Pilger’s Law. Commit it to memory. No idea or thought so succinctly explains my worldview so perfectly and aptly as this. But I’ll go a step further. Never believe the official statement of a government. Ever. It’s per se suspect and not to be believed. It’s never in a country’s or a government’s benefit or interest to tell you the truth. It can’t tell you what it’s doing unless it wants to inspire rioting and tumult.
Imagine incarcerating someone over an idea. Don’t laugh. It’s happening now. What do you think hate crimes are? Think about it. It’s taking a constitutionally permissible thought (hate towards a person or group that doesn’t involve violence) and pairing it with a crime that’s already cognizable at law and aggravating the offense via heightening the punishment because one dared to utter a constitutionally protected form of speech. I scream when I hear folks throw around the word hate crime. And I’m still waiting for a love crime or to have sentence mitigated because a defendant uttered a word or thought of amour whilst pummeling some poor schmo.
And what we’re now hearing more and more is the suggestion that certain ideas that refute “established” doctrine such as anthropomorphic causation models of climate change and global warming might be soon subject to criminal prosecution and incarceration. I shite you not. Add to the mix the words and most scary suggestions of Obama’s onetime regulation czar, Cass Sunstein who’s advanced the now infamous cognitive infiltration. Look him up and read it for yourself. It’s as scary as it sounds.
The more you wear it, the closer you come to implantation. Critical to changing and amending behavior is the phenomenon and doctrine of successive approximation, a Skinnerian theory that allows behavior to be shaped and crafted. Critical even more so to that process is to make a behavior hip, hep, cool and de rigeur. Exhibit A: Google glass, RFID chips, e-tattoos . . . just to name a few.