language for manipulation, exaggeration and hypocrisy continues from the moderation problem.
Most human communication is rubbish.
Through observing the increasing numbers of psychological mistakes originating from popular mass media and other opinionators, abelard pinpoints how current language damages society's mental and social fabric.
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." [1]
"Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together
again in new shapes of your own choosing." [2]
"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four.”
“Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three.
Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder." [2]
the meaning of survival in the human state
A great deal of human behaviour is driven by blind survival drives.
Humans are becoming conscious, and need to understand how to control those drives, otherwise they will wreck the planet and themselves with it.
The prime inherited drives are to breed and to not be eaten.
Humans are often a damn nuisance to each other.
They form collectives which interfere with their ability to get on with their own lives.
Yet, if they do not form collectives, other collectives attempt to invade and thus otherwise to disrupt their lives.
Thus they tax each other, they tend to war against each other, instead of getting on with their own quiet and productive lives.
Much of the abelard.org website describes the logic of just getting on with your lives.
But then comes the irrationalist, collective pressures.
However, if you are not part of a collective, for instance a nation, you are vulnerable to any highwayman or opportunist dirt bag.
Thus there is a conflict between your independence and your simple wish to be left alone.
These insecurities tend to drive most people to overvalue money and commit all manner of crimes to get their hands on money.
The black is paranoid of the police, and so acts negative, suspicious, uncooperative.
So the police learn to expect it.
In turn, they become nervous, irritable.
Thence blacks, gypsies or other minorities in turn learn to distrust police (and other would-be 'authorities') .
This is a generalised problem in human behaviour.
It cannot be stopped until people learn better people skills.
Thus, it is better that such skills taught systematically in society.
nightmare! the corruption of language by politicians and reporters;
I doubt that I could ever emphasise adequately the vast amount of fiction and just so stories that parade in the rhetoric and drivel that is served up by politicians and media as commentary upon everyday happenstance. This is all organised by monkeys seeking to enhance their control over resources (and money). It is all wrapped up in a tinsel of adjectives and emotional superfluidity.
Reporters and politicians destroy language as they encourage people to emote instead of to think.
You may string together longer words to make non-sense, just as you
may string short words,
and vice-versa.
It is time for a dictionary of fashionable non-words with their translations.
These words are often subjective to the person using them and so intended to influence the recipient to mutually agree or disapprove.
emotion displaces reason - a non-word dictionary
non-word
word
non-word
word
nightmare
minor disturbance
moment of truth
what happens next
disgrace
minor mistake
justice
what we want, frequently money
outrage
minor problem
victim, survivor
upset, looking for sympathy/compensation
perfect storm
coincidence
two events ('problems' happening at the same time
good, person or action that is approved of
I want to sell this to you
We, everybody, most people
I, me
the country wants
my constituency....
the party...
I want
[often used by politicians]
cool
(originally, a colder temperature)
I like/approve
clever, good, original to me
self-esteem
encouraging a person to believe that they can do a task that in reality they cannot (a belief that they are more capable than ability warrants)
significantly
massive
greatly
largely
many
most
huge
is not a number
closure
revenge
"In defeat, malice;
in victory, revenge" [3]
we're making progress
we're far behind
feisty
badly behaved, aggressive
banter
aggressive comments and chatter
patriotic
common-sense
the adults in the room
agrees with me
I can't wait!
Please, please, don't change channel to something less boring
that's a good question,
a brilliant question
patronising
I will now blather, or dodge the question
that's an interesting question
I hadn't thought of that
I don't understand the subject, but I intend to bluff my way through.
Maybe flattery would help
I've not thought about this but...
... I want to think how to dodge this one
now to dodge or blather
blown away
mindless surprise
crisis
my rent is due, it's a crisis
crisis, I can't find my pencil
aristocrats
tax inspectors
policemen
people above the law
someone who does not agree with me
scapegoats
reveal
this is old news,
printed elsewhere
you know what I mean
I don't know, I haven't a clue,
but I'm trying to get you to reinforce the load of garbage I'm spouting
no, I absolutely do not know.
I know no such thing
you know...
no, I absolutely do not know.
I know no such thing
tough, as in tough decision
hard decision
difficult ...
decision made in my self-interest, not that of the voters
I/We get it
I understand that
I know better than you
but we will ignore it
a subsection on wokespeak
reach out
talk to, ask
reveal
tell
(aren't I clever to tell you something other people have said before)
push back
answer
identify as
pretend to be
this/xyz speaks to
someone else agrees with my analysis/commentary/version
step down, step back
be asked to step down/back
resign
be sacked
problematic
does not accord with current 'modern think'
explore
tell
(aren't I clever to tell you something other people have said before)
observe
manipulative physical behaviours
continual head nodding
you agree with me, don't you?
I agree with whatever you are saying, however ridiculous
'scientists' and other 'experts'
probably
I haven't a clue
most likely
just-so stories
Much use of language involves just so stories. Every salesman seeks supposed advantages for her victim, let alone politicians or even reporters. Thus, the estate agent doesn't tell you about the problem with the drains. Every barrister in court tells you butter wouldn't melt in the mouth of his client, or else the defendant's the worst monster since Stalin. And so it goes on, not a seeking for facts but attempts to distort, confuse, and to gain advantage. Most humans are not very nice, but we do the best we can.
People make up just so stories that embellish, or justify, or absolve their actions - "I am a victim", "I had no choice", or provide 'virtue signalling'. Other , mostly visual, just so stories claim a country's racial make up to be the inverse of reality.
politicians dripping poison
A common behaviour of politicians is to try to undermine their opponents by a steady drip-feed of unsupported, dishonest exaggeration and poison.
I shall use Stalinmer (Labour/Socialist Opposition Leader, Kier Starmer) as a current example of this process in action.
Note that their cronnies will also pile in opportunistically.
1. This recent spate of political poison in the UK (2022-23) started with a ridiculous campaign about an alleged birthday cake for then Prime Minister Boris Johnson, and moved seamlessly from one unresolved attack to another, supported as usual by media surrogates.
2. Outlandish wage demands among train drivers and nurses.
3. Taxing private school fees, with the objective of undermining, or even destroying, a major, serious education resource for future major leadership positions, including in parliament..
4. The latest step in this campaign is to try to make an issue out of Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC). This has been used since Attlee's 1947 debacle to produce cheap government buildings, and ever since.
Notice that as each attack fades away under analysis, a new piece of nonsense takes its place, until that too starts stumbling as it is analysed.
exciting, inciting behaviours in others
Humans spend much of their time trying to excite and incite other human monkeys into doing what they want others to do, rather than encouraging those people (monkeys) to act in their own interests.
Unfortunately, humans are remarkably inclined to states of excitement. This may work for a band of chimpanzees, or a football crowd, but it is not a wise behaviour for reasoning beings. It may even have worked for bands of warring tribes, but it is suicidally self-destructive for modern societies.
narcissism
People are not narcissists, they do not seek control.
These labels are attempts to control the narrative of other people.
narcissistic
"I'd rather they do what I want them to do, not what they are trying to do themselves that they decided themselves to do." All sounds rather narcissistic to me!
detecting fake emotions
While observing interviews and interactions, I am reminded of an amusing but trivial film which illustrates the fake emotions used to manipulate those less capable of independent thought and analysis. Noticeable is the repeated expression, "Put on your happy face."
You may notice politicians and the like nod their head as they say something affirmative and shake their head as they say something negative. A method of trying to force 'the targets' into agreeing with whatever they are saying, however foolish the speaker's assertions may be.
"A feigned smile, such as one we make for a photographer, often continues for more than four or five seconds, by which time most authentic expressions have faded. Feigned smiles also get switched on more abruptly and off more abruptly than a genuine smile."
[paraphrased from Bugental, p.399]
You can see this continuously on the faces of participants of television advertisements.
Isn't it about time people stopped slagging off poor old Herod?
Surely paranoid Putin has already killed more baybees?
And what about
other previous babee (and adult) killers like Hitler or Stalin?
For how long can you hold grudges?
Maybe Maigret has a point, "Hatred is a disease. It makes you enjoy things that must not be enjoyed."[3, with video excerpt and comments]
That includes things like anger, revenge, rancour, resentment, spite, and other physical and emotional violences.
We have quite enough problems with our latest mass murders without dwelling on those of a hundred years ago, let alone 2,000 years past.
We don't need rhetoric to keep alive old fires of hatred.
We need the will to stop those in the present age.
interests and pretences
Venn diagram illustrating society in political terms
what is an interest?
An interest is an advantage to the person concerned.
Is it a good time to buy a house? Yes, if you have one to sell.
nobody knows
Despite pretences, nobody knows what goes in in the head of another person, yet several 'trades' function on selling the pretence that they do know - lawyers, politicians, and a variety of psychologists, many of whom make a substantial living.
pretending to know another's mind
In this section, I will gives some examples from various charlatans, with their methods of pretending.
example: being a victim
"I have PTSD because I watched a dramatic 'reality' programme, and then tried to associate it with my less than successful life choices.
"Now I can persuade lawyers to sue people who cared for me by blaming them for the circumstances of my life choices."
Thus are created Just
So Stories where distorting descriptions are accepted as being real, as 'truth'.
Lawyers even spend time and money training in the use of such con games. Lawyers charge higher fees for selling nonsense to courts and other willing customers. The customers often pay for it because, to various extents, it, the con, works in the real world.
example: only give a yes or no answer
These examples are from the parliamentary enquiry on the handling of the covid-19 pandemic. Prime Minister at the time, Boris Johnson was questioned.
Q. [Peter Weatherby KC] And this may be one where a "yes" or "no" answer would
suffice. Could you have done more to stop it?
A. [Boris Johnson] I think the answer to that is that, given what I knew at
the time about what was going on, the answer to that is no, but what I possibly should have done is issued
a general instruction to everybody to be mindful of the rules and how things would appear. And, as I say,
I think in one of the WhatsApps that was earlier quoted
by Counsel to the Inquiry, that -- that's my view. [UK Covid-19 Inquiry, 13 December 2023]
A. [Boris Johnson]-- the UK, given its -- the elderliness of the
population, the comorbidities, I do not think it is fair
to say that the UK did significantly worse than others.
Q. [Peter Weatherby KC] Yes, with respect, that's deflecting from my point,
isn't it, by going off and talking about another
country? I've given you the full picture here and asked
you to comment on it.
A. [Boris Johnson] I'm giving you -- sorry, you asked -- you asked me to --
for my opinion about South Korea, now you're saying that
I shouldn't be talking about another country.
Q. [Peter Weatherby KC] No --well, okay, South Korea, ....
Q. [Peter Weatherby KC] Well, the problem is you hadn't got started with it,
Mr Johnson, that's what's you're saying in your
self-reflection in your statement, isn't it? The
reality is --
A.[Boris Johnson] No, that's not true, we had a -- we had a test and trace
system, and we could already test and trace people, but
it was nothing like big enough, and what I hope will be
one of the legacies of this exercise is that we will
have a much bigger diagnostics industry, as indeed we
now do.
Q. [Peter Weatherby KC]Well, the reality is that your government was reactive
not to what was on the horizon but what was there in the
here and now, and you've just reacted too late to
provide PPE, source PPE or source testing; isn't that
the reality of it?
A. [Boris Johnson] No. As soon as we understood the scale of the problem,
we shifted heaven and earth to get both things, and
I think by the end of the year, I think it was something
like 35 billion items of PPE that we'd --
Q. [Peter Weatherby KC] Well, I've put the point to you --
A. [Boris Johnson] And I want to thank Paul Deighton for what he did on
securing PPE --
Q. [Weatherby KC] You're deflecting again, Mr Johnson, aren't you?
A. [Boris Johnson] No, I'm telling you what we did.
-- we're in a -- you can see the -- as I was saying earlier to Mr Keith and to the Inquiry, you can see the
risk that the virus is going to start taking off again,
I'm --
Q. [Peter Weatherby KC] [Weatherby KC] Yes.
A. [Boris Johnson] -- extremely worried --
Q. [Weatherby KC] That's exactly what I'm putting it to you for.
A. [Boris Johnson] And with great respect to you, sir, it looks to me as
though what I'm saying here is that the priority is
to -- and, you know, I'm sorry to have said this about
the Daily Mail, but the priority is to stop deaths.
Q. [Hugo Keith KC] The mistake in the spring was making a decision too
late. The fact that --
A. [Boris Johnson] No, sorry --
Q. [Hugo Keith KC] -- one of the reasons for the decision, for that
mistake, Mr Johnson, may have been a misunderstanding as
to where we were on the epidemiological trajectory is
quite different, is it not?
A. [Boris Johnson] No, we couldn't have made the decision earlier because
the facts as we understood them were -- were different.
There is only one person who knows what is going on in a person's head, and that is the person involved, and, generally, even they are not much good at it.
Meanwhile, an enormous mass of nonsense is being published every year. This nonsense generates fantasies/excuses in the minds of the readers, which are then used to justify their varieties of ridiculous behaviours. People are even 'awarded' degrees for doing this!
example: meaningless accusations
Keir Starmer: The Prime Minister can spin it all he
likes, but the whole country can see that, yet again, the
Tory party is in meltdown and everyone else is paying
the price.
[Prime Minister's Questions, 13 December 2023]
However, a more educated and alert reporter was recently heard saying, "Everyone thinks... no, some people think..."
deliberately dishonest communications -
examples from the socialist cult
The essential purpose of socialists is to either to lie their way to power, or failing that, to generate
mass hysteria and
mob rule in pursuit of revolution. As a dogmatic religion, socialism seeks to disengage people from critical analyis.
the ways socialists lie - destroying the given order
By 'trashing' the person - a form of distraction.
Using a false assumption in questions posed, or replies made.
For instance: "When did you stop beating your wife?"
By trying to divert every reference to the real world towards some emotional irrelevance.
For instance: Statement - Our welfare is becoming out of control.
Response - That's because you don't care about the poor.
Goebbels method of lying:
Repeating a lie over and over again until it is widely believed.
Lenin method: Lenin was right. There is no subtler, no surer
means of overturning the existing basis of society than
to debauch the currency. The process engages all the
hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction,
and does it in a manner which not one man in a million
is able to diagnose. [The
Economic Consequences of the Peace,1919, ch. 6]
This is, of course, the point. This is the objective of Marxists/Socialists - to so disrupt society that they can take over.
Lenin generated devastating inflation. The rouble depreciated about 50 million times by 1923 [Katsenellenbaum, Russian
Currency and banking, 1914-24, published 1925].
Stalin method:
Kill off the establishment. Examples: The French Revolution and Stalin's attempt to kill the capitalists (kulaks).
Kill off anyone with education. Examples: Pol Pot, Mao's cultural revolution, the Iranian revolution also used similar methods.
Cloward-Piven method: "First proposed in 1966 and named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, the Cloward-Piven Strategy seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse."
—
"In their 1966 article, Cloward and Piven charged that the ruling classes used welfare to weaken the poor; that by providing a social safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. Poor people can advance only when "the rest of society is afraid of them," Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970. Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system; the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation; poor people would rise in revolt; only then would "the rest of society" accept their demands."
[Quoted from discoverthenetworks.org]
Deliberately generate conflicts and envy between groups.
Set men against women.
Set ethnic groups against one another.
Set the better-off against the less well-off.
Generate religious conflicts.
Foment strife between those of different ethnicity and skin 'colours'.
And of course Marx's favourite, set workers against employers.
This edition is an illustrated reproduction of the original edition.
We have not included any paperback editions because the publishers of these appear to think they know better than Mr. Kipling as how to illustrate the stories, or even how to write them.
See also
Movement Differences between Deliberate and Spontaneous Facial Expressions: Zygomaticus Major Action in Smiling by Karen L. Schmidt et al. J Nonverbal Behav. 2006; 30(1): 37–52
The Right Honourable James Hacker MP, minister and prime minister, in TV series Yes, Minister and Yes, Priminster, written by Anthony Jay.
I do not believe that this incident or these words appear in the book written by Georges Simenon. As remarked elsewhere, it is a vanity of script writers to believe that they can do better than the original writer.
[Rupert Davies as Commissary Jules Maigret in “Peter the Lett” (1963)]
