This post is aimed at providing readers and viewers with a very in depth look at what a “psyop” is, and how to counter them. There will be several videos below, and beneath each I will do my best to transcribe the most important points to text. I will be providing links to several other sites as well, with a description of what readers will learn there. Please take the time to thoroughly analyze all of this information as it will benefit everyone.
FULL U.S. GOVERNMENT HANDBOOK ON PSYOPS
WHAT ARE PSYOPS?
BEVERLEY EAKMAN ON PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE AND AGENT PROVOCATEURS
This first video is a presentation by Beverly Eakman on psychological warfare and agent provocateurs. As she describes in the video, we must all learn first to identify psychological manipulation so we can take power over the question away from our adversaries. We must master the principles of argument and become able to do it under extreme pressure. She elaborates that the tactics used in psychological operations are far easier to do on groups because unethical facilitators can work around your individuality at this point. Typically the first thing that happens in a psychological operation is people are placed in a group. These groups will often have dishonest facilitators who have prepared beforehand to control the debate or agenda. This can frequently be seen done in schools, courts, online, in media, etc. because these environments can actually be manipulated so ideas are effected in the individual without their realizing it initially.
The provocateur will choose a group setting because they can get the group to do the work for them. Experts will also refer to “mob mentality” as a psychologically controlled environment, and your adversary will often have prepared beforehand to ensure the environment people are placed in will create such a mentality. The four principles of psychological warfare are: an army cannot be run according to rules of etiquette, those skilled in war subdue enemies without a battle, deception and surprise are two most vital elements, and the enemy’s leaders must be confused or driven insane. These principles date back to sun tzu in 476 b.c. First, adversaries create the environment which will frame the scenario so you have little to no ability to redirect, or change the viewpoint. This leads to “cognitive dissonance” where group members encounter an irreconcilable conflict with the controlled environment as time passes. Members lose their frame of reference over time, feel alienated, and often will cause the backbone of the group to leave. Unethical consensus is dependent on group-think, which is dependent on mob mentality or maintained peer pressure. Cognitive dissonance keeps individuals from thinking for themselves, and encourages them to rely on group mentality (i.e. prioritizing need for peers over individual principles).
The coordination between the press, courts, legislators, banks, social media, and other venues is a calculated approach to drive people crazy over time. The expectation being that over time more people will be driven off the deep end, and act out irrationally because of the exposure to cognitive dissonance. When the media presents things as “the consensus” that we know aren’t true, or laws get passed due to fraudulent “the consensus”, it will over time drive a large part of society to extreme levels of frustration. The more they are unable to change this, interject new ideas, or engage in rational dialogue the ultimate end point is anger and irrationality. In this scenario, the agitators create an environment where group members are entirely unable to object.
Beverly explains here that one issue is that most of us do not think like marketing professionals, but agitators do. We care about integrity (end does not justify means) but agitators don’t…they are fine if others are hurt in the process of achieving their goal. Psychological impact is far more important to agitators than the facts, or other’s viewpoints. She next explains “rigged consensus building”, a key part of a psychological operation. Consensus is defined as group solidarity in sentiment and belief, but agitators really want unanimity which is defined as a collective opinion. The philosophy of consensus building was established by Hegel in the late 1700’s. The idea was that you could take a group with opposing views, create a third viewpoint that is a mix of both, and all parties theoretically would accept it. This means that when a consensus is reached, it is effectively a collective opinion that isn’t actually anyone’s opinion. When the collective grid is viewed as more important than the individual (as is seen in socialism or globalism), then consensus will no longer be a compromise. The reason for this is because both the “pro” and “con” viewpoints effectively no longer exist. The “rightness” or “wrongness” are stripped away and people are baited to adopt this new universal viewpoint that only appears to be supported by everyone.
The Delphi Technique is one of many methods used to achieve consensus in a variety of environments. Agitators will constantly escalate tensions, pit factions against each-other, and always demonize one faction and paint them as ridiculous. They will work groups over in any setting in order to achieve a predetermined outcome or consensus. They will call themselves facilitators, moderators, administrators as this is a neutral sounding title and in terms of Facebook many are given the title when they create these groups. The consensus an agitator is attempting to facilitate, if done properly, will be seen by group members as a conclusion they arrived at on their own. As they encourage members to give input or raise concerns they are actually analyzing your behavior, picking out the leaders, and identifying the people who are most susceptible to their ideas being manipulated. As divide and conquer tactics are subtly applied, the undesirable viewpoints suddenly seem ridiculous. Disagreements are deliberately intensified, and members are turned against each-other until the group destabilized entirely. It is at this point in the psychologically controlled environment the group members will adapt the rigged consensus but believe they are compromising with each-other to prevent being ostracized. Between computers and word of mouth the provocateurs will pre-select group members that they feel will be most effective in rigging the consensus, or causing the desired end result.
The key to resisting these tactics lies in controlling the environment of thought. Whoever controls the debate or agenda controls the substance of what is going on. Another thing agitators will do is ensure facts and truths become interchangeable. Individuals will be eased away from thinking about how they feel on a topic through the context of their personal experience. This is accomplished by placing members into a hypothetical environment, or a pretend situation which is foreign to their experience but requires their involvement. These are often experienced as “what would you do if” situations, and many of us have been conditioned to be susceptible to this thanks to the education system. If done correctly, individuals will move from fixed beliefs to a transitional mode of thought in which facts become murky and truths are pitted against principles. From this point the views held by the majority can be reworded until the views people started with are heavily distorted.
The goal in resisting these tactics is to get the facilitator to expose his agenda as early as possible, and before they get you to expose yours. The main ways to counter a psychological environment are: determining first what the actual issue is, establishing your stance and not let go of it, and don’t give anything to the agitator until you know why you are really there. In this environment individuals will all hold different views and what is crucial to remember that everyone is being led towards a pre-determined synthesis of these points which will later be called a compromise. When placed into a group it is best to assume that deception is being used, and information is likely being withheld. One should evaluate who added them, why they did, and determine what may NOT be being told to you about their intentions. Often times the agitator will not tell you that you were added for the real reason, but deceptively present part of the story so you draw the conclusion they want you to. It is always best to do your own research before participating fully, and maintaining your individual beliefs and principles regardless of what the agitator says or does is crucial.
If the agitator succeeds in getting the group to accept the intended stance (great example in video), then virtually anything can be suggested and implemented. The agitator will use the rigged consensus to manipulate members into doing whatever it was their adversary wanted. The agitator does not compromise, and the job of the group members is to prevent them from taking the reigns of the conversation or situation. Psychological manipulation is aimed at legitimize and then institutionalize fraudulent ideas before the group catches on. Mental manipulation relies on four principles: Redefining, Redirecting, Consensus-building, and Marketing. A persons belief system is comprised of their attitudes, experiences, and unconscious automatic responses to life’s situations. The first step to change the collective viewpoint is redefining the terms to ensure they sound good, and slogans play a huge part in this. The manipulation-indoctrination-remediation scenario is the basis of controlling a psychological environment.
Targeting of a market can ensure that new ideas or views are accepted by virtually all of the individuals present. First the agitators will gather enough intel on the group they are targeting to establish what makes them tick. Creating and establishing a new mind-set in a group of individuals depends on three things. Repetition, if individuals hear the same phrases or slogans enough times most will at least accept them. Isolation, if individuals are isolated, undermined, embarrassed, or out-maneuvered often enough they will either give up or become so irrational that nobody in the group takes them seriously. Labeling, if negative labels are applied consistently, both subtly and blatantly, to actions or individuals, the connotations in those labels will eventually become negative conditioned responses. The target group will ultimately work to avoid any appearance of individualism for fear of how the group as a whole will view each person individually.
To frame the psychological environment and maintain control, agitators will use distractions to deflect attention away from the true agenda. A distraction is an effort to change the subject, or divert attention from the real issue. It will become a constant task to remember what it is you are actually discussing, or doing. Indoctrination is similar to brainwashing, as an intense distraction it can actually remove an individuals emotional support system entirely. Indoctrination happens in five steps: sweep away the subject’s support base, bombard with conflict and confusion that impairs the senses that impair rational thought, create a vacuum and lead the subject to desired ideas, condition through repetition, analyze to ensure new ideas have been adopted. An agitator interjects impressions, notions, attitudes, judgement’s, and conclusions into a vacuum created by stripping ones belief system and impairing rational thought.
The provocateurs will repeatedly test the group after this process is completed. If ever a time comes where the population appears to be moving away from the conditioned stance, the agitator will apply the steps all over again. Some of the main tenets of psychological warfare are dependent immensely on deception. One can let their opponent know that an escape route is open so they will flee. By showing a road to safety, one can create the idea in their mind there is an alternative to losing it all and then strike. Individuals can be conquered more easily if the appropriate conditions have been created. Another principle used is recruiting individuals who are highly intelligent but can appear stupid, or strong individuals who appear weak. Agitators will recruit individuals who are capable of enduring great amounts of humiliation in order to succeed. Adversaries will bait opposition with distractions that divert attention, and drain energy. Agitators often employ tactics of keeping people so occupied with these distractions that they are unable to focus on their own goals.
Agitators often will have worked beforehand to lay groundwork so the people they target will be susceptible to the outcome being interjected. This ties into the philosophy that those skilled in war bring the opponent to the field of battle, and not the other way around. These same people will disrupt an individuals alliance’s and use deceptive operations so their target is bewildered and disperses in confusion. Adversaries skilled in deception will control the morale factor and attack when it is at its lowest. If the agitator sees inconsistencies in a group they will use these to disrupt the groups leadership and direction over time. Through this disruption, and fallacies of logic (oversimplification, generalization, false analogy, false dilemma, hypothesis contrary to fact), they are able to make their desired outcome seem much more desirable than it would had they not duped the group.
To summarize, know when you are under attack and if you cannot spot these verbal tactics you will be an easy target. Don’t assume you are paranoid, if something feels off, it likely is. Know what kind of attack is being employed against you, the basic structures of fallacious reasoning, and learn to gauge the skill of your opponent. Ensure that your defense is appropriate to the attack. When you are targeted, always question the agitators basic agenda rather than taking the bait. Finally, follow through and play to win, but don’t feel guilty for fighting back.
BEVERLEY EAKMAN INTERVIEWED ABOUT THE PSYOPS OF THE NWO, AND PUSHING BACK
AUDIO ONLY PODCAST OUTLINING SOME PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE TECHNIQUES
LOGICAL FALLACIES, AND TACTICAL ARGUEMENTS
In these next videos, viewers see examples of many logical fallacies, how to recognize them, and how to combat them.o.