Aldous Huxley, an English writer and philosopher, wrote “Brave New World,” a science-fiction novel in which emotions and the sense of individuality are eliminated, starting in childhood, via the use of conditioning
It’s a work of fiction, but concepts on which it is based, including the power to condition humans to accept an abnormal state of life, are not
In the video, you can hear a 1962 interview with Huxley, in which he speaks about the use of persuasion and conditioning to gain ultimate power and control over society
Non-terroristic methods, such as suggestion and persuasion, are also essential in gaining ultimate control, as some measure of voluntary acceptance is necessary
Via conditioning, humans can get to the point of loving servitude, and consenting to live in, and even enjoy, a state of affairs that they, under natural circumstances, should not
Aldous Huxley, an English writer and philosopher, wrote nearly 50 books, the most famous being “Brave New World,” a dystopian science-fiction novel published in 1932. The world in the novel is a futuristic one based on science and technology. Emotions and the sense of individuality are eliminated, starting in childhood, via the use of conditioning.1
It’s a work of fiction, but concepts on which it is based, including the power to condition humans to accept an abnormal state of life, are not. In the video above, you can hear a 1962 interview with Huxley, in which he speaks about the use of persuasion and conditioning to gain ultimate power and control over society.
“If you are going to control a population for any length of time you must have some measure of consent,” he said.2 His words ring eerily true in 2021.
Conditioning Humans to Love Servitude
Frederick Douglas once said, “When a slave becomes a happy slave, he has effectively relinquished all that makes him human.”3 How does a human get to the point of loving their servitude, or consenting to live in, and even enjoy, a state of affairs that they should not?
Often, it’s through techniques of terrorism. While the word implies violence, some of the most profound and dangerous techniques combine methods of terror with methods of acceptance, Huxley said. By bringing in elements of persuasion, it’s possible for a controlling oligarchy to get people to love their servitude.
In 1957, William Sargant published “Battle for the Mind,” which delves into the techniques used by evangelists, psychiatrists and politicians to change beliefs and behavior. Religious leaders produce conversions, Huxley said, by heightening psychological stress, talking about hell, then releasing this stress by offering a promise of heaven. Prisoners of war can be similarly brainwashed and pressured into making admissions of guilt.
Pavlov’s dogs study is one of the most well-known displays of the power of conditioning. The dogs salivated not only in response to food but in response to any object or event that they learned to associated with food.4
The findings also apply to humans, who can be conditioned to associate abstract images with food, as shown by researchers with the Wellcome department of neuroimaging science at University College London.5
When shown pictures of the food-associated images, their reaction times increased and areas of their brain involved in motivation and emotional processes were activated.
After Pavlov’s demonstration of classical conditioning, the profound observations “sunk into the creature,” Huxley said, and Pavlovian methods were recognized as tools that could be applied with extraordinary efficiency, creating large armies of totally devoted people.
Ultimate Power Involves Voluntary Acceptance
Non-terroristic methods are also essential in gaining ultimate control, as some measure of voluntary acceptance is necessary. Suggestion and hypnosis are two examples. According to Huxley, about 20% of people are easily hypnotized, while 20% are very difficult, if not impossible, to hypnotize. The remaining 60%, the majority, can be gradually hypnotized if you work hard enough at it.6
Similar figures apply to the power of placebo, or suggestion, Huxley said, referring to a study on the administration of morphine or a placebo following surgery. The subjects were experiencing similar levels of pain and were able to receive injections for pain relief whenever requested. Half the injections were morphine and half were distilled water, the placebo.
While 20% of the subjects got just as much pain relief from the placebo as from the morphine, 20% got no relief from the placebo and 60% got some or occasional relief from the placebo.7 Such studies are important, because it isn’t hard to figure out which segment of the population is extremely vulnerable to suggestion and which is in the intermediate space.
As Huxley pointed out, such differences allow for organized society to exist, because if everyone were unsuggestable, there would be no order to society. At the other end of the spectrum, if everyone were highly suggestable, dictatorship would be inevitable. Having the majority of people in the “moderately suggestable” category is a happy medium, allowing for the formation and preservation of organized society.
At the same time, the fact that there are 20% of people who are extremely vulnerable to suggestion is of enormous political importance. Whoever gets ahold of the 20% can easily overthrow any government or country, Huxley said, using the example of Hitler to show what can be done using the power of suggestion.
Hitler understood human weaknesses and exploited them. For instance, knowing that conditioning is easier when people are tired, Hitler held all of his big speeches at night solely so that people would be tired and therefore less capable of resisting persuasion.
What Are the Limits of Human Obedience?
In 1962, in a now infamous experiment, Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram tested the limits of human obedience to authority. The study administrator instructed the study subjects — the “teachers” — to give electric shocks to a student.
The “student” was actually an actor, but the study subjects were unaware of this, and complied with the demands to shock him whenever he gave an incorrect response to a question. Even as the student moaned, begged for the shocks to stop and ultimately stopped responding, the subjects obeyed the authority figure in the room and issued painful electric shocks.
The subjects were clearly uncomfortable with the task at times, but still continued, showing that people may carry out heinous acts when ordered to do so by authorities because they feel less responsible for the behavior in this capacity.8
The Milgram experiment was later criticized for being unethical and, in the U.S., studies that cause subjects serious distress were later banned. However, similar studies in Europe confirmed the results, suggesting that people will willingly and blindly obey authoritarian orders, especially if they feel disconnected from their actions.9
With societal norms rapidly changing, and an increasingly authoritative environment emerging, will humans stop thinking for themselves and proceed fully into a world where privacy no longer exists and citizens turn in their neighbors if they buck the status quo?
You’ll Own Nothing and Love It
Huxley’s science-fiction world in which people learn to love their servitude sounds terrifying to most free thinking humans. But it’s something that’s being openly discussed. Top political figures and Big Tech leaders are using the common refrain that the COVID-19 pandemic has provided an opportunity to “reset” and “build back better.”
“Build back better” is a tagline of sorts for The Great Reset,10 and though this is being played off as a new initiative, it’s simply a rebranding of terms for technocracy and the old “New World Order.”
An elite oligarchy is behind this technocratic plan to govern society through technology, programmed by scientists and technicians and automated through the use of artificial intelligence, rather than through democratically elected politicians and government leaders.
The current pandemic is being used as a justification for the movement, but the agenda has nothing to do with health and everything to do with a long-term plan to monitor and control the world through technical surveillance. Part of the “new normal” dictum is that you will own nothing and be happy. This excerpt was written by Ida Auken, agenda contributor to the World Economic Forum (WEF):11
“Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city — or should I say, “our city.” I don’t own anything. I don’t own a car. I don’t own a house. I don’t own any appliances or any clothes.
It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service … Once in a while I get annoyed about the fact that I have no real privacy. Nowhere I can go and not be registered. I know that, somewhere, everything I do, think and dream of is recorded. I just hope that nobody will use it against me. All in all, it is a good life.”
The unstated implication is that the world’s resources will be owned and controlled by the technocratic elite, and you’ll have to pay for the temporary use of absolutely everything.
Nothing will actually belong to you. All items and resources are to be used by the collective, while actual ownership is restricted to an upper stratum of social class. Through the power of conditioning, humans could come to not only accept this new form of society, but love it.
The Conditioning Has Already Begun
The very purpose of “building back better” is to do away with what was once “normal” and replace it with something different. According to WEF, this entails “reinventing capitalism”:12
“A true recovery from COVID-19 will not be about putting things back together the way they were: we need to ‘build back better’, to ‘reset’, if we are to address the deep systemic vulnerabilities the pandemic has exposed.
… If we don’t seize this opportunity to build back better — to reset and reinvent rather than ‘return to normal’ — systemic risks and vulnerabilities will continue to accumulate, making future shocks both more likely and more dangerous.
Despite the tragedy, we must leverage the COVID-19 pandemic, and make sure that it becomes the catalyst for a profoundly positive transformation of the global economy, taking us closer to a world in which everyone can live well, within planetary boundaries.”
If you don’t think this is possible, consider that the conditioning has already begun. Using fear as a driving force, society not only adapted to but embraced lockdowns, universal masking and mass vaccination with an experimental injection, all without solid data to back up the effectiveness and necessity of these draconian measures.
The vaccines were supposed to stop the spread of COVID-19, but fully vaccinated people can still transmit the virus,13 and censorship of anyone who speaks out about the numerous inconsistencies has become rampant. With the roll out of vaccine passports, unvaccinated people are being increasingly excluded from society, facing a loss of privileges14 and being morally shamed and labeled selfish.
In New York City, as of August 16, 2021, proof of vaccination will be required to enter restaurants, gyms and theaters.15 As civil liberties, privacy and freedom are being slowly chipped away, all for a virus with a documented high survival rate,16 many are supportive of even more questionable restrictions. There are also those, however, who are increasingly rebelling against lockdowns and vaccine passports.
In July 2021, after France’s parliament approved a law that requires a vaccine passport to enter restaurants, trains, planes and certain other public venues, more than 160,000 people, including 11,000 in Paris, protested against the “health pass,” even as police released tear gas and water cannons against some of the protestors.17
Therein may lie one key to stopping the conditioning being foisted upon the public, namely speaking out against what you don’t believe is right. The alternative is much darker, and you can get a glimpse into such an authoritarian future from George Orwell, who said:18
“In our world there will be no emotions except fear, rage, triumph and self-abasement. The sex instinct will be eradicated. We shall abolish the orgasm. There will be no loyalty except loyalty to the party, but always there will be the intoxication of power. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who’s helpless.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever. The moral to be draw from this dangerous nightmare situation is a simple one. Don’t let it happen. It depends on you.”