Aldous Huxley - The Ultimate Revolution... Better than 1984?

[singular_me]

I listened to the whole thing twice... @7mins, he speaks of how to make people to believe that servitude is better for them, desirable. He also mentions many ways to control masses and that anybody aware of the techniques will use them... eugenics during the last 3rd... He claims that his Ultimate Revolution surpasses 1984. Every now and then the public laughs, applauds... what a bunch of idiots, of course today their kids are the targets of what they lauded as a great speech. Evil speak that NO politicians will address.

--------------------------------
Aldous Huxley - The Ultimate Revolution

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WaUkZXKA30

or
https://archive.org/details/AldousHuxley-TheUltimateRevolution

Aldous Huxley in a speech given to Berkley in which he admits that dystopic novels "Brave New World" and "1984" were not just fiction, but blueprints for two types of controlled and enslaved societies.

"The prophetic Aldous Huxley, author of Brave New World, speaks to an audience at University of California, Berkeley, surrounding the use of terrorism and pharmaceuticals to create willing slaves out of the population."

-- Aldous Huxley

"And it seems to me perfectly in the cards that there will be within the next generation or so a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing ⦠a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda, brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods."

-- Aldous Huxley


3 HOUR MOVIE
Brave New World (1980)
Writers: Aldous Huxley
In a future society based on pleasure without moral worries, love is prohibited but casual sex, now called 'engaging', is strongly encouraged. Everyone is kept happy with a legal drug, soma. People are hatched and cloned on conveyor belts to meet the requirements of five different social classes, from ruling Alphas to robot-like Epsilons. Bernard Marx is a different Alpha male with an inclination to thinking. He and a girl called Lenina Disney go visit a reservation of 'savages' where they meet a handsome young man John and bring him back to 'civilization'. John turns out to be the son of the director of the cloning authority, which causes a scandal and makes John a celebrity freak. John falls in love with Lenina but his desire is ruined by his antiquated sexual morale derived from reading Shakespeare. John hates the over-social but anti-emotional civilization, asks to be sent to live in isolation, and gets a job as a lighthouse guard. But even there he can't forget Lenina or escape his celebrity status.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080468/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wlb1bdU-G7o

[midnight rambler]

The Institute for the Study of Democratic Institutions. lol Sounds like something straight out of Monty Python.

[singular_me]

I see a great potential here, since 70% of population are totally neurotic and have been through verbal abuse/molestation during childhood - parents passing on their own neuroses and rampant pedophila - many will ask to delete such memories to feel better. Will be more radical than anti-depressants. right???


dedicating this thread to huxley and orwell.

---------------------------------------------
Scientists Have Figured Out How To Delete And Edit Memories, But Are We Ready?
March 8, 2016
The documentary’s producers explain the premise and motivation behind making this film by saying that,

For much of human history, memory has been seen as a tape recorder that faithfully registers information and replays it intact, but now, researchers are discovering that memory is far more malleable, always being written and rewritten, not just by us but by others. We are discovering the precise mechanisms that can explain and even control our memories.

If you’re thinking about how these studies might relate to the movie Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, you’re not far off. Among the subjects the film studies, the research of Karim Nader is explored. Nader discovered that the human memory may not be permanent but may, instead, be vulnerable to alteration each time a memory is recalled. This discovery led to hundreds of other studies around the world that were rooted in this theory, and is rumored to be an inspiration for the well-known independent movie.

One of the patients in the film is Jake Hausler, a 12-year-old boy with a fascinating and rare ability to remember everything he has ever experienced since he was 8. Jake is the youngest person to ever be diagnosed with Highly Superior Autobiographical Memory, a mental ability that allows him to recall everything he’s ever done but makes it difficult to distinguish between important and trivial memories and events. Researchers from the Washington University School of Medicine are mapping Jake’s brain to understand what makes his memory so strong and to see if this leads to new insights about how memory works.

Professor Julia Shaw, who is a researcher that the film follows as well, is an expert on false memory and the implantation of memories. Her research, which has a 70% success rate for convincing people that they committed a crime that they actually were not involved in, reveals the flaws in the criminal justice system and prisoners who were convicted purely based on eyewitness testimony that was likely faulty.

While Shaw is researching the implantation of memories, another scientist, André Fenton, is studying the science of forgetting memories. He believes that, “Forgetting is probably one of the most important things that brains will do,” and that it’s possible that an injection could erase a painful memory. His hopes are that his research will one day help those suffering with dementia and Alzheimer’s by having a better understanding of how our brain works to remove memories.

http://www.activistpost.com/2016/03/scientists-have-figured-out-how-to-delete-and-edit-memories-but-are-we-ready.html


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP1GXjxxQZs




China Goes Full 'Minority Report', Creates 'Pre-Crime' Program
9 March 2016 GMT
‘By now, the world is largely familiar with Chinese President Xi Jinping’s fabled “Tigers and Flies” campaign.

Since taking office in 2013, Xi has embarked on an ambitious effort to root out party corruption and ensure that the directives passed down from on high in the Politburo are executed faithfully among the sprawling rank and file. As The Atlantic wrote last year, the discipline “problem” is “made more urgent by a slowing economy,” an economy which desperately needs to be reformed.

“Reform, however, requires the ability to enact policy,” The Atlantic flatly adds. “That in turn necessitates bureaucrats who follow the central government’s orders.”’
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-07/china-goes-full-minority-report-creates-pre-crime-program

[Hillbilly]

One of the best things posted in months.

[Glass]

we have had the answer to this problem for aeons. It's called booze.

am watching BNW and its very interesting and troubling at the same time. Every has their own "smart phone" device that the tap away at. It clearly has no buttons on it so it must be touch screen.

[singular_me]

the merchandising of just everything... that is precisely why slavery is embedded in monetarism. Money is a time device above all, which allows certain groups to frame people into a shortsighted time frame. Slavery and power are only made possible when an elite controls time and is way ahead.

Star Trek economics is the only way out and hopefully before it is too late.

ps: havent yet listened to 2nd video, I am keeping it for this evening, but am sure that it is another serious eye opener.

--------------------------------

60 Years Ago Aldous Huxley Predicted How Global Freedom Would Die

Waking Times

In a televised interview with ABC’s Mike Wallace in 1958, author of the seminal classic Brave New World, Aldous Huxley laid out his rather grim vision for the future of the human race in a prescient and timeless warning for us to wake up. After having lived through the bloodbaths of World War I and II and in the early stages of the nuclear cold war, he discussed the problems of freedom and survival in America, making a number of predictions more relevant today, nearly 60 years later, than ever before.

Huxley, as introduced by Wallace:

“A man haunted by a vision of hell on earth. A searing social critic, Mr. Huxley 27 years ago wrote Brave New World, a novel that predicted that someday the entire world would live under a frightful dictatorship. Today Mr. Huxley says that his fictional world of horror is probably just around the corner for all of us.” ~Mike Wallace


This interview was recorded 27 years after the publication of Brave New World, which in and of itself was an eloquent warning to freedom loving people. Fast-forward to 2016 and we find that Huxley was right on every account,

“…after all, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.” ~Aldous Huxley

SOME HIGHLIGHTS

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2016/10/10/60-years-ago-aldous-huxley-predicted-global-freedom-die/

FULL INTERVIEW

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TQZ-2iMUR0


5.) Political Candidates Would Become Merchandise Marketed by Professionals

WALLACE: You write in Enemies of Freedom, you write specifically about the United States. You say this, writing about American political campaigns you say, “All that is needed is money and a candidate who can be coached to look sincere; political principles and plans for specific action have come to lose most of their importance. The personality of the candidate, the way he is projected by the advertising experts, are the things that really matter.”

HUXLEY: Well, this is the…during the last campaign, there was a great deal of this kind of statement by the advertising managers of the campaign parties. This idea that the candidates had to be merchandised as though they were soap and toothpaste and that you had to depend entirely on the personality.

I mean, personality is important, but there are certainly people with an extremely amiable personality, particularly on TV, who might not necessarily be very good in political…positions of political trust.

WALLACE: Well, do you feel that men like Eisenhower, Stevenson, Nixon, with knowledge aforethought were trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the American public?

HUXLEY: No, but they were being advised by powerful advertising agencies who were making campaigns of a quite different kind from what had been made before. and I think we shall see probably, er…all kinds of new devices coming into the picture. I mean, for example, this thing which got a good deal of publicity last autumn, subliminal projection.

WALLACE: And we’ll be persuaded to vote for a candidate that we do not know that we are being persuaded to vote for.

HUXLEY: Exactly, I mean this is the rather alarming picture that you’re being persuaded below the level of choice and reason.

===================

Aldous Huxley - Helping People Realize Their Potentialities

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymiGSa26M1Y

[Glass]

Wanted to poke this thread after I came across a transcript of this speech.

Basically: you can fool (hypnotize) 20% of the people all of the time, 60% of the people all of the time with repetition and 20% of the people none of the time.

And you want all of the people to love their predicament, even if, especially if they don't understand their predicament.

http://12160.info/profiles/blogs/transcript-amp-audio-if-you


Uh, First of all, the, I’d like to say, that the conference at Santa Barbara was not directly concerned with the control of the mind. That was a conference, there have been two of them now, at the University of California Medical center in San Francisco, one this year which I didn’t attend, and one two years ago where there was a considerable discussion on this subject. At Santa Barbara we were talking about technology in general and the effects it’s likely to have on society and the problems related to technological transplanting of technology into underdeveloped countries.

Well now in regard to this problem of the ultimate revolution, this has been very well summed up by the moderator. In the past we can say that all revolutions have essentially aimed at changing the environment in order to change the individual. I mean there’s been the political revolution, the economic revolution, in the time of the reformation, the religious revolution. All these aimed, not directly at the human being, but at his surroundings. So that by modifying the surroundings you did achieve, did one remove the effect of the human being.

Today we are faced, I think, with the approach of what may be called the ultimate revolution, the final revolution, where man can act directly on the mind-body of his fellows. Well needless to say some kind of direct action on human mind-bodies has been going on since the beginning of time. But this has generally been of a violent nature. The Techniques of terrorism have been known from time immemorial and people have employed them with more or less ingenuity sometimes with the utmost cruelty, sometimes with a good deal of skill acquired by a process of trial and error finding out what the best ways of using torture, imprisonment, constraints of various kinds.

But, as, I think it was (sounds like Mettenicht) said many years ago, you can do everything with {garbled} except sit on them. If you are going to control any population for any length of time, you must have some measure of consent, it’s exceedingly difficult to see how pure terrorism can function indefinitely. It can function for a fairly long time, but I think sooner or later you have to bring in an element of persuasion an element of getting people to consent to what is happening to them.


A number of techniques about which I talked seem to be here already. And there seems to be a general movement in the direction of this kind of ultimate revolution, a method of control by which a people can be made to enjoy a state of affairs by which any decent standard they ought not to enjoy. This, the enjoyment of servitude, Well this process is, as I say, has gone on for over the years, and I have become more and more interested in what is happening.


That if you can get people to consent to the state of affairs in which they’re living. The state of servitude the state of being, having their differences ironed out, and being made amenable to mass production methods on the social level, if you can do this, then you have, you are likely, to have a much more stable and lasting society. Much more easily controllable society than you would if you were relying wholly on clubs and firing squads and concentration camps. So that my own feeling is that the 1984 picture was tinged of course by the immediate past and present in which Orwell was living, but the past and present of those years does not reflect, I feel, the likely trend of what is going to happen, needless to say we shall never get rid of terrorism, it will always find its way to the surface.

But I think that insofar as dictators become more and more scientific, more and more concerned with the technically perfect, perfectly running society, they will be more and more interested in the kind of techniques which I imagined and described from existing realities in BNW. So that, it seems to me then, that this ultimate revolution is not really very far away, that we, already a number of techniques for bringing about this kind of control are here, and it remains to be seen when and where and by whom they will first be applied in any large scale.


Pavlov after all made some extremely profound observations both on animals and on human beings. And he found among other things that conditioning techniques applied to animals or humans in a state either of psychological or physical stress sank in so to say, very deeply into the mind-body of the creature, and were extremely difficult to get rid of. That they seemed to be embedded more deeply than other forms of conditioning.

Can we think of any examples where these techniques have been used on the populous?

[Joshua01]

Yeah well, he's dead so....

[Glass]

He has a lot of tie in to the elite. His uncle was a prominent Darwinian. I have heard some links to ugenics think tanks but at the moment can't source anything. edit: ok. so that speech was the actual link to the Tavistock group.

Huxley died at 69 on 11/22/1963. 11 + 22 = 33. + 21 black jack.
69 is the cancer symbol
cancer = 44 = death.
he died of cancer of the larynx


In 1937, Huxley moved to Hollywood with his wife Maria, son Matthew, and friend Gerald Heard. He lived in the US, mainly in southern California, until his death, but also for a time in Taos, New Mexico, where he wrote Ends and Means (published in 1937). The book contains illuminating tracts on war, religion, nationalism and ethics.


Huxley became a close friend of Remsen Bird, president of Occidental College. He spent much time at the college, which is in the Eagle Rock neighbourhood of Los Angeles. The college appears as "Tarzana College" in his satirical novel After Many a Summer (1939). The novel won Huxley a British literary award, the 1939 James Tait Black Memorial Prize for fiction.[28] Huxley also incorporated Bird into the novel.

During this period, Huxley earned a substantial income as a Hollywood screenwriter; Christopher Isherwood, in his autobiography My Guru and His Disciple, states that Huxley earned more than $3,000 per week (an enormous sum in those days) as a screenwriter, and that he used much of it to transport Jewish and left-wing writer and artist refugees from Hitler's Germany to the U.S. In March 1938, his friend Anita Loos, a novelist and screenwriter, put him in touch with Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer who hired Huxley for Madame Curie, which was originally to star Greta Garbo and be directed by George Cukor. (Eventually, the film was completed by MGM in 1943 with a different director and cast.)

We know that Madame Curie, Marie Curie, Mercury (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?95462-Marie-Curie-Mercury-RA(dium)-88-Alchemy-amp-the-Crossroads&highlight=crossroads) (aka Hermes) was likely not a real person.