Conversion Theory

In the United States there is a majority of citizens that have a natural aversion to certain words and certain phrases. As I explored the topic of newspeak, I learned something as I was listening to my audience and that is they seem to be well aware of certain words and phrases that have been introduced into our paradigm that create negative emotional and psychological feelings.

There are a lot of commentators and talk show hosts that use these words to their advantage. They exploit certain words like socialism and communism to trigger certain feelings in their audience.
Other notorious trigger words are Islam and Zionism.

The last caller to my program said that there was yet another word that triggers all sorts of emotion in people and that is the word ‘Nazi‘.

I agreed that no matter what the topic is, you can always find a way to convert someone to your way of thinking by dropping a Nazi bomb and make comparisons to corrupt governments and Nazi philosophies. Some claim that this is a lazy and notorious play and at times becomes a turn off because it stops any meaningful debate and sends a political topic into a tailspin.

In the meantime, we continue feeling that the noose is tightening, the water is boiling and we seem to have a problem expressing just how we are hearing words and phrases that create a schism in the brain. How they confuse us to the point of frightening us.

Another caller to my program expressed how she immediately realized that our country was changing for the worse when it was referred to as the “homeland.” She stated that it sounded too much like the Nazi “Fatherland” or “Mother” Russia. She also said that it was worse when they created a new policing agency known as “Homeland Security” which she felt sounded like the organization of the Stasi or even the Gestapo.

I had to concur that when I first heard the words being used I felt that the conversion process was beginning and it did not matter what political party was in charge, someone was answering to a world authority that knew how the word “Homeland” would sound to Americans who were recovering emotionally from the attacks of September 11th, 2001.

The word ‘homeland’ seemed to be a ‘Teutonic‘ word or something that would be referred to in some German patriotic song. It was a linguistic reminder that no longer do we identify ourselves with American ideals, but with the land we live on. It was a linguistic trigger to remind us that something had changed. Now there may be a contingency that see the word as neutral because gradually and silently the conversion process is happening and many Americans are not aware that this is taking place.

More than decade ago, I really don’t think that I used the word ‘checkpoint‘ as much as I use it now. It seems that stories about police checkpoints and how American citizens are harassed and detained at checkpoints paints another chilling tableau that is far from the American way of life that we were used to just over a decade ago.

If I deride the use of checkpoints and lament that fact that we are now seeing more of them – and hearing about the swabbing of mouths and the extracting of blood by off-duty officers – I have to deal with the consequences of people who will chastise me and assume that I am ‘soft on crime‘, another linguistic trigger phrase.

This is not the case. I have to admit that the thought of a “checkpoint” reminds me of the stories my aunt used to tell me about how things were at the border that divided East and West Germany during the Cold War. The stories were enough to convince me that The United States was most definitely a unique and wonderful place to live as we did not have to subject ourselves to unwanted or unwarranted search and seizure, let alone any checkpoint that demands a sample of DNA.

This again is an indication that yes we have changed in America and that changes had been planned long before it became a marketing term to get Barack Obama elected.

We need to admit to ourselves that the idea of change is subjective. There are many things that have been introduced into our lives that were at first presented as being valuable and vital to our existence. This indicates to us that the so-called change and how it is perceived is dependent upon the individual and their physical/mental/emotional circumstances.

The older we get, we may forget that the generations that have come after us, never knew of a time where words like homeland or things like checkpoints were words used to engender a need for defense against a perceived enemy.

They will never know that the enemy was domestic, and that enemy was against the use of such words and tools of an oppressive nature.

In the Bush era, we were intentionally given mass trauma based change that was meant to victimize us so that we would accept any policy or law that appeared to liberate us from our perceived pain and fear. Now with the Obama administration, we were told that our trauma would be rewarded with a “new dawn” of leadership that would rely less on military rule and more on diplomatic example.

However, that did not transpire.

We were introduced to domestic spying programs developed by the National Security / Homeland Security apparatus. It wasn’t long ago that domestic spying programs were only used in countries like Soviet Russia and other countries that used the threat of subversives to justify a leviathan dragnet against a domestic enemy.

Now in the United States we see that this is no longer a violation of constitution but an imperative for the continuity of government.

It also is important to inform the American people that while we are assured that all of the spying is being done under the rule of law, the standard proof required for obtaining a warrant to listen in on phone conversations and monitor internet activity is a lot lower than a normal criminal warrant.

In fact, in many cases warrants are written and produced like bad checks under the defense of probable cause, something that you would probably see happen in Cuba or in some other country that is being controlled by a fascist dictatorship.

The courts also rarely turn down these requests for the spying warrant. Recently the fight to make such activities unconstitutional was brought to the courts. A judge ruled in favor of the 4th amendment and another Judge ruled in favor of the national security state.

This is unprecedented and evident that America has changed.

The question is how did the change begin? Was it when we started using euphemisms reminiscent of failed fascist dictatorships? Is it when we began to treat our leadership like they were supreme chancellors or divine rulers?

When Obama ran for President we started to see children singing songs of praise to his potential leadership. It seemed so reminiscent of the Nazi Youth singing songs to Der fuhrer or North Korean children performing and praising their dear leader.

This should have been a signal that what is being done is inappropriate and that it mirrors what was done before and what it later became on the way to despotism.

Buzzwords have now become part of our political vocabulary, words like collusion, corporatism, and authoritarian. These are all words that used to fill pages of Cold War spy novels, not the talking points of the American political structure.

There are also other words that have now crept in which add to the conversion of Americans to accepting a despotic way of life. These words include hegemony, nationalism, war, empire and the New World Order.

There is also the acceptance of the cold reality of ‘limits on civil liberties‘ as opposed to the constant attaining and securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

That, of course, is in the preamble to the US Constitution and is a bulwark to our way of life that should be protected and not trivialized.

The definition of “fascism” has some academic variance, but is essentially collusion among the so-called cryptocracy, authoritarian government, and controlled media and education. This type of despotic “leadership” is only possible with a nationalistic public accepting policies of war, empire, and limited civil and political rights.

A “constitutional republic” is a political philosophy of limited government, separated powers with checks and balances to ensure the federal government’s power stays limited within the Constitution, protected civil liberties, and elected representatives responsible to the people who retain the most political power.

To some this is fundamental, to others it may not be beneficial to know or to even care about what now seems to be marginalized as nationalist fanaticism, in the face of what seems to be an unseen threat that has been effective in the conversion process to the altered and decimated constitutional republic.

When ‘change’ was the marketing buzzword for Barack Obama during his election campaign, we were oblivious to the idea that it wasn’t just a slogan for a man who was called an inexperienced senator from Illinois. It was a watered down word for the act of “re-conceptualizing” or “revising” what America was. This was not just the mission of one party, but the objective of both political parties.

It was an act to reverse the paradigm in favor of the powerful and their ability to govern and act without the interference of the people. We are now in the process of witnessing the division of the people in order to prove that there are flaws in the original democratic experiment.

We now discuss openly the mounting sense that class and race war is on verge of exploding. The live footage of such an event makes its way from the smart phones of America on to the social media and mainstream media, in the form of knock out games, and now toddlers who are taught to speak and act like thugs, prompting disgust and anger. This is a very affective mechanism for divisive image and action parameters.

The media mouthpiece is a vehicle for creating the visual and linguistic “proof” that philosophically we have converted to an accepted despotism, with no national goals to improve, only concerns about the next school shooting or environmental catastrophe.

We see the aftermath of all of these tragedies and forget that all of the changes that were proposed were being implemented to prevent such problems. We have somehow accepted paramilitary procedures as normal and not the exception. The left wing and right wing are encouraging extremist behavior.

This is a plot that is being created in order to guarantee a two-fisted militarized assault on the people and the demand for wealth extractions to equalize the financial status of Americans.

This is all for the sake of proving a flawed world that is in need of converting to the new system of control.

Keep in mind that this is a concept of conversion theory. It may not be well defined but it most certainly provides a starting point for dialogue that promotes a recall of what may have triggered our emotional acceptance of what we once objected to as citizens of a constitutional republic.

The power of a person’s worldview cannot be overstated. It is a determining factor in what kinds of behaviors a person will take in response to a given situation. It is nearly impossible to change a person’s personality, and changing someone’s opinions is often an exercise in futility.

But if you change people’s worldviews, you have changed not only the things they have the ability to perceive, and but also the entire range of options they have available for taking action.

Action speaks louder than words do.