The Threat of Autonomy
“The conflict between the will to deny horrible events and the will to proclaim them aloud is the central dialectic of psychological trauma. People who have survived atrocities often tell their stories in a highly emotional, contradictory, and fragmented manner that undermines their credibility and thereby serves the twin imperatives of truth-telling and secrecy. When the truth is finally recognized, survivors can begin their recovery. But far too often secrecy prevails, and the story of the traumatic event surfaces not as a verbal narrative but as a symptom.” ―Judith Lewis Herman, Trauma and Recovery
The primary quality that constitutes a threat to the maintenance of state power is autonomy.
Autonomy is the opposite of conformity, obedience and dependency. When it comes to perception management and behavior modification on a collective scale, the primary obstacle to total control is the fact that people aren’t all alike. Since there exists a spectrum of awareness, gullibility, susceptibility, and autonomy in any given target audience, the exact same methods can’t be applied to everyone on that spectrum. You can’t fool all the people, etc. Not everyone can be indoctrinated, educated, inspired, coerced, or terrorized in the same way to perceive the same things or behave in the same manner.
I deduce from this that one logical way around such a problem is to attempt gradual schismogenesis: to drive people towards whichever end of a spectrum they are closer to, whether towards belief and willing subjugation to the State (including the belief that it is flawed and corrupt and only needs reconfiguring) or towards disbelief and unwilling subjugation. On the one hand, this creates a divide between potential allies (equally oppressed and disempowered subjects); on the other, it creates an increasingly extreme, exaggerated, and nuance-free reading of the situation at both ends of the spectrum.
To this end, I once wrote, “There is a worldwide conspiracy [i.e., agenda] to create the illusion of a worldwide conspiracy.” Yet the opposite may also be true: there is a worldwide conspiracy, or agenda, to discredit the idea of a worldwide conspiracy. All bases are thereby covered.
Since we are talking of a spectrum, albeit one that is always being driven towards polarity, there remains variation within it. Not everyone who rejects a belief in a worldwide conspiracy thinks that the system is salvageable (there are anarchists and Marxists who do not think conspiratorially yet who see our present political, social and economic system as inherently destructive, even “evil”). Many people, for example, believe the government is run by incompetents and that the reason for the self-destructive nature of society is a combination of greed, irresponsibility, and stupidity, rather than any conscious design or malevolence. Or that racism, sexism, intolerance, and inequality are at the root of all social ills, even while, at the other end, it is Jews, Masons, Satanists, or Reptiles who are to blame.
The main thing in such social and psychological schismogenesis is that people believe whatever they believe not from conscious choice but as a result of having had their perceptions managed, i.e., as responses to the advertising. It doesn’t matter if they buy Pepsi or Coke, as long as they keep imbibing the sugar. As long as the narratives they subscribe to—globalism, nationalism, Marxism, neoliberalism, alt-right-ism, racial realism, ethno-nationalism, postmodernism, nihilism, theism, occultism, conspiratorialism—are manufactured as vehicles to capture their attention, direct their choices, and modify their behaviors down pre-prepared State channels, people will continue to sink deeper into dependency, away from autonomy or self-awareness.
This may be why those who gravitate towards a more conspiratorial perspective—one that corresponds more closely with the historical truth of long-term social engineering and a history of psyop—tend to wind up stranded on Planet Illuminati, where the movie playing depicts an all-powerful, all-controlling Satanic elite of possibly superhuman dimensions. If people are going to start wising up, it’s expedient (for the perception managers) that the “red pill” leads them deeper into fear and loathing, dissociation, narcissism and obsession, and not towards embodiment, acceptance, wisdom, peace, understanding, or love.
The Power of Superstition
“The psychological distress symptoms of traumatized people simultaneously call attention to the existence of an unspeakable secret and deflect attention from it. This is most apparent in the way traumatized people alternate between feeling numb and reliving the event. The dialectic of trauma gives rise to complicated, sometimes uncanny alterations of consciousness, which George Orwell . . . called ‘doublethink,’ and which mental health professionals, searching for calm, precise language, call ‘dissociation.’” ―Judith Lewis Herman, Trauma and Recovery
During the Vietnam War, the Joint United States Public Affairs Office (JUSPAO) regularly sent out PSYOP Policy to be used by the troops in the field. Policy Number 36, dated 10 May 1967, describes guidance to be followed by all U.S. elements in Vietnam, beginning with the title “THE USE OF SUPERSTITIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL OPERATIONS IN VIETNAM.” It poses a two-part problem, “To devise guidelines for the exploitation of enemy vulnerabilities provided by superstitions and deeply-held traditional beliefs”; and “To be aware of and accommodate those superstitions of friendly forces and populations that may have a bearing on military operations.”
“A strong superstition or a deeply-held belief shared by a substantial number of the enemy target audience,” it continues (emphasis added), “can be used as a psychological weapon because it permits with some degree of probability the prediction of individual or group behavior under a given set of conditions.”
The manual cautions that using enemy superstition as a starting point for psychological operations requires that “one must be sure of the conditions and control the stimuli that trigger the desired behavior. The first step in the manipulation of a superstition as an enemy vulnerability is its exact identification and detailed definition of its spread and intensity among the target audience” (emphasis added). This exploitation of enemy superstition requires ascertaining that “The superstition or belief is real and powerful” and that manipulating it is not only possible, but that it will “achieve results favorable to the friendly forces.”
According to retired “Superstition Psyop” Sergeant Major, Herbert A. Friedman, one of the prime American proponents of Superstition was General Edward Lansdale, for whom successful psychological warfare depended on “a firm understanding of the socio-cultural beliefs and myths of the target.” Lansdale served as the CIA’s chief operative in the Philippines during the early 1950s counterinsurgency campaign against the country’s Huk rebels.
In the most famous operation, which may or may not be true, it is alleged that [Landsdale] was told of an area known to be harboring Hukbalahap guerrillas. A combat psychological warfare squad was brought in and, under Lansdale’s direction, planted stories among town residents of an asuang or vampire living on the hill where the Huks were based. A famous local soothsayer, they said, had predicted that men with evil in their hearts would become its victim. After letting the story sink in, Lansdale’s ambushers waited for a Huk patrol to pass along the trail, quietly snatched the last insurgent, punctured his neck with two holes, hung the body by the ankles to drain it of blood, then put the corpse back on the trail. When the guerrillas returned to look for their missing comrade they found the bloodless corpse, obviously killed by an Asuang (vampire). The entire Huk unit packed up and left the area in great haste.
As if to indicate the centrality of pop culture to psyop, Friedman inserts the poster for the 1973 Philippine movie, Son of the Vampire:
Friedman provides a similar example in the exploiting of the North Vietnamese fear that, if they died far from home, and their bodies were denied a proper burial, they would become “wandering souls” after death.
The operation was code-named “Wandering Soul.” Engineers spent weeks recording eerie sounds . . . similar to the sounds employed during a scary radio show or movie . . . designed to send shivers down the back. These cries and wails were intended to represent souls of the enemy dead who had failed to find the peace of a proper burial. . . . The purpose of these sounds was to panic and disrupt the enemy and cause him to flee his position. Helicopters were used to broadcast Vietnamese voices pretending to be from beyond the grave. They called on their descendants in the Vietcong to defect, to cease fighting.
Such examples make it clear why pop culture in general, and Hollywood specifically, might be central to the art and science of psyop. If we consider the implications of a domestic appliance of exploiting popular superstitions to manipulate perceptions and behavior; if we juxtapose this with cultural meme machines like Brock’s PAC’s, seemingly fringe players like the Discordian Society, Timothy Leary, Whitley Strieber, Simon’s The Necronomicon, or with specific memes such as “alien abduction,” “Illuminati,” “RussiaGate,” and Satanic Ritual Abuse; and if we recall that psyop is geared towards analyzing “factors that affect and influence the behavior of an adversary . . . to nominate targets in order to change the behavior . . . to facilitate military operations, and to support and communicate national objectives”—then it is easy to imagine the potential of such areas of collective fascination to function as psyop.
Selling the Alien
So-called Satanic Ritual Abuse seems designed to enflame the already combustive, superstitious, fear-based imagination of the masses—specifically Christians but also people “waking up” to political realities—and lure them into a new level of nightmare (so-called “mass hysteria,” “psychic contagion,” or “moral panic”).
One potentially desirable effect of such a psyop would be to manage the target audience’s perceptions towards seeing the State as both diabolic and Godlike. It also seems to function as a highly effective tool of schismogenesis, which can be seen by how opinion on these accounts is so strongly divided, between those who accept the reality of them (sometimes unquestioningly) and those who dismiss them as the result of religious hysteria and the exploitation of hordes of unethical psychotherapists. On both ends of the spectrum, ironically, a massive conspiracy is imagined.
Once again, the truth seems to be found in a less literal-minded or simplistic twilight zone between extremes. Real abominations are certainly being committed, even while the more lurid, fantastic, overly “Satanic” (even supernatural) aspects of these scenarios are being pushed forward: as a means to sensationalize them, on the one hand, and discredit them, on the other. Yet these elements may not be strictly essential or integral to the acts being committed, any more than an abduction experience depends on the existence of aliens. Or if these elements are integral to a given experience, then they are like “special effects” that make a movie that much more persuasive, as in the case of Lansdale’s soldier-vampires.
Was Lansdale’s psyop reality or movie? Real people were killed as part of a real military strategy, and a fake supernatural element was incorporated to spread shock and awe and superstitious dread. The soldiers who committed the acts of violence were not required to believe they were vampires, however, or even to believe in vampires at all, any more than General Lansdale needed to believe in the supernatural to plan the psyop. But those soldiers did need to embody that superstitious belief and make it real. And since the killing was real, and the blood-draining was real, mightn’t they find themselves, like method actors, increasingly unsure at what point the movie ends and reality begins?
The “occultic” aspect of accounts of organized ritual abuse, or of the various serial killings of recent history, may of course be absolutely real. Forces of the occult may also be real. But whatever the case, and whatever those involved actually believe, they certainly appear to be essential to the managing of the perceptions—first of the victims and then the larger public that hears these accounts—as a means of adding an extra dimension of psychological terror to the purely physical horror, while at the same time, paradoxically, introducing an element of the fantastic.
This latter consequence—that of making the accounts so horrible that they seem ridiculous—is for a different target audience, one existing at the other end of the cognitive spectrum, the Sam Harris-Richard Dawkins end (though Jordan Peterson, tellingly, is equally dismissive of organized ritual abuse) that is contemptuous of religious and superstitious belief. For this demographic, the supernatural element, rather than making the accounts more terrifying, increases the apparent absurdity of them.
To a degree, this schismogenesis occurs in the perception, and hence the behaviors, of the percipients themselves. Seeing, or remembering, we both believe and disbelieve our perceptions. And not knowing which of our responses to believe, we are paralyzed to act. Like traumatized children, we are rendered powerless in the face of something so vast that it is seemingly incomprehensible to us.
Our trauma becomes our God, and our traumatized state becomes our traumatizer-State.
 “The Hukbalahap Rebellion was a rebellion staged by former Hukbalahap or Hukbong Bayan Labansa Hapon (Anti-Japanese Army) soldiers against the Philippine government. It started during the Japanese occupation of the Philippines in 1942 and continued during the presidency of Manuel Roxas, and ended in 1954 under the presidency of Ramon Magsaysay.” http://www.psywarrior.com/SuperstitionPSYOP.html