Breaking Obama’s Spell
October 31, 2008
I stayed up until 2 am reading a document that someone provided to me on this blog that alleged that Obama is using a hypnotic technique pioneered by the psychologist Milton Erickson. Erickson’s work is widely recognized today and has become a standard for certain kinds of hypnosis therapies. And it’s used in particular to treat smokers to stop smoking. Obama is a smoker and may have learned about the technique while trying to quit.
It isn’t “magic” and it doesn’t work on everybody. But the kinds of audiences upon whom it would be most effectively used do appear to conform to just the kinds of persons who are being most affected by Obama. For starters is would be most effective upon people who already are predisposed to like Obama a lot and who would welcome his vague recommendations of “change.” To be more precise, it’s maximum effect ought to work on people who really detest president Bush. It would be least effective on people who support Bush strongly (a small minority at the moment), or who are “okay” with him. Among Republicans, it would be most effective with people like me who supported the president but who constantly feel the pressure of the anti-Bush faction because of the accident of living side-by-side among them (I live in a Democratic majority region).
In my own case, I was affected by Obama’s charismatic appeal early in the race and was affected chiefly by the fact that I saw him pushing out Hillary (I was as opposed to Clinton as most of my neighbors are opposed to Bush). For me a “good riddance” to Hillary was the “change” I wanted — so much so that I was happy to see her Democratic challenger push her out and eliminate the need for my candidate to do it. How I regret that judgment now!
I was still susceptible to Obama’s ideas however. Chiefly I was susceptible because of the discomfort I feel in constantly being on the “wrong” side of every argument with every friend I’m likely to have in this neighborhood where one cannot swing the proverbial dead cat without hitting a Democrat. So “change” from a nice seeming guy would make my life a little less stressful on a personal level.
Then I learned about Obama’s stand on abortion, which I learned about through the internet regarding the Born Alive legislation that he opposed in Illinois. It happens that abortion is MY number one negative issue. I am staunchly pro-life, and so this one datum became in effect a “trigger” that undid any hypnotic effect Obama could ever hope to have over me. It made me an unsuitable target for his appeal — permanently. He might still appeal to my sense of reason IF he had a specific argument about another issue about which I also cared strongly. But Obama’s hypnotic appeal is issue-free. Note that “change” is never specified. That’s what makes it a hypnotic appeal rather than a reasoned appeal. And that’s why my “trigger” worked to kill the hypnosis.
He could reach me with specifics — about which I might agree or disagree — but he can no longer reach me at a purely subliminal level because for me — the “magic” — is gone.
Ever been “in love” and then awakened and found yourself “out of love.” Magic gone. The hypnotic effect is broken, and love and other emotionally strong states demonstrate the natural effects of hypnosis in daily life.
I have other posts here that are very different in character than this post. I purposely wrote a very mean-spirited, vitriolic attack on Obama yesterday designed to insult his unthinking supporter. It was an attempt at a minor form of reverse hypnosis — a kind of jolt — that might unsettle someone and make them feel that supporting Obama was “uncool” or would subject them to ridicule. That kind of appeal works more effectively on some people.
What I’m writing now, however persuasive I hope I’m being, is more transparent. I just want anyone reading this blog to understand that. Reasoned arguments can work with people when they’re being reasonable, but some Obama supporters are responding to a subliminal “cult-like” appeal right now. (See previous post: “Obama Flakes”)
October 31, 2008 at 3:25 pm
facts, just facts, only facts should really scare you
http://ngoldfarb.wordpress.com/2008/10/22/barack-obamas-boss-and-mentor-william-ayres-group-killed-more-people-than-the-kkk-klu-lux-klan/
October 31, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Psychological states are facts. What scares me about this candidate is the nearly complete absence of “facts.”
He is a mystery.
List the “changes” that he’s promising.
See what you come up with.
Best wishes.
ANF
October 31, 2008 at 8:51 pm
I’m pretty sure there is no use of hypnotism in the presidential race. Obama is very good with rhetoric, and his presence appeals to many. Also, word of mouth, Wikipedia, and random websites with no authenticity or merit are not good sources of facts.
November 1, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Citizen10
One should be skeptical, but you need to know first off what hypnotism is — and how Milton Erickson used it since it’s his techniques that are allegely being used — and there’s issues of susceptibility. Hypnotism is not “magic” — it’s a natural phenomenon so some people are more open to hypnotic suggestion than others.
The real issue is whether Obama is using it, and the morality associated with that deception. Second, why the media is making matters worse by not vetting the candidate (since they want “a Democrat” (any will do) to win. And the third question would be how effective such hypnotism can be.
That hypnotism exists is scientifically demonstrated and I can provide a link showing a good example, but would have to search for it (would have to get back to you on it).
All politicians who are effective use hypnosis related “techniques” — which are sometimes identical with techniques associated with marketing or persuasion generally. What would make Obama’s use of hypnosis devious is the incorporation of things like “pacing,” “fixation objects,” “embedded suggestions,” “anchors,” and so on.
Why is it deceptive? Because you don’t know he’s doing it. Which makes it like false advertising — like a film maker inserting a subliminal message below the level of consciousness.
It’s “easy” to resist the suggestions, however. First off, one has simply to want to resist. Are you buying a car? Look under the hood, check the tires, ask the salesman a very pointed question. Get the salesman off guard — Joe the Plumber did that in simply asking a very specific question.
Indeed, specificity itself undoes suggestion. Tax cut. How much? For whom? When? How much revenue will that generate for the treasury? Where’s that revenue going? How much will it enlarge the bureacracy? For how long? Etc.
Doesn’t matter what the question is so long as it’s specific. But look at a transcript of an Obama speech, notice how many times a phrase is repeated, how vague the claims are. Especially “change” — change is a very, very weasel concept since of course change is coming. Try to stop things from “changing.” It is the ultimate truism.
He doesn’t have to say what change HE’LL bring, he just let’s you fill in the blanks with the “change” that you want. And he lets you ride that emotion.
All politics uses this to degrees. Maybe the average suave politician does it 85% of the time. With Obama it’s scripted right down to the hand gestures, phrasing, the tone of voice, the eye contact. It’s 99.99% with him.
Sometimes he slips up. The “light coming down … you’ll tell yourself “I have to vote for Obama” was a slip. Too obvious for a public setting and he got caught. The fake presidential seal — too obvious — caught again and ridiculed. However he felt (or his expert hypnosis coaches) felt strongly enough about the efficacy of that tool that they did a “fake oval office” setting for his infomercial.
All of which is to suggest an inevitability to his becoming “president” without having any credentials except a little time in Illinois State legislature and 3 years in the US Senate.
To understand this you have to look at specifically the work of Milton Erickson and hypnotic induction techniques, but even more specifically “conversational” hypnosis that doesn’t require an “induction.”
One should be skeptical, but there’s science here. However, you have to do a little research to see the connection. But then other kinds of “research” should be involved in selecting a candidate — like knowing with at least some reasonable specificity what his philosophy is and what his policies are likely to be — especially based upon some previous record.
So, what do you actually know about Obama? Did you even know that he smokes? Used the name “Barry” in the past. Lived in Indonesia as a child. Did you know about his role in the born alive legislation in Illinois? Or specifically what he actually DID as a “community organizer” and for whom and with what results? Did you know he has Kenyan relatives living in the United States who are poor that he hasn’t helped with his largesse? Etc.
Ask yourself what you really know. Obama is the penultimate “used car salesman” who has just about got you in the driver’s seat, but you have never even seen the car.
Best wishes,
ANF
November 1, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Citizen10
Here’s one link, I’ve found real quick but it’s more about the technique itself which is called “Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP)” and it’s described in general terms here:
http://www.hypnosis-and-health.com/hypnosis.html
I’m still looking for another link to something called a “Stroop task” that has nothing to do with politics but which demonstrates the genuineness of hypnotic phenomena. I saved a particular news video on my computer and am not at that computer, but you might be able to find comparable information by searching yourself and I can also post the link later.
November 1, 2008 at 8:08 pm
To Citizen10 and others
Here’s one simple non-political example of a Stroop test use of hypnosis
http://videos.howstuffworks.com/sciencentral/2922-hypnotic-suggestion-video.htm
November 3, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Here’s a post with a similar reaction to the “hypnotizing” stupidity that you’ve fallen for.
Now please, keep your stupidity to yourself.
November 3, 2008 at 9:05 pm
Dan, I’m surprised to see your comment here. But I’m really looking for experts on this topic, someone with experience in using neuro-linguistic programming also known as NPL. I’ve been reading quite a lot about it in the last two or three or four days, and have positively “mesmerized” myself with the research if you’ll forgive the pun. Milton Erickson who pioneered the 20th century use of hypnotherapy was, I learn, a brilliant practitioner of it as well as quite an amazing human being. He intuitively used the technique before he became a doctor to rehabilitate himself from polio. He learned — he taught himself — to walk again — and it all began by using a mirror.
You really should learn a bit more about this before you rush to judgement. As a scientist I should think you’d know that. I should think at least reading the allegation document is the minimal criterion, and I must say at this juncture my reading has taken me far beyond the initial allegation. I have read enough that I can clearly see Obama’s little magician’s tricks!
You have to hand it to the man. It is the most brilliant deception ever attempted, and he is quite close to succeeding! Of course he will get caught. Too much science is lying around that will nab him. Be patient. When it does, Obama’s “bright light” is going to be shining brightly in his own face and the consequences ain’t going to be pretty.
Moreover he has stirred up something that will bite him in the butt only he doesn’t realize. Or perhaps he does? His father committed suicide. Of course you know that already. His handlers must have considered the risk worth the benefit. But the constant comparison of himself to JFK was not wise. It was a calculated risk. I guess the White House is a big prize for outsized ambition aimed at filling the chasmic void created by an absent, neglectful father about whom he “dreamed.”
My goodness, the repetitions. The hand gestures. I love the hand gestures. His proto-typical gesture of index finger to thumb goes back millenia! It’s a gesture one finds in Hindu sculpture. That must piss him off a bit. His commanding scowls. Was ever a man who made an acceptance speech, when he got the Dem nomination, so angry? WHAT’s up with that? And the pauses. Gotta love the pauses. I can hear his voice in my head. Can you, Dan? He is a mesmerist’s dream.
I am quite confident that Obama is, indeed, using these techniques though it will be interesting to observe one) whether he succeeds and two) what he does afterwards. He has changed his stripes several times during the election, and of course he can change them again. “Change” is the mantra, isn’t it? Change, however, is such a vague concept and one cannot anticipate where such change will lead or whether the change will work for good or ill since either is equally possible. Change is sometimes a disaster. Like getting into a car with a stranger. He has seduced a whole nation and they are fawning over him like a silly girl on a date.
Beware of strangers! Surely your mother taught you that! I ask my Democrat friends specific questions and find that I know more about him than they do. Half of them cannot tell you where he went to school (Columbia and Harvard) or what he did (private practice, prof at U of Chicago, and his “yes-we-can” stint as a “community organizer.” Must make the candidates with resumes nuts with envy.
I feel especially saddened for African Americans in particular who are about to be cheated in the most treacherous way by someone they mistook for one of their own. Well, he’s as much white as black and that chameleon quality is part of the magic. Whether he is a black man who is white at the center — the way Ayers is bitterly white — or whether he is a white man with an inner black soul is all unknown.
I was marveling today at the lengthening list of ill associates he has: Rezko, Farrakahn, Jeremiah Wright (that friend of Gaddafi!), and Dohrn who worshipped Charles Manson, and Ayers the son of a rich man who has never accomplished anything in his life that his daddy didn’t arrange, and Khalid that very good friend of Barack and Michelle who Obama toasts at a political gathering — but the Los Angelos Times will not release the tape! My God, I have never seen the like of this in my lifetime.
And people think hypnosis is a weak science! The things we do not know or understand about our selves and our minds is coming home to roost now (to quote Obama’s pastor). The sleep of reason produces monsters, Dan. It’s really time to wake up now.
Best,
ANF