Because of how you feel when you read something fascinating. That feeling of, “Huh. I never thought of it that way before.” Neurons fire and form new patterns, old beliefs fade, and maybe new, more expansive ones form. And sometimes the world, or even the universe, seems like a different place.
That’s why we’re here.
I’ve always been interested in the mind and how it works. I’ve spent decades learning how to rewire the human mind for a better life experience and performance. Recently I’ve been digging more into what I call deep persuasion – how political and religious conversions occur.
The challenge has been that all the books and resources I’ve come across had one or another component missing. They all had unfinished angles and unexplored unknowns.
But recently I’ve come across the missing component and put it all together. This explains a great deal about what is going on in society, particularly Critical Race Theory and the Marxist ideological push we have been seeing. It might explain why we constantly see news media narratives of fear, tension, and conflict. And it might just explain the rise of the kind of anti-family and anti-male feminism of the last 30 years.
To explain all of this, I first need to talk about the concept of imprints. An imprint is a kind of on/off switch for the nervous system that is set during the life of the individual during a key stage of development. Once set, an imprint is highly resistant to both intellectual and emotional efforts to change it. Learned behavior can be unlearned, deep emotional experiences can be released, but imprints usually persist through the strongest of interventions. They are very hard to shift, hard enough that most who identified them considered them inherent or hereditary.
A healthy mother imprint means the individual’s nervous system is set such that they feel the world is fundamentally safe, while those with an unhealthy mother imprint have a persistent sense that the world is unsafe. The “runt of the litter” effect we see in dogs and cats is an unhealthy mother imprint on the nervous system of the individual. This is what we find in hypersensitive people, for example certain women who see men as predators by nature. It’s not necessarily the men; it’s those women’s nervous systems that are set at a deep level to experience the world as unsafe because they have unhealthy mother imprints.
A healthy father imprint means the individual’s nervous system is set such that they believe that they can be free and that others can be free, and trade and negotiation are the way to resolve disputes. They have healthy boundaries in all senses of the word. In contrast, an unhealthy father imprint locks people into a paradigm where they are convinced all people are either dominant or submissive. They see the world exclusively in terms of oppressor and oppressed. A good example of this is the group of SJWs, feminists and intersectionalists. They think this way because they have unhealthy father imprints.
Timothy Leary, the psychiatrist, identified at least 7 such imprints in humans. He discovered that by using LSD or hallucinogens under the direction of someone to guide things in positive directions, you could revisit and change imprints. He thought they were the only way to get deep enough into the nervous system to change them. However, Masters and Houston later figured out you could do it with hypnosis using certain protocols.
Now, in addition to imprints, I want to talk about the scientist Ivan Pavlov. Pavlov ran many experiments on the nervous systems of dogs. Pavlov’s famous experiment described how by ringing a bell when delivering food to the dogs, he could later trigger salivation in the dogs by ringing the bell without providing any food. Pavlov discovered that overloading the dogs’ nervous system with various physiological stresses often created periods of increased general suggestibility. He also identified certain stages or thresholds of the nervous system’s ability to manage stresses and what happened when those thresholds were breached.
Pavlov used the following techniques to induce nervous system stresses in the subjects:
By applying these stressors, Pavlov identified that when the first threshold of nervous system capacity was breached, the dogs would pass through a phase he called the equivalent phase. In this phase, all stimuli, regardless of strength, produced the same response in the nervous system. In other words, the amount of stimulus no longer mattered to the response. There was no difference in response between trivial and massive stimuli.
Further stresses led to a phase Pavlov called the “paradoxical” phase, where weak stimuli produced more responses than stronger stimuli. This appears to be a method of the nervous system to protect against strong stimuli breaching the next threshold but still allow for other responses to maintain functionality.
In the third stage, which Pavlov called the ultra-paradoxical, the subject’s positive and negative responses would actually reverse. A dog might become hostile to a master it had previously loved or vice versa. The conditioning literally reverses.
Interestingly, once the ultra-paradoxical stage had been reached, the reversals continued even after the subject’s nervous system was no longer stressed and the subject had returned to a normal level of stress. In fact, the behaviors learned during that stage proved exceptionally difficult to change again. The dogs would undergo a kind of permanent conversion.
Later, William Sargant reviewed cases of shell shocked patients after WW1 and WW2 in light of Pavolv’s work. These were patients with severe anxiety or depression, hysterical paralysis, and various physical ailments, after suffering all manner of wartime nervous system overload. He noticed that the human PTSD patients often would exhibit the same symptoms as Pavolv’s dogs had done. Sargant then noted how by emotionally amping up a patient with PTSD, and then offering an outlet for the release of the emotions involved (in his case barbiturates or ether), the patients would go into a kind of coma for one to several hours. After this coma – a kind of fourth stage of complete shutdown – the subject would then recover, in many cases completely. The physical symptoms, anxiety, paralysis, etc all disappeared and the patients would resume normal life.
Sargant then compared these results with the preaching methods of John Wesley. Wesley would whip up the individual into psychological pain and fear of hell and their own guilt, and then offered the salvation, which led to passing out and conversion of many listeners. In many cases the built up traumas of the convert were cleared out during the process, like the WW1 shell shocked vets who went into catatonic states and then were cured. This often led to physical health improvement too, since the nervous system is both mental and physical. Sargant hypothesized the same thing is happening with faith healers, snake handlers, Chinese marxists, and other conversions – and that it was the same physiological mechanism that Pavlov’s dogs experienced in the ultra paradoxical stage.
Now let me tie it all together. Both Pavlov and Sargant observed that different techniques had different effects on different kinds of subjects. Both dogs and humans could be categorized by their responses. Pavlov immediately recognized that his categories corresponded to the four personality types identified by Hippocrates thousands of years ago – namely bilious, phlegmatic, choleric, and melancholy. Sargant noticed this as well. He wrote that the phlegmatic type of humans required 8 times the dosage of barbiturates to trigger the final nervous system overload and release the PTSD than did the melancholic type. And Pavlov wrote similar things about his dogs – the phlegmatic type required far more intense nervous system disruption to produce the paradoxical and ultra paradoxical effects.
The key here, which neither Pavlov nor Sargent knew, is that those four categories are not actually hereditary, they are based on the first 2 mammalian imprints – those imprints of the mother and the father. The following 2 x 2 grid shows the four possibilities of results for the two imprints. The quadrant names in capital letters are Leary’s; the lower case ones are Pavlov’s.
A subject with both mother and father imprints healthy would be in the Friendly Strength / calm imperturbable category, while one with both imprints unhealthy would be in the Hostile Weakness / weak inhibitory category. Remember, one of Pavlov’s dogs, or Sargant’s shell shocked vets, who had both imprints healthy could withstand many times more stress before crossing into the equivalent or paradoxical phases than those with both unhealthy imprints. Essentially, the condition of the imprints determine susceptibility to nervous system overload and thus to stress-based conversion.
One takeaway from this is if you can cause people to have unhealthy mother and father imprints, they are much easier to drive to nervous system overload and into the paradoxical phase, and thus to conversions. And if you converted enough people in this way, you could in effect create a revolution. In fact, Chinese Marxists performed this exact feat in China in the 1960s to create the current communist regime there.
Armed with all this information, how would you do this for a society?
1) Get mothers away from their children and into the workforce. This is likely to lead to poor mother imprints.
2) And since an unhealthy mother imprint makes the person’s nervous system think the world is unsafe, it can be mitigated by availability of self defense such as personal firearms. So the next step is to take away self-defense methods such as guns.
3) Denigrate fathers and force them out of their children’s lives in order to increase the likelihood of unhealthy father imprints. We see this effort in feminism’s careerism, family law bias in awarding women custody of children in 80% or more of cases, and how in media and entertainment so many men are portrayed as buffoons or children. These are often why it is said the left hates the family unit; the left wants to weaken the population’s imprints and resistance to conversion.
4) And since an unhealthy father imprint locks the nervous system into an oppressor / oppressed frame, play up the “virtue” of victimhood. Sargant noted that this type of reinforcement after conversion prevented any backsliding.
5) Use Pavlov’s four methods of inducing nervous system stress to lower resistance and increase suggestibility: disrupt the population’s hormonal balance, overwork them, confuse their associations, and delay their gratification.
Mass hormonal birth control in women and drastically lower testosterone levels in men provide the hormonal disruption. Careerism and requiring two working parents to make ends meet provides the overwork. Technology and its instant gratification has conditioned the younger generation such that even normal waiting times in life induce Pavlov’s delayed result stress. And social media produces continuous streams of positive and negative stimuli that confuse the nervous system.
A society that implemented these would find that in 30-40 years their population – made far more vulnerable by unhealthy imprints – would be primed for strategic nervous system overloads. Those overloads would then trigger the paradoxical and ultra paradoxical stages and the desired conversion event. And if, like John Wesley, you offered them a release from their pain and guilt, a way of salvation, they would take it en masse.
6) So the final step is to induce a final stressor and offer a way of salvation to produce mass conversions. In recent times the final stressor is the guilt, shame, and self-hate at the center of racial identity politics. And the offer of salvation is the offer of Marxism. Convert to Marxism (i.e. being woke, or social justice, or feminist, or “anti-racist” – it’s all the same) and you will be absolved of all your guilt and sins of your past and your race. You will be one of the “good ones” and virtuous.
And this is exactly what we are seeing now.
We see continual incitement of anger in the fatherless black population and guilt in the white population, and continuing stressful situations overall with news and social media.
The ultra paradoxical phase kicks in and you see people hating them selves, their race, their family, their country, and their gender. I suspect the rise in transgenderism in young people, especially teenage girls, is a manifestation of the paradoxical stage in young women. Their nervous systems are overwhelmed by typical teenage hormonal disruption and the signals and stressors of social media.
So, what can be done about this?
Much damage has been done, but as we know it’s possible to correct imprints, so perhaps the best way is to correct them and make people more resilient before they face conversion. Jordan Peterson’s book 12 rules effectively corrects an unhealthy father imprint, making those who read it less susceptible to nervous system overload-based programming.
Correcting the mother imprint is not as straightforward. The effects of an unhealthy mother imprint can be mitigated by self defense classes, gun ownership, and by lifting weights so one gets the sense he can defend himself. But a true correction requires deeper work. As a hypnotist, I myself may develop a video set or book that corrects this imprint as I don’t see much available to address this yet.
A third way is to release the built up tension of the nervous system. This can be done via exercise, positive social interactions, and release of stored emotional pain. Another method is humor. Laughing at something changes it from a stressor to something that provides the nervous system a release of tensions. This is why there has been so much cancellation of comedians, and why feminists are famously humorless. And it may have seemed ridiculous how media often fact-check parody sites like The Onion and the Babylon Bee, but it may make more sense now.
It doesn’t look good, but all is not lost. Many school districts are fighting against critical race theory. Twitter abounds with many great accounts teaching men, young and old, how to be more of men, and women to be more of women. And there is greater awareness of the destructiveness of social media, movies, and the current narrative. So read 12 Rules For Life, exercise, limit social media or use it to connect with people who advocate balance, eat well, spend time connecting with real humans, address your own issues, and connect with like-minded people to start turning things back in the right direction.
If you want to release the tension in your own nervous system, my book Change Your Past, Change Your Life can help. It will guide you to release built up negative emotions in your past, and we all need that, don’t you?
I also work with clients one on one for accelerated results. If you think you may have unhealthy imprints you can schedule sessions and contact me at www.JasonAndrews.coach
What are we?
This is the fundamental question at the root of all existence. The beasts don’t have the capacity to self-reflect the way we humans can. So let’s use that capacity to explore this fascinating question. You might find this will relax you more than you think.
First, I need to talk about something called chunk size because that will help you understand. Here is a great little clip illustrating the concept. (Yes, it was originally designed for kids but watch it anyway because it demonstrates the idea better than any of the other videos I’ve seen.)
So first we have to start with the proper chunk size. Now, on the human scale, we are individual people living in a sensory material world, along with other people, plants and animals. Obvious, right?
Let’s go deeper.
On a cellular level, we are made up on individual cells. Is a cell a human? No, but are we just cells? No, we are interesting arrangements of cells.
Let’s go even deeper.
We (and all our cells) are made of molecules. So on a molecular scale, we are interesting arrangements of molecules. And molecules themselves are interesting arrangements of atoms.
Can we lose some of our atoms and still be “us?” Yes, clearly. But how many? Which ones? At this chunk size it’s not obvious anymore what is us and what is not us.
So what “are” we? It becomes obvious we are not just material components – we are interesting configurations of components. So we can then posit or infer some level or plane of reality that “contains” the patterns – a substrate that contains the information on arrangements, configurations, purposes, and similar information.
If this sounds familiar, it is similar to Plato’s theory of Forms or Ideals. Makes more sense now, doesn’t it?
Now let’s consider what would happen if all our atoms and molecules just stopped. Would we still be us? Or even alive? So we realize we are not just inert matter. There is another component: energy. Movement, motive force, the spark of life, the divine spark, call it what you want, it amounts to the same thing.
So we can now infer a third level of reality: a substrate that movement, energy, intent, and motive force exist in.
These levels are related according to the Hermetic Law:
That which is above is like to that which is below; that which is below is like to that which is above.
Hermes Trismegistus
Similarly to the way sound waves create patterns in sand sprinkled on a surface, the energy-level emanations create patterns in the material substrate or material world.
Now let’s take this to its conclusion: what would happen if all our atoms and molecules were taken out of their current configuration and all the motive power governing their movements were re-appropriated to other uses?
You may experience a kind of clinical curiosity about the idea. It’s interesting, not threatening. Seems like a mechanical process.
Well, this is actually a description of what we call death.
Now do you see why all the gurus, mystics, saints, shamans, high priests, ascetics, and wise men are and have always been, completely unafraid of death?
Death is just a rearrangement.
So – and here’s where it gets really interesting – what if it were possible to continue to exist on the energy and pattern/form substrates after your physical components had been re-arranged and re-appropriated?
This subtle and complex idea – not easy for most people to understand – has been spread to the majority in more basic terms: Westerners call it “heaven” and Easterners call it “liberation.” They are both echoes of the same actual concept: existence after physical vessel rearrangement.
And when you think about it that way, you might notice how you feel about death now. A bit different, is it not?
From here, what can we infer about the universe itself? And “God?” And what can we do with this understanding?
That will be in the next post.
I am a hypnotist and can solve many problems people have – social anxiety, imposter syndrome, health habits, mindset, peak performance, and I can probably help you too at Http://JasonAndrews.coach
Over the last 4 years the term “fake news” has been used – some say overused – to disparage the mainstream media and its message. Some say it’s just an insult designed to distract from negative but accurate reporting. Others say the term correctly describes how the mainstream media are no longer trying to present news accurately. Instead, they are attempting to shape the narrative by biased and hostile stories. As a hypnotist, I agree with the second group because I know what techniques the media are using and how they work. In fact, I don’t think the statement goes far enough: I would say that ALL news reporting is fake news.
Let’s start with the well-documented bias of mainstream media. 90% of the mainstream media vote and donate to liberal candidates. This is a major issue because humans are highly advanced primates. That means humans are subject to the same largely involuntary responses to threats as any other animal. And there’s no question that the current president threatens the media – he attacks their credibility at every opportunity, points out their mistakes and bias, and insults key figures in their camp. It appears that he would end their messaging hegemony if he could, destroying their livelihoods, careers, and mission. So the media react to these threats the same way other primates do – by defending their territory and attempting to assert their dominance. They simply are not able to prevent those perceived threats from affecting their coverage, in some ways drastically.
So, given that the majority of the media are biased, how does this manifest in their stories? How does this bias warp the news coverage to the point where the label “fake news” is appropriate?
The first major way the media spreads disinformation is by story selection. Certain media outlets simply won’t cover major stories that negatively affect the narrative they promote. The site Ground News does a good job exposing this. It lists each major story along with which side’s media outlets covered it. There are many blind spots in coverage according to the political stance of the outlet.
So why don’t people just read outlets from different sides of the spectrum? The news industry has realized that they get more attention, clicks, and revenue by pushing outrage. They push and frame stories that emphasize how bad the other side is and how threatened their own (good) side is. The more anger or threat that people experience this way, the more they return to the same site later to seek reassurance that the “bad guys” aren’t winning. It is, in effect, an addiction protocol.
“Here’s how you are being threatened by the bad guys about X. Oh and since you came back for reassurance on how we are winning the war about X, here is another story about feeling threatened about Y. And when you come back to find out how we are winning the war over Y…”
The combination of these two methods is even more powerful. CNN has ignored the media stories about Joe Biden’s son Hunter was given an enormous monthly payment ($83,333 per month) to be on the board of a Ukrainian energy company and photographed smoking crack and falling asleep with a crack pipe in his mouth.
CNN and MSNBC ignored these stories entirely, except to mention in passing that the Republicans were attacking Joe Biden’s family. That means that those viewers stuck in the outrage addiction cycle for those two networks were denied relevant information about the election. Tens of millions of Americans never even knew that the son of a presidential candidate was a crack addict who had been given huge amounts of money by Ukraine for no apparent reason other than his father was Joe Biden.
That’s relevant information for voters, is it not?
So story selection combined with outrage addiction create silos or bubbles in which no external context can penetrate. This is destructive to the unity of the country. It allows for propagandized stories to be perceived as real by those within the bubble. But it’s not the only tool the media has to fake the news.
The second aspect is selective editing to change the context. This can be omission of relevant information, inappropriate comparisons, labeling based on a biased subset of information, or any number of other techniques. The prime example of this is the “fine people hoax,” which Steve Cortes, Joel Pollak, and Scott Adams have all done great work exposing.
Here’s how the hoax was perpetrated. There was a protest march in Charlottesville, VA, that was somewhat ambiguously billed as a “Unite the Right” rally. It was actually a neo-nazi march, although some attendees apparently didn’t realize that until they got there, and didn’t participate in the march once they arrived. A few were there to defend the removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee and the renaming of a park named after him. In a speech after the event, Trump said there were “very fine people on both sides” of the debate on whether or not to remove statues of founders or other historical figures. In other words, he was saying good people can disagree about keeping or removing statues. However, the media claimed Trump was referring to both the neo-nazis and anti-nazi protestors as fine people. The outrage-inducing implication of this was that the president of the United States said Nazis were fine people.
But, of course, that didn’t happen. Because less than a minute later Trump said “And I’m not talking about the neo-nazis and white supremacists, because they should be condemned totally.” So this wasn’t a case where the media were simply misinterpreting an ambiguous statement – it was a case where the media deliberately spread a malicious lie that wasn’t even slightly ambiguous. Once that narrative took hold early on in Trump’s presidency, it became a defining reference point. Millions interpreted genuinely ambiguous events that happened later in light of that fake story. The hoax became a setup for confirmation bias – it became the background context for his entire presidency. And all because of the media’s deliberate spread of falsehood.
More examples of deliberate media hoaxing include:
Unfortunately, the use of these techniques has become the norm for media outlets. But once you have read this and understood how the techniques work – story selection, outrage addiction, and context manipulation – you will begin to see them everywhere in the media. You’ll be able to check Ground News or a similar site to see what stories are being swept under the rug. You may begin to assume that context is always being withheld, and look for what is missing before judging a story. And you might even get in the habit of catching the outrage cycle right as it starts, and move things in a more emotionally balanced direction instead. And as you do those going forward, it will help you see through the media’s fake news.
Parsing Persuasion 