Manufacturing Dissent: Weapons of Mass Deception – The Master Social Science

Zahir Ebrahim

First Published June 01, 2008
Case Studies from 2008-2009 added Oct. 21, 2009
Case Studies from 2009-2010 and Postscript added Sept. 21, 2010
Case Studies from 2010-2013 and Postscript-3 added Sept. 15, 2013

© Project HumanbeingsfirstTM. Permission granted to use freely as per copyright notice.

Preamble 2008
Manufacturing Dissent: Weapons of Mass Deception – the master social science, and the real power of Western Democracy which famously permits dissent among its free peoples. Here is an example: “Government Insider: Bush Authorized 911 Attacks” – and the “Insider” surely “sleeps with the fishes”, right? Wrong. He moves about quite freely! How comes? Isn't he a great threat to those whom he rats on? The Dialectics of Infamy (also known as Ezra Pound's “Technique of Infamy”) has something for everyone in the dissent-space. It caters to the needs and proclivities of every breed of emergent dissenting flock and every possibility. Everything except that which might actually be consequential in derailing “imperial mobilization” and effectively preempting incremental faits accomplis of real agendas! Those who do pose real threats to these real agendas are trivially made to “sleep with the fishes” – from JFK to RFK to MLK to X!
The manipulation of the mainstream public to get them “United We Stand” is a well understood and rather banal social science today, often euphemistically labeled as “manufacturing consent”. From Roman Emperors to Hitler to President George W. Bush in the modernity du jour, all have expertly capitalized upon it. Zbigniew Brzezinski even expertly documented it with great finesse. “Prisoners of the Cave” entirely unraveled it as “Deception Point 911 And Its Greatest Democratic Enablers”.
The manipulation of the dissentstream however – the handful among any population who are the thinking peoples, as Hitler had noted: “First, those who believe everything they read; Second, those who no longer believe anything; Third, those who critically examine what they read and form their judgments accordingly” – is the least understood.
Indeed, before we begin with the dissentstream, it is instructive to fully quote from the master of sociology himself who had insightfully identified the importance of the “First” type to Machiavellian state-craft, and the main target for manufacturing consent as “the crowd of simpletons and the credulous ... when the voting papers of the masses are the deciding factor”:
'In journalistic circles it is a pleasing custom to speak of the Press as a 'Great Power' within the State. As a matter of fact its importance is immense. One cannot easily overestimate it, for the Press continues the work of education even in adult life. Generally, readers of the Press can be classified into three groups:
First, those who believe everything they read;
Second, those who no longer believe anything;
Third, those who critically examine what they read and form their judgments accordingly.
Numerically, the first group is by far the strongest, being composed of the broad masses of the people. Intellectually, it forms the simplest portion of the nation. It cannot be classified according to occupation but only into grades of intelligence. Under this category come all those who have not been born to think for themselves or who have not learnt to do so and who, partly through incompetence and partly through ignorance, believe everything that is set before them in print. To these we must add that type of lazy individual who, although capable of thinking for himself out of sheer laziness gratefully absorbs everything that others had thought over, modestly believing this to have been thoroughly done. The influence which the Press has on all these people is therefore enormous; for after all they constitute the broad masses of a nation. But, somehow they are not in a position or are not willing personally to sift what is being served up to them; so that their whole attitude towards daily problems is almost solely the result of extraneous influence. All this can be advantageous where public enlightenment is of a serious and truthful character, but great harm is done when scoundrels and liars take a hand at this work.
The second group is numerically smaller, being partly composed of those who were formerly in the first group and after a series of bitter disappointments are now prepared to believe nothing of what they see in print. They hate all newspapers. Either they do not read them at all or they become exceptionally annoyed at their contents, which they hold to be nothing but a congeries of lies and misstatements. These people are difficult to handle; for they will always be sceptical of the truth. Consequently, they are useless for any form of positive work.
The third group is easily the smallest, being composed of real intellectuals whom natural aptitude and education have taught to think for themselves and who in all things try to form their own judgments, while at the same time carefully sifting what they read. They will not read any newspaper without using their own intelligence to collaborate with that of the writer and naturally this does not set writers an easy task. Journalists appreciate this type of reader only with a certain amount of reservation.
Hence the trash that newspapers are capable of serving up is of little danger--much less of importance--to the members of the third group of readers. In the majority of cases these readers have learnt to regard every journalist as fundamentally a rogue who sometimes speaks the truth. Most unfortunately, the value of these readers lies in their intelligence and not in their numerical strength, an unhappy state of affairs in a period where wisdom counts for nothing and majorities for everything. Nowadays when the voting papers of the masses are the deciding factor; the decision lies in the hands of the numerically strongest group; that is to say the first group, the crowd of simpletons and the credulous.
It is an all-important interest of the State and a national duty to prevent these people from falling into the hands of false, ignorant or even evil-minded teachers. Therefore it is the duty of the State to supervise their education and prevent every form of offence in this respect. Particular attention should be paid to the Press; for its influence on these people is by far the strongest and most penetrating of all; since its effect is not transitory but continual. Its immense significance lies in the uniform and persistent repetition of its teaching. Here, if anywhere, the State should never forget that all means should converge towards the same end. It must not be led astray by the will-o'-the-wisp of so-called 'freedom of the Press', or be talked into neglecting its duty, and withholding from the nation that which is good and which does good. With ruthless determination the State must keep control of this instrument of popular education and place it at the service of the State and the Nation.' [Mein Kampf, Adolph Hitler, Vol. 1, Chapter X,]
Thus it isn't accidental that Hitler remains the most studied Machiavellian sociologist at the Rand Corporation, and his Mein Kampf perhaps the favorite reading at the Pentagon and among its policy planners who are spread out in a hundred think-tanks along the Hudson and the Potomac. The propaganda techniques Hitler mastered however, did not originate with him, and he clearly attributed his profound wisdom to his antagonists' great prowess:
'On the other hand, British and American war propaganda was psychologically efficient. By picturing the Germans to their own people as Barbarians and Huns, they were preparing their soldiers for the horrors of war and safeguarding them against illusions. ...
From the enemy, however, a fund of valuable knowledge could be gained by those who kept their eyes open, whose powers of perception had not yet become sclerotic, and who during four-and-a-half years had to experience the perpetual flood of enemy propaganda.
The worst of all was that our people did not understand the very first condition which has to be fulfilled in every kind of propaganda; namely, a systematically one-sided attitude towards every problem that has to be dealt with. ...
The great majority of a nation is so feminine in its character and outlook that its thought and conduct are ruled by sentiment rather than by sober reasoning. This sentiment, however, is not complex, but simple and consistent. It is not highly differentiated, but has only the negative and positive notions of love and hatred, right and wrong, truth and falsehood. Its notions are never partly this and partly that. English propaganda especially understood this in a marvellous way and put what they understood into practice. They allowed no half-measures which might have given rise to some doubt.
Proof of how brilliantly they understood that the feeling of the masses is something primitive was shown in their policy of publishing tales of horror and outrages which fitted in with the real horrors of the time, thereby cleverly and ruthlessly preparing the ground for moral solidarity at the front, even in times of great defeats. Further, the way in which they pilloried the German enemy as solely responsible for the war--which was a brutal and absolute falsehood--and the way in which they proclaimed his guilt was excellently calculated to reach the masses, realizing that these are always extremist in their feelings. And thus it was that this atrocious lie was positively believed. ...
The success of any advertisement, whether of a business or political nature, depends on the consistency and perseverance with which it is employed.
In this respect also the propaganda organized by our enemies set us an excellent example. It confined itself to a few themes, which were meant exclusively for mass consumption, and it repeated these themes with untiring perseverance. Once these fundamental themes and the manner of placing them before the world were recognized as effective, they adhered to them without the slightest alteration for the whole duration of the War. At first all of it appeared to be idiotic in its impudent assertiveness. Later on it was looked upon as disturbing, but finally it was believed.
But in England they came to understand something further: namely, that the possibility of success in the use of this spiritual weapon consists in the mass employment of it, and that when employed in this way it brings full returns for the large expenses incurred.
In England propaganda was regarded as a weapon of the first order, whereas with us it represented the last hope of a livelihood for our unemployed politicians and a snug job for shirkers of the modest hero type. ...
I learned something that was important at that time, namely, to snatch from the hands of the enemy the weapons which he was using in his reply. I soon noticed that our adversaries, especially in the persons of those who led the discussion against us, were furnished with a definite repertoire of arguments out of which they took points against our claims which were being constantly repeated. The uniform character of this mode of procedure pointed to a systematic and unified training. And so we were able to recognize the incredible way in which the enemy's propagandists had been disciplined, and I am proud to-day that I discovered a means not only of making this propaganda ineffective but of beating the artificers of it at their own work. Two years later I was master of that art.' [Mein Kampf, Adolph Hitler, Vol. 2, Chapter VI]
Perhaps for Hitler, Edward Bernays' 1928 American classic “Propaganda” might have been the favorite bedtime reading, nightly perusing its opening pages which of course begin with the fantastic observation:
'The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.' --- Edward Bernays, 1928, pg.1, Propaganda
All and sundry among the scholars of empire have written books upon books on the many techniques for “manufacturing consent” – from Advertising and Marketing techniques to how it was done in the Third Reich to construct “United We Stand” out of the “crowd of simpletons and the credulous” – while the state-craft in their own democracies quietly practice it upon their own peoples laboring under the illusion of “freedom of the press” with “All the news that's fit to print” all the time! But it isn't particularly a secret, and is done quite openly, albeit quietly.
The manipulation of the intelligent conscionable ones however, the “Manufacturing of Dissent”, remains the most poorly analyzed master social science in the West, even though it is also the most secretly practiced Black-art of modern democratic state-craft to effectively deal with the “Second” and “Third” groups of people.
Hitler attempted to win the “Third” group over to his side to be among the Third Reich's ruling elite (if they were of the right racial makeup). Those whom he couldn't attract, he ignored along with the “Second” group, on account of both of them being so minuscule in number. The most dangerous among them of course were simply made to “sleep with the fishes” by the SS. Hitler had chosen to exclusively focus his propaganda war-machine on “the crowd of simpletons and the credulous ... when the voting papers of the masses are the deciding factor”. The Western system of democracy however does not, and cannot, ignore any of the three groups. The “First” group is easy – and remain the focus of the pretty well understood “manufacturing consent”. The other two groups are of course also encouraged or co-opted to join 'empire' – and the majority among them willingly do so because of the immense riches and/or benefits to ones' career and social standing that are to be had in voluntarily remaining silent (in the best case of complicity), and shilling for empire in sophisticated ways suited to their much higher intelligence capabilities (in the worst case as hectoring hegemons).
The remaining gadflies, non-conformists, and rebel rousers become the focus of “Manufactured Dissent”. They are cleverly and continually put on the treadmill that deliberately goes nowhere. Otherwise, left to their own free-thinking un co-opted devices, even small numbers can end up making a significant difference in the long run. Yes, even in the facade of Democracy, since it does constitute a non-linear system of empowered human action. It is not their direct action however that constitutes a significant threat, but the potential of their mobilizing impact among the minority of ordinary conscionable peoples in the larger society whom they might galvanize into efficacious action, that is the real threat. Astutely channeling dissenting energies towards inefficacy, and clever red herrings, is the potent weapon system of choice for deployment among this rebellious group and their potential flock.
This is quite distinct from an open fascist oligarchy and open dictatorships with regimented and coerced human-will which leave little room for non-linearity of human action. In such blatantly ruled autocratic systems, it is only the majority coming together that can bring about any significant transformations – and that too, only through revolutionary means. Which is why the loci of direct manipulative control remains upon the majority peoples in such systems. And the tiny thinking minority is trivially silenced through the instilled fear crafted from disappearances, incarcerations, forced exiles, and “sleeps with the fishes” – the bread and butter of empirical state-craft in non democracies.
To comprehend how the devilishly sophisticated manipulations employing the Technique of Infamy and the Dialectics of Deception work in a democracy to manufacture dissent which goes nowhere in a hurry, and which also smoothly enables faits accomplis to be constructed that is subsequently irreversible, click on the links below in sequence.
It is Project Humanbeingsfirst's profound intent that these matters be immediately corrected – for indeed, intellectual freedoms, voicing dissent, and mobilizing for a conscionable cause are all precious, provided something impactful can be done with them. Otherwise, these pursuits on a treadmill are only as pleasurably productive as you know what!

Postscript 2010
Thank you for wanting to not run on the treadmill of dissent merely to ease your conscience.
A battle of absolute moral dimensions against the hectoring hegemons and their many relativistic incantations of power which continually wage war by way of deception upon the public mind and spirit, can only be productively engineered using both “Mens et Manus” Mind and Hand!
This implies engineering to counter Machiavellian social engineering; not randomly throwing moral words on paper and activist bodies in the streets. We continually fail on that account, and primarily because we fail to appreciate the vagaries of power and its immense ability to deceive, to corrupt, and to co-opt.
Otherwise, breaking the bonds of servitude would have been as simple as following the 3000 years old Law of Moses, or, even Etienne de La Boétie's sixteenth century prescription argued in his famous “The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude”!
Zahir Ebrahim

Postscript-2 2012
Caption An FBI presentation titled “Militancy Considerations” measures the relationship between piety and violence among the texts of the three Abrahamic faiths
The FBI training graph of 2011 titled “Militancy Considerations” is a living example of on-going total perception management today. Click image to read its full deconstruction. The graph illustrates how the manufacturers of both consent and dissent together target us for total perception management. They control our behavior of full servitude by piece-meal conditioning, eventually leading to a Pavlovian compliance to their every stimulus. Their dominant narrative is what informs us, cajoles us, frightens us, and that's how we end up 'United We Stand' with the Massa. When we disagree with the dominant narrative, the dissent-chiefs enter the picture to ensure that the underlying core-axioms remain untouchable.
If they say there is “Islamic terrorism”, we say there is “Islamic terrorism”. If they say 9/11 was the work of “jihadi Muslims”, if they say there is “global warming”, “peak oil”, “swine flu”, this and that global disaster, this and that galactic catastrophe, we not only echo the same, but naturally find ourselves inclined to act in accordance with that implanted fear. If such mantras come anointed with imposing IVY stamp of approval, the Nobel stamp of approval, lofty academic endorsement, so much more we believe in them, to the point that we even permit the state to molest us to keep us safe! The theories of psychological persuasion techniques in text-books and those employed in the Third Reich exactly match the ground realities today in the Fourth Reich. Sounds rather prosaic – but empirically true nevertheless. This ought not to be surprising --- here is Aldous Huxley prognosticating it in 1962 at University of California-Berkeley:
You can do everything with bayonets except sit on them! If you are going to control any population for any length of time you must have some measure of consent. It’s exceedingly difficult to see how pure terrorism can function indefinitely. It can function for a fairly long time, but I think sooner or later you have to bring in an element of persuasion. An element of getting people to consent to what is happening to them. Well, it seems to me that the nature of the Ultimate Revolution with which we are now faced is precisely this: that we are in process of developing a whole series of techniques which will enable the controlling oligarchy who have always existed and presumably always will exist, to get people actually to love their servitude! This is the, it seems to me the ultimate in malevolent revolution shall we say.’ — Aldous Huxley, The Ultimate Revolution, 1962 speech at UC Berkeley, minute 04:06
The effects of total perception management can be seen across the world. Most glaringly however, in America's own most grotesque Obedience Training at the American Airports for continued United We Stand with more absurdities! This time, for their own enslavement... getting Americans to love their own servitude in the name of keeping them safe from terrorists. Someday, it will all be taught at Harvard to undergraduates in government studies and to MBAs in marketing as the case study of most successful perception management of all time. What more needs to be said? It would only be a rehash. Therefore, this is the last word on Manufacturing Dissent by Project Click on the images below to understand your own voluntary servitude.
TSA vagina probe and you – Where are America's balls? In the fist of the TSA…Public Service Announcement: Body-scan Alert - Not Suffering Indignities at Airports
PTSD and American War Heroes - Victims of their own Barbarianism
The ultimate absurdity of one's voluntary servility is of course witnessed among the Veterans of America's lifetime of wars upon the 'untermenschen'. These brave soldiers of patriotism continue to be misled after they acquire their new religion, the pangs of PTSD and a guilty conscience, by vacuously manufactured dissent into inefficacy, the entire purpose behind manufacturing dissent. Among all the world's people who have acquired a conscience, these veterans are in the best position to do something about it. Yet—they too behave like the mind-controlled robots following orders they have trained to be, even as they see their own nation descend into a police state. Evidently, it is far easier to exterminate defenseless Muslim civilians and to brag about it in photo-ops than to stand up to the TSA!
Can you spell mother-fck?

Postscript-3 2013
September 15, 2013
Islamabad, Pakistan.
The whole aim of practical politics of dissent by genuine gadflies to power is to prevent the future fait accompli that is being engineered by 'history's actors' in the present. This is why genuine dissent, that with real teeth and non-zero efficacy, cannot be permitted to exist and flourish. It is instead replaced with manufactured dissent as an essential part of statecraft itself when the illusion of dissent and public opinion is to be maintained in a 'free' democratic society.
Rehearsing crimes of power after these crimes are fait accompli; after all the barbers in town already know it; after their disclosure as the narrative of official history through FOIA declassification, whistle-blowing and deep-throat leaks, and in posthumous confessional diaries of monumental war criminals, none of which really reveal any real secrets, or only do so ex post facto when it is already a fait accompli; is either the job of the professional historian who relies on officialdom to write the official history pre-sanctioned by power by what it chooses to document and what it chooses to make-believe to posterity, or of manufactured dissent!
Let the twain: a genuine intellectual gadfly vs. fabricated dissent and its useful idiots, not be confused with each other!
The latter is the Superman who echoes the axioms of power underneath his supercilious dissent with it, or tells the obvious truth ex post facto, both to the applause of the instruments of power itself, while collecting all the well-intentioned activists and consciences around him. He is the collection-agent of power. His con-job is to ensure that dissent does not stray too far from home. The world is full of the latter, a modern necessity to complement the manufacturing of consent; to cunningly constrain dissent within acceptable limits when dissent is permitted in a 'free' society.
This brilliant Superman herdsman often comes anointed with super advanced degrees, titles, accolades, is well-published, most cited, and speaks with an MIT, Harvard or Oxford accent. He is as powerful in his dissenting “United We Stand” message to his tiny herd as the Superman orator is in his “United We Stand” message to the mainstream herd. The Superman herdsman of dissent is the more brilliant twin in the Hegelian Dialectic of manufactured consent vs. manufactured dissent.
Manufactured dissent is also easy to spot. It almost always states the obvious – rather than the un-obvious. It cleverly keeps the real secrets secret or obfuscated by not going there. It focusses on the effects and stays silent on the cause. It usually also runs with the foxes while hunting with the hounds. It happily eats from the same plate that it purports to spit into. And the most avant-garde of the lot even run with infantile absurdities to make all dissent appear infantile and absurd in the eyes of the mainstream public, lest the latter inadvertently stray from their own home pastures. And since Adolph Hitler had empirically demonstrated the truth of his statement: “The great masses of people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one. Especially if it is repeated over and over.”, the Superman of dissent too repeats the same big lie of the establishment upon which consent is being engineered among the masses!
For instance, just look for all those who share the common establishment “truth”: OBL and Al Qaeda successfully invaded the most armed to the teeth superpower in the world on 9/11, magically hijacked four airliners in the air with box-cutter knives within a matter of an hour, rammed them into two tall buildings and magically demolished three in a feat of demolition which before that day had never been carried out in the entire written history of mankind. All this was planned and orchestrated by an Islamofascist Ali Baba from the Hindu Kush mountains armed to the teeth with cellphones and AK-47s, in collaboration with an illusive database named “Al Qaeda”. The names of the believers of this fantastic fable in the who's who of dissent is surprising. These include some of the biggest and most celebrated names in dissent to keep company with the Neo-cons, the Pentagon, the State Department, the World Bank, the IMF, the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, the United Nations and all its member countries, and the Bush-Obama Administrations: Noam Chomsky, Francis Boyle, the late Howard Zinn, former Congressman Ron Paul, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, Scott Ritter, Dennis Halliday, Michael Moore, Helen Caldicott, Robert Fisk, John Pilger, Greg Palast, Amy Goodman, Daniel Ellsberg, Nelson Mandela, Arundhatti Roy of India, Tariq Ali and Pervez Hoodbhoy of Pakistan, etc.
Once the big lie is cleverly conceded to officialdom without question, all dissent with empire's barbaric acts against its proclaimed enemies is effectively made futile: “either you are with us or with the terrorists” (George W. Bush). Because, as the empire is now given the license to arguably claim, it is only protecting itself from the diabolically brilliant and most superior foe that is even able to penetrate the strongest superpower on earth's super militarized defenses on its own native soil! Then dissent all you want – so long as you keep that core lie intact in all your adumbration: “'No thank you.' We can let him know that the people of the world do not need to choose between a Malevolent Mickey Mouse and the Mad Mullahs.” (Arundhatti Roy). The argument is cleverly moved away from forensically examining the crime as Sherlock Holmes might do, to the best way to deal with the criminals by presupposing who the criminals are: 'they attack us because we have been over there ... I am suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us ... ' (former congressman Ron Paul). Thus both, the establishment chiefs manufacturing consent, and the dissent chiefs manufacturing dissent, end up continually reinforcing the same presuppositions of the system, the same big lie; the former by openly advocating the big lie, the latter by openly refraining from challenging the big lie. Both are propagandists; the former by commission, the latter by omission. British essayist Aldous Huxley captured the implication of silence and the crime of omission most elegantly in his Preface to Brave New World:
The greatest triumphs of propaganda have been accomplished, not by doing something, but by refraining from doing. Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. By simply not mentioning certain subjects, by lowering what Mr. Churchill calls an “iron curtain” between the masses and such facts or arguments as the local political bosses regard as undesirable, totalitarian propagandists have influenced opinion much more effectively than they could have done by the most eloquent denunciations, the most compelling of logical rebuttals.’ — Aldous Huxley, Preface (circa 1946) to Brave New World, 1931, Harper, pg. 11
That is how the Superman herdsman leads the pack of useful idiots in manufactured dissent. He craftily lowers the “iron curtain” of ignorance between the masses and such facts or arguments as the system regards as undesirable or necessary to enforce. And he cleverly echoes the core lies of empire in toto, or presupposes them in his argumentative and tedious dissent. The focus is most craftily shifted from the crime to ex post facto anti-war critique of empire's “imperial mobilization” – after “imperial mobilization” is a fait accompli:
Of course as I told you, I never believe the government, or rarely believe the government. Do I believe the government version of what happened? Well, I am skeptical. Do I believe that the government was in the conspiracy to do this? I don't know. I don't know enough about the situation, and the truth is, I don't care that much. That's past. ... the whole argument that the people are engaged in, about, was the government behind a conspiracy to blow up the two towers, to me that's a diversion from what we really have to do, deal with the fact that whatever, whoever was behind 9/11, the government took advantage of that, to take us to war, and to put us on a disastrous course, and it's that war, those wars, that disastrous course we have to deal with. I don't want to go back to the controversy that I think is endless controversy, and just gets in the way of dealing with the immediate situation.” (Howard Zinn, November 18, 2008)
It is not merely a lucky coincidence for empire that the most prominent leaders of dissent all inevitably retain the big lie of empire intact, each according to their own genius mind. From the tag team of Noam Chomsky and the late Howard Zinn on the left, to the tag team of former US congressman Ron Paul and Fox News anchor Glenn Beck on the right – and a hundred and ten lauded names in between – the empire has the full gamut of respectable dissent field covered. There is something for every malcontent in the 31 flavors of dissent.
When brilliant antipodes, like the “vulgar propagandist” Prof. Bernard Lewis, and his nemesis, “arguably the most important intellectual alive”, Prof. Noam Chomsky, agree on a sacred “truth” of empire, then those with an iota of neurons still firing on all cylinders are provided the opportunity to ponder the non sequitur. A WWF wrestling game being broadcast on all channels: in the lower right hand corner is empire's greatest scholar from empire's greatest university, Princeton, and in the upper left hand corner is empire's greatest detractor from empire's greatest technion, MIT.... ; hmmm...., sounds like they both work for the same bosses and consent is being engineered with “Operation Canned Goods” copycat of the Third Reich. It too had given Mein Führer the propaganda pretext to “goosestep the Herrenvolk across international frontiers.” (Robert H. Jackson at Nuremberg) But then: “How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.” (Adolph Hitler)
The Third Reich had in fact mobilized its entire Reichsdom on precisely this acutely pathological observation of people; itself fabricating the “conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being” (Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard – American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives, 1996) with its “Operation Canned Goods” that gave the German public their own “pearl harbor”; and Adolph Hitler: “a propagandist reason for starting the war”. Mein Führer, by his own admission, well understood the victor's primacy imperative that can never imagine defeat at the peak of its own hubris: “The victor will not be asked afterward whether he told the truth or not. In starting and waging a war it is not the right that matters, but victory.” (Adolph Hitler, quoted by William Shirer)
That Machiavellian modus operandi for engineering the public mind borrowed from the Third Reich is unfortunately not the end of it. Some convolutions are added to the establishment's “truths” to make discovery a tad more confusing than the aforementioned deconstruction recipe of shrewdly examining who else is echoing the big lie in conjunction with the establishment functionaries. To Machiavellianly preempt the eternal skeptics of establishmentarian “truth” irrespective of who brings it to them; to cleverly defocus their expected intransigent resistance to “imperial mobilization” by making them run on treadmills as otherwise “democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization” (Zbigniew Brzezinski, op. cit.); a flavor of manufactured dissent also dissents with the establishment's own “truths”.
This equally diabolical breed of Superman gadfly deliberately introduces plausible sounding false “conspiracy theories” among the skeptics and the diehard recalcitrants. It is even pedantically referred to as inducing “beneficial cognitive diversity” in favor of the establishment. To see through their snake-oil takes a bit more sophistication and a mind attuned to the vagaries of power and its many incantations.
Which is why the majority of well-intentioned activists who had previously escaped from the underground dungeons of the manufacturing consent factory are routinely trapped by this new elitist collection agency! It is elitist because it is often composed of the intellectual elite and the self-proclaimed avant-garde in intellectual thought who feel they are ahead of the herd if they don't buy the establishment's lies. Adolph Hitler perceptively understood this skeptical public mind and typecast it as the second majority group in a nation: “Second, those who no longer believe anything;”. The first and largest majority group he had observed are: “First, those who believe everything they read;”. Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf about the second group:
The second group is numerically smaller, being partly composed of those who were formerly in the first group and after a series of bitter disappointments are now prepared to believe nothing of what they see in print. They hate all newspapers. Either they do not read them at all or they become exceptionally annoyed at their contents, which they hold to be nothing but a congeries of lies and misstatements. These people are difficult to handle; for they will always be sceptical of the truth. Consequently, they are useless for any form of positive work.” (Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Chapter X)
Hitler's phrase, “useless for any form of positive work”, was most perceptive – for these are the easily swayed audience by the baseless “conspiracy theories” invented by the agents and assets of the establishment. This audience, dominated almost entirely by the same most vocal peace activists and rabble rousers who march emotionally in anti-war protests on weekends and holidays, achieves precisely the intended purpose of the establishment: they foolishly defocus the energies of dissent from homing in onto the first cause of war-faring dystopia and the real criminals who pull the strings for its fabrication from behind the facade of elected governments.
It is neither the acme of excellence to predict thunder after witnessing lightening, nor to herald the arrival of winter after seeing the falling autumn leaves. Nor is it the acme of excellence to 'see victory only when it is within the ken of the common herd.' Neither is it the acme of excellence 'if you fight and conquer and the whole Empire says, “Well done!”' And Sun Tzu goes on in the Art of War: 'To lift an autumn hair is no sign of great strength; to see the sun and moon is no sign of sharp sight; to hear the noise of thunder is no sign of a quick ear.'
The acme of excellence for the genuine intellectual gadfly is to point the path to the un-obvious before anyone else can see it. To be the 'chief doubter of systems, of power and its incantations', to be a 'witness to their mendacity', to not fit 'into any role that might be assigned to him', nor fit into 'any of the histories written by the victors'.
In the age of universal deceit it is rare to find such an un co-opted mind that is also free from the cobwebs of conformist thought. It is even rarer to find anyone among the public who would believe him in his own time when something can be done to interdict the non-kosher plans of the 'history's actors'. The genuine gadfly to power is almost always either ignored, marginalized, or administered the hemlock which he drinks with great relish.
By himself, the genuine gadfly is the lonely songbird with a droplet of water in its beak rushing to douse the great fire lighted by Nimrod. By keeping it isolated and lonely, by preventing the drop from becoming a deluge, the songbird is shrewdly protected from realizing its aim. All the freedom of speech in vacuum and one still dies of asphyxiation! It is not the freedom to speak, but the freedom to be heard that is denied to the songbird. The journey of mankind from tyranny to tyranny is paved on the songbird's unheard songs. An empirical truism that is reflected in both: the fate of prophets of antiquity who were the 'chief doubter of systems, of power and its incantations' and 'witness to their mendacity', easily abandoned by their own peoples when not killed or exiled by the rulers; and the fate of prophets of modernity for whom more creativity has been brought to bear in keeping with the more sophisticated times.
New mental illnesses have been coined in the DSM handbook of psychiatry to consign the latter day gadfly to state hospitality, defined as suffering from 'oppositional defiant disorder' exhibiting a pattern of 'negativistic, defiant, disobedient and hostile behavior toward authority figures'. New legal entitlements have been framed to label anyone who challenges power, as the 'terrorist', for what else but to share in that same fate to the great applause and patriotic gratification of the common herd.
In effect, we are back to the early crossroads of the Roman Era in our twenty-first century, and the world turned into a giant coliseum of entertainment for the masses. All roads today lead to one-world government – the empire of the oligarchy.
In the meantime, the dying songbird sings on unheard – while manufactured dissent lives on under establishment cover cornering both the dissent publishing market and the scholarly citation market with lame rehearsals of the obvious and the absurd; and history's actors continue to engineer future history unhindered. Ex post facto, the onlookers will become the new standard patriots just as Mark Twain captured it: “In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot”. Costs nothing to be a patriot: the hallmark of manufactured dissent! It even makes a pretty good living under establishment cover peddling the study of what the history's actors leave behind.
George W. Bush's White House senior advisor had captured this grotesque reality most unabashedly for the New York Times correspondent in 2004:
'...“We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”...' (Ron Suskind, New York Times, Oct. 17, 2004)
The future generation's manufactured dissent will use today's songbirds' songs as gospel truth written in god's own hand writing. It will rehearse these songs of truth ad nauseam to lead its own choir anew in immense sense of patriotic gratification just as it does today, cunningly ignoring the songbirds of its own time. Rehearsing history while echoing the core big lies and axioms of powers du jour will remain its claim to profession as well as fame just as it is today. That is if dissent is still permitted in the George Orwell's world under construction. The trend however appears to be more inclined in the long term towards the world prognosticated by Aldous Huxley where dissent is outright redacted from the very DNA of the standardized humanity. People made to actually enjoy their own servitude. The German philosopher Goethe had aptly summed it: “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. They feed them on falsehoods till wrong looks like right in their eyes.”
Even the common herd can feel the penetrating signs of it approaching faster than the hijacked airliners that ram into tall buildings without interdiction in the most armed to the teeth superpower in history – at the American airports for instance where very intelligent peoples in the most industrious and creative nation on earth continue to quietly subject themselves to indignities in the name of freedom which no one in their self-respecting mind ought to really subject themselves to. Pretty soon, most will even be happy doing it – if many aren't already!
A world without the songbird approaches even faster.

If you would like to challenge a fact or analysis with something more than just an opinion, or if you learnt something new here, please consider leaving a public comment.

[1] Superman refers to Nietzsche's superman; see Thus Spake Zarathustra - A BOOK FOR ALL AND NONE by Friedrich Nietzsche (download from )
[2] For a detailed analysis of manufactured dissent as a Hegelian Dialectic, see: A Note on the Mighty Wurlitzer – Architecture of Modern Propaganda for Psychological Warfare by Zahir Ebrahim,
[3] For an examination of the fascinating theory behind “conspiracy theories”, see: Anatomy of Conspiracy Theory by Zahir Ebrahim, ; see the revealing paper by President Obama's information Czar, Dr. Cass Sunstein, the Harvard Law Professor who openly advocated precisely the method of credibly crafting false conspiracy theories among the public in order to neutralize the ultimate skeptics of establishment's core lies, titled: “Conspiracy Theories”, ; see the forensic examination of this paper and its superficial critics in: A License to Kill: Did David Ray Griffin and Steve Lendman miss the real purpose of Cass Sunstein's “Conspiracy Theories”? by Zahir Ebrahim, .
[4] For the role of genuine gadfly to power as moral agents of change see Vaclav Havel's full quote in Responsibility of Intellectuals – Redux by Zahir Ebrahim,
[5] For the parable of the Songbird and Nimrod see Of Ostriches and Rebels on The Hard Road to World Order by Zahir Ebrahim,
[6] For understanding the empire of the oligarchy and how it is being fashioned in stages with “an end run around national sovereignty”, see The Poor-Man's Guide to Modernity, 7th Edition, August 2013 by Zahir Ebrahim,
[7] For some arguably rich examples of respectable manufactured dissent that live and thrive under establishment cover, see Songbird or Superman – You Decide! by Zahir Ebrahim,
More contemporary examples of both respectable and outlandish manufactured dissent can be found in: Manufacturing Dissent: Weapons of Mass Deception – The Master Social Science by Zahir Ebrahim, ; its Preamble section excerpts at length from Mein Kampf to examine Adolph Hitler's insightful characterization of the three types of public mind that is brilliantly harnessed by Western statecraft today for engineering consent.
The case of Paul Craig Roberts, the former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration, an economist and self-proclaimed “Father of Reaganomics”, a former editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal, Business Week, and Scripps Howard News Service, and the darling of the Christian white man's dissent with the establishment now that Jews have replaced their former tormentors in running the world show, is particularly illustrative of both manufactured dissent as well as dissent for narrow vested interests; see: Rebuttal to Paul Craig Roberts': 'Washington Arrogance has Fomented a Muslim Revolution' by Zahir Ebrahim, .
The case of the distinguished Dr. Francis Boyle, the Hans Morgenthau student, lawyer and political scientist extraordinaire, groomed at Harvard and University of Chicago, serving as the axial pivot of egregious dissent against the villainy of imperial powers at the International Criminal Court of Justice and the World Court in the Hague, is even more illustrative. Like his Jewish confrere Prof. Noam Chomsky, the good Samaritan Christian too retains the core lies of empire even while bringing criminal charges for torture against its visible helmsman at the Hague. A mental midget or a brilliant Superman? It is always instructive to adjudicate for oneself. See Zahir Ebrahim's Response to Francis Boyle's '2011: Prospects for Humanity?' – Unlimited Imperialism and Nation-States but no Secret Rule by Oligarchy for World Government!, .
Some illustrative examples of manufactured dissent that is really only an articulation of the white man's burden having been taken over by another more “superior race”, and the grapes are now sour for the former “superior race”, see: The White Man's Burden appears Uniformly Distributed among Jews Christians and Atheists – how can one tell the difference? by Zahir Ebrahim,
Some illustrative examples of fabricated dissent among the “lesser peoples”, the colonized mind, who willingly carry the white man's burden are in the FAQ: What is an Intellectual Negro? by Zahir Ebrahim,
[8] For Howard Zinn's demagoguery, diverting attention from the crime of 9/11 itself in response to a question from the public, see: ; transcript from: .
[9] The epithet “vulgar propagandist” is dissent Superman Noam Chomsky anointing establishment's Superman Bernard Lewis in the following interview: '... now, until Bernard Lewis tells us that, and that's only one piece of a long story, we know that he is just a vulgar propagandist and not a scholar.' --- Interview to Evan Solomon, CBC, part-2, minute 5:50, December 9, 2003, . The epithet “arguably the most important intellectual alive” is establishment's mouthpiece the New York Times anointing Noam Chomsky. The incestuous self-reinforcement of imperial “truths” among these Superman and the instruments of the establishment who also principally share the same racial and tribal heritage, each playing their own assigned role in the Hegelian Dialectic of Dissent, should no longer be surprising. See Hegelian Dialectic of Dissent, op cit. footnote [2].
[10] For an example of dissent cornering the citation market, see: Chomsky Is Citation Champ, MIT news bulletin, April 15, 1992,
[11] For an example of making a lifetime of lucrative living out of dissent, see: Noam Chomsky, Closet Capitalist, by Peter Schweizer, Hoover Institution, ( or ).
[12] For empirical evidence of the facade of elected governments and why the macro policy calculus of hegemony of the superpower does not change despite changing the front faces in the White House every four years, and the most lauded dissent's calculated inability to focus on the first-cause of that most visible dysfunction, see Response to American Congressman Dennis Kucinich: Impeachment alone does not solve the problem! by Zahir Ebrahim, June 13, 2008, ; and see Response to American criminal lawyer Vincent Bugliosi: Vanilla or Chocolate is merely the icing on the devil's cake! by Zahir Ebrahim, April 09 2009, .
[13] To understand the motivation for Pavlovian training of Americans at US airports beyond the obvious, see Zahir Ebrahim's letter to American Advice Goddess, Amy Alkon:
[14] Supplementary reading: Propaganda by Edward Bernays, 1928, (download from ); watch BBC documentary on Edward Bernays at: ; listen to sociologist and essayist Aldous Huxley explain the elements of the “Ultimate Revolution” at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1962: 'we are in process of developing a whole series of techniques which will enable the controlling oligarchy who have always existed and presumably always will exist, to get people actually to love their servitude! This is the, it seems to me, the ultimate in malevolent revolution shall we say.',
First Published on Sunday, September 15, 2013 10:00 pm 4780

>> The case of the distinguished Dr. Francis Boyle, the Hans Morgenthau student, lawyer and political scientist extraordinaire, groomed at Harvard and University of Chicago, serving as the axial pivot of egregious dissent against the villainy of imperial powers at the International Criminal Court of Justice and the World Court in the Hague, is even more illustrative. Like his Jewish confrere Prof. Noam Chomsky, the good Samaritan Christian too retains the core lies of empire even while bringing criminal charges for torture against its visible helmsman at the Hague. A mental midget or a brilliant Superman? It is always instructive to adjudicate for oneself. Zahir Ebrahim's Response to Francis Boyle's '2011: Prospects for Humanity?' – Unlimited Imperialism and Nation-States but no Secret Rule by Oligarchy for World Government!
>> A great example of disingenuous dissent – after eating 900 mice, the cat performs the hajj and becomes the representative of the mice before other cats to the incredulous cheering of the mice! This unraveling earned Zahir Ebrahim, the honorific of “you are a completely stupid fool, a disgrace to humanity” from Paul Craig Roberts, United States Former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. This example poignantly illustrates how the manufacturers of both consent and dissent retain all core-axioms of 'empire' intact! The difference is that for consent, the empire is projected as good. For dissent, the empire is projected as bad. But the same external enemy is retained, and only re-incarnated either as “jihadis” and “Militant Islam” (consent), or “revolutionaries” and “blowback” (dissent). Neither manufacturers will ever extend their discourse to covert-ops, to forensic analysis of overarching agendas, and to “inside job”!

The astute Machiavelli, imaginatively toiling away in the National Security State to create the hell for the world's 'untermensch', surely know how to effectively harness even the Alien and cosmological threats from the heavens above for creating its one-world government in no less a measure than it knew how to harvest the Ali Baba of Afghanistan for its long planned “Imperial Mobilization”! The Alien Agenda and its official disclosures with perhaps vivid demonstrations in the skies above and in the seas below, will be the coup de grace for finally bringing a fractious nationalism-driven peoples long divided by religion and race, forcibly together in the secular humanism of planetary-level world government: “if suddenly there was a threat to this world from some other species from another planet”. President Ronald Reagan had read that out loud from his script at the United Nations podium in 1987, continuing: “we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside universal threat to make us recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world”.
The hundreds of hours of mostly specious but often entertaining video testimonies captured by Project Camelot is unarguable evidence that its harbingers, perhaps unwittingly – and irrespective of their own zealous convictions – are contributing their bit to facilitate public's irrational beliefs in that new super-mantra, and in the process, arguably causing many rebels to misapply their energies of dissent chasing Annunakis and UFOs. This is straight out of the COINTELPRO recipe book for subverting focussed dissent, spun from the mind of the likes of Harvard's Cass Sunstein, President Obama's minister of advanced learning and legalism, and “Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs”. They evidently have copious help from a plethora of very earnest sounding supposed whistleblowers who bring nothing independently verifiable but their sole moral word as evidence to their Project Camelot video interviews; and from the likes of Zecharia Sitchin et. al., story-tellers par excellence who have got rich peddling enjoyable science fiction based on intriguing re-interpretations of ancient myths and archeology as the New Age Theology of Spiritual Secular Humanism.
I have not encountered a more learned gibberish-space than this as part and parcel of the science of hegemony called political science; it would even top money-as-debt and modern Wall Street economics were it to become a ubiquitously held belief-space. The hectoring hegemons' forte is to cultivate false beliefs in order to pursue their untenable agendas. This is self evident from the plethora of myths of 9/11 cleverly employed for “imperial mobilization”. In fact, 9/11 Commission Executive Director Philip Zelikow had this to say about myths in a Terrorism Study Group three years before 9/11: “'Public Assumptions' Shape Views of History: Such presumptions are beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community. The sources for such presumptions are both personal (from direct experience) and vicarious (from books, movies, and myths).”
This is how “militant Islam” was implanted into Western consciousness years ahead of its harvesting on 9/11; as was environmentalism which led to the Newspeak “global warming” Nobel peace prize being awarded to Al Gore as the precursor to “carbon credit”, the new key instrument of global control of the planet. Sophisticated cultivation of mantras and false beliefs precede the successive baby-steps of “imperial mobilization”. They sew so much confusion and cacophony in the public mind, that in the revealing 1974 words of CFR author Richard N. Gardner: “In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up, rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.” See the import of those Realityspeak words in Project Humanbeingsfirst's “Response to Financial Times Gideon Rachman's 'And now for a world government'”.
Those infected with such myths and false beliefs among the public are generally in the First and Second group in Hitler's nomenclature. Those in the Third group advocating such false beliefs are arguably the agents, assets, and sayanim of the Hectoring Hegemons. They can't themselves be genuinely believing in such absurdities – but then again, many genuinely thoughtful people believe in all sorts of religions and things based on faith alone. Here, it is the empirical political science and not immanent personal faith that is under rational scrutiny through the varifocal lens of social engineering, in order to comprehend the complex manufacturing of consent and dissent. See the tortuous Realityspeak of how mantras are seeded and harvested to achieve world government in Project Humanbeingsfirst's online tutorial: “The Brilliant Construction of World Order – Or a children's bedtime story!” at
>> Witness how dissent-space's most learned consciences and stellar moral minds always tend to leave something crucial out of their endeavors that is essential in making them ineffective: they chase what's already a fait accompli; omit the present, or the highest order bit, or the real prime-movers, or the first cause, spending their entire activism-energies chasing effects and lower-order bits of the previous crime scene – why? If I was a hectoring hegemon trying to control dissent and channel its moral energies into high-minded but specious and inconsequential pursuits so that I could continue pursuing my core-agenda and keep getting away with constructing newer faits accomplis to accomplish it in baby-steps, I couldn't do any better! And pointing this out to these stellar moral minds some how offends them!

If you would like to challenge a fact or analysis with something more than just an opinion, or if you learnt something new here, please consider leaving a public comment.

- ### -

The author, a justice activist, formerly a Silicon Valley systems architect (see engineering patents at ), founded Project in the aftermath of 9/11. He was, mercifully, most imperfectly educated in the United States of America and thus escaped the fate of “likkha-parrha-jahils” mass produced from its vast manufacturing consent complex with all his neurons still intact and still firing on all cylinders. Bio at Email: .

First Published June 01, 2008 | Last Updated Sunday, September 15, 2013 11:00 pm 11056

Manufacturing Dissent: Weapons of Mass Deception - The Master Social Science

The Plebeian antidote to Hectoring Hegemons

Home is

INDEX here.

Okay to copy, print, or post this document; verbatim reproduction only.
here. Full Copyright Notice