Is mind control real? Can someone else control my thoughts? If so just how controlled can one be? How exactly does mind control work? How prevalent is mind control?
If an individual is able to convince another person(s) that they are a god then that individual has obtained at least partial (mind) control of the thinking of that person. In order to convince someone of your godhood deception is required, even if the person actually believes they are a god, they then come from a place of self deception. On the grand scale of all lies, does not “I’m a god, worship me” rank really high on the list? At least in the top 10. If people will accept the deception that a human is a god, then isn’t any other deception but child’s play? But why or how does a person choose to believe a grand deception, or any deception for that matter?
Let’s address three scenarios;
Scenario 1: I am told a lie, have no reason to doubt or suspect deception, and therefore believe the lie.
Scenario 2: I am told a lie, have reason to doubt or suspect deception, but believe the lie anyway.
Scenario 3: I am told a lie, I know it is deception, but choose to accept the lie.
Scenario 1 is the most powerful. It is here that one is truly deceived. It is here that a person believes falsehood to be truth. From the standpoint of the deceiver, this is where they always want to be. It seems to me that ‘trust’ is a major factor in order for Scenario 1 to occur. A classic example is Santa Claus. The young child is told by his parents that SC is real, some of their friends agree, others say he is not, but since they trust their parents more than their peers they believe the deception. Do you remember the SC holdouts, the 10yo+ kids who still believed? I guarantee you they had parents who continued the deception. Anyone who has done any deep study of History knows just how ‘bias’, and that can be a gross understatement, history texts can be. In school we’re implicitly taught to trust the system, and explicitly to trust the teacher. So if the teacher, we trust, teaches from a history text, we assume the information is factual. It does not matter whether the teacher believes the text is true, or knows it to be false, the end result is the same. The deceived perpetuate the deception. The chain or pyramid of trust… which, imo, demonstrates how easy it is to be deceived. So then is ‘trust’ a required ingredient of deception? I admit this is a new thought for me… and a disturbing one.
In this they [the Jews] proceeded on the sound principle that the magnitude of a lie always contains a certain factor of credibility, since the great masses of the people in the very bottom of their hearts tend to be corrupted rather than consciously and purposely evil, and that, therefore, in view of the primitive simplicity of their minds, they more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a little one, since they themselves lie in little things, but would be ashamed of lies that were too big. Such a falsehood will never enter their heads, and they will not be able to believe in the possibility of such monstrous effrontery and infamous misrepresentation in others.…” (p. 231 of the Manheim translation)
-Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf
Scenario 2 is very interesting. The person is suspicious or doubtful of the lie presented, but chooses to believe anyway. It seems again that trust is a critical factor here. In fact I would surmise that it is ‘the’ critical factor. For if we do not trust then we most likely will reject the lie. A good example of this scenario is when the story is hard to believe, or improbable. We can look at the Santa Claus example again. The child is older, has doubts about flying reindeer, going down chimneys, etc. but their parents stick to the story and since they trust their parents they believe the myth. We also have evidence here of the person’s ‘desire’ to believe the story (religion perhaps?) as a critical factor as well. What kid does not want to believe in SC? Unless of course they’re a little @%*&. The desire to believe and trust overcomes doubts. In the same vein it seems ‘social pressure’ can be another strong factor in a person choosing to believe something they doubt. My friends Bob, Sarah, and Juan all believe… maybe I’m wrong?… they’re smart and I trust them. There’s that trust thing again.
Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive!
– Sir Walter Scott, Marmion (Canto VI)
Scenario 3 you could argue is invalid, since they are not deceived but, and with a massive dose of irony, then lie about believing the lie… deceiving the deceiver. I have suspected for years that a great many ‘religious’ people fall into this category. People knowingly accept a lie for numerous reasons; social pressure, avoid conflict, laziness, inconsequential, fear, desire. I’m sure most of you have witnessed the parent who cannot admit that their child has committed a heinous crime. Either the evidence is overwhelming but the person refuses to admit to it, and so the parent believes the lie, or the person does admit to it and the parent refuses the truth… self deception. Self deception is a topic in and of itself and I believe it is easier to deceive those who actively self-deceive. Going back to Santa Claus one more time. The child no longer believes in SC but the parent refuses to end the deception so the child plays along to appease the parent. One could argue that there is nothing necessarily wrong with this. But I must disagree. In these cases we double the deception, and both parties are now lying. You could call the whole SC myth deception training. I suspect a decent percentage of the population falls into scenario 3 when it comes to major psy-op events like JFK and 9-11.
Note: I stumbled upon the Hitler quote while I was looking for the Goebbels quote about the Big Lie but it turns out their is no verifiable source for it. It appears the Big Lie quote was created from the Hitler quote above and a quote Goebbels made about Churchill and the British. I’ve decided to only use quotes with verifiable sources and to list the source with the quote.