the citizen has become a pawn in a high-stakes game of political maneuvering that has morphed from the competitiveness and rhetorical give-and-take of 40-plus years ago, to something more closely resembling combat, with countless new and old deceptive strategies continually being auditioned and evaluated for their mass appeal. Elections 1952 and 2012 are rather like the difference between the classic 1980s video game, “Pac-Man,” and later concoctions such as “Grand Theft Auto.” The old classic was challenging entertainment; the new renditions incorporate intimidation and are wholly calculated to make the players (as well as any onlookers) uncomfortable.
Pick any issue of political significance—education, for example—and you will find yourself awash in a high-stress, depersonalized battle. But it will be one that you, the ordinary “player,” have virtually no chance of influencing one way or the other.
Meanwhile, the ever-expanding civil-service “machine” churns out a familiar hodgepodge of rules, regulations and controls, zealously guarding old turf, while greedily appending new offices, bureaus and directorates.
Consequently, today’s political contests bear no resemblance to the post World Wars I and II eras. Rather, there exists a calculated effort, by all sorts of demagogues, to sow dissention—to alienate, demoralize and, if possible, neutralize entire potential pools of voters, with all the negative energy such a scheme entails: coercion, ostracism, intimidation, loss of status or job, and outright censorship. In this scenario, the agenda becomes all-important; the individual recedes into expendability.
This book was initially conceived as a response to readers’ requests for help in communicating effectively with local, state and federal representatives on complex issues. Concerns like national health care, the budget, energy policy, educational standards, foreign wars and job creation all have many aspects. Unfortunately, they are awash in the nuanced language of attorneys, politicians and special interests. This makes it not only difficult for the layperson to comprehend the subject at hand, but to link it to other, tangential topics that necessarily affect discussion.
Efforts to contact representatives for a one-on-one conversation are roundly discouraged, save for exceptionally wealthy individuals—and then only because such persons might be cajoled into donating tens of thousands of dollars. Anyone not belonging to that category can expect to encounter a phalanx of screening mechanisms—receptionists, “executive” assistants, aides, and “contact me” forms on websites that require some 30-minutes’ worth of menu options and mandatory inputs aimed more at identifying new campaign contributors than ascertaining constituent viewpoints. The “comments” box is calculated to discourage the addition of explanatory remarks and, in any case, the message is reviewed by someone other than the intended recipient, and only rarely is it passed along.
Today’s political leaders are quite satisfied with this process. They are not keen on engaging in a logic-laden exchange of ideas with those they pretend to serve—that is to say, average voters. While their minions tweet, dig up dirt on opponents for ad campaigns and help political marketing firms set up irritating robo-calls, legislators themselves are busy consulting with their speechwriters and practicing brief position statements that will sound good on the stump and in televised pseudo-debates. Such debates are typically moderated by TV commentators or newscasters—most of whom are more concerned with their own celebrity than eliciting the views of office-seekers.
Recognition of this sad state of affairs led to a re-examination of this book’s purpose. In struggling to simplify concerns such as health care options, foreign policy, environmentalism and education, so that typical taxpayers could communicate knowledgeably with elected representatives and local authorities, it became increasingly apparent that the voting public is being “played.”
From Agenda Games, expected release: August 2012
April 11, 2012 on CBS‘ “60 Minutes”: “Is Sugar Toxic?” In the segment, Dr. Sanjay Gupta interviewed Dr. Robert Lustig, a pediatric endocrinologist, who insists that once the fat was taken out, most foods tasted so bad that “the food industry replaced it with sugar.”
Mr. Bacon offered three fairly on-target predictions, not so much about the harmful effects of sugar—which he took with a grain of, um, salt. (After all, school children’s breakfast diets from the early 1900s through the 1950s were the equivalent of Frosted Flakes. Or, if mom was a stickler for complete breakfasts, she might have presented her loved ones with cholesterol-laden eggs, sausage or bacon, grits, hash brown potatoes, and maybe a stack of pancakes drowned in syrup. But guess what? Her children not only thrived, but were more polite in class, didn’t swing from the lampposts, or need to be constantly reminded to concentrate and pay attention. That only started happening in the post-war years—the Boomer generation.)
Whether the government chooses to fixate on sugar, trans-fats, obesity, substance-abuse, contraceptives, health -insurance mandates, Medicare, mental-health screening, the mom-packed lunch sack, or outright denial of treatment, we see the same agenda game at work: health in the service of bigger, more intrusive, government.
From Beverly's upcoming book: Agenda Games
For many years, there have been back-and-forth warnings for and against certain foods and beverages, to the point where old-timers don’t pay much attention to them, and young parents are totally confused. Alcohol was supposed to be terrible—until some sage figured out that wine, in moderation, actually aided digestion. Meat was a killer, except that it contained protein that was difficult to get in another form. Bacon was a heart attack waiting to happen, but a certain type and amount of fat in the diet was good for you. Then the axe was laid at the foot of the cow: whole milk, much less cream, was to be avoided. Buttermilk was ripped from the grocery shelf because nothing was “fattier” than that—except how would anyone ever again make a tasty pancake or waffle? Finally, dairy sections were filled with no-fats: no-fat yogurt, sour creams, milk, puddings, etc., until one day doctors discovered that many people couldn’t digest no-fat dairy products!
Every first Lady, of course, has to have a gimmick, and Michelle Obama’s is obesity. Not satisfied with having schools teach about the major food groups and their merits (parents thought teaching something in health classes besides sex might actually be a good move), but school lunches suddenly became nightmarish events that discouraged eating altogether and led to food fights. Indeed, the food police at one school recently examined the contents of a pupil’s lunch sack and, finding a nicely wrapped turkey sandwich, compliments of mom, threw it out in disgust and exchanged it for…chicken nuggets—which, last anyone heard, contained the dreaded “f” word: f-r-i-e-d. Who knows? Maybe the food police boil them. Plain. Without salt.
Which brings up an interesting article by James A. Bacon (yes, no kidding!), written April 6, 2012, for The Washington Times. The piece was only somewhat tongue-in-cheek. He starts with the sensible question: What good has all this food-related badgering by the government done? “Americans are more overweight, more prone to diabetes and more at risk of heart disease than ever before,” he wrote.
- For the first time in American history, average citizens are worrying about being targeted by their own government—not from police looking down the barrel of a gun, but from bureaucrats sharing intelligence from a computer or illicit wiretap.
- Thanks to satellites and an Interpol-on-steroids mindset, personalized data collected on every conceivable subject can be transmitted worldwide in seconds. The only data we can’t seem to transmit is that on illegal immigration, which passes through a Swiss-cheese “fence,” protecting less than half the Southern border. Unfortunately, many of our nation’s leaders consider illegal immigration an asset to their careers, if not necessarily the inhabitants of their respective states.
- The presumption is made that people who have nothing to hide won’t mind a bit of bureaucratic overkill in the name of security. The nothing-to-hide argument implies the freedom to opt out. In practice, of course, there are repercussions for refusing. The 2007 $9.75 million lawsuit brought by law student Stephen Dunne against the Massachusetts Board of Bar Examiners and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court dramatically highlighted the nature of these repercussions, just as the lawsuit against the TSA by former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura demonstrated that refusal is not an option.
- The trouble with curriculums like “conflict resolution,” which dates back to the late 1970s, is that young students failed to understand that some people don’t want their grievances resolved. When educators mentioned this at all, they labeled such people “mentally ill.” But, as the various terrorist organizations have shown us, their “sickness” is one of spirit. They have not lost their mind, they have lost their conscience. Unfortunately, the same students whose attitudes were shaped by those conflict-resolution courses in high school sit as national security and foreign policy decision-makers.
- Read more in the upcoming book: Agenda Games
by Tom DeWeese
May 14, 2011
America is being transformed. Americans know something is very wrong and are desperately digging for answers. Spending is out of control. Rules and regulations are enforced over every aspect of our lives. Not only can we not build on our private property, but our rivers and streams are becoming off limits; energy prices are skyrocketing as our government refuses to even consider using American energy reserves that are locked away, apparently forever. American jobs are disappearing oversees. Our money is growing more worthless every day and taxes are going up on everything we buy, eat, drive, or wear. Schools don’t teach. healthcare isn’t about health. Investments translate to bankruptcy. And Social Security isn’t secure.
We just held an election demanding that the run- away federal budget and government intrusion be reigned in. But after a lot of fast maneuvering, hot rhetoric and back slapping, basically nothing was cut. how can all of this happen before our very eyes, in broad daylight, against our will? Bottom line – politicians at all levels have found a way to ignore the American people while accomplishing the greatest transformation in American history.
How indeed? Alert political activists may have noticed a major change in the way government and public policy has been run for the past couple of decades. That change is the key to how we are being outmaneuvered – right before our eyes. There are many names for the tactic: Group Manipulation; Consensus; Facilitation. Psychologically- Controlled Environments; Scientific Coercion. It all means the same thing; professional manipulators are being employed to control public meetings through a pre- determined outcome, and they are trained to lead you straight to that result and even make you think it was your idea.
If you’ve been to a public meeting lately, you will see the meeting is run by a man or woman who is not really part of the group in an “official” capacity. They are called “facilitator.” his/her job is to bring the group to “consensus,” which means there is not to be debate or disagreement. The policy or project or program on the table is not discussed in detail so that the group can judge the item on its merits and vote on it. In fact, if you begin to question the policy, or ask who the facilitator represents, or in general show signs of disagreement, the facilitator quickly loses his/her charm and begins to describe you to the group as “uncooperative” or a troublemaker who is wasting the group’s time. There is never a vote on the issue. Instead, the group somehow reaches “consensus.”
The average activist or concerned citizen doesn’t have a chance to debate merits of the program. A property owner is viewed as selfish and unenlightened to bring up how a policy might affect his/her property. And if the facilitator is good at his job, and they usually are highly paid to be good, then it won’t matter how many protesters manage to turn out. It doesn’t matter how much pressure has been brought to bear in letters to the editor. The facilitator brings his group home to the predetermined outcome, the policy becomes law. Government grows, freedoms are lost. …Until now — that is.
Best-selling author Beverly Eakman has been conducting one-day seminars for years to teach the good guys how to bust up these facilitator-controlled public policy meetings. Those attending her events have also been provided a copy of a manual detailing how to organize and fight back. The problem was, Beverly could only conduct so many seminars and that made for a small distribution of the manual. Now that has changed.
Beverly has updated the manual to stand on its own, without the necessary seminar, and she has released it as a stand alone book. That means activists across the nation can now learn how to take back control of their government just by reading and following the advice in “How To Counter Group Manipulation Tactics, 2011 Edition.” The book is available from Amazon.
She details how “Provocateurs,” “Agitators,” and “Change Agents” are able to force through their agendas right under your nose. She teaches you their lingo and how they use it to divide you from the group and marginalize your honest questions and objections. Beverly goes into great detail, giving you specific dialog and words that would be used against you. She shows how, once you have reveled your opposition, the facilitator will focus on you, using lines like, ‘even a child would understand…” or “everyone on the committee understands…” indicating only you are out of step.
It’s psychological warfare and Bev Eakman’s book gives you everything you need to know to take control of the battlefield. She teaches you how to recognize that the process is in use; she shows you how to remain calm and under the radar until you are ready to launch an effective counter attack – and she shows you how to turn the tables on the facilitator. She also gives you the five basic steps to indoctrination and how to counter them.
We are engaged in a titanic battle for American freedoms. We are losing on battle fields at every level. And group manipulation is being employed as a tool to turn our Constitutionally-correct public policy process into a weapon against us. Beverly Eakman’s book, “How To Counter Group Manipulation Tactics” is not only a valuable tool for our side, it is a mandatory weapon of mass destruction in the arsenal of the forces of freedom. Get a copy and start turning the tables on their psychological tactics.
© 2011 Tom DeWeese - All Rights Reserved
Tom DeWeese is one of the nation’s leading advocates of individual liberty, free enterprise, private property rights, personal privacy, back-to-basics education and American sovereignty and independence.
A native of Ohio, he’s been a candidate for the Ohio Legislature, served as editor of two newspapers, and has owned several businesses since the age of 23. In 1989 Tom led the only privately-funded election-observation team to the Panamanian elections. In 2006 Tom was invited to Cambridge University to debate the issue of the United Nations before the Cambridge Union, a 200 year old debating society. Today he serves as Founder and President of the American Policy Center and editor of The DeWeese Report
For 40 years Tom DeWeese has been a businessman, grassroots activist, writer and publisher. As such, he has always advocated a firm belief in man’s need to keep moving forward while protecting our Constitutionally-guaranteed rights.
The DeWeese Report , 70 Main Street, Suite 23, Warrenton Virginia. (540) 341-8911