Asch

On Incestuous Amplification

"That intelligent, well-meaning, young people are willing to call white black is a matter of concern." – Asch

“no matter what we may say, the customs and practices of life in society sweep us along.” - Michel de Montaigne

I just finished listening to Malcolm Kendrick’s magnificent book The Great Cholesterol Con. I need to gather my thoughts before I write about it but suffice to say that the cholesterol industrial complex is yet another global medical scam, corrupted by capture, billions of dollars, and decades of junk science.

One passage that stood out for me was this:

Actually, there was another bit of this article that I really enjoyed. It was part of a discussion about how bias can creep into collective decisions:

‘When companies with identical interests are underwriting virtually all the researchers, decision makers can become susceptible to “group think.” The military has a name for this sort of trap – “incestuous amplification.”’

I love the concept of incestuous amplification. Never was a truer phrase coined than this. I knew that there had to be some psychological explanation for the collective madness surrounding LDL levels and treatment with statins. My phrase for it was the 'tyranny of conformity: But I prefer 'incestuous amplification: It sounds much more pathological and in need of treatment.

I’m reminded again by the quote from Alan Cassels in the documentary Uninformed Consent (a must watch really) where he talks about the influencing of doctors:

“The science of influence is about 40 years ahead of the science of evidence-based medicine”.

“The science used to convince them to prescribe something is way more advanced than the science that has been used to actually develop the treatment in the first place.”

By now we’ve all heard of Milgram’s work. If not watch this.

But the Cassels comment reminded me to go and look up the Asch Experiment. I heard about it a while back, and recently butchered its explanation to my wife, so here I am doing the homework to understand what the hell Solomon Asch did and what he figured out.

Here are two great clips, with old footage of the Asch Conformity Experiment.

The results of the experiment were:

In the control group, with no pressure to conform to actors, the error rate on the critical stimuli was less than 1%.

In the actor condition also, the majority of participants' responses remained correct (63.2%), but a sizable minority of responses conformed to the actors' (incorrect) answer (36.8 percent). The responses revealed strong individual differences: Only 5 percent of participants were always swayed by the crowd. 25 percent of the sample consistently defied majority opinion, with the rest conforming on some trials. An examination of all critical trials in the experimental group revealed that one-third of all responses were incorrect. These incorrect responses often matched the incorrect response of the majority group (i.e., actors). Overall, 75% of participants gave at least one incorrect answer out of the 12 critical trials. In his opinion regarding the study results, Asch put it this way: "That intelligent, well-meaning, young people are willing to call white black is a matter of concern."

So, said another way:

• 37% of people preferred to agree with the majority rather than stand out by telling the truth. This when they could “see” the “simple truth” in front of their very eyes.

• 25% of people were immune from the herd pressure (that number was clearly lower during the GMC, I think because population tendencies have changed, for the worse, since the 50s, but that the scale of the psychological onslaught was such that it compressed the resistance to a wafer think minority that is obviously starting to grow in numbers now.

• If one other actor on the panel told the truth, the “conforming group” reduced from 37% to 5%! That is a stunning drop, and maps over Desmet’s point about the importance of continuing to tell the truth.

Here is the Asch experiment being done in a lift.

This is a good short, modern clip. I wonder how the percentage of conformers has changed over the years from the first time Asch did the experiment in the 50s. My gut says it’s changed for the worse, thank you social media.

As he correctly says at the end, there is a major evolutionary advantage for following the group. It’s called survival!

“If you want to stay safe, stay with the herd.”

But as Brownstein says in this article, in real life it’s even harder to stray from the crowd because we don’t have the same easy “access to the facts”:

If you’re sure you would go against the grain when it matters, consider Asch explained that in his experiments, the subjects had “independent [visual] access to the facts” but in many situations, we don’t. In real-life, going against the herd is harder:

The experimental arrangements ensured that each person could see with his own eyes and under optimal conditions. In this respect the present situation differs sharply from other, and frequent, forms of disagreement. Often in social life differences of judgments are about facts that are far less visible. The social and political ‘lines’ and their relations are as a rule not bluntly given in the individual’s field. Instead he often depends on others to inform him not only about the interpretation, but also about the existence of facts remote from his experience. This indirectness was here excluded. The facts were constantly present, and the individual could not help but see them as he did.

In Asch’s words, the majority “did not exert pressure in the usual sense of persuading or applying sanctions…Whatever pressure the subject felt grew solely within himself.”

The SCIENCE of organising the herd is far more advanced that we understand. That is the point that Cassels is trying to make.

Toby Rogers’ recent article on what big pharma know about manipulating the system and how THEY have been working on its perfection for a very long time. The understanding of how to do it, and the tools today at their disposable, and the sheer resource available to them means they could execute the global psychological operation that has been, and continues to be, the GMC.

IV. The targeted messaging behind the iatrogenocide

Watching the iatrogenocide unfold all around us for the last three years it’s been striking to see friends, family, co-workers, and neighbors turned into mindless Pharma zombies.

But that’s because we are now in the midst of the most sophisticated targeted messaging campaign in human history. Think about what we are up against — the cartel consists of Pharma (the largest and most ruthless industry in the world), massive global public relations firms (that have gotten incredibly sophisticated), private intelligence agencies like Black Cube (former Mossad), a bunch of billionaires, and, if Mathew Crawford is correct, the Department of Defense/NSA/CIA.

Well, I do believe that Crawford is correct, as I have said before, I think the GMC is Joint Venture between the two big gorillas.

It goes something like this in my mind (part Martin outline and part my thoughts):

The two big gorillas know there is no winner, that both need to exist but that both “need” each other to be the “enemy”. The global financial system was near collapse, especially after a decade of patchwork and global money printing post GFC, and to stave off a global economic collapse, they BOTH agreed to bring on the “pandemic”, create the pretext for one last round of major printing, and both agree to “break” the world and jointly rebuild it in a manner that suits both parties with greater control over all populations and all governments, bring in a new global digital currency that is the foundation of the new digitised control system, and basically jointly share in the spoils of this new creation.

There is plenty that points to this third thesis.

The data files that these agencies have on every American (and every person in the developed world) are unprecedented.

As I small side note, a good friend recommended I watch Artificial Immortality, which I just did. I need to gather my thoughts on what this actually means, but if you want some insight into this “data file” point, this documentary is a great starting point.

So for example, the cartel gets a Pro-mRNA message to:

• kids via Elmo and Sesame Street;

• women who get their news from Entertainment Tonight by targeting celebrities;

• dudes on the couch by targeting athletes; and

• social media addicts by buying off influencers (at up to $1500 a post).

But targeting goes well beyond that — the cartel has different strategies for targeting doctors, pharmacists, academics, people who watch the different cable news shows, different races, different classes, different sexes, and different age groups.

Furthermore, it seems that the cartel knows the exact message (leverage point, persuasion point) that will cause the person to take the action that the cartel desires (in this case, poisoning oneself with toxic mRNA).

In essence, the cartel has a giant Salesforce database on every American — with notes inside the file that explain exactly how you make decisions. Via the targeting that is possible on social media, the cartel can send exactly the right message at exactly the right time to get you to take that deadly shot.

Again, judging by their actions and the results, it seems to me that the cartel must have the most sophisticated map of human nature (human psychology, human behavior) ever developed. And that map, or model, is insightful, cynical, and incredibly effective.

Think about the friends, family, co-workers, and neighbors that you’ve lost to the glassy-eyed Pharma zombie stare:

• The cartel knew that fear turns off the regions of the brain that process rationality and so they flooded society with nonstop images of people dropping dead on the streets of Wuhan (it’s still not clear if those were real or not).

• The cartel knew that most bougiecrats would rather die of a heart attack than be excluded from mainstream society. So they encouraged everyone to post selfies of getting the shot to show that they belonged in the club and mercilessly punished the refuseniks by firing them from their jobs and barring them from social gatherings.

• The cartel knew that all of the gatekeepers could be bought off with the right financial incentives. So the cartel just straight up bought the media, science and medicine, and the political establishment.

It’s essential here to underscore CJ Hopkins’ brilliant point — when one participates in totalitarian systems — whether that is out of fear, a desire for belonging, or for financial reasons (or some combination of all 3) — one quickly comes to actually believe in the things one is doing. It’s not an act, it’s more than obedience, the bougie normies we are dealing with actually believe in the sacred duty of self-inflicted genocide. They cannot wait to get these shots and when the shots kill them they feel that they are dying in glorious battle for a cause greater than themselves.

Let’s end with Stalin, this again from the Brownstein stack:

Opposing Totalitarians Who Are “Dizzy with Success”

In March of 1930, Joseph Stalin wrote an essay for Pravda titled “Dizzy with Success.” Stalin proclaimed, “The Soviet government’s successes in the sphere of the collective-farm movement are now being spoken of by everyone. Even our enemies are forced to admit that the successes are substantial. And they really are very great.”

Not only did he declare “very great” success, but Stalin claimed collectivization was totally voluntary: “The successes of our collective-farm policy are due, among other things, to the fact that it rests on the voluntary character of the collective-farm movement and on taking into account the diversity of conditions in the various regions of the U.S.S.R.” 

Stalin feigned support for the principle that “collective farms must not be established by force…The collective-farm movement must rest on the active support of the main mass of the peasantry.”

While some Western apologists for Stalin did laud collectivization, none of the rest was true. When Stalin wrote his essay, the murder/exile/starvation of approximately five million Ukrainians was underway. Except for the victims, few knew the truth, even in the Soviet Union. Likely they believed Stalin when he wrote: “We can achieve anything! There is nothing we can’t do!”

If you are wondering why more Americans are not alarmed by eroding freedom, there are lessons we can learn from the horrors experienced by Soviet citizens and many others. In The Road to Serfdom, Friedrich Hayek writes, “If the feeling of oppression in totalitarian countries is in general much less acute than most people in liberal countries imagine, this is because the totalitarian governments succeed to a high degree in making people think as they want them to.”

Hayek observes, “It is not difficult to deprive the great majority of independent thought.” With sufficient censorship, persuasion isn’t necessary: “The skillful propagandist…has power to mold their minds in any direction he chooses, and even the most intelligent and independent people cannot entirely escape that influence if they are long isolated from all other sources of information.” 

By the way the movie is out tomorrow, (Tuesday Australian time).

Spread the word.

Trailer

Message from Jeff Hays, Producer

---

Thank you for reading this Substack.

Please consider a small paid subscription (donation). The money goes to a good cause.

I am always looking for good, personal GMC (pandemic and jab) or childhood vaccination stories. Shared stories are remembered and help others.

In the comments, please let me know what’s on your mind.

You can write to me privately: unbekoming@outlook.com

If you are Covid-jab injured, consider the FLCCC Post-Vaccine Treatment

Here are three eBooks I have produced so far:

FREE eBook: A letter to my two adult kids - Vaccines and the free spike protein

FREE eBook: The Climate™

FREE eBook: What is a woman? - “We don’t know yet.”