FREEDOM - LIBERTY - HAPPINESS SUPPORT DOC MALIK About this conversation - David Charalambous is a behavioural analyst with 25 years of experience. In this far-reaching almost 4 hour podcast we talk about how behavioural sciences were used by the Government to manipulate us.
This was one of those podcasts I have to listen to at normal speed, so information dense.
I am lucky enough to have been interested in these subjects for 20 odd years and have read a few of the books mentioned as well as studied NLP, hypnosis and other persuasion techniques, so I saw most of the techniques used on us from 2020 (and before) pretty clearly. But this was a masterclass of professional detail, excellent.
I remember the first pots and pans night thinking, Oh My God, I know exactly what this is. It took a couple of weeks to convince the family though.
I often wonder if Derren Brown can sleep at nights for staying silent.
Fabulous chats...so much vital information. I've started listening to the videos on David's site too.
I'm not sure if I missed it in the chat but what do we think the dancing medics/police was all about? China is big on dance (community, all doing the same), dance is used to tell stories, is the movement meant to be a distraction so the message they sing goes in deeper? Most people saw it as strange, I only saw one post that defended them for needing to let off steam as sooo busy and hardworking.
I have given this much thought, but I am still unsure what it is.
I imagine they ran scenarios to see what would work to get the outcome they desired and this worked.
It may be linked to conscious mind distractions such as radio ads. If they have a message that will meet resistance from the conscious mind, they gain by putting it on the radio as the conscious mind is usually doing something else, and the watchman at the gate is distracted.
Something is appealing about choreographed dance routines at the theatre. I wonder if they use that to elicit an emotion to fuse to the subliminal message.
Thank you, yes there's something attractive about dance routines, like synchronised swimming too, it's skilled and takes work for everyone to be coordinated and work as a whole. Maybe also telling us a story of what is happening in the hospitals that we weren't allowed into...this is what they're doing but at the same time showing us it was all theatre. There is a theory that they have to tell us what they're doing, so that we can be deemed in agreement of it...there seem to be occult links with the dates they choose and numbers etc.
A further thought...the last time we saw medics dancing was at the London Olympics. The dancing medics were everywhere but in the UK they could hark back to the games.
Good discussion. An aside on the brief mention of Joseph Campbell's much loved 'The Hero with a Thousand Faces'.
You know the much-discussed thing where you read something in a newspaper that you know about and realise that what's been written is total rubbish, but then you read an article on the next page and are tempted to believe it...
I was reading the book, struggling a bit with stuff I had some knowledge of, until I reached a chapter on a topic I happen to have a PhD in. The chapter was rubbish, it wasn't even in the ball park of being vaguely correct. How many other chapters in this book are like that? Many of them I expect.
Hi Nik, this is an essential point that most do not ponder. Why do we feel strong emotions when watching a fictional movie? Even more interesting are the same feelings when watching for the 2nd time, even if we know the hero wins. This reveals something interesting about the 'adaptive' unconscious. It may be because so much of the conditioning is in plain sight.
What I saw in Campbell's book was confirmation bias. He has gone through the world's literature on religion and mythology and cherry-picked things that appear to match his thesis.
Interesting. Can you point me toward some disconfirming information?
I think it is a function of the brain to do this, which is far stronger than most account for. Some data from "How Minds Change" suggests that 30% of disconfirming data is needed for a belief to collapse. This leads me to conclude that censorship has far more significant issues than previously thought.
It also seems that conflict of interest is no longer an issue. Regulators are being funded by those they are supposed to regulate.
Why do I have the feeling that we're talking across each other?
I no longer own the book, but I can tell you the chapter on Buddhism is nonsense. I rather suspect that the experts in other subject areas might say that Campbell has not been accurate there either. I don't know that but on the basis of 'if you're wrong about X, why should my default be to trust you about Y', I am left wondering how much of the rest of the book I should trust.
I can well believe your figure of 30%, but I have a sense that things may be changing. Strange causalities are in play these days. For example, I would say that people are far more sceptical about AGW and Net Zero these days. This is not, I would argue, because they have been reading the academic journals and the papers that counter the 'consensus'. I would say it is because more people have woken up to the way they were manipulated regarding the pandemic, and that has made them more wary and more suspicious that some of what they are being told is propaganda.
Has the loss of trust in the corporate and state media affected the 30% figure? I am interested in your thoughts.
I think you are right. It is so easy to talk at cross purposes in text.
It has been my experience that our blindspots can come across in books. This may be Cambell's. In that book, I mentioned the 30% figure. McCraney has blindspots around how governments use this information (how minds change) and is blind to much of the propaganda. He does a great shop of showing the structure but may have inaccuracies in his content knowledge (he mentions horse dewormer etc, not seeing the propaganda).
I believe you are correct about the propaganda waking more up. I would think this is the blowback that simple logic fails to comprehend. "let's condition them," not realizing sooner or later they will spot it.
This was one of those podcasts I have to listen to at normal speed, so information dense.
I am lucky enough to have been interested in these subjects for 20 odd years and have read a few of the books mentioned as well as studied NLP, hypnosis and other persuasion techniques, so I saw most of the techniques used on us from 2020 (and before) pretty clearly. But this was a masterclass of professional detail, excellent.
I remember the first pots and pans night thinking, Oh My God, I know exactly what this is. It took a couple of weeks to convince the family though.
I often wonder if Derren Brown can sleep at nights for staying silent.
Fabulous chats...so much vital information. I've started listening to the videos on David's site too.
I'm not sure if I missed it in the chat but what do we think the dancing medics/police was all about? China is big on dance (community, all doing the same), dance is used to tell stories, is the movement meant to be a distraction so the message they sing goes in deeper? Most people saw it as strange, I only saw one post that defended them for needing to let off steam as sooo busy and hardworking.
I have given this much thought, but I am still unsure what it is.
I imagine they ran scenarios to see what would work to get the outcome they desired and this worked.
It may be linked to conscious mind distractions such as radio ads. If they have a message that will meet resistance from the conscious mind, they gain by putting it on the radio as the conscious mind is usually doing something else, and the watchman at the gate is distracted.
Something is appealing about choreographed dance routines at the theatre. I wonder if they use that to elicit an emotion to fuse to the subliminal message.
Thank you, yes there's something attractive about dance routines, like synchronised swimming too, it's skilled and takes work for everyone to be coordinated and work as a whole. Maybe also telling us a story of what is happening in the hospitals that we weren't allowed into...this is what they're doing but at the same time showing us it was all theatre. There is a theory that they have to tell us what they're doing, so that we can be deemed in agreement of it...there seem to be occult links with the dates they choose and numbers etc.
A further thought...the last time we saw medics dancing was at the London Olympics. The dancing medics were everywhere but in the UK they could hark back to the games.
Good discussion. An aside on the brief mention of Joseph Campbell's much loved 'The Hero with a Thousand Faces'.
You know the much-discussed thing where you read something in a newspaper that you know about and realise that what's been written is total rubbish, but then you read an article on the next page and are tempted to believe it...
I was reading the book, struggling a bit with stuff I had some knowledge of, until I reached a chapter on a topic I happen to have a PhD in. The chapter was rubbish, it wasn't even in the ball park of being vaguely correct. How many other chapters in this book are like that? Many of them I expect.
Hi Nik, this is an essential point that most do not ponder. Why do we feel strong emotions when watching a fictional movie? Even more interesting are the same feelings when watching for the 2nd time, even if we know the hero wins. This reveals something interesting about the 'adaptive' unconscious. It may be because so much of the conditioning is in plain sight.
What I saw in Campbell's book was confirmation bias. He has gone through the world's literature on religion and mythology and cherry-picked things that appear to match his thesis.
Interesting. Can you point me toward some disconfirming information?
I think it is a function of the brain to do this, which is far stronger than most account for. Some data from "How Minds Change" suggests that 30% of disconfirming data is needed for a belief to collapse. This leads me to conclude that censorship has far more significant issues than previously thought.
It also seems that conflict of interest is no longer an issue. Regulators are being funded by those they are supposed to regulate.
Why do I have the feeling that we're talking across each other?
I no longer own the book, but I can tell you the chapter on Buddhism is nonsense. I rather suspect that the experts in other subject areas might say that Campbell has not been accurate there either. I don't know that but on the basis of 'if you're wrong about X, why should my default be to trust you about Y', I am left wondering how much of the rest of the book I should trust.
I can well believe your figure of 30%, but I have a sense that things may be changing. Strange causalities are in play these days. For example, I would say that people are far more sceptical about AGW and Net Zero these days. This is not, I would argue, because they have been reading the academic journals and the papers that counter the 'consensus'. I would say it is because more people have woken up to the way they were manipulated regarding the pandemic, and that has made them more wary and more suspicious that some of what they are being told is propaganda.
Has the loss of trust in the corporate and state media affected the 30% figure? I am interested in your thoughts.
I think you are right. It is so easy to talk at cross purposes in text.
It has been my experience that our blindspots can come across in books. This may be Cambell's. In that book, I mentioned the 30% figure. McCraney has blindspots around how governments use this information (how minds change) and is blind to much of the propaganda. He does a great shop of showing the structure but may have inaccuracies in his content knowledge (he mentions horse dewormer etc, not seeing the propaganda).
I believe you are correct about the propaganda waking more up. I would think this is the blowback that simple logic fails to comprehend. "let's condition them," not realizing sooner or later they will spot it.