? It was just lessons, and I had some fun learning".

--fwiw

 

[Woodsman]

Hello all!

Great discussion here. TV plays such an enormous role in Western civilization, that speaking about how it affects us in an honest manner is difficult to do without people feeling defensive and 'fighty'. I know that I have spent thousands of hours in front of the tube; it has been without question, my favorite drug. --And just calling it a drug took a lot of honest appraisal and even now invokes an emotional 'fight' response deep within. The thing is, it's not so black & white; as has been pointed out, television also has its benefits.

When I learned of the, "Knowledge Protects" idea, and I began to nourish without guilt the "Fun" aspect of learning, TV and media in general seated itself in with the top handful of subjects on my list of, "Things to Learn About!" Knowledge only protects when you have it. --Some of the stuff I have learned about how media and awareness work and of the various forces in play wrt them, have been on their own kind of pointless and even distracting. (I think I might have a mild form of one or more of those conditions the medical/industrial community has been so eager to classify as 'diseases' or 'disorders' for which it sells billions of dollars worth of narcotics. ADD, Manic/Depressive, etc.) But I've learned to trust in the collection of knowledge, and I've been learning how to balance it with the rest of my life. --This forum, though nobody has really said anything directly, has been a huge learning opportunity for me in the sense of balance. --I have had to work in order to keep my focus trained so that I don't just splurge out too much stuff in poorly chosen directions, and while I have not been entirely successful, just knowing that there are smart, aware people reading here, whose time and energies I don't want to waste has been a BIG help.

One of the things I've had to get used to here is that nobody fights me! All over the web, just putting forth a small idea I am excited about requires that I spend the better part of my energy trying to avoid or survive open combat. (Which has also had its uses. The bearpits of the web constantly force one to face their darker parts and choose whether to act on them or not. But that's a whole other discussion). When encountering a community which is curious, encouraging and excited about learning, I have found that the hose of my thinking was suddenly unblocked and sprayed rather ungracefully. I'd like to thank everybody for putting up with me thus far while I learn to mange the various pressures.

Anyway. . .

Speaking of focus, I left a couple of previous items concerning the technical aspects of different kinds of video monitor incomplete, so I'll hit 'Post' on this, and then address those points in my next comment. . .

Cheers!

 

[Buddy]

Hi Woodsman;

Your enthusiasm is palpable! Great job on the research.

...speaking about how it affects us in an honest manner is difficult to do without people feeling defensive and 'fighty'.

Your point here is understood, however, possibly a bit subjective as what appears to one person as "defensive and 'fighty'" may simply be the common struggle of a sincere seeker to learn without hiding or censoring their expression so they can receive the most beneficial feedback...or so I think.

The thing is, it's not so black & white; as has been pointed out, television also has its benefits.

That's the way I see it too. It appears to me that the most significant issue is one's purpose for viewing.


[quote author=Woodsman]
Knowledge only protects when you have it.
[/quote]

...and apply it, right? Even if the application is nothing more than to one's own behavior. Kinda like the formula: awareness + application = knowledge.
Static [1] knowledge would be useless by definition, I think. :)



-----------------------
[1]
Static:
–adjective
1. pertaining to or characterized by a fixed or stationary condition.
2. showing little or no change: a static concept; a static relationship.
3. lacking movement, development, or vitality
Source: _http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Static

 

[Woodsman]

--Which suggests as I had more or less surmised by this point, subliminal audio and "Sound of Silence" are not perhaps as significant as the original posts made them out to be while the old system of "opening and then bombarding" people remains in force. I find it interesting LCD flat screens, with their much higher frequency CCFL light sources which effectively for the optic nerve do not strobe, were bypassed altogether by the whole "living room entertainment center" market.

EDIT*****************

I just got a brain flash. This is really interesting. Please disregard the last sentence above; I just worked out an essential element of LCD flat-screen monitors and how they might in fact strobe sometimes in a very specific way so that they strobe when playing videos but not while reading text. Let me research this a bit. I'll check in when I've thought through it fully. . .

The 'brain flash' I had was this. . .

I have suggested that the LCD flat-screen type of monitor common to many computer systems today does not contain a light source which 'strobes' in the manner which might cause a 'hypnotic openness' in the viewer because, as I am currently thinking, it strobes at such a high frequency, (in the mid to high kilohertz range), that it might indeed register as steady light. However, it struck me that a video played on that same screen might by virtue of the inherent nature of how the illusion of motion is created via animation, might still have a hypnotic effect.

When I look at the settings for the LCD flat-screen I'm currently looking at when I write this, I see that it's refresh rate is 60 Hz. --That is, the computer sends updated video information to the screen 60 times per second. This is also referred to as the 'Frame Rate'.

Now the nice thing about an LCD monitor is that a given pixel, if it is called to remain, say, white for a whole second, (meaning that the liquid crystal 'window' which makes up the pixel is completely open, allowing light from the CCFL set behind the screen to shine through), does not mean that pixel turns on and off 60 times during that second. (As would be the case with an old CRT monitor). Rather, it persists in one state until called to change. The 60 Hz refresh rate means that the computer is simply capable of sending new commands to that pixel 60 times per second. Which means that a page of text on a computer isn't strobing at all. Thus one can logically conclude that with no strobe effect, the screen cannot hypnotize the viewer in the manner under discussion.

However. . .

If one is watching a video on the same screen, then the image does indeed strobe, and it may do so at the exact cycle rate as an old-style CRT monitor. (Video, depending on its type, animates at between 24 and 60 frames per second.) --Of course, this is a very different kind of strobing. I do not know exactly how one would measure for a hypnotic effect, or even if there is one, but I can can say from the soft and hard-to-quantify 'science' of simply trying to gauge my own experiences, that I have certainly noticed when I watch videos on my computer that many of the same symptoms of 'addiction' I note in myself with regular television are in evidence, although not nearly as significantly as with a regular television.

That was the content of my little brain flash. I haven't been able to verify anything hard regarding this idea yet. I spent a day wondering whether it was even worth mentioning; the simple notion that the basic concept of animation might by its very nature have a mesmerizing quality seemed rather too alarmist to contemplate seriously. But I decided that everybody here is wise enough to take all ideas with plenty of salt and to do what they will with them. In any case, it struck me as well-worth considering.

Quote from Woodsman

The Frequency / refresh rate is the number of times a TV picture is updated each second. Most traditional TVs have a rate of 50Hz which some people may notice flickering. The latest Plasma TVs operate at 100Hz, giving a clearer picture. In addition all pixels emit light simultaneously, further reducing flicker.

I work in this arena and the data is actually incorrect. It is much worse than stated in your quote. Plasma TV's operate at a Frequency/refresh rate of 480Hz, and have done so for over four years. Now, the LCD TV's are joining the game, with sets offering refresh rates of 120Hz, and the latest, greatest ones now can refresh at 240Hz! I receive data from vendors that I can't quote here, but I am looking for data that I can post and verify to all.

This information I thought at first was a potential game changer.

--All of the information I have looked at thus far has suggested that hypnotic effects wrt strobe lights occur with frequencies in the sub 120 Hz range. --So when you described Plasma screens operating at 480 Hz, I didn't at first know what to make of it. I don't know if light flickering at that speed is fast enough to appear to the subconscious as a solid light or as a strobe, and nothing I was able to find described anybody trying to measure cognitive reactions in people exposed to light strobing in that frequency range.

HOWEVER. . .

In searching, I quickly learned that the refresh rates of plasma screen televisions is a subject of intense interest to many people; it is discussed widely in home-entertainment forums. --Apparently, the frequency of light strobing from a plasma screen is not nearly as high as 480Hz at all. Even on the newest plasma televisions, it remains at or well below the 120 Hz range where cognition is affected. Nothing appears to have changed except advertising language. Apparently what has happened is simply that modern plasma screens have been divided up into 8 or more sections or, 'subfields'. As one poster in a forum put it:

[quote author=http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/archive/index.php/t-1006091.html]
"8 subfields per frame x 60 frames per second = 480 subfields per second = 480hz = Marketing jargon to compete with LCD 120Hz"
[/quote]

The patent describing this system is here. . .

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7050035/claims.html

In any case, it is good to know that you work in the field. I am sure everybody would be grateful to learn any new tidbits of info as they come along.

Cheers, and thank-you for raising this fascinating point.

 

[Woodsman]

...speaking about how it affects us in an honest manner is difficult to do without people feeling defensive and 'fighty'.

Your point here is understood, however, possibly a bit subjective as what appears to one person as "defensive and 'fighty'" may simply be the common struggle of a sincere seeker to learn without hiding or censoring their expression so they can receive the most beneficial feedback...or so I think.

No doubt. --Though, I was primarily thinking of humanity in general when making my comments. I've had conversations about the effects of television with dozens of people over the years, and it rarely fails to elicit a strong reaction in everybody, myself included. I find my reaction these days takes the form of a flustered bunch of auto-programs which leap up to try to justify and rationalize my behavior when I watch a video. For a long time I didn't have to deal with this at all; I'd gotten rid of my television years ago, but in the last couple of years I've had the ability to download videos to my computer. This has changed things. I now have to use will-power and question my motivations a lot more.

 

[thevenusian]

This thread has certainly become more of a general discussion of television, and as such I share a few paragraphs from "In The Absence of The Sacred" by Jerry Mander, published in 1991. There does not appear to be much on the web about this book. Mander's first book was entitled "Four Arguments For the Elimination of Television". I myself fall probably closest to Pepperfritz's description of the use of TV in this thread, so I am not trying to argue against watching by any means. I'd bet most forum members do not fall into the 'average' range of viewers, but as such it is maybe easy for us to forget how the vast majority of people relate to TV. Anyway, I have found this information to be a useful volume in my branch library of 'knowledge protects'. Bear in mind these statistics are from almost twenty years ago.

"Let's start with some 1990 statistics....
• According to the US Dept of Commerce, 99.5 percent of the homes in the United States that have electricity have television sets. Electronically speaking, we are all wired together as a single entity. An electronic signal sent from a single source can now reach nearly every person in the country- 250 million people across 3 million square miles- at exactly the same time. When such figures first appeared in the sixties, Marshall McLuhan hailed them as a portent of a new "global village", but he missed an important political point. The autocratic potential- the power of the one speaking into the brains of the many- is unprecedented. Its consequences are only discussed adequately in science fiction, by such people as Orwell and Huxley. The consequences are also keenly appreciated by those institutions large enough to attempt to control the medium: corporations, government, religion.
• According to the A. C. Nielsen Company, 95% of the US population watches some TV every day. No day goes by without a "hit" of television, which indicates the level of engagement, or addiction, that people feel for the medium.
• Nielsen reports that the average American home has a television on for nearly eight hours per day. The average American adult watches TV nearly five hours per day. The average child between the ages of two and five watches about three and a half hours per day. The average adult over fifty-five watches nearly six hours.

...Ours is the first society in history of which it can be said that life has moved inside media. The average person, watching television for five hours per day, is physically engaged with- looking at and experiencing- a machine. To that extent, the person is not relating to anything else in the environment. But the environment of TV is not static, it is aggressive. It enters people's minds and leaves images within, which people then carry permanently. So television is an external environment that becomes an internal, mental environment.
The situation is really so odd that it lends itself well to science fiction descriptions. Imagine, for example, that a research team from Andromeda Galaxy is sent to Earth. Hovering above our country, the researchers might report back to their home base something like this:
'We are scanning the Americans now. Night after night they sit still in dark rooms, not talking to each other, barely moving except to eat. Many of them sit in separate rooms, but even those sitting in groups rarely speak to one another. They are staring at a light! The light flickers on and off many times per second [from the AC current]. The humans eyes are not moving, and since we know that there is an association between eye movement and thought, we have measured their brainwaves. Their brains are in "alpha", a non-cognitive, passive-receptive mode. The humans are receivers.
As for the light, it comes in the form of images, sent from only a few sources, thousands of miles from where the humans are gathering them in. The images are of places and events that are not, for the most part, related to people's lives. Once placed into their heads, the images seem to take on permanence. We have noted that people use these images in their conversations with other people, and that they begin to dress and act in a manner that imitates the images. They also choose their national leaders from among the images.
In summary, this place seems to be engaged in some kind of weird mental training akin to brainwashing."

From "In the Absence of the Sacred" by Jerry Mander, 1991

 

[Woodsman]

'We are scanning the Americans now. Night after night they sit still in dark rooms, not talking to each other, barely moving except to eat. Many of them sit in separate rooms, but even those sitting in groups rarely speak to one another. They are staring at a light! The light flickers on and off many times per second [from the AC current]. The humans eyes are not moving, and since we know that there is an association between eye movement and thought, we have measured their brainwaves. Their brains are in "alpha", a non-cognitive, passive-receptive mode. The humans are receivers.
As for the light, it comes in the form of images, sent from only a few sources, thousands of miles from where the humans are gathering them in. The images are of places and events that are not, for the most part, related to people's lives. Once placed into their heads, the images seem to take on permanence. We have noted that people use these images in their conversations with other people, and that they begin to dress and act in a manner that imitates the images. They also choose their national leaders from among the images.
In summary, this place seems to be engaged in some kind of weird mental training akin to brainwashing."

From "In the Absence of the Sacred" by Jerry Mander, 1991

Wow.

That reminds me of this time when I was walking home one evening around 8:00 PM, (television Prime Time), and passing a 3-story apartment building a couple times wider than it was tall. It was dark outside and enough of the windows were flickering that weird bluish television light so that it looked like the whole building was uniformly engaged. It struck me because, (and here's my 'language of television' reference), the building looked like a Borg Cube. --I could envision all the human 'drones' inside in their little alcoves with their heads coupled up to the central cyber brain. I was struck cold because it was immediately obvious that the reality bore very little difference from the fiction. It spooked me to the core in a way which doesn't happen very often.

The amazing thing to me was that I'd never really thought about it like that before. --Or at least not in such a concrete manner. And that evening wasn't a special circumstance; the drone-connection process was happening every day for hours at a time. It was just I'd never really seen it or thought about it on that scale before.

It further astonished me that in our daily world, people (for the most part) never think about this, but just go about their activities as though everything is normal, oblivious to the reality, living in a dream world filled with the dramas of work, relationships, school, driving the kids to soccer, etc., --With much of the behavior defining the flavor and content of those activities downloaded every evening during a time of motionless gazing at the flickering light. "The Matrix" offered similar visual and conceptual metaphors, but it wasn't until I found myself standing in front of a real life 'Borg Cube' that it really hit home.

Another experiment in shocking the awareness I do from time to time is this: Next time you go to a movie cinema, sit up close to the front, then take a moment to turn around in the middle of the film. All those faces look mighty weird.

However, I've seen that kind of expression before. I've had the opportunity to read stories to kids and parents at libraries, and when you're right in the rhythm of a good story, you'll see that same expression in everybody's face. --Except it has a very different quality. This might be due to the setting and my having been in the feedback loop, but it didn't feel cold or alien; rather it felt healthy and positive. --Story-telling is an ancient aspect of human culture, the 'gathering around the fire' to re-tell the myths and legends important to the culture. This is one of the most primal and effective ways of learning appropriate behavior within the workings of the 'tribe'.

When I was doing readings, I noticed that it wasn't a one-way mechanism. I believe teachers and stage actors will report the same thing; that there is a communication going on between the audience and the speaker that goes both ways. I definitely felt this; you can see where people's interest perks up or drops down, and from that recognize the thing you are reading is of more or less interest, and so even while you are broadcasting information, you also learn something of the state of society from what is connecting best; that there is hunger or a dispassion for a given idea. I'd go home thinking about certain parts of a story I'd read, having experienced it within a cultural value context.

I can easily see why an alien invader would want to hijack this aspect of human behavior to insert subversive messages into the signal. --Maybe even go back to the seeding of a population to make sure humans evolve in such a way so that this natural craving for stories is heightened or altered to make programming through that means even easier. Because it's SO powerful, and people barely recognize that it's even happening. How astonishing! --That an entire population can all become Borg for a few hours every night and not even notice it!

The concept of the "Army of Aryan psychic projectors" over a million strong beaming influence at the creative community REALLY caught my attention when I was reading the C transcripts. I'd really like to discuss this idea at some length and see what other people think on the matter. Perhaps another thread is called for. (I'll have to run a search through the existing forum threads to see if this has been dissected already.)

 

[anart]

I find a great deal of value in TV. For my household, the key has been selective viewing. We have a receiver that includes a PVR (Personal Video Recorder, known in the U.S., I believe, as "TIVO"). And we receive only those channels/networks that interest us. This allows us to pre-record only what we wish to watch, and then view it without commercials. I have learned a great deal from the programs I regularly watch on history, nature, criminal forensics, health, gardening, home renovation, cooking, etc. We also enjoy very high-quality films and television dramas. And we choose not to watch the kind of programming that is heavy on brainwashing, like news and political commentary.

This evidences a rather enormous assumption that all television - no matter the surface content - is not beaming other information as well.  The fact of the matter is that it is programming - period - no matter the 'surface' content, other 'information' is being transmitted along with those 'pictures and sound' as well.  To think otherwise is to ignore all evidence to the contrary.   

It might be highly beneficial to run a very simple experiment.  Turn off the television set - completely - for one month.  Observe your thinking and behavior - anxiety levels, clarity of thought, etc.  Then, turn the television back on and watch it as you were - notice how you feel, what you think and how it affects you. Of course, if the reaction to the thought of turning the television off - completely - for one month evokes anxiety or a reflexive, 'that's ridiculous' - then that should be signal enough that it needs to be turned off.  My own experience with this experiment several years ago resulted in an inability to watch television as I once did - prolonged exposure ( more than 30 minutes - no matter the content) results in anxiety, headache and general discomfort.

Never underestimate the power of the control structure and its use of technology to keep you in your place.