November 24, 2009
How to “Read” Media Persuasion Tactics
Part I: Three Machiavellian Media Tactics: Learn These Today
The Great Senate Healthcare “Vote”: Machiavellian Media-Think
Are you “wowed” yet? What an “exciting” week the media had covering the Senate Healthcare vote. We even had a day by day (and on Saturday, hour by hour) “countdown” to the moment the Senate was to vote. It hasn’t been this exciting since Inaugural week when the media kept us on pins and needles breathlessly anticipating each new tax-supported, publicly flaunted, multi-thousand dollar gown Michelle would wear to the next Inaugural event.
Let’s face it, there was nothing about this Senate vote worth talking about. BUT… there was MUCH to learn about. Specifically, we saw the media’s methodology and how they attempt to deceive the American people. In fact, they have been using the same chicanery for years. Unfortunately, much of the hoopla worked. Countless Americans are convinced that, in essence, the Healthcare bill which they have clearly opposed, is a “done deal”, “That’s all folks”, “There’s nothing more you can do about it”.
And that, dear reader, is the point: “There’s nothing more you can do about it.” Especially, since the Congress has learned a “fear of American public reaction” over the past 5 months.
The “vote”, so anticipated all through last week, was nothing more than a “throw-together” package of previous suggestions and failed attempts (10 years of wannabe healthcare “packages” to be specific). All that last week’s “historic vote” accomplished was to bring the issue to … debate. (!)
Did you get that? All the hoopla was about getting a bill so that it could be “debated.” Associated Press writer Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar reported Senatorial reactions “…in the wake of a key Senate vote Saturday night that advanced a 10-year, $959 billion health bill to full debate.”
"Three Machiavellian Media Truth Tactics
Don’t get me wrong. I expect nothing honorable from Capitol Hill. So, I’m not at all enamored with the “goings-on”. Just about everything they do is illegal were they abiding by the provisions of the Constitution of the United States which they swear by oath to uphold. But, they’ve contracted that away.
No. It’s the mesmerizing deceits used by the American media that’s just a “wonder” to behold. First of all, it’s “Machiavellian” in character. Machiavellian media tactics is nothing more than deceit on steroids. Instead of merely lying about an event or personage, Machiavellian media attempts the Herculean task of CREATING public sentiment… or reaction. Therefore, “deceit”, a la the media, is not, in their minds, so much a willful misreporting of events. Not at all. “Truth” is more like viewing the public as errant urchin miscreants who just don’t seem to “get it” – we poor sheeplings just don’t understand what’s “best”. “We” are the deceived. The media is our instructor (priesthood). So… the media will report what’s “best” as truth, moving us to feel as if the “illusion of popular support” for what they are creating really exists, and therefore, that becomes the “news”.
You see it’s all about “what should be” viewed as truth… not “what is”. It’s all about “creating a usable past.” Machiavellianism is socio-political engineering, with society as “We…the engineered”.
Second… and more important: The media must come to the aid of the beleaguered Dems in Congress. The latter have been overwhelmed by the wrath of average Americans who are decidedly opposed to the Healthcare bill as a whole. Therefore, the media was enlisted to back off the average American’s resistance by making this “vote” the landmark, “never-say-nay”, historic event. The media went on the do just that by creating a false “hurdle” to “overcome”. Once the vote was taken on a pitifully impoverished, thoroughly unsuitable, insanely inept Healthcare bill, the American people were doused with victory hoopla.
NOW… we are being told there is no turning back. The message is clear: “America, this is a “done deal” and it has all the support it needs.” As Sen. Charles Schumer, (D-N.Y.) said, "But we’re not going to not pass a bill."
The media created a false obstacle (passing a bill to debate, not a Healthcare bill to implement). No one among the “moderate” Dems would risk his/her political future to oppose so inane a bill.
Third: By structuring all the victory hoopla, they use a tactic which gives us the impression that their agenda is “inevitable”. It cannot be stopped. That was the media objective of the week’s rant. The goal is “the inevitability doctrine”.
Media Machiavellians: The Healthcare Bill that Doesn’t Solve Healthcare Problems
So, they got many Americans thinking, “It’s all over”… when in fact it has hardly just begun. The debate as whether this thing can even continue to exist as a viable bill – given its real unsolved hurdles – or how it would function if once passed. None of that has been addressed.
Be Honest with yourself: Did you find yourself believing that the historic vote was the major step to overcome so as to pass the Healthcare legislation? In actuality, according to the afore-mentioned reporter, this “bill” did NOT address any of these problems:
- Multiple mandates and increased taxes which would cripple already marginal businesses
- Abortion provisions and who pays for abortions
- Allowing government to sell insurance, competing with the healthcare industry to do so. This is a huge economic and legal hurdle, no one has solved.
- Record deficits on top of already record deficits.
- Who will pay for the healthcare? The “rich”? No. If you think that, then you’ve succumbed to more Machiavellian media-think. They want people to believe they will tax the wealthy. It’s the middle class, written into the legislation, who will pay. The income range specified includes precisely that segment of our society who provide the vast majority of jobs – the small business owners.
- Mandated healthcare premiums for individuals that are not affordable (Do these Congressional scoundrels even know there is an economic implosion going on?).
Economic Implosion Rule Number 1: Do not inflict greater expenses upon individual families and businesses if you are trying to heal the economy. Economic Implosion Rule Number 2: If you do impose greater costs upon individuals and businesses, you do not understand economics, being ignorant of what makes business successful OR you are the enemy of the businesses and families in this country. In either case, you should not hold office.
- Democratically sponsored measures still leave 12 million eligible Americans uninsured.
- Most middle-class families who would be required to buy coverage would still be unable to afford the premiums even with government aid.
- A new federal fund designed to provide temporary coverage for people with health problems would quickly run out of cash.
- Here’s an explanation that oozes special interest: “For now, these bread-and-butter concerns take a back seat to more pressing issues for Democratic lawmakers trying to deliver on President Barack Obama’s signature issue.” In other words, the political success of the Obama administration and its Democratic host, far outweighs their concern for the well-being of the average American.
These three Machiavellian Media tactics: 1) Create the public sentiment as truth, i.e., Create the illusion of popular support. 2) Create a false, more-easily-attained “obstacle” to overcome. In overcoming it, then announce the momentum as heralding victory. 3) Put in place the inevitability doctrine. Put it in the minds of your opposition. Drain their energies and resolve.
The media – not the Healthcare bill – deserved all the attention last week… and in the future.
-submitted, Wayne C. Sedlak, ICHR
Ps. Look for more articles on “How the media tactically and strategically deceives Americans”
September 19, 2009
What’s All the “Fuss” about “Socialism”? A Christian Critique
Socialism: The Hate Thy Neighbor Theology Exposed by Frederic Bastiat
Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee, that frameth mischief with a law ?– Psalm 94:20
Frederic Bastiat was a 19th century French journalist, who became famous for his public commentary on political economy. From the time of the French Revolution of 1789 right on through a century of socialistic turmoil leading to the rise of the Third Republic of France, the French nation experienced one economic recession after another. Frederick Bastiat understood the underlying problem was not primarily economics. To be sure, it was manifested in political economy. But all ethics have their origin in worldview and Bastiat was wise enough to understand that the new political plaything now taking the rather innocuous sounding name of "socialism" was really an attack upon the Christian faith.
Bastiat became the leading defender of free market thinking and the outspoken advocate of Christian principle in the strife-torn revolutionary — socialistic France of the 19th century. He was not ashamed to reference the Lord’s oversight in the affairs of men and society, using the term "Providence" repeatedly despite the mockery and scorn heaped upon him by the atheistic-socialistic scholars of the day. His observations, listed below, deserve special scrutiny as they identify, in a concise manner, part of the problem we call "Socialism". Here are a few of his observations (with my Notes attached):
1. It is evident that the socialists set out in quest of an artificial social order only because they deemed the natural order to be either bad or inadequate; they deemed it bad or inadequate only because they felt man’s interests are fundamentally antagonistic, for all the otherwise they would not have had recourse to coercion. It is not necessary to force into harmony things that are inherently harmonious.
Note: When Bastiat states that the Socialist believe man’s interests are fundamentally antagonistic, what he’s referring to is the fact that they believe — along with most government-school taught Americans, and even many so-called Christians — that the natural order ( the physical world around us) and societal order ( mankind’s propensity to organize in communities) are ALWAYS given to strife, and therefore, "someone" ( usually the State) must, of necessity, restrict human freedom in order to bring about progress and peace. In other words, all socialists of all types believe that the social order — whatever it might be and however constituted — MUST BE REGULATED by the State or else "chaos" will reign throughout society.
Socialism is ALWAYS guided by the presumptuous attitude that all societies, all men everywhere, must be CONTROLLED, especially in matters pertaining to economics. (See Plato’s view, listed under Bastiat’s point 3, below.)
2. The Socialists conjure up a society out of their imagination and then conceive of a human heart to fit this society. - Frederic Bastiat, Economic Harmonies, p. xxv
Note: Bastiat has hit the nail right on the head. Socialists, of all types, dream up a society as they believe it should be constituted but because they have no sound view of human nature ( fallen, sinful and made in God’s image) nor of the Lord, His Will, or His Kingdom, they must dream up a new kind of human being and sort of retrofit this "new creation" of social engineering to their utopian plan. This is the reason our society is overwhelmed by the presence of expensive, uncaring, and even brutal bureaucracies. It is also the reason our land swarms with social agencies of all sorts. It also explains why modern psychological, psychiatric, and sociological theories (of all sorts and approaches) inundates the land because it is precisely these "disciplines" which are needed to reshape human thinking and behavior. Additionally, they become the "thought police" as well as the "behavioral police" determining the nature of Good and Evil. In other words, they become the Standard; you dare not oppose them or you are considered unfit, and a "hater-of-mankind", as early church Christians were called in the Roman Empire.
3. Although they [the socialists] have a kind of sentimental love for humanity in their hearts, hate flows from their lips. Each of them reserves all his love for the society that is dreamed up; but the natural society, that in which it is our lot to live cannot be destroyed soon enough to suit them, so that from its ruins may rise [their version of] the New Jerusalem.
Note: Bastiat has again hit the nail on the head. Socialism derives its greatest strength from "the best" and "the worst"of society. The worst kinds of individuals are those insidious individuals who understand the real agenda of radicalism and forward it is a function of their own personal advantage. However, socialism always gains its "public image" from its humanitarian appeals. It’s humanitarian appeals become the foundation for its political strengths and successes. Issues such as "feeding the poor", "defending the helpless against injustices", "providing health care for all people", "ending exploitation", "doing away with "special privilege" that would include an endless litany of privileges needing correction such as,
- private ownership of property,
- profitability and the profit system,
- inheritance,
- sexual fidelity with one’s spouse,
- child rearing under parental authority and guidance,
- business ownership,
- vocational choice/calling
- the right to contract
- true liberty
… the list is almost endless.
Socialism professes a love for humanity. However, the "love" they profess is only a love for that which they "imagine".in other words, they’re in love with their own preferences and self-professed ideals. it’s simply another version of what God warned Adam and Eve to avoid: to be as gods knowing good and evil.
Socialism ALWAYS professes love for mankind but ALWAYS nourishes HATE,stirring strife throughout society by creating factions among different groups who are taught by the Socialist propaganda HOW TO HATE EFFECTIVLEY.
Witness the following opinions of socialistic thinkers:
"The Revolutionary is a doomed man. He has no personal interests, no business affairs, no emotions, no attachments, no property and no name. Everything in him is wholly absorbed in the single thought and the single passion for revolution." - Sergei Nechayev, Forerunner of the Bolshevik ( communist) Revolution of 1917. It was his influence upon Vladimir Lenin which was to determine the revolutionary approach of the Bolsheviks.
Note: We should note here, as Bastiat noted concerning all socialists, the disdain with which this man viewed a society in which he lived. He always taught his followers they were building a new society. Of course, the old one had to be completely destroyed. He penned this instruction to his followers - his description of such hatred:
"The Revolutionary knows that in the very depths of his being, not only in words but also in deeds, he has broken all the bonds which tie him to the social order and the civilized world with all of its laws, moralities and customs and with all its generally accepted conventions. He is their implacable enemy, and if he continues to live with them it is only in order to destroy them more speedily." - Sergei Nechayev
"Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov had the courage to come out and say openly that famine would have numerous positive results, particularly in the appearance of a new industrial proletariat, which would take over from the bourgeoisie. Famine, he explained, in destroying the outdated peasant economy, would bring about the next age more rapidly, and usher in Socialism, the stage that necessarily followed capitalism. Famine would also destroy faith not only in the Czar, but in God also." -Fellow revolutionary and friend of Vladimir Lenin describing Lenin’s "courage" in opposing any or all aid to victims of the 1891 Russian famine.
Note: Lenin believed the famine to be a necessary precursor to the rise of socialism. Lenin also believe that the destruction of faith in God was absolutely necessary for the attainment of socialistic goals.
Note: Socialistic planners of the future ruin in America follow Lenin’s model. They believe in the necessity of mass genocide, upwards of 150 million Americans (or more) must be genocidally removed they say! They posit the position that, if multitudes of Ameicans "rise up" against them, they will allow the consequent destruction of the economic system to usher in famine, and kill off the oppostion throught starvation, plague and strife.
"The greatest principle of all is that nobody, whether male or female, should be without a leader. Nor should the mind of anybody being habituated to letting him do anything at all on his own initiative; neither out of zeal, or even playfully. But in war and in the midst of peace — to his leader he should direct his eyes and follow faithfully. And even in the smallest matter he should stand under leadership. For example, he should get up, or move, or wash, or take his meals… only if he has been told to do so. In a word, he should teach his soul, by long habit, never to dream of acting independently, and become utterly incapable of it." - Plato, Greek philosopher, c. 380 BC
Note: Notice how the appeal for socialism by Plato in his Republic subordinates ALL FREEDOM and ALL PERSONAL INITIATIVE. in all respects, the state REMAKES the individual in its own image and punishes the whole concept of individual maturity and responsibility, even as Bastiat stated. Note too, the "long habit", "teaching his soul", "subordinating all freedom" behavioral conditioning of the individual.
4. Therefore, they [Socialists] have found fundamental antagonisms everywhere:
- Between the property owner and the worker
- Between capital and labor
- Between the common people and bourgeoisie
- Between the farmer and the city dweller
- Between the native born and the foreigner
- Between the producer and the consumer
- Between civilization and the social order
Note: Socialism of all types, in all eras, has exploited the weaknesses, flaws and especially, the points of envy in society. By pointing to private ownership, accumulation of wealth, business ownership, material blessings, inheritance and other advantages, the Socialist can arouse envy in others. By recasting these things in the mind as injustice and privilege, the Socialist conjures up factions. Factions create rivalries in society. Rivalries bring discord and the approach of chaos within society. Since people cannot live for long safely in a society dominated by chaos and discord, society at large cries for Big Brother to step in. Since Socialism thrives upon alleged or actual injustices, the Socialist always uses revolutionary fervor to bring about the All Powerful State.
Reaction to discord by the general population brings overbearing action by the State, in the hands of the socialists. Or as radical revolutionaries like to put it, “All the action is in the reaction.”
5. If humanity is inevitably impelled toward injustice by the laws of value, toward inequality by the laws of rent, toward poverty by the laws of population, and toward sterilization by the laws of heredity, we cannot say that God’s handiwork is harmonious in the social order; as it is in the physical universe. We must instead admit, with heads bowed in grief, that He has seen fit to establish His social order upon revolting and irremediable discord. – Frederic Bastiat, Economic Harmonies, p. xxviii
Note: Here we find the heart of the matter with socialism, of all kinds. The socialist, as Bastiat points out, believes that any God who would be at the head of this created order (the world around us) must be imbecilic because He has built the creation upon revolting principles which must be “corrected”, a thing the socialist is only too happy to perform. Of course, since any concept of “God”, by definition, could not include “imbecile” in His nature, there must NOT be a “God” in any sense of the term. Hence, the vast majority of socialists (except, for example, the so-called “Christian socialists”) are atheists or agnostics.
The real point to see in #5 is this: when Adam and Eve were warned concerning the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, the warning saw them as attempting to become “as god” to “know good and evil.” Socialism is one major expression of that issue. Socialists, according to what Bastiat has written here, are always motivated to critique the social order as fundamentally “evil”. Therefore, they feel they know better than God. They feel they know what kind of social order they should bring about. Obviously, they conclude, somebody must do it. They then step up to the plate with their theories… and engineer strife among us and from positions of rule." To be as god, to know good and evil" meant God charged mankind as those who charge Him with folly - and say they can "do better."
6. I raise my voice to make men hear these words which, if true, may silence all protesting voices: It is NOT true that the great laws of Providence are hastening society along the road to disaster. – Frederic Bastiat, Economic Harmonies, p. xxix
Note: Amen.
-submitted, Wayne C. Sedlak, ICHR
February 1, 2009
Welcome To The Vision Viewpoint Newsletter
Welcome.
If you have any problems, or have any questions, please contact us right away.
Vsvion Viewpoint Staff
Comments(6)September 18, 2007
Hitler’s Broadcast
In a radio broadcast Hitler made a mistake…never before had the party aligned themselves with a particular group of Christians…but now, under what he called positive Christianity…(not negative which included sin and a need for repentance)….but he now…grouped himself with the “German Christians”, which was heavily laced with Nazis. Hitler was using this “Christianity” as a cloak to disguise their real intentions.
September 9, 2007
Altona Confession
Altona Confession where the Christians took their stand against the radicalism of the Nazi party’s effect on the Christian Church.
All Germany Knew Hitler’s Claim to being a Christian
Ever since 1920 Hitler and his Nazi thugs claimed to be Christian according to the infamous Article 24 of the Nazi Platform. Hitler knew very few German’s knew of his occultic background and that his Nazi henchmen (Goebbels, Hess, Himmler, etc. ) all had occultic and criminal backgrounds. However Article 24 insisted that the Nazis were to be understood as embracing a “positive Christianity” and not a negative Christianity. The “positive Christian” emphasis of the Nazis meant they were not going to be restricted by things they believed were negative in tone such as, man’s sinful and fallen nature, the need for a Substitutionary Atonement, the historic Gospel of a Justifying Faith in Jesus Christ and the need for a new birth from our fallen nature. These and other doctrines were negative to the Nazis and the Nazis especially abhorred the “negativity” of the Laws of God as found in the Pentateuch, the Prophets and throughout the New Testament. ( they rejected for example the 10 commandments). Hitler very often had himself photographed in the news holding Luther’s actual Bible, and often spoke of the Nazi movement as completing the German Reformation and morality. His choice of words here were exposed by several individuals early. (Read the article)
September 7, 2007
The Hitler Ploy: Setting the Record Straight
With the rise of the Internet, a new “breed” of atheism is disseminating its positions boldly. Many issues are addressed on websites by the new guard of atheists who bear their “non-belief” like a badge of honor. It is a bold, aggressive movement…
One of the most egregious misstatements of this aggressive movement is its attempt to liken the historic tenets and Churches of the Christian faith in
America to the “Christianity” of Adolph Hitler. The fact of the matter remains: Hitler and his Nazi thugs were master deceivers… and with the massive money infusion provided by some American industrialists and their companies to German I.G. Farben, those Nazis gained a strong position through the cultural organs of the day. (Read the article)
