PART II: Chapter 5:

Dumbing Down: Enclosing the limits of debate

Thou shalt not!: Confining the national discussion to 'safe' things ...

"Unpopular ideas can be silenced, and inconvenient facts kept dark, without the need for any official ban. Anyone who has lived long in a foreign country will know of instances of sensational items of news - things which on their own merits would get the big headlines - being kept right out of the British press, not because the Government intervened but because of a general tacit agreement that 'it wouldn't do' to mention that particular fact. So far as the daily newspapers go, this is easy to understand. The British press is extremely centralised, and most of it is owned by wealthy men who have every motive to be dishonest on certain important topics. But the same kind of veiled censorship also operates in books and periodicals, as well as in plays, films and radio. At any given moment there is an orthodoxy, a body of ideas which it is assumed that all right-thinking people will accept without question. It is not exactly forbidden to say this, that or the other, but it is 'not done' to say it, just as in mid-Victorian times it was 'not done' to mention trousers in the presence of a lady. Anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising effectiveness. A genuinely unfashionable opinion is almost never given a fair hearing, either in the popular press or in the highbrow periodicals." -- George Orwell, Animal Farm

Media Lens: You say what you like, because they like what you say...

Both Chomsky and Hedges, and many other writers and commenters on what is going on in our world, make the important point that one of the most important parts of the 'work' of the mainstream media is setting and maintaining the limits of the national debate, or conversation - establishing the bounds within which such discussion shall take place, a 'this far and no farther' fence that stops any talk before it gets into areas that might challenge, or expose, the lies and indoctrination of the 'true rulers' of the country, the moneyed, behind-the-scenes plutocracy, with any public conversations carefully kept away from anything that might turn on the lights showing clearly we do not actually live in a 'democracy' at all, or raise some general questioning about the other central lies we live under - the things, in other words, I talk about in this book (and many others of course talk and write about, but not on the CBC or other corporate media whose role, it must be very obvious, is to *prevent* any public discussion of these things). This 'enclosure', or fencing off of certain areas, ensures that probing behind the 'official dogma' fairy tale of things like the 'debt crisis' and economic chaos, which are completely artificial and unnecessary, used only to create insecurity and unrest among the people, is 'beyond the pale' for those allowed to comment in the public media, as are the completely false 'war on terror', or the very obviously propagandistic/gatekeeping/ population management role of the corporate state media, the open questioning of, and discussion about by those who see what is happening, could easily lead to a dangerous situation for those ruling.

This 'control the limits of discussion' tactic only affects this 'mass of the people' in a secondary way, the Chomskian 80% who don't have much interest in what is going on in the country as long as they have their simple lives beyond the various 'choices' they are given to choose among during an election every few years, and make their choice and go back to their lives, but it is a different situation for the Chomskian upper 20% who are better educated than the lower 80%, in terms of having a broader understanding of what is going on in our country and world, who read more widely than the simplistic sports and entertainment 'readers digests' which are the mainstay of the 80%, who are actually somewhat engaged with their country, who see the problems, who are earnestly and sincerely looking for solutions to those problems, and, most importantly, who could provide some leadership to the 80% in directions very definitely not wanted by the rulers, who *must* be somehow effectively managed, if the 'illusion of democracy' is to be maintained, so they appear free to think and talk and plan as they like, but accept, or even better simply remain ignorant of, certain barriers placed around their minds that keep them away from the truly dangerous-to-Power information they have been taught to stay away from, and maintain these limits by themselves largely unpoliced.

Most importantly, in terms of the CBC and 'public debate' in our country, these somewhat more intelligent, more engaged from a 'progressive' standpoint people are not going to be happy with a constant diet of dumbed down children-adults talking about the latest sports and entertainment 'news', or the really funny new cat video on youtube, or a diet of blatantly one-sided propaganda on 'current affairs' CBC shows - these people are going to want some decently intelligent-appearing people on whatever media they listen to or read, talking about current 'issues' from a more 'progressive' standpoint, and it is thus the job of the CBC to provide content that will satisfy these people, without, again, getting into any truly dangerous areas such as the debt scam or the pretend-democracy or the pretend-terrorism 'war of our times' or the (obviously must be avoided) corporate state propagandist role of all mainstream media, CBC most definitely included for this Chomskian 20%.

It is this upper 20%, most of whom are of a 'liberal' or 'progressive' leaning, who speak and meet among themselves and in their own organisations and at 'progressive' meetings of various sorts, whose like-thinking spokespersons must get regular voices in the mainstream media to demonstrate their commitment to 'full and open debate in the democracy', thus acting as a crucial part of the 'illusion of democracy', who must earnestly, and visibly, with no obvious restrictions, talk about our problems for all to hear, with apparently unfettered in any way thoughts or voices, making suggestions, offering analyses, or formulating strategies to combat and voice alternatives to what it is they do not approve of in our rapidly advancing 'new world order', appearing to speak for, and in agreement with, 'the progressives' in opposition to the NWO forces quite obviously ruling these days, speaking for and representing the wealthy, the 'corporate governments' opposed by most of us. These 'mainstream-featured alternative voices' are very important in giving the appearance of 'legitimacy' to the rulers, in maintaining the illusion of 'democracy' - as long as such voices appear in the media, apparently saying whatever they like, apparently talking without restriction about the best possible 'alternative policies' they can imagine, voicing some opposition to the current ruling regime, and the voters are free to choose the 'alternative' candidates or parties such voices usually advocate, then the argument is evident that this is, indeed, a democracy, and the unpopular regime could be replaced at any time with something more to the liking of a majority of the people - that such a change is not made is evidence that the rulers rule with popular support, no matter what unrest may be indicated by some minority of the population - but that, of course, the argument goes, is a healthy democracy in action, with unrestricted popular debate about controversial things wanted by some but not by a majority.

So, then, the 'big trick' for the master gamesplayers who rule, who control the government and media from behind the scenes, is allowing such 'progressive' or 'alternative voices' to speak 'freely' on places like the CBC, whilst still ensuring they speak from within a well understood 'this far and no farther!!' box, an enclosure outside of which lie the truths I talk of in this book (and many others know and speak of also, of course..) that would expose what the rulers are really up to, would expose the media lies and manipulation, the pretend-democracy, the money-credit fraud, the lies of the 'war on terror' and the associated increased police presence and lockdown attitude, the 'dumbing down' program to regress the mass of the population to an easier to manage state, would expose these few but crucial things that allow the rulers to maintain their rule, and would thus put that rule in extreme danger, taking us back perhaps to the 60s when the very scary beast, to the rulers, of 'True Democracy of, by and for engaged, informed citizens' was actually beginning to get on its feet and start breathing what would appear to be very deadly dragon fire towards those who considered themselves, and wished to remain, hereditary and virtually omnipotent rulers of an ignorant, passive, but hard-working serf class who, of course, were necessary to create their great wealth and power.

For example, when polling (and low voter turnout) shows a very large number of Canadians are getting pretty unhappy with the state of 'their' 'democracy', something that is very difficult to conceal given the widespread 'free' sharing of information a 'democracy' must demonstrably have, getting almost out of control the last few years with the spread of the almost unstoppable internet, the 'alternative' spokespersons must earnestly appear to be concerned as well, speaking for the 'progressive masses', as they complain on the CBC about the undemocratic ways of the current political party in power, and wring their hands and talk about the 'excesses' of the government, demanding 'more free votes' or 'passing rules to require MPs to be more civil' or 'reducing the power of the PMO' or 'give the riding association more input' or 'ban/reform the senate!' or 'fixed election dates is what will save Democracy!', or 'we MUST get rid of that damned Harper!!', and etc etc, when talking about the widespread unhappiness with the political process - but, when observed from 'beyond the pale', it can be seen all of this 'debate' takes place without **ever** getting into or even near the very, very dangerous area, at this time, of simply starting the discussion by stating the obvious 'elephant in the room' problem, the root of our 'democratic deficit', the obvious observation that, in reality, with the obvious Big Money control of every political party as talked about earlier and their complete concordance on every major issue we have today, with the support of the corporate state media, and the very, very serious things being done internationally and nationally in spite of the opposition of most Canadians, Canada actually has no right to call itself a true 'democracy' at all, no matter what pretty lies and colors the new-Vichy NWO government wraps itself in or how determinedly the media and our education system insist we are a GREAT democracy YES!!, and we need a big open debate about what is really going on here, and how to truly get at least some democratic power back into the hands of the people (or perhaps truly into the hands of the people for the first time ever in the history of the English speaking people) - this is so obvious, for people able and willing to think for themselves away from the influence of the full spectrum corporate-state propaganda media, that were this idea freely allowed out in the public conversation, people might well start to understand what has really been going on here, and consequently getting outraged at the great lies and thefts that have been so subversively been underway around them during the last few decades, start to come out from their indoctrination-tv-induced comas and demand a return to some 'real' democratic government doing what the people want done democratically, and putting the unfettered rule of the moneyed plutocrats in perhaps serious danger - as it was in the 60s, and which the entire CRR has been directed to stopping.

{just an aside, that demonstrates how controlled this 'debate' is - our voting system is a leading indication of how undemocratic our country is, when it is common for a party with under 40% of the vote (representing ~25% of the 'eligible voters' given the rising number of people who are so disillusioned they don't bother to vote at all) getting a 'majority' government, and then being free for several years, as Harper has, in 2015, been doing, to get up to all kinds of things quite strongly disapproved of by most Canadians - the very obvious solution is a 'proportional representation' voting system such as most modern democracies have, in which a party would get approximately the same number of seats as it got votes, and in the government they would just have to learn to work together to do things at least a true majority of elected representatives will vote for, who are at least a little bit answerable to their constituents, even notwithstanding the tweedledee-dum pretend democracy. Such a system, of course, would make it much more problematic for the 'we're doing as we want fuck you!!!' attitude of Harper (and anyone else with such a false majority), and if the 'alternative' speakers and parties were truly interested in 'democracy', or the media, this subject would be front and center in all talks about 'democracy and its problems in Canada', and we would have regular columns in the media pointing out the obvious way to make our 'democracy' at least a bit more democratic - but although PR is mentioned sometimes, a kind of 'lip service acknowledgement from the NDP', it is at all times kept way, way in the background, and any time some movement manages to get a bit of publicity, the corporate press immediately start demonising the idea, and it quickly gets put back in the background. The reasons the rulers do not want PR, tweedledee-dum control notwithstanding, are obvious enough - even in a tweedledee-dum-dumber system such as we have, if they are going to maintain the illusion of democracy, when Harper or anyone did something facing strong public opposition, the non-governing parties, a majority in any PR election, would have the power to stop him, and if they did not, then the questions about 'is this really a democracy?' would become much, much stronger, and the illusion much harder to maintain. With the phony majorities regularly delivered by the FPTP system, the 'majority government' is completely free to do as it likes, and 'opposition' parties are completely free to pontificate about how they oppose him, but darn, he has a 'majority' so we can't stop him - but vote for us the next time for change!!!! - and etc. Again, one of those 'deeper truths' you need to be able to think for yourself to see, as you're sure as hell **never** going to hear this on the CBC ...)

Or to address the ongoing, and growing, economic concerns that are the inevitable result of the ever strengthening new feudalism enclosure and transfer of wealth from the lower classes and increasingly middle classes to the rulers, obviously (as intended) steadily weakening the former as it increases the power of the latter, these 'safe progressive voices' must appear genuinely concerned about the financial and economic problems the people and country are trying to deal with, and talk earnestly about 'fair taxation' and 'spending priorities' and even go to the great task of preparing an 'alternative budget' which would arrange everything the way they think 'progressives' would be happy with - while without **ever** getting even remotely near the highly dangerous (for the rulers) idea of talking about how money is actually nothing more than 'credit', or who controls our money-credit system, or how this system is used for massive looting when, properly understood and managed democratically and intelligently and honestly, it could create a great and stable and prosperous society for all of us.

Or again, when the entire corporate ruling class, and their secretariat media, are determined to create an atmosphere of approval for their latest regime-change operation, voices pointing out the lies used to justify earlier such interventions, pointing out how, because of earlier completely unjustified bombings and wars, we're all war criminals now and do we really want to be that kind of country, or simply giving the non-propaganda side of what is really happening that is the real root of the desired regime change rather than the false atrocity claims, are surely not going to be allowed into the conversation beyond the most tepid, controlled suggestions that there might be other things we could do such as sanctions to try to get rid of the monster du jour, as open talk of such things, any true understanding and discussion of the history of these areas, would be completely fatal to the desired course of action.

It is very clear that all people allowed to participate in these discussions are very, very clear about the 'this far and no farther' aspects of such debates - so then the big question still remains - how do you keep the overall national debate within the desired 'safe' bounds, while appearing to be completely open and wide-ranging and addressing the concerns of 'progressives'?

How do you avoid the appearance of simply censoring undesired voices, which would quickly give your game away and raise serious opposition in the country among those who are very concerned about what is happening with 'our' country, and expose your deeper plan and the (democratic) illegitimacy of your government?

There are, certainly, many people around who understand this country has no business calling itself a 'democracy' these days, who understand the national debt and money supply scams, who understand the true reasons Canada wants to support the US and its ongoing attempts to get rid of leaders who oppose its drive to become the world hegemon, and some number of other things the regime wishes nowhere near the public debate, and are very actively talking about these things where they can, primarily the internet now - how do you keep such voices marginalised and out of the 'central' debate, and yet appear to offer full and unrestricted discussion of such important issues, keeping the content controlled so the decisions you have already decided upon will appear to be the inevitable result, or at least unchallenged in any more than a cursory, tut-tut lip-service sort of way?

The most obvious and common way is, of course, that anyone who is allowed on the CBC is simply another lying traitor, working for Power, but pretending to be a 'friend' to the people, such as all of the senior at least people in the Cdn media who are responsible for gatekeeping dangerous info, including the main CBC current affairs shows hosts, and a selection of the uppermost '1% of the 20%' who are the upper managerial and ruling classes, or those who have moved into the senior levels of the managerial class, totally loyal to the ruling class (really good perks, really, for betraying your fellow citizens, esp when all around you is going south rapidly and the New Days of the NWO-New Feudalism are about to begin, and you do NOT want to be on the wrong end of THAT society), all very much anything but 'progressive', as those of the upper classes suited for such work take a few years to 'do their duty' and pretend to be 'progressive' to lead the people away from dangerous places (names like Bob Rae and Paul Martin come to mind, there would undoubtedly be many others recognizable for those familiar with the ruling class in our country).

We would have a second group of such people, those of some intelligence and ability who rose out of the middle classes to become popular leaders of some kind on the 'progressive' side of the political equation, and were coopted into working for the rulers one way or another, and then given the media support required to consolidate their position as 'senior good guys' one way or another, with the job of engaging in the public debate as an apparently strong supporter of 'progressive' policies, but, again, understanding well the few but very important 'limits of debate' which must never be breached - no talking about the great credit-accounting system (aka 'money') scam, the obvious propaganda role of the corporate media, the pretend democracy, the pretend 'war on terror'. This group would also include 'loyal members of her majesty's opposition', pretending to criticize government policies whilst keeping away from the things that must not be talked about. You can do a bit of thinking about, for example, former provincial premiers of either party (or the NDP) who strutted their few moments on the stage doing the NWOs bidding, then stepped aside, almost never to be heard from again in their nice new ambassadorship or some similar comfortable retirement post somewhere they want to be. (this is again a kind of 'win win' for the rulers - they can point to such posts as 'proof' that Cdn politics really is a 'gentleman's' sport, with no hard feelings at the end of the day... ) The infamous 'patronage appointments' of low level bagmen or other supporters to nice sinecures as a reward for their service are another example)

And a kind of third level, the middle level fully indoctrinated normal people, who speak reasonably well, and have some desire to share their voices in the public debate, and who have completely internalised the 'limits' of debate, following the lead of those above them, speaking of what they speak, and not thinking of what the leaders do not tell them to think of. Such people are useful to present an apparently wide array of voices, speaking apparently freely of what they find wrong with the country from a 'progressive' viewpoint, what they think should be done, etc.

This group of people, pretending to be 'progressive' or at the very least 'honorable' would apply, in these opening days of our now corporate-elite dominated country and world, to pretty much all senior positions in the country aside from the political and media positions noted already - university heads and other senior bureaucrats in the education system, senior people in the legal system, etc - all there to be voices to talk to if the media needs someone from these fields, but of known 'safety', not talking themselves, and ensuring nobody else starts talking in public places, about things the rulers need people in public places to **never** be talking about (unless of course they are responding to some kind of rumor that has gotten loose, and need to mock it and chuckle at it derisively so the good obedient citizen can not worry about it, and get it back out of the light ASAP).

It would be worth noting, in closing, that this 'enclosure of the limits of debate' is not as difficult a plan to implement, as one might object, in the time frame we are talking about. The CRR has been in place for over 30 years, as talked about earlier, both dumbing down as talked about, and indoctrinating people to 'internalise' certain beliefs that make deceptions such as controlling the debate in these few but very important ways much easier than they would be if dealing with an awake and aware and intelligent, adult citizenry. Above all, children are 'educated' to believe we in Canada are 'the good guys', to trust their media, esp the CBC for 'progressives', and to believe in the general integrity of their system and institutions - and so as long as those manipulating and infiltraiting these institutions to push the people of Canada one way or another take proper care to maintain those beliefs, as they have been, and continue to very aggressively marginalise any 'alternative' viewpoints that would show the lie of these most important things, the great deception can be successfully achieved. As, very obviously, it has been. As long as most progressives continue to blindly trust the CBC, and blindly assume the NDP is working for good, and people like the Governor of the Bank of Canada or others in senior positions of trust in terms of managing our economy, are beyond questioning in terms of their integrity and ability, as the media are careful to continually portray them - they are going to succeed in the plan.

And it is also very much worth pointing out that this is not a strategy they must maintain forever, continually vulnerable to exposure - they are very busy constructing some very powerful enclosures around us, physically, and once these enclosures are in place, it won't matter how many people wake up and protest, the tools of the rulers will be in place - with our complete approval - to quickly find and neutralise any leaders, and physically force the less strong to obey.

If we don't become aware very soon, and cast off the chains they are building around both our minds and physical communities - we are going to wake up one day in the not very distant future in Mordor, with the once so beautiful Shire all dead around us, the victim not of brutal monsters, but our own lack of appreciation of what we have, and our failure to protect it from the evil that ever lurks around us.

And they've built the box - and you're in it.

{{ Serendipitous insert - as so often when I write, something directly related comes across the media - today, as I write about a 'managerial' class, - this - Redford's travel scout - a look at how the managerial class lives. Nice job, for those willing to sell out their 'lesser' brothers and sisters. }}