The pink pill makes you sleepy, the orange pill makes you smart.

by Not Sure

13 November 2022


                The news this week includes the annual gathering of the UN’s Climate Summit Conference of the Parties (COP27) in Egypt.  The two-week event just wrapped up its first week and by all accounts it was a success if raw sewage running in the streets is a good thing.  The leak sent a stream of foul-smelling waste flowing across one of the venue’s main traffic areas.  Young delegates who had pre-paid $700 for their accommodations showed up to find that they had no lodging or had to pay an additional $300-$600 per night for a room.  Some of the rooms were filthy, with seven or eight youth in rooms that normally slept four.

                Several weeks ago, a scowling Greta announced that she would skip COP27 as it was just “greenwashing” and “an opportunity for leaders and people in power to get attention.”  Greta is getting her attention at a climate protest outside the Swedish parliament building.  No raw sewage there.  What Sweden does boast is the second-highest number of rape cases in the world.  Sweden has long had the most generous refugee policy in Europe.  No correlation.


                In the U.S. mid-term elections, the Red Wave didn’t materialize.  Sarcasm Alert! Evidently the voters spoke.  They like inflation, rising food and fuel costs and vaccine mandates.  Donald Trump is angry that his endorsements were mostly losers, but he paused the election critique yesterday to host a lavish wedding for his daughter, Tiffany.  The mainstream press said the voters have spoken.  They are angry about the overturning of Roe v. Wade.  Could it be that we have never had real elections?  Alan Watt often paraphrased Carroll Quigley stating in his book Tragedy and Hope that leaders from both parties were selected in advance of their political careers to serve an agenda above politics.  Long Quote Alert!


In American politics we have several parties included under the blanket words "Democratic" and "Republican." In oversimplified terms, as I have said, the Republicans were the party of the middle classes, and the Democrats were the party of the fringes. Both of these were subdivided, each with a Congressional and a National Party wing. The Republican Congressional Party (representing localism) was much farther to the Right than the National Republican Party, and as such was closer to the petty-bourgeois than to the upper- middle-class outlook. The Democratic Congressional Party was much more clearly of the fringes and minorities (and thus often further to the Left) than the Democratic National Party. The party machinery in each case was in Congressional Party control during the intervals between the quadrennial presidential elections, but, in order to win these elections, each had to call into existence, in presidential election years, its shadowy National Party. This meant that the Republicans had to appear to move to the Left, closer to the Center, while the Democrats had also to move from the fringes toward the Center, usually by moving to the Right. As a result, the National parties and their presidential candidates, with the Eastern Establishment assiduously fostering the process behind the scenes, moved closer together and nearly met in the center with almost identical candidates and platforms, although the process was concealed, as much as possible, by the revival of obsolescent or meaningless war cries and slogans (often going back to the Civil War). As soon as the presidential election was over, the two National parties vanished, and party controls fell back into the hands of the Congressional parties, leaving the newly elected President in a precarious position between the two Congressional parties, neither of which was very close to the brief National coalition that had elected him.


The chief problem of [the Eastern Establishment] ... for a long time has been how to make the two Congressional parties more national and international. The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is [to the Eastern Establishment] a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, [they believe that] the two parties should be almost identical, so that [they can control the elections] ... without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. The [Eastern Establishment believes that] policies that are vital and necessary for America are no longer subjects of significant disagreement, but are disputable only in details of procedure, priority, or method: we must remain strong, continue to function as a great world Power in cooperation with other Powers, ... keep the economy moving without significant slump, help other countries do the same, provide the basic social necessities for all our citizens, open up opportunities for social shifts for those willing to work to achieve them, and defend the basic Western outlook of diversity, pluralism, cooperation, and the rest of it, as already described. These things any national American party hoping to win a presidential election must accept. But either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigor-less. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.

                Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope – A History of the World in Our Time, 1966


                If you couldn’t stay awake for that quote, try this one that has been attributed to quite a few people, but one that Alan liked to repeat, “If voting worked (changed anything or mattered) they’d make it illegal.”


                Today’s Redux is Alan Watt "Cutting Through The Matrix" Live On RBN (#218) on Dec. 18, 2008, “Psychiatric Drugs for Healthy Mugs.”  At the beginning of the talk, Alan makes the point that we have to understand the big picture, that we’re being guided in a direction by hundreds of NGOs and private organizations that all work together towards the same goal and that goal is depopulation.  When this is achieved the “better types” will have the world to themselves, with a few purpose-made people to maintain it for them.  This has been the plan for a very long time, but we’re not to get spooked as they’re killing us off.  We should play and be happy until we die out, but this agenda with its money system and authoritarian controls isn’t conducive to happiness.  We must be drugged into a “happy” state.  In his famous Berkeley talk from the 1960s, Aldous Huxley asks what is wrong with drugging people because they’re not too happy anyway.

                Alan mentioned that we’ve had years of being told by psychiatric associations that most of society is mentally ill.  If you hang on to religion (the old types, not the new religions) you’re mentally ill.  If you believe in bonding for life to your marriage partner, or you believe in maintaining strong families, you’re mentally ill.  Alan suggested we read The Human Agenda put out by one of their [this system’s] protégés. 

                I’ve never read this 1972 book by psychiatrist/psychoanalyst and University of California at Los Angeles psychiatry professor Roderic Gorney.  I skimmed the book this week and found it dense and meandering.  Gorney appeared to be strongly advocating the Darwinist, materialist idea of evolution determined by the survival of the fittest and other eugenical ideas. (Nature/Genetics) yet he also wrote about using behaviour modification, brain stimulation and brain implants for creating new values that were better suited for his imagined future world.  Self-Validative Love, Work, and Play in the Future of Abundance and Psychic Intimacy as Observed in Psychoanalysis.  (Nurture/Behaviourism).  Everything he proposed fit under the theory of evolution.  Since we aren’t created, we can evolve towards anything with adequate stimulus and reward.

                As I pondered his writing, a thought occurred to me.  Those at the top of this system, what we might call the Ancient Priesthood, very much believe in the Hard Sciences, what can be empirically tested, what can be recreated in the laboratory setting, by controlled experiments and mathematical models.  They obsess on eugenics (what we have now politely renamed bioethics), genetics, physics, biology, neuroscience, whereas what is promoted heavily to shape the world view of their lessers are the social sciences, what have sometimes been called the “soft” sciences: anthropology, economics (voodoo), linguistics, management science, political science, natural philosophy and the science of society.  And a blurring of the two with areas of study such as neuropsychology and sociobiology.

                Why does this matter?  Because at the top are those with good genes, tried and tested over generations, born to rule you might say.  They spend their time planning how to eliminate us and then how to remake and control those who remain.

                On the level of “the little people” the soft sciences keep us unhappy by confusing our own observations of what is real, what is natural, what is good.  The Frankfurt School tells us that marriage and bonding and family are fascistically patriarchal.  Margaret Mead tells us that young Samoan girls have sex with whomever they please with no bad consequences and Westerners should do the same.  Franz Boaz argued and many others since him, tell us there is no such thing as race and that to believe otherwise makes us racists.  Boaz’ upbringing as a Jewish man in Germany in the late nineteenth century exposed him to antisemitism which shaped his thinking.  He refused to convert to Christianity but did not identify as Jewish.

                  Margaret Mead was a student of Boaz.  As I wrote in my piece last week “Mead’s work played a pivotal role in the creation of conditions for what we now refer to as The Sexual Revolution of the 1960s.” Boaz’ work to debunk the concept of race and promote cultural relativism is arguably amongst the most influential of the twentieth century.

                Geneticist David Reich who is also Jewish has stated, “while race may be a social construct, differences in genetic ancestry that happen to correlate to many of today's racial constructs are real.”

In response to Reich, a group of 67 scientists from a broad range of disciplines (certainly many soft or social sciences will be represented amongst those disciplines) wrote that his concept of race was “flawed” as “the meaning and significance of the groups is produced through social interventions.” 

                I don’t think that race is a determining factor in what is good and beautiful, superior or inferior, and I wouldn’t want to see it used as a basis of discrimination.  But what we have been wrongly told is that eugenics was the brainchild of Hitler, and its misuses under him are often repeated.  “Soft” social sciences have rewritten history and eliminated truth, but as Alan Watt often pointed out, eugenics was born in Britain and the United States, where it still exists under the name bioethics.  Anthony Fauci’s wife Christine Grady is a bioethicist who serves as the head of the Department of Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center.

                I said to a friend that the theory of evolution is a religion.  My friend replied, “Evolution is not a religion.  It is apologetics for atheism, for the denial of a Creator.  The religion is atheism.”  Apologetics is the discipline of defending religious doctrines through systematic argumentation and discourse.  Those who participate in apologetics are defending their beliefs against outside critics.  Looking for clues as to what motivated Gorney’s work, I found a few instances in the book of what can only be called a mockery of Christianity.  As I dug a bit deeper, I discovered that one of the paperback editions of The Human Agenda was subtitled How to be at Home in the Universe – Without Magic.  In one chapter, Gorney advocated Mystic Withdrawal, yet in the prologue he stated that he found inspiration in the Talmud.  I found an old review of the book that said “Anyone who views atheism and humanism as negative, destructive forces will change their tune after reading the book.  The trick is to get them to do so.”  This book was indeed apologetics for atheism. 

                I continued to search for clues about the intent and purpose of the book, for clearly it was more than a plea for the creation of humanistic values.  Believe it or not, at the ripe old age of 98, Gorney is still practicing psychotherapy in L.A.  He is also the founder/director of The Ashley Montagu Institute, whose mission is to disseminate and apply the works of renowned [not to me as I never heard of him] anthropologist Ashley Montagu, his mentor of 35 years.  This is what Wikipedia has to say about Montagu.  “Montague Francis Ashley-Montagu (June 28, 1905 – November 26, 1999) — born Israel Ehrenberg — was a British-American anthropologist who popularized the study of topics such as race and gender and their relation to politics and development. He was the rapporteur, in 1950, for the UNESCO statement “The Race Question.”  Montagu coined the term “ethnic group” which are shared traditions, ancestry, language, history, society, culture, nation, religion, or social treatment of peoples residing within a particular area, quite distinct from racial characteristics, which since the mid-twentieth century thanks to anthropologists such as Boaz, Mead and Montagu have been relegated to the rubbish heap of “bad science.”

                Whether our differences are “racial” or “ethnic”, religious or political, I believe in man’s ability to transcend divisions not because man is naturally or innately good but because we have an innate knowledge of right or wrong.  The mind manipulators have been at work on us so long, undermining simple truths and devoting whole schools of thought to “situation ethics” and “new value systems.”

                None of this was what I intended to write about this week.  I spent hours researching the main theme of Alan’s talk, drugging the healthy so we can perform better.  Cognitive enhancement, brain stimulation, Elon Musk’s Neuralink, “smart drugs” and micro-dosing hallucinogens to treat depression and PTSD.  In particular, I read several papers on experiments that various militaries are doing to improve the cognitive ability of soldiers.  I will share many of those articles and studies with you in the links below this piece and also on the index of the websites.  While you’re culling the herd, you keep the rest of the animals happy, and drugs are very good for the job of keeping people “happy.”

                Gorney didn’t jump on the hallucinogenic bandwagon of his day and he was even critical of the man of the hour, Timothy Leary, but he had more far-reaching ideas of what the future of the brain and mind would bring: modification, transplantation, electronics, chemistry and drugs.  Yes, drugs, but the kind doled out by pharmaceutical companies, not passed around at music festivals or dropped in punch bowls. 

                Gorney was very excited about some of the work being done on the brain in the area of memory at that time (late 1960s to early 1970s).  He mentioned a doctor in Sweden who had suggested that “there must be a chemical substance in the cytoplasm of nerve cells which could be structurally modified by electrical nerve impulses coming in from the nerve fiber, thus recording and retaining the information.  This chemical basis of memory he felt must be RNA, the complex molecule we encountered in the messenger which carries information from DNA and which is the governor of cell metabolism.  If correct, this means that RNA can be informed not only by the genes from within, by experience arising from without.”

                We have all read and heard plenty the last couple of years about RNA and DNA, but as it was presented to us, it was all such new and exciting research that had come together just in the nick of time to save us from a novel coronavirus!


                Tonight’s research diversion brought me a twofold outcome.  One, the soft sciences have been used to create maximum culture destruction and chaos on every level and this work has been ongoing since at least the 1940s.  Two, this chaos justifies the label of “mentally ill” that is slapped on most of society and it makes drugging us with antidepressants, antipsychotics and mood enhancers appear to be the only humane thing to do.


Psychiatric Drugs for Healthy Mugs:


"Psychiatric Drugs for the Healthy, Not Detrimental,

Shades of Aldous Huxley, Sound Coincidental?

'Chip and Drug Society,' Experts Moaned,

'Change the Laws, Let's All Get Stoned,'

Uppers for Work, Downers for Sleep,

Forget Your Pill? -- Brain Chip Will Beep,

Don't Overdo It, You'll Become a Cropper,

With Bloodshot Eyes, Saliva Slobber,

'We're Trained Intellectuals,' Advocates Cried,

Give Them Downers, They're Insane Certified"

© Alan Watt, December 18, 2008


                Alan sometimes said that at this stage of a very ancient war, the battle is now for the mind of each individual.  He laid out the history, clearly, concisely and repetitively.  Earlier in this piece I asked why all these excavations into the structures of control built so long ago matter.  Why does it matter?  Because without some sort of historical support and context we fall victim to “scientifically” designed cons.  Alan gets the last word from his book Cutting Through volume one, because the Big Picture is what we cannot lose sight of. 

                The fact is, there have been many “ages” and humanity as we know it has been around for millions of years.  That is why the sciences, including language have been use, not to free humanity but to enslave it.  The art of illusion is complete comprehension of how the human mind digests incoming information via the five senses and, by deliberate interference, bring the subject to the desired conclusion.  When the subject thinks he has come to “his” conclusion, then all repetition of similar incoming information is automatically put into storage, by-passing all scrutiny. Faulty conclusions are then passed from parent to child and from generation to generation.  This technique of IMPRISONING the MIND was well understood from antiquity…”


© Not Sure


Additional reading:


COP 27 - 27th Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC


Flowing sewage, bewildering signs, lack of water: COP27 faces logistics nightmares


Egypt’s COP27 PR disaster


Dark personality traits linked to a greater desire to enhance oneself using technological methods (2022)


Super-Men and Wonder-Women: the Relationship Between the Acceptance of Self-enhancement, Personality, and Values (2022)


Simulated visual hallucinations in virtual reality enhance cognitive flexibility (2022)


Use of “Smart Drugs” on the Rise (2018)


The Runaway Train of Cognitive Enhancement (2019)


We need to increase research into psychedelics for veterans with PTSD (2022)


Support Growing for Therapeutic Use of Psychedelics for Vets with PTSD (2022)


Microdosing Psilocybin Mushrooms May Improve Mental Health and Mood (2022)


Could Psychedelic Medicine Help People Living With Memory Loss? (2022)


The Military Is Funding Ethicists to Keep Its Brain Enhancement Experiments in Check (2021)


US military successfully tests electrical brain stimulation to enhance staff skills (2016)


The Pentagon’s Push to Program Soldiers’ Brains (2018)


Ten extraordinary Pentagon mind experiments (2014)


Brain stimulation: The military’s mind-zapping project (2014)


Hacking Brains: Enhancing Soldier Cognitive Performance (2020)


The ethics of AI-assisted warfighter enhancement research and experimentation: Historical perspectives and ethical challenges (2022)


Metabolic Enhancement of the Soldier Brain (2019)


Canadian Defence Research and Development’s “Identifying Ethical Issues of Human Enhancement Technologies in the Military” (2017)


Enhanced Warfighters: Risk, Ethics, and Policy (2013)


Neuroenhancements in the Military: A Mixed-Method Pilot Study on Attitudes of Staff Officers to Ethics and Rules (2022)


A Successful Artificial Memory Has Been Created (2019)


Should you upgrade your brain? (2019)


Elon Musk to demo Neuralink ‘brain chip’ that lets you control computers with your mind next month