31 Comments
May 3, 2022Liked by Chris Bray

This has been a bad day for reading my 100 substacks. All of them have nothing but entirely depressing news. Where is some good news? :(

Expand full comment
author

Yeah, this is why I schedule computer-free days.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Sounds good in theory, but the government doesn't care about your genetics or how your lipid raft will effect if the jab will make you sick or kill you.

Expand full comment

That is so cool!!

Expand full comment
May 3, 2022Liked by Chris Bray

The disease just keeps spreading. No one will be spared.

Expand full comment
May 3, 2022·edited May 3, 2022Liked by Chris Bray

A natural progression from these warnings in a book published in 1997 of dark times for natural sciences ahead. They were called reactionaries, conspiracy kooks at the time. Hint: Truth-tellers are always called reactionaries and conspiracy kooks by radicals attempting to seize power while the population is asleep and in denial.

Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science by Paul R. Gross and Norman Levitt

Science Is Increasingly the Target of Would-Be Revolutionaries and Regicide

https://fee.org/articles/higher-superstition-the-academic-left-and-its-quarrels-with-science-by-paul-r-gross-and-norman-levitt/

Marx and Engles wrote, "there can be only one science, the science of history," when musing on the separation of natural and social sciences.

http://www.autodidactproject.org/quote/marxsci2.html

A separation that came about in the Age of Reason when Rene Descartes first designed the scientific method that came to challenge and discredit many of the nonscientific edicts and systems of control authored by autocrats. Inspired by a vision known as Descartes' Dream. Which he had in....1619. Coincidence or the actual target of The 1619 Project? The re-merging of natural and social sciences to discard reason, notions of autonomous self and usher in collectivist authoritarianism for the eternal bondage of man in service to their betters?

https://physics.weber.edu/carroll/honors/descarte.htm

Expand full comment

Social and Behavioral Science. The science of masks, lockdowns, vaccines, climate change, gender, being happy owning nothing.

Predicated on the stupidity and ignorance of the masses needing to be controlled by smarter and wiser elites. For their own good. To protect freedom...they say. Behavioral Science is the science that studies the efficacy of propaganda to change perspectives and behaviors. Requires Behavioral science teams, aka Nudge units: Check. License to propagandize a domestic audience: Check. Ministries of Truth, aka disinformation panels: Check.

https://behavioralscientist.org/executive-order-formally-establishes-us-nudge-unit/

https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s-repeals-propaganda-ban-spreads-government-made-news-to-americans/

https://spectator.org/biden-ministry-of-truth-mayorkas/

How these self-imagined elites think of themselves and think of the masses. Both Republicans and Democrats. Capitalists and Marxists. Class is the distinction, not race, gender, religion or ideology. The same way of thinking about the organization and governance of man that preceded the Age of Reason, that separated natural science from social science and served as the precursor to individual liberty and freedom. From Chomsky’s speech while on book tour for Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media in 1989.

“If you go back to the International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences published in 1933 — days when people were a little more open and honest in what they said — there’s an article on propaganda, and it’s well worth reading. There’s an entry under propaganda. The entry is written by a leading- one- maybe the leading American political scientist, Harold Lasswell, who was very influential, particularly in this area, communications, and so on. And in this entry in the International Encyclopedia on propaganda he says, we should not succumb to democratic dogmatisms about men being the best judges of their own interests. They’re not, he said. Even with the rise of mass education- doesn’t mean that people can judge their own interests. They can’t. The best judges of their interests are elites — the specialized class, the cool observers, the people who have rationality — and therefore they must be granted the means to impose their will. Notice, for the common good. Because, again, because- well, he says, because of the ignorance and superstition of the masses, he said it’s necessary to have a whole new technique of control, largely through propaganda. Propaganda, he says, we shouldn’t have a negative connotation about, it’s neutral. Propaganda, he says, is as neutral as a pump handle. You can use it for good, you can use it for bad; since were good people, obviously, — that’s sort of true by definition — we’ll use it for good purposes, and there should be no negative connotations about that. In fact, it’s moral to use it, because that’s the only way that you can save the ignorant and stupid masses of the population from their own errors. You don’t let a three year old run across the street, and you don’t let ordinary people make their own decisions. You have to control them.

And why do you need propaganda? Well, he explains that. He says, in military-run or feudal societies — what we would these days call totalitarian societies — you don’t really need propaganda that much. And the reason is you’ve got a- you’ve got a club in your hand. You can control the way people behave, and therefore it doesn’t matter much what they think, because if they get out of line you can control them — for their own good, of course. But once you lose the club, you know, once the State loses its capacity to coerce by force, then you have some problems. The voice of the people is heard — you’ve got all these formal mechanisms around that permit people to express themselves, and even participate, and vote, and that sort of thing — and you can’t control them by force, because you’ve lost that capacity. But the voice of the people is heard, and therefore you’ve got to make sure it says the right thing. And in order to make sure it says the right thing, you’ve got to have effective and sophisticated propaganda, again, for their own good.

So in a- as a society becomes more free — that is, there’s less capacity to coerce — it simply needs more sophisticated indoctrination and propaganda. For the public good.

The similarity between this and Leninist ideology is very striking. According to Leninist ideology, the cool observers, the radical intelligentsia, will be the vanguard who will lead the stupid and ignorant masses on to, you know, communist utopia, because they’re too stupid to work it out by themselves.

And in fact there’s been a very easy transition over these years between one and the other position. You know, it’s very striking that continually people move from one position to the other, very easily. And I think the reason for the ease is partly because they’re sort of the same position. So you can be either a Marxist-Leninist commissar, or you can be somebody celebrating the magnificence of State capitalism, and you can serve those guys. It’s more or less the same position. You pick one or the other depending on your estimate of where power is, and that can change.

The- and in fact the mainstream of the intelligentsia, I think over the last, say, through this century, have tended to be in one or the other camp. Either- there’s this strong appeal of Marxism-Leninism to the intelligentsia, for obvious reasons — I don’t have to bother saying. And there’s the same appeal of these doctrines to the intelligentsia, because it puts them in the position of justifying- of having a justified role as ideological managers, in the service of real power, corporate/State power. For the public good, of course. So you naturally are tempted to one or the other position.”

https://chomsky.info/19890315/

Expand full comment

They first told us to follow the science. So I followed it. When I did and found the natural science didn't support their edicts they told me I was too good at science-ing. That my scientific findings belonged in the finest, most prestigious scientific publications...before social science and natural science merged in 2020. Now the science I followed is too dangerous to be allowed to be published and shared. It has to be, "shouted down or silenced." Actual findings and conclusions of this 2021 MIT study on "Coronavirus Skeptics."

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2101.07993.pdf

Which told me I was following the wrong science. I misunderstood what type of science they meant, as did most everyone, when they said we must follow the "best" science. They meant social and behavioral science. So I followed that. And share that science with you. Everyone needs to know the type of science they mean. They mustn't be allowed to merge both natural and social science into the intentional ambiguity of "the science." They are and must remain separate, apologies to Marx and Engels, they are wrong.

And just as we knew anti-American racism was being taught in our schools and cultural centers of power we were unsuccessful in waking people up to the threat it posed until we seized upon the name it had acquired, Critical Race Theory (CRT). We must similarly seize upon the name behind The Science we've been led by, Behavioral Science, Behaviorism, Behavioral Economics, Nudge Theory, many candidates to direct awareness of the threat it poses to wake people up and build opposition to it.

The future of freedom and individual liberty for humanity rests on the defeat of pscyho-social manipulation of the masses by an elite that believes themselves superior. Call it by its name. It is the weapon of mass destruction of liberty and freedom.

Expand full comment

Political Science is what I've been calling it. Any "science" that the Government and Public Health has been referring to.

Expand full comment

Yes, Political Science is a Social Science. Behavioral Science is the type of science that is used by political scientists to apply psychological manipulations to achieve political goals. Epidemiologists are extensively trained in behavioral science, not just the natural sciences of virology and microbiology. To change behaviors of a population during a pandemic. Behavioral science has multiple known and widely agreed upon applications that would be helpful during a pandemic.

Behavioral science burst onto the scene of public policy in the past 15 years with push for "Nudges" claiming successes in helping people save for retirement, and improve their health and fitness with nudges and reframing choices, choice architecture. In a pandemic that is claiming high numbers of obese and diabetic outside the known vulnerable elderly as CV does - the data on that was coming in at the very beginning from around the world and in the US - an appropriate behavioral science response would've drawn upon its claim to fame and efficacy of helping people improve their health and fitness, make better dietary choices, get more exercise. A "Get Fit America" campaign to beat Covid would've been far superior and demonstrably more effective than "Mask Up and Stay Home America." Which has been a fear-based behavioral science application.

Fear was chosen as pandemic NPI. Knowing that tyranny rides in on the back of fear. A far greater threat than any novel virus. The behavioral sciences have been applied unethically, against all of the guidelines and restraints of responsible behavioral psychology. Put into place following the abuses learned from the propaganda campaigns of psychological manipulation by Joseph Goebbels. Advancing the political science of National Socialism. That also embraced the elitist view of governing the cognitively deficient uninformed overly emotional masses that Chomsky wrote of. The 1933 International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences he cites in his speech I excerpted in this comment thread was known and read by Goebbels, too.

This belief structure has always existed. It existed when Descartes used natural sciences to take away the social science-based power of elites. Exposing "The Science" as behavioral science is the same as Dorothy pulling the curtain back on the Wizard of Oz. Revealing a weak, pathetic old man using magic and tricks to control the lesser people of Oz. For their own good, of course. The Wizard left to beg and plead for mercy once shown to be the fraud he was. The Chomsky's and behaviorists of our time, the propagandists, are linguistic sorcerers, little different from the Merlin's and Rasputin's of the ago. Their dark magic must be revealed.

Expand full comment

Commie to the core! This definitely gives a deeper look into his/the elite thought process/mind. I listened to an interview with Chomsky yesterday for the reason that he said Trump is the only statesman to put forth negotiating with Putin regarding the war. The interview was interesting! His commie views came out now and again, of course, but didn't take over.

Expand full comment

True, but too narrow a target. This predicament free people of the US and world are in today isn't just a result of Marxist's gaining unprecedented power and control. The past few years have pulled the curtain back far enough for us to see the Marxists and Fascists working together to defeat individual liberty and freedom across the globe. As Chomsky describes, those in power can easily float between Marxism and Capitalism, as long as they stay in the elite positions within both systems.

They have no ideological preference. They have a status preference. They believe themselves to be better, more elite, more intelligent, wiser, greater human than the rest of humanity. They bicker over which system of governing the little people is preferable, neither believing that the little people should be the true deciders of their fate.

It's why Hitler and Stalin once had a nonaggression pact; they shared that fundamental belief. Hitler got greedy, believed himself more clever and more powerful, and paid the price. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. The Fascists and Marxists learned from that history. Not the same lesson that we'd like to think. They learned that they must first eliminate individual liberty and freedom before they settle their fight over which system of governing the little people is preferable.

This explains why the corporations, Rino's, SCOTUS, have gone along with the elimination of our constitutional rights, a New Normal of reduced freedom and increased surveillance (Thanks Patriot Act!) Only a handful of Freedom Caucus politicians fighting the good fight for us. Mocked and scorned by leaders on both the left and right.

Did you ever wonder what happened to the Nazi-sympathizers in the US like Rockefeller, Lindbergh, Ford, when WWII broke out? Do you really believe they had a Road to Damascus conversion and rejected and rebuked their preference for Fascist governance, corporations efficiently aligned with government? I never read the history of them confessing their sins. I did read that they just got silent about it and hoped the memory of their support would fade away.

Do you know who one of Hitler's biggest international bankers was during WWII? Prescott Bush, father of George H W Bush. Who also happened to be the UN Ambassador under Nixon who recognized the CCP in China over our previous allies in Taiwan. Who was the first US Ambassador to China. Who was Ford's Director of the CIA. Who turned a blind eye to the CCP's brutal put down of freedom in Tiananmen Square. Who shortly after announced the New World Order. That Klaus Schwab and the UN promote in their Great Reset/Agenda 2030 push. The Bush's and Cheney's mortal enemies of Trump and freedom and liberty fighting MAGA. Coincidence?

No, this predicament is much more dire than just Commies and Marxists inside the gate. They've made their own nonaggression pact with the Fascists already here. Until they get rid of us Bitter Clingers and Deplorables. MAGA types. Both sides call us domestic terrorists. They've both declared war against constitutional freedom and liberty-minded Patriots. We are their combined enemy. Who must be eliminated before they can contest which one of them ends up governing the obedient.

Using behavioral science to make the people believe they are still free and love their new chains. Long and velvet-lined if they play their cards right. But still enslaved to higher elites. It's a hellofa fight we have on our hands to wake people up. Oppressors to the left, oppressors to the right. Surrounded. It's time to attack. Past time. With truth bombs. And pulling the curtain all the way back to reveal the whole, ugly truth of it all.

Expand full comment

Gad Saad has a section in his book "the parasitic mind" about how Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion has supplanted the search for truth in some Canadian academic institutions. I've tried to talk about this issue to some prominent scientists I know, but very hard to articulate succinctly for those that aren't paying attention to cultural trends/aren't familiar with CRT etc. This article is particularly good, and a lot easier to share than a book segment. Thanks Chris!

Expand full comment
May 3, 2022Liked by Chris Bray

Shocking! 🙄

Expand full comment

Reading this I couldn't help but think of Vox Day, who's been using the term 'convergence' for like a decade now to describe institutional capture by the woke cult, and the way in which the institution's activities are inevitably redirected away from the core mission and towards advancing cultural marxism, And here we find the NSF, happily using exactly the same term coined by one of their bitterest enemies, to describe exactly the same process.

Clown world truly is its own parody.

Expand full comment
May 4, 2022Liked by Chris Bray

Any institution that hands out tax dollars is a big target for political warfare. It should be no surprise at all that the long march through the institutions has set up camp in the NSF.

Honestly, I'm pretty blasé about it, myself. Government science is, generally speaking, pretty weak sauce already. The weaker it gets, the stronger the alternatives will be.

Expand full comment
author

What are the alternatives? I suspect federal funding -- NIH and NSF -- has cut off a great deal of oxygen for other ways of doing science. But we always have the researchers at Pfizer, so. I wonder how much science exists outside of the few corrupted lanes.

Expand full comment

Alternatives aren't benefitting from professionalization or popularization, but they're already here. Technology is cheap. Data is plentiful. The most precious thing a scientist can have is fresh perspective, and institutions are made to squelch that.

One of the benefits of wearing this silly disguise is that I never have to fear looking like my tinfoil is showing. But allow me to recommend an example of just how much better physics can be done by an outsider:

http://milesmathis.com/index.html

Plenty more where that came from. But that's a lot already!

Expand full comment

This happened in environmental sciences in Universities 30-40 years ago. Freedom Fox is right to mention Marx. There is only one science, everything is political. What are we going to do about it?

Expand full comment

They need to have only one science. We mustn't let them have it, we must demark natural from social science. Separate natural sciences were the precursor to individual liberty and freedom. They provide an alternate authority to the social science-based edicts of rulers, authoritarians. Capable of contradicting self-serving manipulations of totalitarians. In the same way faith in God provides an alternate authority to the edicts of rulers. It's why communists ban religion, no alternate authority is permissible under collectivist authoritarianism, under any strain of authoritarianism. The scientific method inspired by Descartes' Dream in 1619 contradicted edicts of the theologies and monarchies in the Age of Reason. There can be no freedom and liberty under a one science merger of social and natural sciences.

What are we going to do about it? Take some advice from Saul Alinsky and "freeze the target" by naming it, then attacking it. Like is finally happening today with CRT. The racist indoctrination it stands for had gone on in classrooms for decades before finally being given a name, which froze the target, now it's being attacked.

Behavioral Science is "the science of totalitarianism." Described as such by a practitioner of it in the UK's pandemic response nudge team (we have one in the US, too).

https://web.archive.org/web/20210519003131/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/14/scientists-admit-totalitarian-use-fear-control-behaviour-covid/

Say its name. Share it. Attack it. Wide and far. It is the enemy of freedom. It is the science the WEF and UN are deploying on us to implement The Great Reset/Agenda 2030, where we will "own nothing and be happy." Psycho-social manipulation, choice architecture, nudges, shoves and slaps.

https://www.undp.org/publications/behavioural-insights-united-nations-%E2%80%93-achieving-agenda-2030

Please read my separate comment and reply comments in its thread for more links and information. Thank you for recognizing it in your comment, ACSD.

Expand full comment

The Department For Fixing White People.

Expand full comment

More like the Department for Fuck White People.

Expand full comment

Nah, I think they really do just want to reprogram us so we can be peacefully phased out. Self-loathing whites with money and social influence have been great foot soldiers for their own destruction.

Expand full comment

I see we are well on our way to becoming a BIPOC Woke broke backwater.

Expand full comment

the corporate social credit system at work.

Expand full comment

This illustrates rather perfectly how globalism -- which I think is what the Rothschilds were aiming for from the moment they first hung up their red shield -- has infiltrated every facet of society. Which in turn illustrates how much power is to be had from gaining control over national money supplies.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

The term 'settled science' is itself an anti-scientific rhetorical term deployed by the people who corrupted science towards political ends in the first place. "The science is settled" is the functional equivalent of "'Shut up!', she exclaimed".

Expand full comment

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts."

-- Richard Feynman

Expand full comment

how dare you question Experts and The Science, you heathen! BURN HIM!

Expand full comment

Does he weigh more than a duck?🤣

Expand full comment