3 ms·

>You can control people’s minds to a large extent by the language you put in their heads. So, it’s very important that some of the first words you want to get p

>You can control people’s minds to a large extent by the language you put in their heads. So, it’s very important that some of the first words you want to get people to hear are the words good, bad, right, wrong, normal, abnormal, should, shouldn’t, have to, and can’t. If you want people to be controllable by authority, the key unit of education is language. So, what--there is a cabal of ultra-powerful sociopathic geniuses that design the language used by lesser mortals? That seems highly implausible.

47282847 2y ago
Not everything has to be purposefully designed by a conspiracy. Just picked up and used to the benefit of domination structures. These structures can well run independent from each other but find and employ the same mechanisms, narratives being a central one. Nothing in the book suggests it’s one coordinated “cabal“.
- ConspiracyFact 2y ago
  At the risk of being rude, I’ll ask you to reread the bit that I quoted. It reads very much like a description of how an intelligent agent might consciously manipulate the entire system of language. It doesn’t sound figurative at all to me. Edited to add: what you said—essentially, that true conspiracies are rare and that confluence of interests can often give the appearance of conspiracy—is something I wholeheartedly agree with. I commented because in this case it sounds like the author is claiming the existence of a rather implausible large-scale conspiracy.
  - 47282847 2y ago
    It does not read that way to me. It literally just says you should (ha!) push this perspective and its language on to people if you want to retain domination structures. There’s nothing in there for me that hints towards a conspiracy.
    - ConspiracyFact 2y ago
      > So, it’s very important that some of the first words you want to get people to hear are the words good, bad, right, wrong, normal, abnormal, should, shouldn’t, have to, and can’t How can you manipulate the first words that people hear if you’re not a super powerful conspirator?
      - rendx 2y ago
        Any independent regime, church, youth club, you name it, can build their particular structure based on such words (or rather, such ideas behind words). It does not have to be a conspiracy. Think: parents? Teachers? Preachers? Politicians? Journalists? Each of those (1) have a certain power position in the existing system and (2) have (early) access to others to get them to hear their phrases "first" -- about who you should (or must, to belong) consider "bad". And they do not have to conspire to each independently use the same strategy in order to maintain their place of dominance. There is no element of coordination necessary. To the contrary, most likely people who think in power-over dynamics will try to label the other "bad". That's the opposite of a conspiracy.

47282847 2y ago

Not everything has to be purposefully designed by a conspiracy. Just picked up and used to the benefit of domination structures. These structures can well run independent from each other but find and employ the same mechanisms, narratives being a central one. Nothing in the book suggests it’s one coordinated “cabal“.

ConspiracyFact 2y ago
At the risk of being rude, I’ll ask you to reread the bit that I quoted. It reads very much like a description of how an intelligent agent might consciously manipulate the entire system of language. It doesn’t sound figurative at all to me. Edited to add: what you said—essentially, that true conspiracies are rare and that confluence of interests can often give the appearance of conspiracy—is something I wholeheartedly agree with. I commented because in this case it sounds like the author is claiming the existence of a rather implausible large-scale conspiracy.
- 47282847 2y ago
  It does not read that way to me. It literally just says you should (ha!) push this perspective and its language on to people if you want to retain domination structures. There’s nothing in there for me that hints towards a conspiracy.
  - ConspiracyFact 2y ago
    > So, it’s very important that some of the first words you want to get people to hear are the words good, bad, right, wrong, normal, abnormal, should, shouldn’t, have to, and can’t How can you manipulate the first words that people hear if you’re not a super powerful conspirator?
    - rendx 2y ago
      Any independent regime, church, youth club, you name it, can build their particular structure based on such words (or rather, such ideas behind words). It does not have to be a conspiracy. Think: parents? Teachers? Preachers? Politicians? Journalists? Each of those (1) have a certain power position in the existing system and (2) have (early) access to others to get them to hear their phrases "first" -- about who you should (or must, to belong) consider "bad". And they do not have to conspire to each independently use the same strategy in order to maintain their place of dominance. There is no element of coordination necessary. To the contrary, most likely people who think in power-over dynamics will try to label the other "bad". That's the opposite of a conspiracy.