Science is the practice of first observing patterns, then constructing models for the predicting of specific outcomes, and then finally measuring those various models relative to their conformity to actual results. If a model conforms precisely to reality, we notice that. If a model correlates reasonably well, we could even measure the size of the variation between expectations and observations. Fundamentally, science is about observation, experimentation, and measurement.
Note that memorizing a doctrine and then repeating that memorized doctrine back for social validation (like from a teacher) is not the practice of science. We could memorize doctrines about science in a class that we call a science class, yet still never perform a single scientific experiment in that class.
Fundamentally, science is a practice that involves repeated measurements. Publicity and indoctrination, in contrast, are practices that involve repeated promotion of a particular idea, typically without subjecting the idea to thorough testing and open criticism.
In fact, the more popular and familiar that an idea is, the more people can be expected to accept it without any examination (and even to hysterically defend it from skepticism and assessment). To further present a pretense of a scientific method, weak criticisms can be invented and emphasized, then ridiculed and discarded. If all forms of criticism can be categorized as being equivalent to a single weak criticism, then it is easier to program the masses to completely dismiss science in the name of science. Their prejudice against the practice of science can be quite extreme.
They may literally worship a particular model. Further it is often a model that they have never thoroughly evaluated or attempted to rigorously assess.
Often, researchers construct experiments that are specifically designed to confirm a particular pre-existing bias. That is still not what I would call scientific research. Scientific experiments are designed to measure exactly how precise (or imprecise) a particular model is. In contrast, much of mainstream “institutional science” is about creating evidence to be used in biasing the outcome of lawsuits and political controversies (like the approval of a new synthetic drug).
Of course, there is a meeting point between real science and real indoctrination, which is the scientific study of indoctrination. What is the best way to bias the masses? Which social rituals can be implemented on young adults (and even children as young as 5) to bias them toward the worship of particular doctrines?
In the 16th century, some major advances in the science of indoctrination were made in Rome, Italy. Below is an inscription over the entrance to a building which we could translate as the “City College for the Spreading of the Faith.” (Note that the word propagate means to increase or grow. The Latin root of propagation is “propaganda.”)
That building was used for the training of instructors who would then travel far away from Rome (even to outside of Italy to the various kingdoms under the rule of the Vatican) where they would conduct rituals in which they would all promote a curriculum that had been created by a central committee in Rome. The same basic model is used in all government-regulated educational curriculums.
Not only did the central committee create the indoctrination rituals and the specific curriculum, but they also ruled over their subsidiary kingdoms. Each local king was crowned or coronated in a ritual that was officiated by the supervising official of the Vatican. Note that the word supervisor means to watch over, which is the same root meaning as Episcopal (from epi-scope or over-see) and that is the root of the word bishop.
So, in the traditional model, there would be a variety of local rulers who were instructed and guided by their local supervisor or bishop. There were many levels of aristrocrat, from Count (the ruler of a County) all the way up to King (the ruler of a kingdom). Above the kings were other levels of nobility, such as Maharaj (great king), as well as the head of an entire empire, who would bear titles like “King of Kings” or “Lord of Lords” or simply “Emperor.”
In the case of Japan, there is a clear contrast between the “commander-in-chief” of the military (the Shogun) and the actual political leader, the Emperor (called Mikado or Tenno, meaning heavenly sovereign). In other imperial branches, the acting warlord or military commander-in-chief may have other titles, like President or Prime Minister.
Note that one monarch can rule over several Prime Ministers (like Queen Elizabeth rules over the prime ministers of her many colonies in Canada and Australia as well as in England). Each Prime Minister will be the supervisor over the local armed forces (army and navy, etc…).
Likewise, the Pope can rule over several monarchs. Again, it is the subordinate of the Pope who riutally places the crown on the head of each monarch, symbolizing that the Pope is not only above all the coronating bishops, but also above all the kings and queens who are crowned by those subordinate bishops (AKA “supervisors”).
So we have the military warlords or commanders-in-chief, then the regional monarchs above them, then the bishops above them, then the archbishops and finally the pope. Of course, I am using English words here. The same hierarchy of authority can be recognized in many languages. All governing systems involve titles and a rigid chain of command, like superintendent, then principal, then teacher, then instructional aide.
Of course, these heirachies are much older than the 16th century. However, what happened in the 16th century involved advances in the prior systems of spreading doctrine (such as weekly rituals and lectures) to a much more elaborate training program. In particular, a formal set of doctrines was published in 1566 and was called a catechism. That exact set of doctrines was used until 1992 when it was updated by Pope John Paul II.
Of course, there has also been monastic training for thousands of years and there have been armies and military training camps for thousands of years prior to that. In some cases, the training programs were rather informal and in other cases quite structured.
The Shao Lin temples in China are famous for being places where where Buddhist monks trained to be warriors. While the first Shao Lin monastery was built in the 5th century, the martial arts may not have been a major part of training until the 17th century.
The martial arts developed there were soon exported to Japan. Just as the Hindu practice of Dhyana meditation was scripted as Chan in China, it was scripted as Zen in Japan.
Not only did the martial arts spread to Japan, but new innovations and weapons were developed. Eventually, a group of trained assassins called Ninjas became a famous part of Japanese legends.
Even the word assassin has religious roots. In the 11th century there was an Ismaili Muslim named Hassan-i Sabbah, who liked to call his disciples Asasiyun (meaning loyal to the faith). He trained his spies to infiltrate in to enemy territory and ambush political opponents and kill them.
Modern organizations such as the mafia and the CIA may use similar tactics. Further, the use of deception in warfare and politics is nothing new, with the legend of the ancient Trojan Horse being one famous example. That is from about the 12th century BC (over 3,000 years ago).
So, one of the most important activities in many empires has been the cultivation of new soldiers. Those soldiers may simply taken from the lower classes and forced in to military service through direct enslavement (getting kidnapped or “shanghaied,” which is typical of child soldiers in Africa). Or, when the governing institution has more influence over the public, soldiers are summoned through a draft.
Then, they must be trained. Indoctrination is so important to the training of soldiers that the US Navy even uses the specific word indoctrination in the name of their Officer Indoctrination School (now called the DCOIC program).
See also: http://www.ocs.navy.mil/dcoic.html
What is the historical source of these indoctrination rituals and programming sessions? Some of their methodology and rituals are very ancient. However, some of the formal classroom practices were only developed after the printing press was invented in the 15th century. The word “press” is still used to refer to all forms of mass media, whether printed with a press, printed with an inkjet or laserjet, or not printed at all (like radio, TV, and electronic media).
After the mass printing of textbooks, rituals of indoctrination advanced rapidly from prior millenia. You can even find the content of a US Navy program online for free.
That is the powerpoint slideshow for the “Command Sponsor and Indoctrination Program.” It makes direct references to Indoctrination Coordinators who have “indoctrination responsibilities” in the presenting of “indoctrination topics.”
Consider that technology has recently changed quickly from the printing press, then broadcast media (like radio and TV), and now electronic media. Do the curriculum coordinators of the empire use books, broadcasts, and other media to indoctrinate select groups? What about for the indoctrination of the general population?
Why not begin the indoctrination of prospective soldiers (or selective service draftees) prior to bootcamp? Why not sponsor movies that glorify war heroes? Why not sponsor textbooks and classroom programming that suppress the rage of the masses, then promote intense debate among the young citizens (but not violence) over which country to invade next, the direct widespread animosity to certain “common enemies?”
Edward Bernays published reports of how he was hired by international banking interests to promote an invasion of Europe by the United States in the 1910s. He also reported on his methods, which included concocting stories with no factual basis to use to demonize the targets.
Did Germans really make lampshades out of human skin? The stories, whether partly factual or entirely false, created strong emotional reactions. Those reactions were more important than “accuracy” to the funders of the publicity campaign.
Soon, large segments of the public were sincerely calling for the US to send at least a small number of troops to invade Europe. After entering massive debts to European Bankers (with the launch of a private bank called the Federal Reserve), the US not only supplied soldiers to tip the scales of the latest multi-nation conflict in Europe, but went in to massive debts to manufacture the tools of war, and most importantly perhaps, to provide fuel (oil) for the invasion.
Most people in the US in current times will refer to that conflict as World War One. In order to repay the massive debts created to fund that war, a new constitutional amendment was even promoted to legalize the Income Tax (which otherwise would have been conspicuously “unconstitutional”).
“The roaring 20s” were a time of booming productivity and spending in the US. The problem was that so much of the spending in the US was based on aggressive borrowing, not accumulated wealth. As the US Government approached the maturing of the 20-year debt obligations owed to the private Federal Reserve bank, there was less emphasis on spending and borrowing and more on obtaining cash to pay back the debt.
The dumping of non-cash assets to obtain cash and pay off debts is known as a credit market deflation. If there is more borrowing than pay off of debt, that is an inflation of the credit bubble. When there is more paying off of debt than borrowing, that is a deflating of the credit bubble. That started in 1929.
In the spring of 1933, the US government formally defaulted on their 20-year promises to the private Federal Reserve. In order to come closer to paying the full amount owed to the Federal Reserve, the US Government criminalized the “hoarding” of gold by US Citizens, effectively forcing most of the privately-held gold in the US to be delivered by the public to the government.
The US government bought the gold at a pre-set exchange rate for Federal Reserve Notes. Months later, on January 31, 1934, the paper currency that the government had distributed to the public was formally devalued overnight by 41%.
While it is reasonably easy to research each of the details mentioned above, it is possible that some other version of the major events of the early 20th century in the US have been emphasized to you in the past. In fact, it is even predictable that certain business interests might favor obscuring some of the above details by completely ignoring those developments (or presenting them with a radically different spin or bias). Perhaps certain other stories would be emphasized (however accurate).
Recall that the emotions sparked by a particular paragraph in a history book might be of interest to the authors and publishers of that book. If students are presented certain details to focus on and memorize and then repeat back for social validation, they may learn to value “whatever is likely to be on the test.”
Is the accuracy of the memorized information important to the student? The tests in the classroom do not test for historical accuracy but only for conformity to the curriculum approved by the central committee.
Does the stated answer match “the answer key?” If so, the student receives social validation from the teacher. If the student provides no answer or any answer other than the approved one, then they receive social invalidation from the teacher.
When it was time to promote the next major US invasion of Europe in the 1940s, which was more important to the promoters of the invasion: historical accuracy or the emotions evoked in the general public? To simplify the question, whether or not it was time to promote another military invasion, which was more important to the “indoctrination coordinators:” historical accuracy or emotional hysteria?
Whether we use printed books or broadcast media, the core focus of a governing system is the focus of the masses. Direct or rule their attention. Next, program their values (including the assessment of fair pricing and their demand for various items such as gold or diamonds or gasoline). Program them with bias. Once the biases are drilled in, then train them to interpret or label using certain models of reality. If the biases and prejudices are deeply implanted, then there should be a hysterical defense of the popular biases (and total rejection of skepticism and scientific questioning).
Their minds will be controlled. Their attention and focus will be controlled. Their interpretations will be controlled. Their filtered perceptions will predictably produce certain intense emotional experiences. They can even be programmed in regard to how to respond behaviorally to their programmed perceptions.
The enemy makes lampshades out of human skin. Here is a fake photo of such a lamp. Here is another photo of a real lampshade made from human skin.
Next, right before the 5 cent movie, the government-regulated newsreel includes an audio broadcast featuring our own actor reading a script in which they pretend to be one of our enemies. They hysterically scream that we are the ones who took human flesh and made it in to lampshades (or maybe soap). Later in the same script (perhaps a few months later), our actor who is pretending to be our enemy confesses to falsely accusing us of making human skin in to a lampshade. They admit to faking a photo themselves and pretending it was a real skin lampshade.
The public is emotionally bombarded by each wave of the propaganda. They are driven to sympathetic grief, then defensive rage, and so on. Soon, they are eager to invade our next target and even to pay a higher tax rate to do so.
Backing up, that kind of intensive propaganda was simply not possible prior to motion pictures and TV. Consider how much slower the “propagating of the approved doctrines” would have been back when the only tool was a printing press to make newspapers and books and magazines.
There were even a few universities prior to 1566, when the first Holy Roman Catechism was created. Long before the printing press was invented, the first university in Europe was in Italy in 1088. The oldest educational institution that still operates today is in North Africa (Morocco) and was founded in the year 859.
What was used for textbooks? Most of the instruction was done by lecture and there was not a lot of assigned reading for many fields of study. Textbooks are largely a modern innovation.
Of course there were books prior to the invention of the printing press. However, they would have to be penned by hand. So, they were extremely time consuming to create and then to copy letter by letter.
Further, most university students would not have had years of schooling. Prior to the printing press, how common would it be for the average young adult to know how to read?
The methods of influence were more likely to be crude and brutal. If someone openly questioned the Holy Roman curriculum, they could simply be tortured in public and then executed in a very provocative ritual of human sacrifice.
Eventually, such practices were mostly replaced with intensive propaganda rituals. If young people can be programmed to literally worship their regional government, then it is relatively trivial whether or not they will make a public oath of allegiance to the king of kings in Rome.
In fact, the more that the average person thinks of their local governing official, the less that person thinks of those who supervise or watch over that local governing official. It must be very exciting to have intense emotions stirred up about who to elect as the county supervisor or even the prime minister of the entire kingdom.
If only the masses participate in voting rituals, then one of these centuries we may finally reform our system to better match with the propaganda ideals that we were indoctrinated to worship as the founding principles of our regional cult. Were those political ideals ever an accurate match for the actual reality of the historical foundation of our regional cult? In some cases, historical accuracy might not be as important as the intense emotions evoked.