Humanarchy, Chapter 2 - Belief and Fear, Part 2
|...continued, from Part 1 of CHAPTER TWO Belief and Fear
Part Two of
CHAPTER TWO Belief and Fear
|The third part of the Unholy Trinity is the most feared because it concerns the most
personal and fundamental aspect of our individual lives. Just like every other living
thing upon the face of the Earth we are born with one purpose hard wired into our bodies
and our minds. We are born to procreate.
For most of the time human beings have been around, the Earths population was
fairly stable that is births and deaths were almost perfectly in balance. It may be
argued that any species, living in harmony with its environment, would exhibit a similar
stability. However, after the invention of agriculture, the worlds population began
to increase rapidly. Right now, we are told, there are almost 6 billion of us and the
worlds population now doubles every forty years. Put simply, this means that there
are around 240,000 more people being born each day than are dying.
None other than the late, but highly esteemed, Jaques Cousteau wrote in a UNESCO
The United Nations Global Biodiversity Assessment, seems to agree with him and informs
It's terrible to have to say this. World population must be stabilised and to do
that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. This is so horrible to contemplate that we
shouldn't even say it. But the general situation in which we are involved is lamentable.
Given that most of the worlds population would almost certainly aspire to an
"American material standard of living," that means there are presently around 5
billion too many of us kicking around this third rock from the sun. Clearly, dealing with
this problem now will be far cheaper and much more humane than in the future. So, now the
United Nations is engaged in a long term drive to stop the population increase by
eliminating poverty, with safe and effective birth control widely available and by
formulating strategies that transfer real political power to women.
...an agricultural world, in which most human beings are peasants, should be able
to support 5 to 7 billion people...a reasonable estimate for an industrialised world
society at the present North American material standard of living would be one billion. At
the more frugal European standard of living, 2 - 3 billion would be possible.
But hang on there just a minute doesn't giving power to one half of humanity
(female) mean that that the other half (male) will have to lose power? The answer is
undoubtedly yes. The feminisation of society is already well under way and will increase
dramatically in the new Century Of Women. Legislation is underway to enforce
all governments to ensure that all women have equal access to property and
wealth and must be free to live untouched by warfare or violence.
These strategies ostensibly to enhance womens rights are
being applied zealously through our individual nations governments. Strange, when you
consider that the USA, Canada, Europe, Australia and New Zealand are countries that have
practically negative population growth, yet in these nations the destruction of families
is rampant, the injustices and punitive measures against males are the most harsh and that
women are the wealthiest, healthiest and most cosseted on the entire planet.
Strange also that the United Nations originally championed human rights
that applied to all human beings as clearly human beings are both male and female.
But the UN has progressively elevated human rights for women and The
Girl Child to the degree that they have now been redefined as superior to those of
males. Consequently, we must assume that the male of our species is now defined as
If we were looking at such an explosion of numbers among any species on this planet it
would naturally cause us deep concern. Surely, no possible increase in food supply can
cope with this? There are just too many of us. Surely, unless the population explosion is
slowed down we are headed for a global catastrophe even if global warming and toxic
emissions can be reduced.
But dont panic! The fact is that the Total Fertility Rate (TFR) is actually
declining world wide. A TFR of 2.1 is generally accepted as population stability or Zero
Population Growth. In developing countries, where we are told things are really desperate,
the TFR shows a 45-year decline, down from 6.1 in 1950, to 3.9 at the present. In the
developed countries, the rate is below zero growth. In America, the rate is 2.0; in
Europe, 1.6; in Japan, 1.5; in Spain and Italy, the rate is 1.3.
Good news but even if a small fraction of humanity still continues to reproduce
at its current rates the situation is essentially the same the worlds
population will increase overall at an alarming rate even if many nations are in
ZPG. Time to panic again? No, not yet. The trends indicate that though the populations of
some Asian countries, Africa and Latin America will continue to grow for some decades, the
rest of the world will soon be in demographic decline. Additionally, there is a well known
correlation between poverty and high birth rates. In almost all countries, whether they be
capitalist, communist, Catholic, Muslim, eastern or western, population growth slows down
or stops when grinding poverty disappears.
This is called demographic transition. This is why helping countries to become self
sufficient is not just decent it is vital. So, one of the central issues in the
world population crisis is poverty. But, there are exceptions to this. Some wealthy
nations still have high birth rates. But in them, contraceptives are sparsely available
and women lack any real political power. See where we are headed? In forty years time, if
the doubling stays constant there will be 12 billion of us, in a hundred and twenty years
48 billion. There is no way the Earth can support that many is there?
The idea that population growth has exceeded the earth's capacity was first exploited
by Malthus (1766 - 1834), and has resurfaced every now and again especially when
there is a political advantage to scaring the shit out of the human herd. For example, in
1968 Paul Ehrlich spelled out the devastating consequences of overpopulation. He also
suggested a solution to the problem a government that would imposed severe
population control measures to save the planet.
Heavy stuff but lets hear it from another perspective. The Agricultural
Economic Institute at Oxford University, who presumably ought to know what they are
talking about, conducted studies that showed that by utilising the "best
methods," 35.1 billion people could be fed to the standards of an average American
diet. Not only that, but Colin Clark, the former director of the AEI, estimated that no
more than half the land area would be used for agriculture.
The Population Research Institute gave this simple illustration. They calculate that
if you divide the present global population by the 262,000 square miles of the State of
Texas, the entire human race would fit nicely into it, with the average family of four
having the amount of space approximately the size of an urban building lot. Well,
thats a comforting thought unless you happen to live in Texas already, that
So what the hell is going on here? This is scary stuff. Who do we believe the
scientists who tell us there is no need to panic, things are actually getting better and
the population in coming down or those who predict global catastrophe and want to
kill off 5 billion of us? Of course, its possible that both sides are lying to us
but which one and why? You know its a frightening thought but
what if they are both telling us the truth?
THE UNHOLY TRINITY OF THE
WE HAVE WAYS OF
MAKING YOU THINK
There is no such thing at this date of the world's history, in America, as an
independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write
your honest opinions and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in
print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinions out of the paper I am connected
with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things and any of you who would
be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another
job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before
twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.
The business of a journalist is to destroy truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to
vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon and to sell his country and his race for his daily
bread. You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We
are the tools and vassals for rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they
pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the
property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.
John Swinton, the former Chief of Staff of the New York Times,
called by his peers, "The Dean of his profession,"
when asked to give a toast before the NY Press Club in 1953
|Before the First World War, there only 125,000 radio receiving sets in the entire
U.S.A. Radio was seen as a enthusiasts hobby rather than a means of mass entertainment but
by 1937, 27.5 million American families had radios a larger percentage than had
telephones, automobiles, plumbing, or even electricity!
Such wide access to the ears, hearts and minds of so many Americans was too good to
miss especially to advertisers desperate to sell their products. It was American
radio that gave birth to the soap opera short dramas serials with
comforting homespun themes liberally laced with the message from our sponsor
usually an entreaty to the housewife to buy a particular brand of soap powder.
The new media attracted the attentions of more than just the advertising industry
though. In 1937 the Rockefeller Foundation funded several universities to investigate the
social affects of this new form of mass entertainment. They headquartered the study
popularly known as "the Radio Project." at the School of Public and
International Affairs at Princeton University. Its true purpose was to test the
thesis that the overall effect of the mass media could be used to atomize and
increase lability in other words brainwash people.
In 1939, the Radio Project actually published some of its findings in the
Journal of Applied Psychology. They announced that the American public had become what
they termed radio minded and that repetition of format was the key to
popularity. Repetition of almost any content would invariably make it acceptable
something that most of us who have grown up in an age where we have been constantly
bombarded with the strategies of the Radio project, on TV, in advertising, music and
movies do not even give a second thought to. It was also found that rigid, recurring
themes were very successful at shaping the minds of the masses the characters, the
period, the details may change, but the same basic story is the same.
We have become accepting of having our minds made up for us by somebody else. We
dont even notice it, but we are constantly having our opinions formed on all kinds
of issues. Selling us soap powder, a car, a hit song or a movie is relatively harmless (as
long as you think that having you mind controlled by someone else to get at your money is
harmless) but the power of the press can be used to deliberately lead people
astray, and to make them believe whatever propagandists want them to believe. When it
comes to swaying your opinions politically, things can take on a more sinister aspect.
One of the shrewdest ways for human predators to conquer their stronger victims
is to steadily convince them with propaganda that they're still free...'
Dr. N.A. Scott
"All Germany hears the Führer with the folks' radio
|When Adolf Hitler took power in Germany he well understood the power of the media,
and he used it to shape a modern, civilised industrial nation to his ends. With full
control of the national press, his propaganda minister Paul Josef Goebbels developed
sophisticated and very effective tools of propaganda to control public opinion in Germany,
and even in other countries. He infamously proved that if you repeat a lie often enough in
the mass media, most people would accept it as the truth. We should remember also what was
achieved with the relatively primitive methods and limited media components of the day
the radio, the cinema and the printed word. Today, the skills and techniques of
advertising and propaganda have been honed to perfection. Lying to the public to control
their actions and their thoughts is now an extremely sophisticated science.
Indeed, such is the subtle nature of propaganda that we fail to understand its
significance and its power unlike those who disseminate it who are fully
aware of how effective and necessary it can be in keeping the human herd moving along.
Today,some advertising agencies have bigger budgets and more actual power than Goebbels
did imagine what a government could do with such power. Yet we totally ignore the
fact that our freedom of thought is manipulated. If our bodies were being poisoned by
radiation or chemicals there would be hell to pay but our minds? Thats OK, we
allow anyone to come right in and do what ever they please with them.
We may think that advertising agencies use their power only to sell us commercial
goods, but they also plan election campaigns for politicians, and manipulate our
perception of governments. Politicians may pretend that their advertising managers have no
political power, but it's obvious that the man who controls the election also controls the
politician. In this day and age, where huge national and multi-national corporations are
more powerful than governments, we should be even more aware that we are being lied to
but no the line between fiction and reality is so blurred in our minds we
let it all wash over us and whats worse we allow an unhealthy amount
of it to sink in.
There are some advertising practises that are supposed to be illegal, subliminal
advertising on movies and TV, for example, but the limits are not enforceable. Advertising is a multi-billion dollar business and advertising
agencies have millions of dollars a year to fund research, naturally they have good
reasons to keep their techniques secret. You can bet that there plenty of other, more
underhand techniques that we don't know about.
Most of the things that are advertised are actually things that we do not need and do
not want therefore advertisers have to create that need. One way is to make people
unhappy with what they already have by bringing out new superior models of
their products. This philosophy is taken to the extreme the
by the fashion industry. The young and the gullible are the prime victims of fashion, but
the threat of insecurity posed by not looking like or keeping up with the herd is a
powerful mechanism that is hard for almost everyone to resist.
But, the media does not just sell us products it sells us an image of ourselves
and we are suckered into believing it because we are basically scared to see beyond
the safe boundaries of the herd. But who makes these boundaries? Who restricts us to what
we may believe about the world even about ourselves? Not the democratic consensus
of the herd, but the drovers. They tell us what to think and if we are honest with
ourselves, most of us are just too plain chicken to think for ourselves.
In 1990, a study found that nearly 40% of the contents of American newspapers began
with press releases or other hype from public relations agencies. There is no way the
daily newspaper can compete with TV and radio, yet we still cling to the belief that
anything in black and white is the truth. The rest of the news even the
real news is nothing but bad news. As every newspaper man knows bad
news sells newspapers. It also gives the public a deep seated sense of unease. It keeps
them scared with a daily diet of horror, murder, death and environmental destruction.
After all, the view of the world that advertisers like to portray is the one that says
you can't be happy until you have bought every single product they have to sell. Obviously
you will never succeed, but that's no problem for the advertisers, because you will keep
trying as long as you have money in your pockets that is. Subconsciously you have
picked up the message that by buying this car or that video camera going to see
this movie or listening to that music you will somehow get a little closer to nirvana. It
wont. In spite of the lies the media constantly tell us, the truth is that
possessions do not make you happy and they certainly will not make you rich.
However the people who are selling them to us are not doing it for their health or because
they are basically altruistic, caring human beings. They just want your wad all of
it. We know that but somehow we just cant bring ourselves to believe it.
Ask yourself, what do we want in this country above all? People want to be happy,
isnt that right? Havent you heard it all your life? I want to be happy, people
say. Well, arent they? Dont we keep them moving, dont we give them fun?
Thats all we live for, isnt it? For pleasure, for titillation? And you must
admit, our culture provides plenty of these.
The Fire Chief Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury
FOR SALE NEW
|Fashion is not just about the clothes we wear or the kind of car we drive it
pervades everything we do the food we eat, our body shape and the way we think.
Fifty years ago it was fashionable to love your country and hate the Japanese. Today we go
to sushi restaurants and drive cars made by the same company whos aircraft bombed
Pearl Harbour yet there are still people alive who fought their way across the
Pacific and witnessed thousands of their comrades killed by fanatical Japanese troops.
Fashion can heal the wounds of warfare, but its as well to remember that it can open
them up a hell of a lot quicker like in Iran, Iraq and Serbia for example.
Today it is unfashionable to be patriotic, to fly the flag of your country. In the UK,
the Union flag is now regarded by many as a symbol of evil, racist thuggery. Sixty years
ago it was an image of freedom and democracy holding out against the nazi invaders. Today,
the Rolls Royce company the technological acme of British skill and engineering is
owned by BMW a company whos engines powered the bombers of the Nazi Blitz.
The world is now taking shape in "trading sectors" the "Pacific
Rim," "The Americas," "European," and "Middle Eastern
New forms of multi-national currency unit are an important aspect of this melding. The
introduction of the Euro created the first real challenge to the Dollar on
world currency markets and though it remains to be seen whether the EU will stabilise,
international commerce between individuals as well as companies and organisations may
eventuallyl lead to the adoption of a truly international world currency unit. Whether we
like it or not, the nation state is already dead the flags that millions of men
died for are worthless rags to be despised, set fire to and trampled in the dust.
During the late 60's and most of the 1970's the United States fought a hot war in
Vietnam as well the Cold War with the Soviet Union. There was considerable opposition
within the United States and in Europe to the Vietnam War opposition that emanated
in the main from students in Colleges and Universities. There was also a deep sense of
unease brought about by nightly news broadcasts showing the casualties, both military and
The Soviet intelligence services had access to some very powerful propaganda and
persuasion techniques and a long established spy network that spread throughout most of
the free world. They paid particular attention to causing rebellion and unrest among the
student populations. They knew full well that the young, the naïve and the idealistic
were among the most malleable sections of any human society. The hi-jacking of whole
generations allegiances was accomplished. The science of persuasion and manipulation
made a quantum leap in the years from 1960 to 1980 and thousands of young men died
uselessly and needlessly in a war that was never declared.
Since the 1970's some of the people who protested about the Vietnam War have done very
well in the social action business. Hanoi Jane Fonda, for example, who
actually visited North Vietnam and openly protested against American bombing raids and
then later actually persuaded millions of American women to buy her exercise video.
Organisations that began as idealistic crusades, born out of the civil rights movement, or
campaigns for equal rights, or to save the whales or whatever, now have budgets of
millions of dollars a year. Their very existence depending on a constant supply of bad
news to justify their very existence.
Moving, moving, moving, though theyre disapprovin keep those dogies
Lyric from the theme song of the popular 60s TV series
|Now, just suppose that a powerful organisation an organisation like Ted
Turners CNN, for example or the Walt Disney Corporation, Time-Warner or Viacom
wanted to sell us a whole new society? Wouldnt they attempt to make the old,
traditional model look bad? Wouldnt they keep right on telling us that the new
improved version was better? You bet they would. You bet they do.
YOULL DO IT
|Public opinion is nothing of the sort. The public do not possess an
opinion of their own and if they should start to form one, there are powerful methods at
work to suppress any such rebellion. The power that shapes and manipulates our thoughts
reaches into almost every home, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. It moulds
the minds of the young and the old, the intelligent as well as the ignorant, the rich as
well as the poor. The media gives us not only a carefully tailored image of our world
it also tells us what to think about that image.
Government deregulation of the mass media has led not to a varied and competitive
industry, but to a succession of massive mergers and take-overs that have brought about a
situation where the whole of the western worlds media resides in the hands of very
few people. Wherever you watch TV or a movie, wherever you listen to music, read a
newspaper or a book you can almost guarantee it was produced and distributed by one of
these powerful mega-media companies.
This is a situation that is bound to lead to an abuse of the tremendous power that
such organisations wield over us. Its one thing to use that power to sell us their
products, but when they sell us our thoughts or more accurately force us to think
what they want us to think then we should resist and rebel against such oppression.
Yet we do not question what is thrown at us. If we even notice a sudden increase in
important roles played by black actors, for example we applaud it as a good strategy for
racial integration. If we see an amusing sit-com including a positive homosexual
character, we might figure that this is the way the world is now and we should emulate the
TV script and learn to be tolerant. These characters are paraded in front of us that we
may believe and obey. The smart loner in control of her life the modern woman who
has career, wealth, numerous partners and a child, but is independent of a
husband. The promiscuous divorcee outrageously pursuing men half her age and
screwing her way to the top of the ladder. All positive modern female role models for
impressionable young women too emulate.
But when we see the negative stereotypes constantly paraded before us we should
be warned. The Deadbeat Dad. The racist bigot always male and white the
violent criminal always male and white, the survivalist, the gun nut patriot
always male and white. The fool once exclusively a black man, now always male and
How about those terrible Nazi propaganda movies where Jews were shown in the streets
spliced with pictures of rats running through the sewers? How we used scorn those old
40s movies that portrayed black people as happy banjo plunking minstrels, or
oversized but devoted housemaids. The 50s when lip-sticked, corsetted females were
simpering, hysterical, neurotics hopelessly falling in love with Rock Hudson.
Remember when every western bad guy wore a black hat? How about the early 60s
where every social outcast and juvenile delinquent was a young guy on a motorcycle wearing
a black leather jacket? How about the70s when we had a succession of black
side-kicks, police chiefs or street-wise hipsters? Then there were the female cops,
battling against sexism and the glass ceiling in between shooting down nasty white males
in litter strewn alleyways.
Now the decent hero who stood alone under the noon day sun is an embodiment of the
patriarchal oppressor. He has been replaced by the heroine shes feisty,
violently independent and constantly at war with the male establishment the only
men in her life are drooling morons or gay boutique owners.
An action movie is now a plot-less succession of near nuclear explosions where
hundreds of men are gunned down by a Neanderthal hero in a blood spattered vest. A horror
movie is where an attractive career woman is stalked by a rapist. A family comedy is when
an ex-husband has to dress up as a woman to see his own kids.
Anyone who doubts that public attitudes are changed by the media is as deluded as
every other couch potato who sits in front of the tube, day after day, night after night
and has their brains sucked out by the one eyed, two faced, lying telescreen. Its fantasy is
what passes for reality.
Its safer to conform to the perceived conformity of the herd, but we do not
really know what the herd thinks we only know what we are told it thinks by the
media. The truth is that mostly it doesnt think at all. We are told that we are all
part of the same great big human herd, moving steadily forward, guided by our drovers
towards anew, improved equal opportunitied, eco-friendly, multicultural, sexually diverse
future. The old model is obsolete and God help us incredible as it may seem
we believe it.
Posted 2000 04 19
2006 10 31 (reformated)