Sunday, December 12, 2004


How to deal with dissent in the "soft" police state

In case you have not noticed, we of the Party do not exhibit outright censorship upon the press. There are no government officials peering over the shoulders of reporters to make sure that they publish only articles that we wish them to publish. There are no black ops squads going out and killing reporters who report things that we of the Party do not like. Yet if you look at the headlines and stories in every newspaper in America, they show a surprising obedience to the Party's official line. How can this be? How can the Party control what the press is printing, without actually censoring them via the power of the State?!

Well, there's a few characteristics of the human animal that are interesting here, which allow the Party to suppress the truth without appearing to suppress the truth. For example:
  1. Human animals are HERD animals, basically hairless gorillas. Like hairless gorillas, they want to be part of the herd. They do not want to be out by themselves. Any human animal that does not think like the rest of the human animals is thus ostracized, expelled, ignored.
  2. Like all herd animals, human animals will, if left to their own devices, blindly follow the leader of the herd. If you attempt to tell the typical human animal that his herd leader is not fit to be leader, said herd animal will typically react with suspicion and anger -- against you, the entity that is challenging the supremecy of his herd leader. Thus in 1972, President Richard Nixon was re-elected by a landslide, despite the electorate knowing about Watergate. Knowledge that does not fit into the human animal's desire to follow his leader is ignored.
  3. Human animals want stability. They want to continue their pointless lives of masticating, fornicating, defecating, and consuming mass quantities without any disruptions caused by nasty little things like "truth".
  4. Human animals do not WANT to know the truth. What human animals want is lies, lies to justify the human animal's pointless life of masticating, fornicating, and defecating, lies that justify the human animal's sloth and mass consumption, bright and shining lives to give meaning to a meaningless life that will be forgotten within minutes of the dead animal's name being carved on a tombstone.
So with that in mind, let us give an example: The destruction of Gary Webb.

The first thing we did, when Gary published an expose' of CIA drug dealing, was ostracize him and his newspaper (principle #1: human animals are herd animals). We used our CIA asset(1) Walter Pincus in the Washington Post to start the task of ostracizing Webb and his newspaper. This took advantage of principle #2: Human animals blindly follow the leader of the herd. And the Washington Post is, for a great many journalists, the leader of the (journalistic) herd. Thus once Pincus published his "rebuttal" of Webb's story, a number of other media outlets blindly followed the leader of the herd (the Post) and similarly published "rebuttals" of Webb's story. Similarly, they did not want to believe ill of the overall leader of the herd (President Reagan's CIA), and thus were predisposed to follow Pincus's lead in the first place. Principle #3: Laziness. We provided a large number of Party officials to do damage control, calmly assuring reporters that Webb was lying. Rather than do their own reporting, these reporters could instead just let Pincus write their stories for them (basically), quote some "off the record" Party officials denying Webb's story, and get paid the same as if they'd actually done real work. This contributed to the herd effect. Other reporters, seeing that the majority of the herd was ostracizing Webb and his newspaper, jumped on the bandwagon. Finally, principle #4, a desire to be lied to. Really, these reporters literally BEGGED for us to lie to them. They wanted to be part of the herd, instead of an outcast like Webb. They wanted to believe the best of the CIA, rather than have to actually do work uncovering the CIA's drug smuggling past. Furthermore, the American public as a *whole* wanted to be lied to, and reporters are conditioned to give the public what they want -- lies, bright and shiny lies, lies to soothe the daily lives of misery and pointless mastication and defecation of human animals whose sole purpose for existing is as cogs in a vast and mighty machine that their pathetic little minds will never comprehend or even perceive.

Within a few short weeks, the editor of the San Jose Mercury News caved. He could not bear being ostracized from the herd. Gary Webb refused to cave, continued to insist upon that "truth" thing, and was ostracized, blacklisted from the journalistic herd. We took his career from him, his livelihood from him, and finally, we took his wife and kids from him. Eventually it was all too much for him, and on the day he was going to be kicked out of his long-time home in suburbia on to the streets, evicted to roam the streets as yet another of those homeless bums that we instinctually avoid looking at when we see them on the streets, he ate a shotgun.

That is what happens to truth-tellers who dare tell the people truths that they do not wish to hear. That, my friends, is why few journalists ever bother writing real stories. Not only are journalists herd animals by nature, but they do not wish to be ostracized from their herd, and examples like Gary Webb make sure that they keep that fear of ostracization deep within their pathetic little souls. Not that most journalists would ever dare go out in front of the pack like Gary Webb did, anyhow. They are, for the most part, a bunch of pathetic sheep, who view their job as being transcriptionists of the words of those in power, who will give equal time to a Garry Webb telling the truth and a CIA official lying, without ever stating in their story "we have evidence that Gary is telling the truth and we have evidence that the CIA official is lying." Why, that would require them to make a judgement! And surely you're asking too much of a poor reporter, whose job, after all, is to be the transcriptionist of those in power, rather than truth (which nobody wants to know anyhow)!

And so it goes in the American provinces of Oceania, which claim to have a "free press" -- yet where every newspaper in the country appears to have the same headlines and quote the same Party officials regarding the allocation of tea and sugar, day after day, year after year, in a lockstep conformity that the Communists could only aspire to... ah yes, the United States of Delusion, where even a free press is just an illusion...

Orwellianly Yours,
Karl Rove O'Brien, Bush's Brain

1. Walter Pincus, "How I Traveled Abroad On CIA Subsidy," San Jose Mercury, 18 February 1967, p. 14. wherin Mr. Pincus talks about his career as a CIA mole in student organizations

All this talk of herd is making me hungry. I'm thinking BBQ. You? Maybe nixon won because the criminal who hired lawyers to falsely accuse him over watergate was a murdering drunk sex criminal (Ted kennedy?). Or maybe nixon was just running against a terrorist?
And have you seen the obituaries for our intrepid Mr. Webb?

Additional kicks in the teeth - to a man already dead.

His accomplishments are distorted, and the inconsistencies of his death are dismissed as annoying internet conspiracy.

And thus a warning from the party goes out to every would-be investigative journalist.... pursue the truth at your own peril. For, even in death, you will not escape our wrath.
I wonder what you would think of my "combatting psychological warfare at home" article in my politics and religion blog. it's kinda fun to spot these tricks in the media as well. I really enjoyed your post.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

ObeyBigBrother: Documenting the rise of the Soft Police State
All contents copyright 1984-2004 by, other than exerpts copyrighted 1948 by George Orwell.