Some things right and some things wrong.
3 Likes
10:51-11:36:
“If you want to preserve your power indefinitely, you have to get the consent of the ruled. And this they will do, partly by drugs . . . , partly by these new techniques of propaganda. They will do it by bypassing the sort of rational side of man and appealing to his subconscious and his deeper emotions, and his physiology even. And so making him actually love his slavery. I mean, I think this is the danger, that actually people may be, in some way, happy under the new régime, but they will be happy in a situation where they oughtn’t to be happy.”
Bingo.
7 Likes
Makes me wonder, how many truly are are singing the “Heigh-Ho” happy slave song?
Sometime in the past; did mankind have slavery genes engineered into his DNA[code]?
1 Like
We can’t be slaves because we can be fired from a job.
1 Like
Rightly so! Slaves are put to death, which might be our future IF we don’t act in time to stop it.
2 Likes
I was 8 when this interview was recorded with Wallace. My parents went to Europe the following year for the entire summer and 3 years after that the whole world changed in November. Too bad I couldn’t go back and hear this interview when I read his book, probably1966. Wonder if I could have put it together then. The beauty of the rear view mirror.
5 Likes
Aldous Huxley popularized the term Scientific Dictatorship to talk about his dystopian vision of a human society divided into scientific castes, but the idea preceded him and persists today, and the meme continues to infect the mind of globalists. Here is a old enlightening episode from Corbett report that deals with this topic:
2 Likes
@Robert_Barricklow And just imagine: merely being enslaved to a job looks like paradise by comparison to the world Klaus et al. want to usher in.
3 Likes
Huxley was spot on with that assessment!
3 Likes
I think Huxley avoided some questions, or soft-peddled because Wallace would have asked for names (which Huxley likely knew). It didn’t seem like a “comfortable” interview.
Gotta love Hux!! I sure have been influenced by him, maybe mark twain was more influential for me as a young person, but as an adult, Huxley has become more relevant. Our authors have been predictive prophetic etc, Orwell and others. Our “infiniverse” is 68% total mystery. It doesn’t matter you want a multiverse, a infiniverse never ends so another “verse” isn’t possible. Expanding into nothing and originating out of nowhere, yet we have theories, lol lol it’s the same quackademics giving us life “from chemicals” in a test tube. Have they not looked at a one celled creature under electron microscopes? It’s a huge “misinformation” implying that “one cell” means “easy to produce from raw materials” lol lol but millions are being spent to create life out of nothing, prove god is easy, man can do it. Well looking closely at Dr Lanza biocentric views, and Dr Steven Meyers one cell impossibility, it’s not credible for science to reject the photon slit experiment nor the entanglement conclusions it’s just not, dark matter cannot be dealt with yet it’s 68% of our existing stuff, dark energy add 25%, we know little, we suspect what we can prove, which may be misleading, small is really difficult yet is large not impossible ?? Invisible ?? Invisiverse….