Communication and systems of influence

In my own observation, I notice the use of communication to promote a range of results. Some patterns of communication contribute to attraction, receptivity, cooperation and collaboration. Some patterns correspond to interpersonal repulsion or opposition as well as internal conflict.

While it might seem obvious that it can be useful to promote collaboration, consider that it can also be attractive to promote conflict in adversaries or competitors. But even with an idea as familiar as promoting collaboration, how clear is it what works to promote collaboration?
First, we could define collaboration. I do not mean mere compliance or cooperation.

For contrast, compliance can be promoted simply by coercion. Like when forcing a strong animal like a bull to move, we can use strong ropes and a lot of strength or we can use a tiny string pulling a ring in the nose of a bull. Why does the bull move so much more easily when pulling the nose ring (compared to pushing the bull from behind)? The simple answer is pain.

Collaboration certainly can be attractive in regard to producing relief from pain or avoidance of pain. However, issues of pain (or injury) are not the only factors that make collaboration appealing.

What else is appealing about collaboration? Collaboration can give access to a variety of benefits.

Collaboration involves two or more organisms intentionally working together toward a common goal. Of course, we can observe instances of cooperation in many animal species that communicate in ways that are less complex than human language. But language is especially useful when collaborating.
Researchers have asserted that the development of human language resulted from a few unique factors. First, the upright bipedal position of humans allowed for unusual uses of the arms, particularly for the throwing of missile weapons (as in anything from a rock to an ax or spear).
The activity of throwing involves a very complex coordination which has no comparison among other species of earthling. The structures of the brain that govern the complex intricacy of throwing have been analyzed by neuroscientists and identified as the same neural network that is used to create complex sentence structures. In other words, the researchers concluded that we developed language as a result of throwing (hunting with thrown objects).
The ability to throw was the foundation of human dominance over other predatory species. When humans first recognized that throwing was useful in hunting, they began to practice throwing in leisure times in order to be better at throwing when the opportunity arose to hunt.

Then, the domination of humans as predators was greatly advanced when groups of humans hunted together. Eventually, they began to coordinate their hunting using an intricate system for complex vocal signaling. Simply stated, we then developed the use of language. Quickly, because of the new advantage of language for coordinating hunting activities, humans went from being better predators than other predators to being the dominant predator on the planet by far.

So collaboration allows us to coordinate and plan important activities like hunting. Language does not replace the value of throwing, but, when there are several people who organize their activity of throwing (for instance) using language, the value of throwing is multiplied. Those who are skilled at throwing can even use language to quickly train others to throw well.
Using language to coordinate their activities, humans even formed groups of warriors. Instead of only hunting prey, these warriors used their coordinated violence to raid other groups of humans.
According to the ancient scriptures of Exodus, a new advance in coordinated violence arose in the time of Noah. After a massive drop in population relating to a sudden flooding of the planet, Noah initiated a seventh commandment in addition to the six from the time of Adam. That commandment was the establishing of courts of justice.
Courts of justice refer to groups of people that attempt to monopolize the use of violence. If they weapons and planning is better than any competitors, then they can punish unauthorized coercion and extortion. They claim to alone have the legitimate authority to perform public rituals of human sacrifice.

A commandment regarding the prohibition of murder refers to the act of intentionally killing a human (at least the killing of a protected member of the privileged class as distinct from slaves who can be legally killed by their owners). But murder is not just any intentional killing. It is only intentional killing that has not been ritually authorized by the warlords in the court of justice.
To bring a modern context to these topics, imagine that an individual intentionally kills another person and openly confesses it. A primary issue that would be considered in the ritual proceeding of a criminal indictment is the question of whether the intentional killing was legally authorized, such as self-defense, an act of war or in the proper performance of duties as a member of the priestly class of government deputies.

Next, imagine that an individual is not only indicted but also prosecuted and then convicted of the unauthorized intentional killing of a protected organism. However, what if the high priest of the Executive Branch conducts a ritual of pardoning? After the proper granting of a pardon, the individual convicted of murder would be legally protected from criminal penalties.
But even though that is technically possible, you might dismiss it as something that no High Priest of your own geographic jurisdiction would do. You could be wrong.

I will give a few examples below of the pardoning of murder (an unauthorized act of intentional killing). You can easily verify them with a quick internet search.

However, before I present those examples, I want to not the importance of programming targeted populations with shame. Shame is a type of terror or panic involving anxiety about social perceptions and social penalties.

Holy Empires operate by shaming their human resources. Certain types of behavior are ritually shamed, such as in the indoctrination programs of public schooling.

What is the effect of that shaming? The masses are discouraged from using certain methods. Further, they are programmed to experience so much shame about a particular behavior that the idea that their own rulers operate in those shameful ways is terrifying and disturbing to them. They are programmed with hysteria about the methods used by their rulers (methods that are forbidden to them- severely penalized).

The resulting experience of the masses is not an accident (hysteria and paranoia and social anxiety). It is the central innovation that allows for massive Holy Empires to form, stabilize, and grow. Shame is carefully programmed in order to promote blind compliance with the rituals of the empire. Empires are operations of domestic terror (coercion).
This is a very easy thing to observe, but those who have been targeted with the propaganda of an empire may have a very strong emotional reaction to direct mention of these subjects. They may experience panic and rage and nausea.

Why the nausea? The shaming of the masses involves the internalization of chronic tensions designed to block the display of certain emotions labeled shameful (negative). If information is presented that triggers a rapid release of those chronic tensions, that can result in toxins that have been trapped for decades finally being released.

When people study the terrifying methods used by holy empires, it can be sickening to them. That response of disgust or getting sick is not due to any immediate threat. If you are reading some little shapes on a screen, these letters and words pose no danger to you. The words are not the aggression of the soldiers of a holy empire.

However, there may have been many incidents of actual threat and intimidation, especially in childhood. Imagine the case of a child born as a slave. They are constantly subject to an immediate threat of physical injury. They would develop chronic physical tensions to block any emotional displays that previously resulted in the inflicting of pain or injury on them.

If they were later freed (or escaped to safety), would the chronic tensions instantly dissolve? They would probably remain. Eventually, layer by layer of tension might be relaxed.

However, consider the history of traumas that the former slave may have endured and never healed. Consider the toxins that their body may have stored behind the blocked circulation of chronic muscular tensions.

It might be ideal that their tensions release slowly. Why? Because each relaxing of a chronic muscular tension could also release stored toxins. The body may be challenged to detoxify so quickly.

The immune system might activate with vomiting or diarrhea. So, it is not unusual that a former slave might suddenly get sick if they see another slave being whipped or executed.

Their response is not due to an immediate threat to them. However, they may perceive a threat anyway. They could experience a threat reaction even to hearing a story (even to telling their own stories).

Consider the common rituals of rehearsing trauma in a psychiatric session. Week after week, year after year, traumatic experiences can be rehearsed (including fantasies of future distress). If people quickly or gradually experience a diminishing of terror and shame, so be it. However, many do not improve and, after retriggering their traumas, they are then given lucrative drugs for the benefit of commercial interests that created the psychiatric rituals of restimulating trauma and pushing drugs on the masses. As for rituals for stimulating traumatic responses, note that many religious groups have similar rituals in which every spring at Easter, they tell children stories about the betrayal, torture, and public execution of someone that the children should aspire to model. They are told “this story is about the person that you should do your best to be like and so you need to know exactly what happened to them.”

So, upon hearing commentaries like this one (or hearing actual biographical details of an individual’s actual experience with psychiatrists, shock therapy, lobotomies, and psychiatric medication), how do people respond? Does their heart rate change? Does their breathing change?

They may experience degrees of distress. They may attempt to “flee” from the perceived threat of the ideas (to withdraw or distract themselves). To emphasize this point, they may perceive certain ideas as threats.

They can experience terror about an idea. Infants do not experience terror about ideas, right? By adulthood though, many people do.
What is really going on there? They already have an experience of terror that is repressed and then the mentioning of the idea allows for a surfacing of the suppressed terror. If they are trying to repress their terror (out of social anxiety about what would happen if their terror is recognized) and then their mechanisms for repressing the display of terror are overwhelmed, then they panic.

Infants do not panic about ideas. Healthy people do not panic about ideas (about a particular interpretation). Healthy people only panic about perceived threats (such as a charging bull or a wildfire). Unhealthy people (traumatized, terrorized people who have not yet recovered) will panic over exposure to any ideas that disturb their social anxieties, shames, and pretenses.

Also, governments can program people to ignore actual dangers and risks simply by labeling something “safe” (such as an ingredient in food). If people are under the spell that governments are honest and act in the interest of the human resources ruled by the government, then when a government priest announces that cholesterol is poison, people experience paranoia. If a government priest announces that everyone should participate in the state lottery because in that gambling operation, the more that you play, the more likely you are to win. Mathematically, the more that someone plays a state lottery, the more likely they are to transfer more and more of their net worth to the government that is running the gambling operation.

So why exactly do so many people panic over ideas? Yes, they first must have been tamed through public rituals of intimidation. What else is relevant?

They may be ashamed of their own past terror. They may react by condemning specific people who intimidated them or betrayed them (as in acting in ways that revealed the error of their expectations). They may ignore the most intimidating bullies and instead focus their condemnation on the least intimidating “villain.” That is their coping mechanism.

They may even seek to identify a particular enemy (an individual or group) as the one who corrupted their favorite holy empire. They may hysterically say things like “Everything was fine [just like in the empire’s propaganda] until that one person came along and disgraced our empire with their corruption and evil and sociopathic sickness.”

This is a protective response. They may have too much toxicity trapped behind chronic tensions to allow the tensions to relax and the toxins to get in to the circulation (the bloodstream or lymph system) and be neutralized and removed.

If someone experiences tension, distress, and rage upon hearing some suggestion that their favorite holy empire has at least on occasion operated in ways that do not correspond to the programmed ideals of that system, that is quite normal. If when reading a neutral analysis like this, they experience first a wave of relief but soon then a “sour” feeling in the stomach, that is probably from toxins being dumped in to the stomach.

So, with all of those warnings in place, I note that below are a few examples of the presidential pardons issued in the US in the last few hundred years. These cases involve crimes that resulted in severe penalties against large numbers of people. However, in select cases, the penalties were entirely waived (cases usually involving an individual who was closely allied with well-connected people like whoever was the U.S. President at the time).

Consider the case of the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln. 3 men convicted for their roles in the public execution were pardoned in 1869 by the new President Andrew Johnson. Note that Johnson automatically became President because of the killing of Lincoln.

Was Johnson also involved in the planning of the assassination? That is debatable. Some scholars have argued that he was intimidated by members of British secret societies (networks of spies and assassins). According to those claims, President Johnson had a sincere perception that he would also be assassinated if he did not comply with their demands, so he issued the pardons as instructed by the European “gangsters” (British agents). Others have accused Johnson of being more involved with the planning and implementation of the assassination of Lincoln. Whatever the details, the uncontroversial facts are that 3 men were convicted in connection with the assassination, then were pardoned by the new President (and that was on the last day that the President was in office, which is typical for U.S. Presidential pardons, implying that everyone knows that issuing these pardons at any other time would lead to public outrage).

Another notable case was George Wilson, who was convicted in 1829 of committing murder while robbing trains. He was granted a pardon by President Jackson specifically for the crime of murder (but not for his other crimes).
In the 1981, a notable pardon was granted by Jimmy Carter for a popular music star named Peter Yarrow (who was also a political activist). The singer was a member of a trio called “Peter, Paul, and Mary” and had written (and sung on) hits like “Puff the Magic Dragon.”

In 1970, Yarrow pleaded guilty to taking “immoral and indecent liberties” with a 14-year-old young lady who came to his hotel room asking for an autograph. He was sentenced and served three months in prison and then over 10 years later was pardoned by President Jimmy Carter.

There are many other cases of pardons in U.S. after the entire criminal sentence has been served. Even people who are dead have been pardoned. (Of course, it may also seem notable that sexually molesting a minor got such a light sentence in the first place, but keep in mind that Yarrow was a political activist with lots of influential friends.)
Beyond the power of presidential pardon, there have been many other interesting actions by the US court system. A famous case involved a confessed rapist named Miranda whose conviction was the eventually canceled based on a procedural technicality involving an improper step in the ritual of prosecuting and convicting him. Miranda was in prison at the time his conviction was overturned and was released with no further penalty. (What kind of message did that send to the victim of the rape?)

The innocence of the offender was not the issue. The issue was that the organization that had been confining him (the court system) simply performed a new ritual to cancel their prior ritual authorizing his confinement.

Of course, other court systems have similar rituals though in other times and on other parts of the planet. Prosecutions are performed case by case and it is generally accepted by legal scholars that some criminal activities are ignored (because of the political connections of the potential defendants) while other cases with no apparent factual merit are pursued simply out of political animosity toward the target. The priests of the court system sometimes simply invent evidence (whether that is technically legal or not) and proceed. In fact, every court system criminalizes political activities that are deemed unfavorable to the operation of the court system itself. If the facts of the case are that someone is accused of criticizing the court system in certain ways (or even being insufficient in their praise of the system), those facts can be enough in some court systems to result in a punishment of a public ritual of human sacrifice.

Prior to Noah, there may not have been any court systems in which the ruling warlord priests of that system claimed authority over the entire planet and all of humanity. We can also read the various published announcements across the centuries by the Popes of the Holy Roman Empire pertaining to their claim over the entire planet and all of humanity.

Claims are the basis of all legal proceedings. Someone claims something, then presents the claim according to the rituals of the court system.

To make a claim, someone must have standing within that system to do so (like a slave in ancient Greece did not have the legal privilege of filing a lawsuit) and most claims also require an assertion of particular merits behind the claim (a sequence of historical events that authorize them to make that specific claim). Even when governments invent claims (such as the claim to a 10% sales tax on any transaction within their jurisdiction), they have special rituals for authorizing those claims.

What is the main difference between government extortion systems and the protection rackets of other organized bullies? Governments have standardized rituals behind their operations. When gangs take power and stabilize a bureaucracy to expand a very large redistribution program, they must standardize their official procedures because there are so many participants in their expanding priesthood network.

Sometimes official procedures are not precisely followed, but that is the discretion of the specific priests and warlords. If no other bully penalizes them for failing to follow the official policy, then the official policy can eventually be just a propaganda device for promoting public compliance. Consider the widespread bribing of low-level government officers in many court systems.

While bribery is technically a crime, if it is widespread enough, then what government agent would want to prosecute it aggressively? If prosecuting bribery resulted in huge portions of the agents of the court system being penalized, then who would operate the system of organized coercion to penalize them? In systems where activities that are technically “corruption” is most common, virtually all government agents accept bribes and so the only time that a government agent will be prosecuted for bribery is when there is an internal targeting of that person (not for accepting bribes, which may be very common, but for some other reason).

As for lobbying, that is not bribery. Why? Because like murder mean unauthorized killing, bribery means unauthorized lobbying.

How openly do modern governments publicize the origin of their rituals? As an example, the government of the US quietly published an announcement in the 1990s to recognize that their system of government is based on the system initiated by Noah. But what was really unusual about the new rituals performed based on the new 7th commandment of Noah?

There were many groups of people that monopolized organized violence against their own local population prior to Noah (such as individual robbers and thugs or gangs). What was different about Noah’s commandment was that the Levites (the ruling class of the Israelites) suddenly claimed authority over not just the Israelites, but over all of humanity, including all individuals, even those without tribal affiliations.

As an example of how that new doctrine was implemented, consider the later case of the slaughter of the Midianites by the Israelites. The order was issued by Moses for the Israelites to form an army and invade the land of the Midianites.

Moses stated that the crime of the Midianites was that the Midianite women had distracted the Israelite men with their health and charm, disrupting the social order of the Israelites. The punishment of that crime was the slaughter of all Midianite males from newborn to elderly and the slaughter of all Midianite females except the virgins (as in pre-adolescent). Those spared females (numbering 32,000) were taken by the Israelites as wives.

The sheep and cattle of the Midianites was also taken by the Israelites and distributed among the Israelite soldiers. For a detailing of these events, one can read of it in the Old Testament’s Book of Numbers.

So, these courts of justice established in the time of Noah not only can authorize public rituals of human sacrifice. Further, as in the later time of Moses, these courts also have rituals for considering a declaration of war. While there was no ritual involved in authorizing the slaughter of the Midianites, we can notice that, in later times, there was an elaborate ritual required. Kings in Europe would request permission to wage war from the Pope. Waging war without first obtaining authorization from the Pope would have serious political consequences.

I previously mentioned the monopolizing of extortion. When those conducting the business of a court system have local competitors, they may label as “protection rackets” those other systems that use threats of force to obtain economic support. They may label their own activities as “legal taxation” or “legal fines, tariffs, levies, and garnishments.”
In the event that one court system invades another, then the participants in the old system may also be labeled “criminal.” Or, the prior participants may continue their activities as before, but with a new final recipient for the spoils of their collection activity.

How does a court system maintain it’s dominance? It must maintain a significant military advantage over the human resources from which it extracts taxes and other tribute. Further, it must either defend itself from neighboring court systems or else engage in so much trade and collaboration that the alliance with neighbors provides protection from invasion.

However, rather than regularly inflict physical pain and injury on individuals, court systems conduct operations to promote compliance. These operations involve language.

These activities are similar to the placing of a ring in the nose of a bull to easily subdue the bull. Using training systems for promoting compliance, court systems govern the masses with great efficiency. Violence and intimidation is the core of the process, but indoctrination and shame (social anxiety) is the crown.

So, compliance involves a clear imbalance of power. Collaboration involves a mutual understanding of common interests and an open, interactive process. There can be brainstorming about priority outcomes, identifying of relevant options for promoting the priorities, and even collaborating in the enactment of plans.

What can the system do to reduce competition? It can cripple the masses through promoting low-quality communication, interpersonal resentments and contempt, as well as internal conflict (such as shame).

When the masses observe the nature of the system, what is a typical response? The masses flee from the obvious and focus on the slogans indoctrinated to them about how the system should be (or should not be). They argue hysterically. They plan reforms to attempt to convert the system to how it should be (according to mass propaganda).

Why do the masses do these things? The social system has programmed them to use language in specific ways. Certain topics are publicized according to the central curriculum. Certain models of interpretation are programmed. Certain responses to those interpretations are programmed.

Compliance is programmed. The innate potential for collaboration is compromised.

How do courts of justice redistribute valuables from the human resources to the warlords? They do so very efficiently. I respect that.


Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: