New Dawn – World's Most Unusual Magazine

Author: Nick Parkins

  • Do Psychopaths Run the World?

    Do Psychopaths Run the World?

    From New Dawn 152 (Sept-Oct 2015)

    Our society is run by insane people for insane objectives. I think we’re being run by maniacs for maniacal ends and I think I’m liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That’s what’s insane about it.
    – John Lennon (1940-1980), English singer and songwriter

    Lennon and others externalise the apparent paranoia that wells up inside us. “The world has gone mad!” More often than not we partition this voice off, content to view the world as others prescribe it. But who are these others, and what do they want?

    The term psychopath is often criminally misjudged, thanks largely to unhelpful portrayals of sick, twisted and violent psycho-character types in the popular media. This has led, by way of public ignorance, to the common belief that the psychopath has no function, role or place in open society. A swift offload that allows us, the apparent sane majority, to circumvent our worst fears.

    Any notion that the psychopath is incapable of functioning in open society is, according to M.E. Thomas1 – a self-confessed sociopath – flawed. The question is not the capacity to function, but rather what capacity or form that function takes. As Thomas says, psychopaths and sociopaths share an intertwined clinical history; both can function, they just do so differently. And though we are left to muse on what mask that function may take, in many social situations they excel.

    Competition Wins Out

    Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck was a French biologist who advocated a theory of evolution widely rebuked in establishment circles. Lamarck’s major work was published in the same year Charles Darwin was born – who would go on to supplant Lamarck’s theory 50 years later. In Lamarck’s world cooperation prevailed over Darwinian competition as the driving mechanism of evolution.

    According to authors G. Greenberg and M.M. Haraway,2 it was Darwin’s view that served to reflect and sustain a Victorian society tied to free market, capitalist and imperial values. His model supported a dog-eat-dog, life is hard, code of practice; the scientific valediction of the natural world as played out on a brutal, cold and insensitive landscape. Arguably the perfect environment for the aspiring modern day psychopath, and a prevailing view that the poet Tennyson described as nature, red in tooth and claw.

    Snakes & Ladders

    Although diagnosing definitive psychopathy in individuals remains somewhat of a grey area, attempts have been made to categorise psychological traits that set psychopathic personalities apart. Most prominent is the diagnostic check-list devised by renowned Canadian psychologist Robert Hare that is used to determine a categorical diagnosis of clinical psychopathy, or at best a category score.

    According to Hare’s list, psychopaths display superficial charm, unbridled ego, and pathological lying and cold, calculated cunning to entrance their prey. They are often impulsive and irresponsible, and exhibit an absence of empathy and remorseless lack of guilt. These and other attributes, such as criminal versatility and a marked capacity to manipulate, deceive and control, mark them out as dangerous. These are traits that enable psychopaths to move into high-ranking positions of power and influence.

    “We know much less about corporate psychopathy and its implications,” explains New York psychologist Paul Babiak, “in large part because of the difficulty in obtaining the active cooperation of business organisations for our research.”3 A dilemma that Hare disclosed to Jon Ronson, author of The Psychopath Test. “Prisoners are easy,” states Hare. “They like meeting researchers. It breaks up the monotony of their day. But CEOs, politicians…”4 According to Hare, these sharks are a different kettle of fish.

    A rare study on psychopathy in the workplace conducted by Babiak, Neumann and Hare5 suggests that 1 in 25, or 4 per cent, of corporate executives display significant personality traits typical of psychopathy – an incidence four times that estimated in the general population. The study supports the claim that psychopaths can and in fact do achieve high ranking corporate status. We are left to speculate, but Hare concedes Wall Street may harbour 1 in 10 attracted to lucrative watering holes that are poorly regulated.6 Factor this in and it’s not hard to see how the very lifeblood and identity of corporations and financial institutions can often run cold.

    Arguably most startling, the study indicates that despite being classed as substandard managers, team players and attracting poor performance appraisals, executives that met the clinical threshold of psychopath were valued by their immediate superiors as creative and innovative, as good communicators and strategic thinkers.

    In short, they may not always fly under the radar. Despite the blips, it is clear to American psychiatrist Hervey Cleckley7 that psychopaths possess the communication, persuasion and interpersonal skills to override any negative impacts on their career. A finding supported by the Babiak study: “some companies viewed psychopathic executives as having leadership potential, despite negative performance reviews and low ratings on leadership and management by subordinates.”8 According to the authors, this shows a proficiency to manipulate decision makers, a point made by psychologist Dennis Doren who observed in institutions the psychopath’s unerring ability to seek out and foster relationships with those of highest authority and demonstrate tremendous skill at influencing them.9

    In many instances the chameleon-like ability of the psychopath to mimic its surroundings by reading and influencing colleagues through the art of deception, be it through self promotion or subtle persuasion, allows the snake charmer to hide his true skin and pass unchecked through social customs. Studies suggest psychopathy, in body or by proxy, can entrench itself at the top, but is this phenomenon relatively isolated, or has this scenario over the course of human history always prevailed?

    As Above, So Below

    As vice president and director of Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution, Darrell West analyses business and law school curricula, specifically, according to West “because business and law schools train the leaders of tomorrow.”10 In the course of his research West reviews course syllabi and conducts interviews with faculty members. He has also surveyed data on business and law school student perceptions. What he found was troubling.

    “The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits,” states West, taking his lead from the title of a 1970 New York Times magazine article written by the highly-influential American economist and statistician, Milton Friedman. The article was unequivocal: according to Friedman, maximising shareholder value was a company’s sole responsibility.11

    “Many schools do not require stand alone courses that provide broad conceptions on the purpose of the corporation in society,” says West. Of those that do, “many focus on the purpose of the corporation, with emphasis on how to maximise shareholder value, especially in law schools.”12 Instruction therefore is key, notes West, and will colour a student’s view of the world. In fact, West concludes, “business school surveys show that after completing school, students are more likely to see shareholder value as the most important goal of the corporation.”13

    It was not that Friedman was a prophet. In hindsight, according to West, he helped shape the outlook of numerous business leaders, academics, and thought-leaders that ultimately served to affect America’s modern sense of purpose of the corporation. An inherent identity that helps shape the way business and law school students view their, often times, lack of responsibility to society even today.

    In the real world, inevitable coldly-calculated equations play out on the one side to maximise profit and on the other to minimise loss. And like most mathematical equations they make little or no sense to the layman.

    “Can you buy what you already own?” This was the equation facing all concerned when Canadian-based Nautilus Minerals Inc. purchased the licence in 2011 from the “Independent State of Papua New Guinea” (PNG) to mine deep-sea vent fields in sovereign waters off the country’s coastline. The answer, morally, of course, is no.

    According to Sir Julias Chan, current Governor of New Ireland province in PNG, ethics are an intangible commodity, and unlike cold hard currency rarely stack up. “First, the state cedes exploration and production rights to foreign companies for next to nothing,” says Chan. In the case of PNG 10,000 kina, equivalent to US$4,000. “For this pittance, the foreign developer gets full control of all the wealth that can be taken from the ground.”14

    “The next step is for the state to seek equity in the project, usually 30 percent in a mining project and 22.5 per cent in an oil or gas project,” explains Chan. “The state has ‘given away’ the entire resource to a foreign company, and now returns to buy what was already legally its own property, for a 30 percent interest in the project.” To PNG this meant 300 million kina, or US$118 million. “And, to do so, the state usually takes out a commercial loan rate that puts the country further into debt at high interest.”15 Today a common event whereby the state acts to castrate itself and its people to high finance.

    Joel Bakan is a professor of law at the University of British Columbia, Canada. While those that run corporations are for the most part, good, moral people, says Bakan, the duty of the corporate executive is to the corporation’s business interests first and foremost. “The money they manage is not theirs,” explains Bakan. “They can no sooner use it to heal the sick… or buy a villa in Tuscany.” In the corporate world, good people are encouraged to behave badly. In fact, the sum of corporate parts are “singularly self interested and unable to feel genuine concern for others in any context. The corporation, like the psychopathic personality it resembles, is programmed to exploit others for profit.”16

    Under such terms it is not difficult to envisage how a system can soon come to value and mimic its most deviant parts. Equally, how the parts over time can come to be shaped by the whole.

    [alert type=”info” dismiss=”no”]If you appreciate this article, please consider a subscription to New Dawn magazine.[/alert]

    It’s Behind You

    According to philosopher and author Aaron James, while the psychopath feigns moral action as a tool to manipulate others, the arsehole could well be a butt of equal contention. Unlike the prototypical psychopath, says James, the arsehole “traffics in and is moved by moral justification,” which leads to an “entrenched sense of special entitlement.”17

    The perfect example, according to James, is Apple founder Steve Jobs who saw his sole obligation to society as implicitly tied to producing the products his consumers desired. James notes what Jobs’s best friend, Jony Ive, once told Business Insider: “when he’s frustrated… his way to achieve catharsis is to hurt somebody. And I think he feels he has a liberty and license to do that,” said Ive. “The normal rules of social engagement, he feels, don’t apply to him.”18

    Worryingly, James says, “the arsehole’s reasoning is shaped by the moral justification his surrounding culture makes available to him.”19 For instance, according to Hare, many white-collar criminals are psychopaths. “They flourish because the characteristics that define the disorder are actually valued,” asserts Hare. “When they get caught, what happens? A slap on the wrist, a six-month ban from trading, [oh] and don’t give us the $100 million back.”20

    Accordingly, not only does corporate culture control net arsehole production, but the quality of butt-heads produced. And, depending on the culture, says James, “an arsehole can be better or worse behaved than a psychopath.”21 A consoling thought.

    Arguably it is no more comforting to know that the psychopath you had fingered all along is really an arsehole nurtured by a system that is, by way of inherent nature, socially deviant. If the reasoning of a typical arsehole is moved by moral justification, taken from his surrounding environment, then the ability of a psychopathic culture and/or system to shape its own governing class is implied.

    Get the issue this article appears in

    They Gave Us Their Mind

    The enduring strength of psychopathy lies in its ability to manipulate how others perceive it. But the innate ability of the psychopath or the system to shape our perceptions is not, in itself, entirely the reserve of the clinical psychopath.

    We all play our part in the masquerade. Many of us partake in cosmetic enhancements and props that support our ego’s waltz through this porcelain world. Whatever the score, the Hare check-list has a number picked out for us all. In its pursuit of ultimate control, this is the greatest achievement of psychopathy; after all, what better way to predict by response a person or group, than to give them your mind?

    The competitor’s urge to win at all cost is certainly pervasive. So, too, the trend of irresponsibility, most evident in the compensation culture that has crept into the social mindset, thanks to laws that restrict a person’s capacity to develop by way of ethics and moral concepts of right and wrong. How can you take responsibility for thoughts and concepts that are not your own? In the broad, rules and regulations teach us to hand over our power, a transaction that re-enforces itself in society according to Thomas. She says that given the choice between having power and giving it up to a ‘trusted’ entity, people often choose to give it up rather than take the responsibility that comes with it.22

    In its apparent, endless quest to reinvent society in its own image, psychopathy perhaps has more than one expression. Recent research into social media habits throws up disturbing correlations between heavy Facebook use and socially aggressive narcissism. In one study users that scored highly on a Narcissistic Personality Inventory questionnaire, reports Damien Pearse, “had more friends on Facebook, tagged themselves more often and updated their news-feeds more regularly.” The research, the report states, “comes amid mounting evidence that young people are becoming increasingly narcissistic, and obsessed with self-image and shallow friendships.”23

    In the same breath the media have ‘jokingly’ jumped on those abstaining from Facebook as highly suspicious and suspect – they could have something to hide. Facebook use is, of course, prevalent and ‘normal’.

    An infinite number of media streams exist that entice us to see our reflection, drawing us into powerful undercurrents, and buffeting us from one bank to the next. We surface only to take breath, disorientated and confused, disconnected from our natural cues. But perhaps that’s the idea. Certainly it is the innate need to control and the power to wield it, at whatever cost, and without care, that fractures the pathological mind from the rest of us.

    The God Complex

    Those who rise to power in the corporatocracy, are control freaks, addicted to the buzz of power over other human beings.
    – Bruce Levine, social critic & psychologist

    In a competitive world there will always be those who actively seek out, justify or embrace traits of psychopathy as a route to success. For a surgeon, a cold detachment and cool head has its place. But glorifying the psychopath is a perilous path to tread. According to psychologist Linda Mealey, competition only serves to increase the use of antisocial and Machiavellian strategies and counteracts any increase in pro-social behaviour after success.

    Spiralling societal separation, and re-enforcing detachment, sets a dangerous precedent, what James refers to as a sense of “entitlement born of cosmic grandiosity.”24 He cites oil baron John D. Rockefeller who viewed his wealth not in some Wild West American capitalist context that gave him free rein, but unapologetically, by divine right: “God gave me my money,”25 said Rockefeller.

    This sense of divine entitlement, being chosen, as apart from society, has deeply disturbing parallels to contemporary wealth.

    Jeff Greene is a multi-billionaire property investor and entrepreneur, and owns reportedly America’s most expensive home. Greene, who made his fortune betting on sub-prime mortgages, says Americans need to have “less things”: “America’s lifestyle expectations are far too high and need to be adjusted, so we have less things and a smaller, better existence,” lectured the 60-year old, who lets out the $195 million palatial estate in Beverly Hills to royal families and international dignitaries for hundreds of thousands of dollars a month.26

    At its heart, assuming it had one, departments within the system, be they political, corporate or financial, select by lineage this mind; one willing to create, support and maintain it. “Figures such as J.P. Morgan, Randolph Hearst, and Mayer Rothschild,” argues author Stefan Verstappen, “are professional psychopaths that reach the pinnacle of the financial stage where they cause no less misery and destruction as their political counterparts.”27

    As a result, examples of psychopathic conduct in high office are commonplace. Robert Kirkconnell is a decorated US Air Force combat veteran of 27 years, and an outspoken critic of the US government MK-ULTRA program that conducted a battery of callous psychological or ‘mind control’ tests on its own citizens. In American Heart of Darkness, Kirkconnell charges the presidential Rockefeller Commission, set up to investigate the CIA’s activities, which he says funded the program. Kirkconnell no longer sees his home as a constitutional republic, but as a pathocracy run by psychopaths.

    Contagious Psychopathic Worldviews?

    I had to win at all costs, sometimes allowing the costs to flow unchecked, just to see the volume of my power.
    – M.E. Thomas

    “Power is all I have ever really cared about in my life,” states Thomas. “Physical power, the power of being desired or admired, destructive power, knowledge, invisible influence. I like people enough that I want to touch them, mould them, ruin them,” says Thomas. “I want to exercise my power.”28 It’s nothing personal. It’s dietary. The idea of ruining people, she says, is simply delicious.

    Thomas is not unique. The psychopath invariably plays with its food. In the process actively seeking to visit misfortune or suffering on others. Thomas regards herself as a white tiger – a beautiful and exotic pet but inherently dangerous. And whilst in her own words she considers herself tamed, inside she continues to grapple with a primal urge to destroy.

    This mindset is not lost on society. In fact, it is a worldview captured succinctly in Michael Ellner’s personal state of the world address: “Just look at us,” he asks. “Everything is backwards, everything is upside down. Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, psychiatrists destroy minds, scientists destroy truth, major media destroys information, religions destroy spirituality and governments destroy freedom.” You can see his point. But to what extent does this world talked of by Ellner stem solely from blind pursuit of power and profit?

    Is there a hidden systemic malevolence that creates fear and uncertainty; the chaos to warrant this chase? Is the malevolent mist, that evil intent we ascribe to heinous acts and misdeeds, illusory, an epiphenomena, a by-product of the psychopath brain? Or is it real, autonomous, and guiding the program? And does this distinction matter? Does it help us interpret, say, the rise in chronic illness, its origins and how the healing profession has become, as critics claim, a public relations buzz-term; managing symptoms for profit?

    The world of Kirkconnell swings into focus. Are we all victims of systemic programming; of disorientation; an imbalance the predator incites in us to maintain and enforce its position and status?

    Like a god, so much of what psychopathy is and does hides in plain sight. The psychopath appeals to its prey’s sense of empathy and faith in humanity. He is the blank slate onto which people project their hopes and ideals.

    This realisation must dawn if we are to expose systemic psychopathy and confront wildly sinister possibilities, not least the darker identities and underlying motives upon which it is based.

    Darwin Dorr is the director of research into psychopathology at Wichita State University, Kansas. “The majority of paedophiles are psychopathic,” says Dorr, “or at least manifest to a significant degree the psychological characteristics of psychopathy.”29

    Such ties that bind power to its perversions are historic, endemic and persist to this day. Investigations surrounding an elite Sydney paedophile ring are only the tip of a cold and callous iceberg that threatens to sink a titanic raft of untruths. In the UK, the reputation of once respected DJ, television presenter, and establishment confidante, Jimmy Savile, sank when his penchant for children, dead bodies, and satanic rituals and foreplay was disclosed to a shocked population.

    Questions are now being asked outside UK Home Office circles and its curious taste for celebrity trash cans. All of a sudden the term psychopath seems no longer sufficient. Are such people, the system they represent, and the entities they mimic and worship, beyond a check-list? Certainly UK and wider establishment attempts to stymie the truth only serve to disclose further the covert means and amoral control by which psychopathy operates as an integral part of the system.

    [alert type=”general” dismiss=”no”]This article was published in New Dawn 152.[/alert]

    [alert type=”success” dismiss=”no”]If you appreciate this article, please consider subscribing to help maintain this website.[/alert]

    Footnotes

    1. M.E. Thomas, Confessions of a Sociopath: A Life Spent Hiding In Plain Sight, Crown Publishing Group, 2013
    2. G. Greenberg, M.M. Haraway, Comparative Psychology: A Handbook, Garland Reference Library of Social Science, Routledge, 1998
    3. P. Babiak, C.S. Neumann, R.D. Hare, “Corporate psychopathy: Talking the walk,” Behavioural Sciences and the Law, at http://web.natur.cuni.cz/~houdek3/papers/Babiak et al 2010.pdf
    4. J. Ronson, The Psychopath Test: A Journey Through the Madness Industry, Picador, 2011
    5. P. Babiak, C.S. Neumann, R.D. Hare, op. cit.
    6. R. Hare, www.hare.org/comments/comment2.html
    7. H.M. Cleckley, The Mask of Sanity: An Attempt to Clarify Some Issues About the So Called Psychopathic Personality, Mosby, 1976
    8. P. Babiak, C.S. Neumann, R.D. Hare, op. cit.
    9. B.J. Board, K. Fritzon, “Disordered personalities at work,” Psychology, Crime and Law, Vol. 11(1), 17-32, with reference to D. Doren, Understanding and Treating the Psychopath, Wile, 1987
    10. D. West, “The purpose of the corporation in business and law school curricula,” Governance Studies at Brookings, www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2011/7/19 corporation west/0719_corporation_west.pdf
    11. M. Friedman, “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits,” New York Times Magazine, 13 September 1970
    12. D. West, op. cit.
    13. D. West, op. cit.
    14. “PNG Leadership has been poor steward of resources,” The National, 20 April 2011, www.roland-seib.de/05/Seib-Pressespiegel-1.5.11.pdf
    15. Ibid.
    16. J. Bakan, The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power, Free Press, 2004
    17. A. James, “Ass-holes: a theory,” Nicholas Brealey Publishing, 2013
    18. D. Love, “16 Examples of Steve Jobs being a jerk,” Business Insider, 25 October 2011, www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-jerk-2011-10
    19. A. James, op. cit.
    20. R. Hercz, “Psychopaths among us,” www.hare.org/links/saturday.html
    21. A. James, op. cit.
    22. M.E. Thomas, op. cit.
    23. D. Pearse, “Facebook’s dark side: study finds link to socially aggressive narcissism,” The Guardian, 17 March 2012, www.theguardian.com/technology/2012/mar/17/facebook-dark-side-study-aggressive-narcissism
    24. A. James, op. cit.
    25. www.bartleby.com/73/1207.html
    26. J. Christie, “Multi-billionaire who gave a lecture about American’s ‘needing to have less things and live a smaller existence’ owns a staggering FIVE mansions…”, Daily Mail, 24 January 2015
    27. S. Verstappen, Defense Against the Psychopath: A Brief Introduction to Human Predators, Woodbridge Press, 2011
    28. M.E. Thomas, op. cit.
    29. D. Dorr, “The pedophile as psychopath,” 1998, in T. Millon, E. Simonsen, & M. Birket-Smith (Eds.), Psychopathy: Antisocial, Violent, and Criminal Behavior, 304-320, Guilford Press
    30. P. Gilbert, “An introduction to the theory and practice of compassion-focused therapy and compassionate mind training for shame based difficulties,” The Compassionate Mind Foundation, www.compassionatemind.co.uk/downloads/training_materials/1.Workbook_2010.pdf
    31. P. Gilbert, op. cit.

    © New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
    For our reproduction notice, click here.

  • Subconscious Manipulators: Take Your Life Off Autopilot

    Subconscious Manipulators: Take Your Life Off Autopilot

    From New Dawn 139 (Jul-Aug 2013)

    The idea of someone or something controlling our every thought and action is so 1980s. Let’s face it, we live out our modern, technological lives with access to instant communication and information that allows us to enjoy greater control and freedoms of thought and expression than at any point in recorded human history; right?

    Each of us draws comfort from the decisions we make, sure in the knowledge that we are individuals, masters of our own destiny. We mock those that aren’t as under the thumb, as easily lead, or weak. Underlying this attitude is the principle that no person or system has the right to influence or determine the free will of another. This may be true, but what if this truth was naive; that even the strong-minded could not trust the direction their thoughts were taking them?

    A Fabric of Lies?

    Why for instance do we accept laws that govern conduct and shunt every aspect of human experience into a narrow band of monotonous conformity? What if we were to strip society of its rules and regulations governing conduct; what then? Would we fall into anarchy? This social consensus maybe misplaced.

    Consider road signs and signals. Substantial reductions in traffic incidents and fatalities have been recorded in communities that have adopted a rather novel approach to road safety by removing street clutter. If this idea of so-called ‘naked roads’ seems counter-intuitive to you, just ask the resident exhibitionists of Christiansfeld, Denmark.

    In 2004, local libertarians stripped traffic lights and other road markings from a notorious crossroads in a bid to improve road safety. Surprisingly this simple act of faith saved Danish bacon, reducing the death toll to zero on a road which throughout the previous decade had claimed three lives every year. It is believed the fall in casualty figures was due to uncertainty over who had right-of-way.

    The late Dutch traffic engineer Hans Monderman did much to inspire this rethink. He devised schemes in the Netherlands that removed all traffic lights, signs and markings, and other driver instructions from the small villages of Drachten, Makkinga and town of Oosterwolde; all with great effect. Perhaps unsurprisingly removing red lights from a particular district in Amsterdam has yet to catch on.

    Interestingly, naked road studies like those in Christiansfeld suggest a re-think; that road signs, in some instances, offer about as much protection to the elements as the Emperor’s new clothes. Of course the Danish subjects in Hans Christian Andersen’s tale who saw through the head of state’s veiled attempt at modesty were considered subversive. So are road signs as useful as non-existent clothing? Does that make me subversive?

    Laws operate as a strong arm of social conditioning, in so much as they slowly undermine the ability of the individual to assess situations and make judgements based on past experiences. Laws make us passive; we look out to authority for answers rather than to ourselves within. The danger is we become easily manipulated and no longer able to question authority; not only because we have been conditioned to, but because we are being slowly stripped of the tools and acuity with which to do so.

    This point is telling when put under the microscope with other basic freedoms that have been removed on the back of trumped up, often unfounded fears over public safety.

    If this study asks us anything, it questions the extent to which we walk through life with little conscious free will at all. And that is not as stupid as it sounds according to some experts.

    ‘I’ is the One Per Cent

    Dr. Bruce Lipton is a stem cell biologist and bestselling author who believes that the conscious mind governs less than it would like to think it does. “The major problem is that people are aware of their conscious beliefs and behaviours, but not of that belonging to the subconscious,” says Lipton.

    The conscious I might take credit for decisions, computations, realisations and reactions, but in reality credit must go to the subconscious. Neurological experiments carried out by the late pioneering scientist Benjamin Libet suggest that conscious recognition of a pain event, in this case a pinprick to the finger, lags up to half a second behind the prick itself. It takes half a second for us to become conscious of stimulation of the sensory cortex. In other words our conscious experience of pain at the moment in time that the prick occurs is a temporal fraud. Essentially we feel a prick after the event.

    In his bestseller The User Illusion, Tor Nørretranders compares this fraud: that conscious experience is projected back in time in exactly the same way as a direct stimulation of the sensory cortex can be shown to project out onto the body. There is a good reason for this, he suggests: what we need to know is when our skin was pricked, not when we became conscious of it.

    Of course, in reality we can’t be half a second behind the eight ball and expect to stay in the moment, let alone in the game. Take, for example, the football midfielder that whips in a free-kick; he does not consciously calculate the angular projection and speed; he just whips, period. Pythagoras he is not. To perform, successful sports stars rely on instinct, automatic reactions based on subconscious programs ingrained by hours dedicated to practice and training. Conscious thought here is the bane of instinct, which experts say is not just left on the sports field.

    “Most people don’t even acknowledge their subconscious mind, that it is at play, when in fact this mind is a million times more powerful,” says Lipton. “We operate up to 99 per cent of our lives from subconscious programs.”

    In short, your conscious I, the ego, might not like it, but it’s under the thumb. Truth is it’s only let out to play when time permits. And even then our thoughts and actions are often simply the result of consciousness fielding thoughts and ideas pitched from the infinite depths of the subconscious mind. Slip of the tongue? Ah, that would be a curve ball. More often than not consciousness doesn’t even get to use what Nørretranders (and Libet) term as its veto, to otherwise accept or reject a choice or urge that the subconscious mind has already made. Many decisions and actions bypass our conscious mind altogether.

    Should we give up on the idea of conscious free will? It has its veto, but on the whole the numbers are not encouraging. According to Nørretranders, every second our senses pass on and process about 11 million bits of information to our brain. The vast majority, 10,999,984 or so bits of information, we remain unaware of, processed as it is by our unconscious, or what I refer to herein as subconscious mind. Such events are disconcerting for an ego; it likes to think of itself as solely in charge. But how can it be? It has no eye for a ball and can’t even hold down a job as a bouncer.

    Truth is our subconscious is open to suggestion. Subliminal messages easily bypass conscious perception. During the 1920s when radio first aired in the UK it was unpopular and seen by many as a sinister intrusion. To persuade would-be listeners the BBC planted a backward message in its jingles. The message when played forward was hidden, but when reversed could clearly be heard to say, “This is not a noose, no really it’s not.” In normal play the subconscious picks up on what the conscious cannot. Audible messages can also be played beyond the normal frequency range of human hearing. In both instances the subconscious mind may be programmed beyond conscious perception or approval.

    And it’s not just on radio.

    Remote Control

    Typically television and film footage runs at 25 frames per second. As it turns out subliminal images of a single frame can be slipped into a sequence that avoid conscious detection. Who knew? Baby (George W) Bush apparently. One reported incident occurred during the 2000 US presidential race when a TV advertisement focusing on who should pay for prescription drugs for the elderly included the slogan “bureaucrats decide”; the slogan preceded for a split second by the word “rats” accompanied by an image of Al Gore.

    “Television is a ‘dream come true’ for an authoritarian society,” explains clinical psychologist Dr. Bruce Levine. “Those with the most money own most of what people see.” Subliminal messaging is officially frowned on by most companies that operate in the public domain. Some companies have a code of ethics. Where there’s a profit to be made however, there are always those that don’t. Their behaviour is often modified simply by a fear of being found out. After all, technology today allows consumers to hit rewind, pause and dissect footage frame by frame.

    And why expose yourself to bad publicity, when you can make fear work for you openly. The control industry even has a name for it: television programming. “Fear-based TV programming makes people more afraid and distrustful of one another, which is good for an authoritarian society adopting a ‘divide and conquer’ strategy,” says Levine.

    For example, fear-based broadcasts are the lifeblood of the corporate mainstream media and don’t even pretend to hide from the conscious mind. The fact that large sections of society fail to see their underlying purpose could be argued is evidence of this affect. To such an extent, Lipton says, that people have been programmed to believe that they’re victims. “We’re programmed from childhood with beliefs. Sincesubconscious programs operate outside the range of consciousness, we don’t experience ourselves playing out these behaviours that can sabotage our own lives.” As a result, says Lipton, we don’t take responsibility for the lives we lead. We see ourselves as victims of forces outside of our control.

    “For instance, when we get sick, we were told that we must go to the doctor because the doctor is the authority concerning our health.” Thus we learn in our formative years that we are victims of bodily forces beyond our ability to control. “The joke, however, is that people often get better while on the way to the doctor,” says Lipton. “That’s when the innate ability for self-healing kicks in, a perfect example of the placebo effect.”

    According to Lipton, medical institutions operate on fear. “The funding and regulatory elements know that within each of us is the power to heal,” he explains. “For example, it is a proven fact that one-third of all healings are due to the placebo effect, which is controlled by the subconscious mind, but medical-related corporations based on making a profit don’t want us to know this.”

    Have You Seen My Watch?

    The effect of all this forces us to look outside for answers and guidance, rather than within – into the hands of those who program us further.

    Reality TV is a perfect example. Money and fame is the panacea we are sold. When the ‘I’ buys into this culture, it allows the outside world to define it. I reflect its values, and buy into its marketing of me. And what happens with most marketing? Scratch the surface and there is nothing of substance beneath. When we buy into these outward distractions, our conscious mind rejects the subconscious, the part of ourselves that we unknowingly value the most. Here is the modern malaise, and why in those moments of quiet solitude, the ‘I’ feels so empty.

    The idea of ego, of an independent me is empowering. But we are being sold a pup. The ‘I’, the conscious me, is not nearly all that I am. This is THE distraction. The ‘I’ is all of me, all of my subconscious urges, not just the conscious imposter that catches a reflective glimpse every so often of what the political class and its corporate masters will not even acknowledge to me exists. Thanks to this distraction one’s connection is stolen, one’s true voice. The sense of who I really am. The corporate elite is the pickpocket that distracts its victim before stealing his watch. And then how do you find out the time? That’s obvious, says Levine: “When you’re isolated and watching TV it interferes with the connection to one’s own humanity, which makes it easier to accept an authority’s version of society and life.”

    Authority has my voice and chances are I don’t even know it. According to Levine television achieves this by putting the viewer in a brain state that makes it difficult to think critically. It’s all those alpha brain waves, now just relax and let your eyes follow my watch. Alpha brain waves, some experts claim, are the bridge between the conscious and subconscious; a highly suggestive meditative state. Problem is the viewer’s focus is outward rather than within.

    Television offers no quality time to quietly reflect on what makes us unique, the very same spark that unites us, beyond the tired old dividing lines of class, politics and creed. “Television isolates people so they are not joining together to govern themselves,” says Levine. So we not only feel separated from ourselves, but from each other. Just what the doctor ordered. Now if we can just get back to erecting those religious divides, I’ve got a war to fight.

    Do laws, rules and the governing norms of behaviour really cause more problems than they solve? According to Levine this is a question that will take people, at least those who take it seriously, on an acid trip. “If you spend a lot of time thinking about how unnecessary laws are, and then don’t comply with these laws, eventually, logically, you will end up in jail,” says Levine. “Or if you obey laws that you think are bullshit, you will lose self-respect, integrity, wholeness, and feel like a pathetic hypocrite and potentially have a nervous breakdown and end up in a mental hospital. And jail and mental hospitals have lots of television.”

    Talk about coming full circle.

    Get the issue this article appears in

    Did You Look Inside?

    OK, so jail is a relative term; so too madness. Some might argue that by giving in to outside pressures to conform we locked up our innate subconscious many moons ago. And it is that which has us howling like some insane wolfman at every full moon that passes.

    Einstein once said that you can’t solve problems with the same level of consciousness that created them. The conscious mind cannot solve problems that its separation from the subconscious created. If we value peace and harmony and only focus on fear, is it not surprising when we access the same old negative programs? Einstein was equally specific when he described what he believed was the only truly valuable thing: intuition.

    According to bestselling author and intuitionist Laura Day, intuition is a faculty, like one of our five senses. In the same way that muscles waste when they are not used, education largely trains us to consider only what the system considers logical; what passes as the social consensus. As a result we do not take seriously and often throw away our best ideas, what make us different and potentially successful, because they come from flashes of insight.

    Intuition is all possibility, all knowing, and is at the heart of human discovery. Insight often has us asking: where did that voice come from? Or who found my watch?

    Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell not only summarised in four short equations all that was known about electricity and magnetism, but his equations succeeded in predicting phenomena that weren’t considered anything to do with these fields of study until after his death. How was this possible? In a sense, Nørretranders writes, Maxwell gave his own answer saying, “What is done by what is called myself is, I feel, done by something greater than myself in me.”

    What Maxwell was suggesting is common to many great advances, in that they arise somewhere in the mind that is beyond the control of consciousness. Intuition is responsible for the arts and the sciences as we know them, and across the whole range of human advancement and endeavour, if only we’d see it.

    The subconscious mind throws up answers that our conscious cannot even predict. The lesson here is to make informed choices; we must zone out from instructions, turn off the TV and tune in to within. Will this help us steer clear of acid trips? Maybe, maybe not. Intuition makes us resilient. It is our greatest teacher. It may trip us up, but it dusts us down. That comes from the freedom to choose. It does not do prisons or make prisoners of others. If that’s acid, then it surely beats neutral, which we are conditioned to believe is the only reality that should concern us.

    The author would like to thank Tor Nørretranders, Dr. Bruce Levine, Dr. Bruce Lipton, Dr. Kerry Crofton and Laura Day.

    Be sure to check out Nick Parkins’ article “Rise of the Technocrats” in New Dawn 145. 

    [alert type=”general” dismiss=”no”]This article was published in New Dawn 139.[/alert]

    [alert type=”success” dismiss=”no”]If you appreciate this article, please consider subscribing to help maintain this website.[/alert]

    © New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
    For our reproduction notice, click here.