How Did We Get Here?


To a casual observer, we seem to have stumbled into a dystopian nether world. After a quick glance around, it appears to be primarily populated by a loud and vocal minority, obsessed with image and reparations for previous wrongdoings against them. Others obsessing over ‘rights’ to declare their own particular senses of fragmented identity. Everyone is a social justice warrior with a valid opinion delivered from behind a computer keyboard. The casual observer would reasonably conclude that Virtue-signalling is the default setting of this new metropolitan persona. Hysterical shrieking accompanies a myriad of demonstrations and public protests. And the guardians of a civil society look anxiously on, powerless to act, for fear of being put in the modern day equivalent of the medieval stocks, to suffer the insults and public degradation of being authoritarian, archaic and imperialistic. Nothing could be worse than being racist, elitist and judgmental.

To understand how we have reached the post-modern era, we need to follow the roots of modern day social engineering. Such a practice has been applied for thousands of years, but it is fair to say that only in the last few centuries has modern man wrestled with, and understood, the finer nuances of group manipulation.

If we follow the main branch of social engineering, we will find ourselves in the year 1875, in a German town called Leipzig. During this time, a professor, Wilhelm Wundt, was putting together some ideas and practices of psychology that would shape the world in a way he may never have imagined.

Wilhelm Wundt
Wilhelm Wundt

When professor Wundt created the world’s first psychological laboratory, the field of psychology, and its study, was not taken seriously by any reputable scientific community, and was mainly the concern of philosophers, who debated psychology and consciousness, based upon theories and religious ideals.

He argued that the conscious mind could be broken down into constituent parts and studied, just like any other organ, and, so, using a few simple practices, he set about studying the human mind by recording his subjects’ responses to basic stimuli.

Wundt is considered by some to be the father of Psychology. He concerned himself with the breaking down of human psyche, by studying elements of it in isolation in comparison to the complexities of the mind as a whole. He concluded that Man’s will was a direct result of the stimuli he experienced, and not the result of conscious intent or collections of philosophy.

Wundt was adamant that he believed that Man was void of spirit, and was merely the summation of his experiences and stimuli. Much like an animal, Man could be persuaded to do just about anything, given the right type of stimulation and experience. (This will, no doubt, strike a familiar chord with modern social science/ humanist devotees.)

He wrote The Principals of Physiological Psychology, which inspired many teachers and academics around the world, the most notable being G. Stanley Hall, who briefly spent time in the Leipzig Laboratory, before becoming the first president of the Psychological Association and a prominent influence in child development; and James McKeen Cattell, the first professor of Psychology in the United States.

Wundt’s methods and conclusions had a dramatic effect on the world, most notably in education, where his ideas on training and development have been taught through almost every academic institution, in one form or another, in the Western world. Modern education no longer relies upon teaching children how to think critically and independently, it now concentrates its efforts on training children to behave and react in a prescribed manner.

B.F. Skinner, an American psychologist, was inspired by Wundt’s work and developed educational methods, in order to train children using a reward system. The results of which can be seen in schools today, in the form of rewards, such as gold stars.

B.F. Skinner propaganda
B.F. Skinner

Skinner coined the term ‘Operant Conditioning’, a process whereby desired behaviours can be reinforced through reward, whilst undesired behaviours are punished to prevent their repeating. This may seem obvious, since that is how we train animals to behave in a prescribed fashion (Pavlov’s dog).

However, such methods of education do not create free thinking or critical individuals, which is a requisite for a free thinking, critical society. Instead, they produce more compliant, accepting members of a society, more readily conforming to a prescribed order.

Unsurprisingly, Skinner believed that children should be reared by the state, to be trained from birth in order to behave in a unified manner, which was echoed in his novel Walden Two, published in 1948 and in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World.

It is through this method of ‘training’ that human behaviour has been changed over time, simply though reward and punishment. Those that follow the prescribed path and ideals, as laid out by governments and high ranking think tanks, are successful in life.

Those that go against the grain are ridiculed, alienated and often punished. A recent example being Christian B&B owners who were fined for not allowing an un-married homosexual couple to stay in the same bed together. Or a baker not wanting to take a commission for a same sex wedding cake. There are many other examples of this too, leading up to the now common crime of ‘Hate Crime’- where people voice what is now a socially unaccepted opinion, often on the all pervasive social media. Orwell would have called it wrong-think.

It was during this period of the 50‘s, that another professor, Alfred Kinsey, published his book, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, which sought to wrestle human sexuality from its traditional principals of love and marriage.

Kinsey’s book is just one example that demonstrates the initial beginnings of an agenda to undermine traditional family values. A stable, loving, balanced family unit that is not tainted with violence or animosity, but founded on love and compassion, is the principal foundation in any stable society.

As children, we draw our identity, morality and strength from our parents; Rudyard Kipling stated that, “Give me the boy till he is seven and I will give you the man.” This is what is known in psychology as the formative years. If these formative years become imbalanced or absent in any way, then society will be unbalanced, lacking in compassion proportionate to the abuse that we, as individuals, suffered as children. This will apply to sexuality too.

At roughly the same time that Kinsey was publishing his works designed to lay the foundations for sexual unions outside of traditional heterosexual marriage, one of the most infamous and far-reaching social engineering organisations was created.

The origins of the Tavistock Institute can be found in the run-up to the first World War in another early ‘human relations’ organisation called Wellington House, which was set up in order to manipulate the British public into supporting the war against Germany.

WW2 British propaganda

Decades later, after the second world war, following its success in changing public opinion, as well as considerable funding from the Rockefeller Foundation, Wellington House spawned the Tavistock Institute, where the likes of Elliott Jacques, John Rawlings Rees and Wilfred Bion employed more sophisticated techniques.

Undoubtedly one of the biggest contributors of techniques applied upon the unsuspecting public of the 20th and 21st Century was the father of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud.

Freud’s psychoanalysis of 20th Century Man has been used at great length, to create some of the most potent social engineering techniques of modern times.

When Germany annexed Austria in 1938, Freud fled to London, where he began work with a prominent neurosurgeon, by the name of Wilfred Trotter. Although not a founding member, Trotter would become a key part in the spawning of the Tavistock Institute; it was Trotter who introduced Wilfred Bion to Freud’s ideas.

Bion would later become a prominent member of the Freudian psychoanalysis movement in England, and play a large part in developing ‘Group Dynamics’, drawing upon the works of Freud and another world famous socialist: Gustave Le Bon (most famous for his 1895 work: The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind).

Gustave Le Bon served as a great inspiration to the nephew of Sigmud Freud, Edward Bernays, as did Wilfred Trotter who wrote the book: Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War. Looking at the previous description above, we see that these prominent characters knew each other directly and must have discussed at length matters regarding psychoanalysis and herd mentality.

Bernays is perhaps the most renowned for developing techniques in order to control large groups of people, and was the most prominent promoter of such methods in the United States of America, to such an extent that he has often been referred to as the father of Public Relations.

Commenting on such techniques, Bernays once said, “If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without them knowing it.”

He called this method ‘engineering consent’, and he did this by manipulating political personalities and organisations, once admitting:

If you can influence the leaders, either with or without their conscious cooperation, you automatically influence the group which they sway.

This particular technique he called “opinion making,” and, despite it appearing to be contrary to an open and democratic system, this socially acceptable and legal practice is more commonly known today as lobbying.

Lobbying in the 19th Century was known as petitioning, and just about anyone could petition HM Government for a particular cause. Today, the Lobbying industry is worth billions and, to influence political decisions, one must be prepared to pay a considerable sum of money.

Whilst Edward Bernays cannot be held responsible for this type of practice becoming so popular, it can be said that his technique of ‘opinion making’ is the hallmark in the practice of lobbying, for, if one can influence political ideologies, one can ultimately profit from shaping a society, its practices and culture.

The Tavistock Institute has grown bigger and even more ambitious, following its success in applying herd manipulation techniques created by those named above. Through the application of propaganda, drugs, popular culture, media, film studios, music labels and educational programs and lobbying, the Tavistock Institute has shaped society, our culture and the way we respond to politics, wars and changes in behaviour and practices; one of which has been to shape our society’s views on sexuality as discussed in the previous article.

Tavistock Institute propaganda public influence

Sexuality has been a considerable target for these sorts of conspirators. Whilst such groups have sought to change our opinions on homosexuality and trans-genders with one arm, they have sought to turn man against woman with the other. This is seen in the ‘Women’s liberation movement’ and various other strands of identity politics. Breaking a functioning society down to its component parts, with very little in common.

Celebrities throughout media, popular culture, the entertainment industry and politics are now being used, and have been to propagate opinions, designed to disrupt the family unit. (Live Aid changed everybody’s perception of giving to overseas charities back in the 1980’s.)

Glamourous pawns, acting on the promise of fame and wealth, working for faceless institutions, in order to encourage naïve and impressionable minds to alter their perceptions to what is packaged as a popular or fashionable opinion in order to slowly change traditional culture.

In less than a century, this technique has been used to change our opinions and perceptions of premarital sex and pregnancy, drugs, promiscuity, marriage, divorce, abortion, homosexuality, morality, the rule of law and even gender. To oppose such ‘new ideologies’ is to be branded archaic, xenophobic, colonial and face ostracization from friends and relatives. (The stocks I referred to earlier). This not only provides negative conditioning as per B.F. Skinner, but further isolates any dissenting voices.

Most prominently, these new behaviours have been arrived at under the guise of progressiveness and the support of the rights of a disadvantaged minority.

Progressive ideology will argue that this is, well, progress. This hasn’t happened overnight though, the images on our high streets; here children that are playing violent video games that affect their behavior in the real world; here and music artists that flaunt themselves salaciously, here all aimed at young minds. (Remember, operant conditioning and role-modelling from earlier). And a family court service, which operates behind closed doors to remove children from their families, further fragmenting society by negative conditioning-straight out of the B.F. Skinner manual.

These are symptoms of a system that is not only failing society, it is contributing to its slow erosion, by targeting its building blocks. The core family unit, that for generations, indeed millennia has been a model of success and stability.

If we believe that this is all happening by chance and that it is the result of a few unfortunate coincidences of actions carried out by a group of organisations acting independently, consider this.

The people connected to the world’s most prominent think tanks, such as the Committee 300, Chatham House, The Bilderberg Group, Commission on Foreign Relations, Tri-Lateral Commission, Common Purpose and the Tavistock Institute are advisors, directors, members and shareholders of the largest corporations in the world.

And they all influence the disparate parts of a society, reverse-engineered, all unglued,  so it is pliable and compliant. They can disproportionately shape the world and culture we live in. It is worth considering what exactly it is that we are buying into, and how we can minimize, or even reverse their impact.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here