Index April 2022 The Newstart OnLine Journal 4 pages Item 5
Farming People
Until about ten to twelve thousand years ago, it is thought that there was no farming at all. Hunting and gathering sustained the small populations of the time.
As a farmer myself I suspect that animals were the first to be domesticated. Herbivores which could be caught young, hobbled, and tamed offered an easier option with less genetic change being necessary than with many plants. Both plants and animals were domesticated long ago, though modifications to their genetics and husbandry continues unabated to this day.
Exploiting natural things to enhance our economy had been our major preoccupation for millennia. It used to be the endeavour at the cutting edge of improving our lot, and the vast majority of people were employed in it. By 1900 however, only 40% of the population were living and working on farms in countries like the United States and Australia. Then came the last great reform in farming.
It came with the internal combustion engine in the form of a tractor and led to changes so revolutionary that a hundred years later farming only occupied 1 to 2% of the population. Human effort as the dominant resource required in producing food and fibre was over. Another farming revolution, perhaps more significant, also began from about the year 1900. As farming plants and animals became an accomplished art, another form of farming was taken up. This one farmed people themselves.
In the long learning curve of domesticating animals, we learned a lot about them, and we probably learned even more about ourselves. A key thing in controlling animals was to be understood in observing their reactions to provocation. These reactions come in two types. One was to put as much distance as possible between the predator and themselves. The other was to put as many of their friends as possible between the predator and themselves.
I observed a herd of cattle with the first approach in North Queensland in the 1970s. Six very experienced and accomplished stockmen ("ringers") attempted to drive 400 head into nearby cattle yards. The herd immediately scattered with urgency and only six head were captured by the men throwing down a beast each and tying it up. The greater mob were later yarded with the aid of helicopters and by trapping them at watering points.
The policy of avoidance preferred and encouraged by farmers is the second. This does not involve diverse flight, but rather, the animal placing itself on the opposite side of the herd to the predator in the expectation that it will eat someone else instead. This is typified in a tight ball of sardines under predation, and herds and flocks holding together. An exploding star has too many fragments to allow many to be caught. A flock or herd continually adjusting itself away from threat whilst maintaining its "safety in numbers" policy, is easily directed into enclosures in its entirety. When farming people this must be borne in mind.
Being a more rational being, shock and fear is best induced if humans are to be encouraged into the "safety in numbers" mode of defending themselves. The age of experimenting with farming people opened in earnest with the first World War. That men would act with bravery (brazenly risk death) rather than face the censure of their "mob" has been understood from earliest warfare. It was a high art form in 1914-18.
A number of experiments with farming human beings will be considered with a view to understanding the basic elements needed. Shock and fear need to be present to induce the psychosis conducive of hiding from the danger behind others. In the first experiment to be considered, the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, the shock was provided by the massive mismanagement and disastrous Russian defeats of World War I.
Once fear is present, all that is necessary to establish hegemony is to be found in showing that all others think in a given and proscribed way. With the right means this can be artificially attained, and rationality is then deliberately though subconsciously abandoned, to avoid one being singled out. As will be seen, rationality will not be allowed to interrupt the security to be enjoyed through uniform thought with the "herd".
The Bolsheviks were a minority of only 40,000 in a population of over 100 million. No matter, they took control of the means of telling the people what the people thought. Trotsky brought five million dollars in gold from New York, Stalin had robbed many banks, and by this and concentrating themselves in St Petersburg the media of the day, the newspapers, were brought under their control. What everybody thought that everybody thought, was soon - in the primordial inevitability of herd conformity - self-fulfilled. Once settled and accepted under stress, only decades of pain and disappointment can undo such surety, and that only in a later generation.
The next great experiment in farming people came in Germany in the 1930s. The shock and stress of the war was compounded by the vindictive peace imposed by the victors. All that was necessary now for social control was a monopoly of informing the people what the people thought, and then, always wanting to believe what most others were believed to believe, they also believed it, and therefore it was so. But surely this is irrational? Exactly! It was in accord with the human propensity to conform with the herd, and was never, once adopted, open to any logical exposition of the truth. This would have been an "inhuman response", (though one which none ever claims as being so), which made it unrecognisable and therefore unaddressed.
The experiments continued with knowledge of how best to farm people being progressively improved. A more recent example of threat with herd-think prevailing over logic, was provided by the Covid pandemic of 2021.
A group was told and accepted that 80% of the population at that time was vaccinated. The Government reported that 80% of those infected that day were vaccinated and that 20% were not, and that those committed to hospital were also 80% vaccinated and that 20% were not. Whether correct or otherwise, no one in the group disputed these figures.
It was then suggested that this meant that vaccination was ineffective in preventing infection, and also, that it didn't lessen the severity of infection once contracted. Not one person in the group would accept this, including even those with university training in interpreting statistics. Mathematical certainty could not prevail over these people's commitment to the group-thought of the time.
People, like sardines, once they are swirling in a meatball under perceived threat, are completely impervious to any factual observation offered. Contradiction of "herd-think" is itself a threat to perceptions of security, and man is pathologically incapable of accepting it. This is not new. It has been a fixed part of the instinctive behaviour of humans no less than that of sardines, and herds, and flocks from the beginning of time. We are an irrational being, and an obstinate, determined and wilful one when herd-thinking is threatened with disturbance.
If 20% of a certain population were red headed, but their average athletic ability, mathematical scores, or susceptibility to some diseases were identical with the 80%, then it is an inescapable conclusion that red hairiness is irrelevant in such cases. Only committed herd-thinking that it be otherwise can deny this logic; and of course, it does, because it is older and more deeply entrenched in our emotional/thought patterns than any rationality. Examples of slavish herd-think abound.
Fear of "global warming" and media unanimity that it is caused by human action releasing CO2 into the atmosphere, has produced a type of carbon-phobia. Most are convinced that increased CO2 has the ability to vastly increase temperatures, and that science confirms this. Actually, science says that a significant temperature increase from rising CO2 levels is impossible.
Professor of Physics at Loyola Marymount University, Michel Van Biezen, explained this in one of his many videos available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57pU2F-bIQs on 4/6/2015. CO2, while efficient as a hothouse gas, only operates at two very limited infrared wavelengths, these being in the vicinity of 4.1 and 15.6 microns. Only 18% of the heat (infrared radiation) departing earth is in these wavelengths. Water vapour already intercepts over 70% of this, being a much more significant greenhouse gas than CO2, so only 5% of the heat escaping earth can be intercepted by CO2 whatever its concentration. At 400 parts per million most of this 5% is already captured.
This explains why in the Cambrian Period when CO2 was at 2,000 ppm it was very little warmer, though the earth was much greener because of carbon dioxide's benefits to plants.
When the media cooperates in farming public opinion, to the point that each is convinced that all others think in some specific way, human thought swirls around in the fear of exiting consensus. Nothing can induce it to leave the safety of "unified-thought"; not science, not reason, nor any evidence whatsoever. Human thought, like the sardines in a spherical meatball, will not leave it. Telling of the limitations of CO2 can never be heard, and is pathologically impossible to any minds which have not been prepared to resist their thought being farmed.
Fear and the media's consensus have convinced the world that the Twin Towers fell down because two planes flew into them. More than ten thousand engineers and architects have pointed out, and signed declarations, that without deliberate modern demolition being used the buildings could never instantaneously lose all resistance to gravity as they did. There was never even a remote prospect for years afterwards that the majority could hear such as this. Why? Because we are primordial organic beings and must act like it.
In May 2020 we all saw George Floyd being held down and asphyxiated. He told us in a loud voice about sixty times that he couldn't breathe. Nobody else has ever been able to yell it even four times without another breath. In emotional circumstances and with no media descent, we will all believe the impossible and resent any who mention it.
More examples are superfluous, as men in their "sardinian meatballs" and placing others between themselves and their fears, cannot allow any thought to enter.
These few observations are the specifics upon which the science of farming populations is based. Advertising is in full flight in exploiting mass psychology. People farming goes further, as advertising only urges certain actions upon us, while "P F", through fear and the media's unanimous repetition, seeks to overrule alternate thought. It is still early days in this art, but it is developing nicely, and will in all probability define the future of the human organism.
There is no hope in seeking to change human nature or wishing it were otherwise. We must accept our propensity to be farmed if we are not to be farmed. Those outside of the spinning spherical meatball of human herd-thought are their brothers' keepers. Their help will be resented, disputed, and refused, but they cannot allow themselves to be inhibited. Men and mankind have a common destiny.
Of course, an aspect of intelligent domestication of animals thus far unexamined, is the inducement that can be offered with food. Food offerings to the local bird populations will progressively tame them. In time they trust the farmer and conform to what is necessary to get it. Food is too abundantly available to humans to sufficiently influence their behaviour. Money plays the part, in domesticating humans into the service of others, that food does with animals.
No modern money is created by private persons through counterfeiting, and no money being created forms revenue in any Government budget. All money is created and owned by our banking systems; usually private systems. Two inevitabilities arise from this. One is that all media will be owned by, or mortgaged or beholden to the money-creating entities. The second is that no media will ever tell us this, so few will have the "bottle" to believe that the private right to create money and use it to control society exists, as herd-think will not affirm it.
Those who watch the domestication of their fellows with continual assurances in the media that CO2 can significantly heat the planet, that vaccinations are effective in preventing the number or severity of covid-19 infections, or that buildings sometimes instantaneously lose their resistance to gravity, have insufficient media to contradict it. The volume of repetition is the determinant of public thinking, not truth or logic when they are unexpressed sufficiently.
I don't think that the elites necessarily have any specific nasty intent towards us at the moment; they are just practicing with the idea that farming people will come in handy sometime. So, what is to be done?
The first thing is to accept our credulity in the face of herd-think. The next thing is to accept that a seeming conformity in thought can be artificially arranged by a dominant media. Acceptance of these raises awareness, and the media's repertoire of sung narratives repeated too often is thus open to, and will invoke, the necessary suspicion. This is a beginning.
It cannot be ended of course while society allows elite interests to create, own, and distribute as debt all of the money existent. Whether we can be farmed into a state of permanent and unrecognised submission, with the media as Pied Piper ever playing a one-think melody, is likely to be the one significant and important question for the human organism until it is decided one way or the other.
Perhaps if we just know that farming humans is happening, it may be enough to end it. It will never be an open question being discussed until it has already been destroyed. If this is so, and the media is silent, its existence is then affirmed is it not? Take care.