From our forum we publish this multi-part, exceptional posting from Mr. Winston Smith.

It is an interesting analysis, from a different and new angle, of collective behaviour. How do “denormalizations” work? Why, for example, non smokers who used to have smokers as guests and having no problem with their cigarettes, would gradually ask them to smoke on balconies, then in the back yard and then call them no more? And how come those non smokers wouldn’t even realize why they are no longer inviting their smoking friends they were so fond of?

Find out how the mechanism of collective mind control, hate and social disintegration works in this multi-part essay that truly deserves to be published.

Happy reading.


The whole, the larger pattern, of something like anti-smoking acts in a manner that can not be easily reduced to the behavior of its constituent elements; namely, people.

In the pictures I’ve included, you’ll notice that when the fish or the birds are alarmed, they all act exactly the same way, as if they were all somehow communicating or following the directions of a signal that only they can hear.

What I’ve learned recently, though, is that they’re not doing any such thing. They’re all acting in their own rational self-interest. Each individual or each bird in the pictures above is only acting the way it thinks it should; not according to any set of outside rules. Every bird and fish thinks its an independent soul, but to us, they all look like they are just joining the herd.

They’re not joining a herd, though. They’re conforming to a pattern, but each is only acting as an individual. Though they make a mass or a pattern that behaves as if it is a whole new entity acting on is own, it only consists of, if you’ll forgive the term, "independent thinkers".

So, each person acts in their own self-interest and when that self-interest is driven by a falsely created fear, they act collectively without any real knowledge of participating in a collective activity.

There is probably absolutely nothing to distinguish today’s eighteen year old from an eighteen year old of 60 years ago. On an individual level, you could subject today’s eighteen year old to a battery of psychological and physiological tests and you might find that they are not only equal to the eighteen year old of 60 years ago, but, in fact, better.

Yet, I would assert, if the eighteen year olds of today were sent to fight an enemy like that of World War II, they would be slaughtered. An evil force like that which America fought in World War II would prevail.


This is why the whole thing gets screwed up.

We’re used to living in a world of individualism, where we are, as individuals, the masters of our own cause and effect. When a mass movement like anti-smoking or neo-communism intervenes, it screws up this relationship. A larger force is at work, and it acts through the individual, not to promote their own interest, but to promote the interest of the larger pattern itself.

A larger pattern that does not promote the interests of individual autonomy weakens the individual on a level that can’t be determined on the individual level. That’s because it does so on a larger and very powerful level. In other words, it works to cut through the individual and everything they represent and seek the larger pattern, using the individual as only a medium, a path of least resistance.

If you have a job you hate, for instance, but still diligently work and attend that job, the bottom, resulting effect of you performing your duties is of benefit to society by what you produce as a worker. This is depsite the "elephant in the room": you hate your job. This is because "you" don’t matter to the larger pattern that works through you.

What if you love your job? It still doesn’t matter. You’ll be rewarded to a greater extent, and that’s a good thing, but the larger pattern has just found someone who is inclined to conform to it.

Don’t be confused about one thing, though. The larger pattern is amoral. It doesn’t care about you. It cares only about itself, and its own preservation. If someone hates their job and does well, so be it. Reward. If someone loves their job and does well. So be it. Reward. Or even no reward. As long as they conform to the larger pattern and the results are the same.

Meanwhile, everyone in this equation has just "been themself". No one has tried to consciously act in a way that is in accordance with any notion of larger patterns, which they are completely oblivious of.

So, in short, anti-smoking seeks to force a larger pattern on everyone, whether they like it or not. That pattern, I believe, is a very, very powerful force that has a natural explanation that includes all of the reasons for all of the great attrocities that have ever occurred throughout history. No Nazi thought of himself as the "bad guy". Neither did any communist or any fascist. They all thought they were serving a larger pattern that they believed was "good". No individual was being evil or stupid or immoral. They were acting in accordance with a larger pattern that cared as much about human morals as a doorknob does. They, though, as individuals, probably cared as much as you do or I do.

The constant wall that we are running up against with anti-smoking is the idea that individual anti-smokers can’t be held to account for their collective tendencies. This is, in fact, because they are "Collective Tendencies"; they act as individuals and they are not "bad people". The larger pattern, though, is, I believe, a "bad pattern". We have a name for this "bad pattern" because it isn’t a new pattern, it’s as old as human civilization and maybe time itself.

It’s commonly called Evil.

Evil, of course, has a counterpart, Good. The larger patterns I speak of are, I’ll reitterate, amoral, they don’t care. And, for our purposes, it isn’t a matter of which works and which doesn’t work for us as people. It only matters what works for the larger pattern. If we choose Evil for us, that larger pattern will work through us, no sweat. If we choose good, that larger pattern will work through us, no sweat. In short, we choose, the larger patterns are just being themselves, like hurricanes or volcanoes or tidal waves or a lottery win. The patterns in themselves don’t care, but these patterns are a bit different from the random events that I speak of because we can pick and choose which we want for our world.

Like the force of gravity or electromagnetism or time, I seek to propose that these patterns that I speak of are actual, scientifically quantifiable and understandable entities.

This seems far fetched in the same way these other notions did in their time; I can’t give you "a bottle" of gravity, or "a box" of time. We only understand these ideas by being able to identify how they behave. In and of themselves, they have no physical reality that any person can touch or feel or otherwise sense, except by their resulting behavior and influence.

These are very bold assertions. They are mine and mine only, though many others have had similar ideas. I’ve read them and it shouldn’t be concluded that they agree with me. I intend to back these assertions up with legitimate writings, that can be easily referenced, in upcoming posts.

Click here for: PART II



Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder