 |
Brainwashing
|
|
|
|
Brainwashing
|
|
From Jeff W.: I watched a program the other night on the History Channel that was about how the children were programmed by the Nazis under Hitler. It was pretty consistent with what you pointed out before on your site. There was apparently a very strong orientation toward making the kids conform to a type of political correctness and a specific ideology. It also made no bones, that the kids were to be programmed to admire and be loyal to certain desired things and to hate other things (Jews in particular of course). They also stressed the idea of community, society, and the state. The individual then, apparently as now, had very little value. Group thinking was the way they were manipulated into certain belief systems. They created a type of peer pressure by doing this, that did not allow individual thinking to prevail.
Berit, as to President Bush, I have noticed that in a lot of areas, he seems to be more global oriented than American and individual oriented. He seems to pick certain areas to put on a face of being a conservative Christian. But in practice I believe most of his policies reflect something quite different. A lot of the large Christian organizations (like TBN, Falwell, and Robertson and others) have as you know, backed him pretty strongly, but his actual administration is far more oriented to the global community.
From Charles J. Hunsinger: For some months now, and approximately 30,000 words later, I have been deeply immersed in research and writing. The topic or working title is, "They have stolen our children, our country, our freedom". In the process of doing research on the net I stumbled across your Article, 'Trading U.S. Rights for UN Rules', and for a moment I thought I was reading something that I had written. I applaud your research, your writing skills, and your perspective in these most treasonous of times. You are, of course. absolutely right. I was beginning to believe that I was the only person in this country who was able to see what was happening, at a very accelerated rate.
My philosophy is Atheistic, and I see what you see, but my vision, perhaps, is a little wider then yours. I see a nightmare for generations to come, not just for Christians, but for humanity. I see a vile, perverse, and distorted world, of people who constantly live and die in fear, fear of government, of neighbor, of whets left of a family unit, of their own thoughts. What I see is George Orwell's 1984 for many, many generations to come, until perhaps a group of men, hidden away, rediscover, and rewrite The Bill of Rights.
I would enjoy any communication. I would also ask your permission to quote your writings.
Thank you, Charles, for your thoughtful letter. I am so glad we see many of the same changes in this world. It always helps when we find others who understand our concerns.
Yes, of course, you may quote from our writings. I want to share the information with all who will listen. Besides, it's all by God's grace, for I never could write anything worthwhile until He changed my life.
From Don: I must comment on the posted article "Watch out for adult ads." The "adult" ads on TV are the principle reason I have stopped watching television. I don't want to see or remember these ads, so I simply to shut Satan's box off, and leave it off.
From Kathy Christian: Subject: Resisting the indoctrination.
I've started reading Brave New Schools and Twist of Faith, and I can tell you that I had the unfortunate experience of having been in the consensus process at work a few years ago, and when I was 16, and having bucked it both times. I didn't know what it was at the time; when I was 16 terms like "consensus process" weren't in use, but the general idea was there.By the time I encountered it again at work, I had read enough of communist tactics to recognize it for what it was, and I said so, saying what they wanted us to do sounded exactly like a Chinese communist party "struggle meeting", at which a group of people, led by a communist cadre, would "struggle" against a person designated as "an enemy of the people", i.e., they would harass them, shout at them, verbally abuse them, sometimes even physically abuse them, accuse them of various things, although at this stage it certainly wouldn't get to the shouting stage, but the basic premise was there. It was regarding "diversity training", and it was mandatory.
We had to attend four hours of mandatory "diversity training." At first I refused to go, saying what I did about the Chinese communist party struggle meetings, but my supervisor told me I had to go, so a coworker who felt the same way I did about it suggested that since the first session was just a film that I take a book along and read during the film. I did just that. I never attended the other three sessions. I had planned on calling in sick or just conveniently "forgetting" to attend, in which case they would have had to wait another year, but I left the job beforehand. This happened during the Clinton years.
The incident that happened when I was 16 was basically that I was in this therapy group, or it was supposed to be a therapy group, but when I attended the therapy it turned into an attack on me by everyone else in the group led by the "facilitator", a psychologist. I refused to attend later group sessions. In fact, I think I walked out of the initial session after their attacks started. What "group therapy" consisted of for me, at least, during that time was someone would begin with their "problem", and everyone in the group would pick that person apart, and through the consensus process would make decisions about that person's "problem" or the solutions to it. If you resisted group, you resisted therapy. Needless to say, because I resisted group, I was accused of resisting therapy.
I can only say that through different circumstances that I know in retrospect the Lord brought about in my life, I was fortunate (or unfortunate, depending on your point of view) enough to have attended Catholic schools for six of the eight years of my elementary and junior high school years, so that by the time I was 16, I was pretty well inured to the "consensus process". Not that it wasn't devastating, not that it made it any easier to deal with, but the foundation for my faith had already been laid, and if they did anything they taught you to think for yourself in those days, and I really do believe that it was my Catholic school education that prevented much of the indoctrination I see in my peers.Thank you for sharing you story and your insights. I thank God for opening your eyes and protecting you from deception all these years. So many others -- both in Catholic and Protestant churchs have succumbed to the process and have been trained to think dialectically -- putting the group decision above God's Word as well as any factual and logical personal decision.
See also Brainwashing and "Education Reform"
From JC: In looking at your two new symbols, I am reminded of two books that I have read (or in some cases read "parts of"; these books are emotionally difficult reading and not for young people).
One book was by someone named Cathy O'Brien and Mark Philips, "Trance Formation of America", and the other one by Brice Taylor, whose real name was Susan Ford, and ----I think it was called "Thanks for the Memories". Both of these women, now apparently in their 40's and 50's, claim to have been victims of a personal form of mind control developed by the CIA for the specific purpose of developing clandestine international messengers, forms of what might be loosely termed idiot savants, computer experts, health personnel, and sex slaves. (I am trying to summarize these horrendous claims, but it is difficult.)
Another such mind control victim in Nebraska, a young man, was trying to bring his case to light with the help of a lawyer who was the personal friend of former CIA director William Colby, who most independent investigators believe to have been murdered.
At any rate, the symbol of the butterfly, particularly the monarch butterfly, was alleged by at least one of these women to have been used in this form of mind control, as a signal, and also perhaps to set off different personalities in the victim. In fact, the in the name of a home for children in Tennessee where her daughter, also a victim, is incarcerated (allegedly in order to avoid bringing out the truth) is called ===something like---"the home for broken butterflies" (some such thing).
ALso in these books the women wore pins (can't remember which book) that would tip off their "handlers" or others who controlled them, as to what sort of "robot" they were---for example, a rose with a tiny dagger indicated a killer, but a butterfly (I think) indicated, I believe, a sex slave....I thought you might like to know about another use that is probably being made of these symbols. It is, of course, a shame..... This is truly horrible material and I hesitate to recommend that anyone at all read it, however, I believe it is somewhat credible (if you want to know the reasons I believe this, I will try to write them in another e-mail), at least.... I believe that this is another reason that God's judgment may be coming upon our country.
From Agramen: I for know that it is very difficult to change the mind of one who does not want to be changed. In saying that my comments are more or less lost before they are even begun. Ones faith is often as hard as stone and just as difficult to move.
Why do i write then ? Well I guess I'm in a way just like you. I hope to reach a person that is willing to listen to my words of supposed wisdom.
While reading your web page I came to a few conclusions. Interpretation of particular bible passages can be understood to mean something to the particular reader that isn't always there. The reader may understand that passage as he reads it but he may not fully grasp its implications or wording. I'm not saying that your dumb but only your view (and others as well) is individualistic in nature. You may see the same passage as I and read it the same way but the understanding is different. This individualistic view often comes up in your opinions. Your particular views on the web page are pretty intelligent and well thought out but it is still based on your particular world view, life experiences and shaped faith.Of course, Agramen. But so are yours. We all filter information through our personal worldview. Mine is based on the Bible (both Old and New Testament), and anyone with a different worldview will read different messages into the words of the Bible.
You have made direct and often times stretching connections to many popular entertainments and the occult. Given the chance I could make the same connections to many popular "christian" books without much effort. It is the interpretation of the words based on your experience that makes all the difference. I read the Torah and you read the holy bible...To you they may be different but to me they are the same.
The written word in its many forms can be often times misunderstood. (Same thing can be said for the media.) Tolkien and Lewis may be deep insights (or hellspawned inspiration.) to you but they are nothing more fantasy to me with a small but reachable message. I can ignore the mystical meanings and babble without much effort because I was bought up to believe that there are no such things as elves, dwarves, harry potters or a thousand gods in the sky. Based on my world view and experience I can absorb that type of information without trouble.
One of your readers (john I think) explained to others that Dungeons and Dragons is not just a "game." I for one can dispute his claim. Based on my experience it is just a game and nothing more. Based on my experience and life it is just as I said...a game. The one who believes that it is more then just a game may have had situations in his life and experience that would lead him to that conclusion.Your reasoning illustrates our new chart on the Postmodern worldview. It emphasizes personal experience rather than facts, truth or scientific studies as the basis for evaluating reality and forming conclusions.
Some think that Anakin Skywalkers name is some rewording of a sumarian god while i just see the name Anakin. Am i ignorant, looking at things with rose coloured glasses or just seeing things in my view of the world? Again i must say interpertation is the key.
Now some parents will not trust there children. They will tell there children what not to like and what to do even with such small decisions. Are parents unsecure in themselves? One of your readers stated that she was disturbed at her young daughter seeing tarzan in only a loin cloth. Could the mother have explained the human body to her child in an mature way? As i read the parent just showed their own insecurities by not allow the child to see anymore semi nude tarzan. Though again it is based on experience and your personal world view. You may see the body as an evil thing or the medical terminology of some body parts as a bad word that a child should not hear. Interpertation.Most entertainment today fuel an obsession with sexuality and drives the rampant promiscuity that has undermined the family and helped destroy the moral fiber of our nation. Did you notice the media discussions about "sexy" female commentators? The body is good, but sensual cravings destroy both people and cultures.
It all seems a bit odd to me that all these secret underminings of christian values are all responsible for the brainwashing and disruption of life and not some of the writers themselves bringing up their children (and themselves) in an oppressive, strangling and paranoid household.
No, the real brainwashing is taking place in our schools and communities. Behind parents and children's backs, the government is manipulating minds and willfully changing values. Please see Brainwashing in America and Chronology.
But you are certainly right about our “particular world view.” One of the wonderful things about America has been that different people were free to believe different things. That is changing. In a Postmodern world, the old Biblical absolute that founded our nation on integrity, faith, facts and logic have become intolerable to leaders across the country.
From Dan and Vicki Paulson: I was just reading the on-line book, "The Rape of the Mind." I've only read a small portion of it but the techniques are recognizable. It's sad that people have to do such things to their fellow man. The various ways of psycological manipulation that have arisen are at best, interesting, and at worst, diabolically evil. Only Satan could be the author of such thinking and actions.
I have been reading a quite a bit of your on-line literature, and I thought you might be interested in a small book that one of my kids brought home from school a number of years ago. The title is "the Children's Story", by James Clavell. It takes about 20 minutes to read. And according to the "story", that's all it takes to change a child's view of their life's situation. It is available at Barnes & Noble book store.
They are not my favorite bookstore because of the highly liberal atmosphere. But they do have access to a larger selection of materials than some others.
P.S. Men need to heed the scripture, Psalm 2: 12 "Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are they that put their trust in Him." The Hebrew word translated "kiss" means, by analogy, "to equip with weapons." We must equip ourselves with what weapons? The weapons that God has given us to use not only as a defense in our war against the devil, but to use as offensive weapons. The sword of the spirit, which is the word of God, and all the other parts of the Armor of God. If used properly, by a skillful soldier, the various parts of the armor could be used defensively, and offensively.
We must take up, also the most important weapon that has been given. That is God's love. Agape (divine) love. This is the weapon that lays open the very heart of anyone, to do that changing so that we can do God's will.
From Christian in Norway: I have just finished reading your last chapter of Brave New Schools, and I've also read quite a bit of what you previously have posted about indoctrination and brainwashing elsewhere on your site. The impression I have is that you consider socialization into any belief other than Christianity to be indoctrination (and often brainwashing). Is this impression correct? And if so, why is it not indoctrination (and often brainwashing) to raise your children up in the belief of Jesus and the Christian God?
Berit's response: It depends on how you define indoctrination. If it only refers to the process of instilling doctrine into the mind of a person, then the term would apply to any kind of religious or ethical training. But general usage implies a negative connotation: that the indoctrination is accomplished by social engineers or a government that would impose totalitarian standards on the people involved. In other words, the strong arm of the the state invades the realm which America preserved for the family. Parents -- whether Christians, Jews, Buddhist, or Muslim -- were free to teach their personal beliefs and values to their children. Today's global education program is eroding that freedom.
To distinguish between brainwashing, indoctrinating and education/acceptable socialization is not simple at all, but a helpful term is "the better argument". The choice between "better arguments" is not possible without, quite simple, other arguments (for instance information about other religions than Christianity). Now, brainwashing is a method of bringing people to believe, uncritically, in something that they normally wouldn't believe in -by various techniques (among others simple and operant conditioning). The choice between better arguments is hence not present. In my opinion it is this lack of information about other views that is to be criticized (that is -the method), in any education, not the fact that people get to choose between alternate opinions or explanations.
I agree we need information, but we need historical and cultural facts, not feeling-based fantasies or hypothetical experiences designed by "multicultural" educators to bypass logical thinking and stir hostility toward biblical Christianity. I don't agree that the way to distinguish between "brainwashing, indoctrination..." is "the better argument." That may fit a relativistic humanist paradigm, but it fits neither the Christian world view nor the new global paradigm -- both of which base assessments and evaluations on certain standards. The Biblical standards are written in the Bible and not open to negotiation or subject to what people might call "better arguments." The global standards for religion, values, etc. are being written by the UN, UNESCO, the World Bank and other agencies that claim the right to define and establish a 21st century global government that would manage human as well as natural, produced and social resources around the world.
Your preferences for the "old way", that is "learning of facts" as you put it ("facts" is not a very easily treatable term), is not in a dichotomous relation to the methods of group-working, and other more recent ways of teaching. You may still learn the very same facts, but in a different way/by a different method -a way that is bearing much less resemblance to indoctrination and brainwashing than the "old way".
You don't learn "the very same facts" by the new feeling-based education methods. Instead you learn to dismiss facts and truths that might offend someone in your group. You learn to form impressions and hold opinions -- but only as long as it takes the facilitator to persuade the group to move on to the next level of "truth" and opinions in this continually evolving dialectic process. The students, who are now group members subject to the brainwashing process used in communist schools through most of the last century, hardly know what is happening to them. Thinking they are making their own choices, they don't know they are being manipulated.
When the school systems, especially in the Western world, have implemented a somewhat stronger emphasis on knowledge that is not as "fact based" as it used to be, that is a consequence of the fact(?^_^, perhaps I should say notion) that the times are changing -and so the basis and arguments for what kind of knowledge it is crucial to have/master in order to cope with society at large have changed. That this turn from authoritarian to less dogmatic, more democratic methods and from "hard facts" to more process focused knowledge in the educational systems is debatable is true, every one should have the opportunity to state their own opinions, but to say that this change is planned as a gigantic, pagan brainwashing-operation is so far out that I have problems believing that you are serious! These are simply school systems that have adopted some of their thinking from other organizations, combined with a planning for what the future society might demand. Now, they might be wrong about their predictions, but they are certainly not guided by any evil forces. Neither is this change evil in it self -no matter how much, or little, focus it has on the religion of Christianity.
I didn't say "that this change is planned as a gigantic, pagan brainwashing-operation," but I suggest you read some of the documentation in the posted Introduction and chapters 2 and 3 in Brave New Schools for the documentation showing the planned changes.
The times do change Berit - perhaps not always to the better for all of us, but certainly not to the worst for all of us either. That the schools are a part of this change is unavoidable and necessary. The next generation should be as well prepared for the future as possible, this has always been a guideline for the schools in the democratic countries, and hence should the educators adopt the methods that seem to give the best result. That people stick to their old beliefs and religions parallel to this change is their private business but they should (in my opinion) not for a second think that it is given or natural that their religion is the basis for the education of all children in any given school system (and please remember that from a strictly logical/scientific (see Klafki/Degenhardt/Stenhouse etc.) point of view private Christian schools are much closer to being indoctrinating their students than public schools in our part of the world are).
I don't believe "that it is given or natural that their [or my] religion is the basis for the education of all children in any given school system." Jesus told His disciples that they were "in the world but not of the world." As He said, "My Kingdom is not of this world." Those who follow Him -- loving others, reaching out to the hurting, being willing to die for someone who has contrary beliefs -- do not fit into a world's system that equates biblical Christianity with being "hateful" and "intolerant." (See Biblical versus Cultural Christianity) Nor will they be squeezed into conformity by the new global education system. As Jesus warned us in John 15:18-21, they will be persecuted.
Fanaticism is conquered through information and ethically sound education, leaving the "students" (anyone in the process of learning) able to take rational (and oftentimes emotional) choices between the myriad of ways and explanations - tolerance for other peoples views should therefore not be seen as a threat but as a well earned gift!
I hope you will post this^_^! Vennlig hilsen
I really appreciate your thoughtful comments, Christian, and am impressed with your ability as a Norwegian to articulate your thoughts in the English language. Thank you for taking time to read and ponder what we have written and posted. Gratefully, Berit
| Home | Armor of God | Persecution | His Word | Articles | Books | Links |