![[tmbchr]™](/journal/popocculture-blog-logo.jpg){kind=logo}
Hubbard on Language
One of the things that first caught my attention in various accounts of Scientology is their use of language. This excerpt I read in a small local paper called “The Front” and comes from a person who was apparently involved in the organization.
The thing I found most interesting is the dictionary. New words were created, and others like “ethics” were given new definitions. The text would read like this: the definition of ____ is ____. It amazed me how people would honestly say, “And for all these years I thought the word ____ meant ____; I was using the word all wrong!”
So I’ve begun reading a bit about this technique of redefining words, and how through that, you can redefine people’s conception of reality. Seems like very powerful stuff, but also a very simple technique, really. Anyway, the Wikipedia entry on Scientology beliefs and practices also quotes from L. Ron Hubbard (found of Scientology), about some of his views on language and propaganda:
A long term propaganda technique used by socialists (Communists and Nazis alike) is of interest to PR practitioners. I know of no place it is mentioned in PR literature. But the data had verbal circulation in intelligence circles and is in constant current use.
The trick is - Words are redefined to mean something else to the advantage of the propagandist.
Many examples of this exist. They are not natural changes in language. They are propaganda changes, carefully planned and campaigned in order to obtain a public opinion advantage for the group doing the propaganda.
Given enough repetition of the redefinition public opinion can be altered by altering the meaning of a word. The technique is good or bad depending on the ultimate objective of the propagandists. (…)
This is definitely something we see today used not only in Scientology, but on a mass scale. Think of “patriotic” slogans like “Freedom Isn’t Free!” The idea here is to re-educate us according to the meanings of words. It also calls to mind an excellent Philip K. Dick quote:
The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words.
Orwell too seems to have written about this extensively under the guise of “Newspeak” in 1984. Does anybody know any additional good resources for studying this technique, either from a philosophical, practical or occult perspective? I have a few other trails I’m following, but more are always welcome.
June 12th, 2005 at 2:28 pm
dick sutphen has an essay called “the battle for our minds”,which talks about hypnotic inductions of priests and presidents throughout history.the study of general semantics,alfred korzebski`s thesis is a master`s level study of the meaning of words and thier structure.nlp is a synthesis of g.s. and hypnosis,amongst other things.the whole political correctness movement rides on semantic definitions of words.marshall mcluhan`s study of the world is one of semantics.the jesuit priesthood is one of linguistic juggling.black is white and then it`s suddenly black again.our language creates our reality.if someone controls the meaning of the words we use then they can shift our reality.
we are in a tunnel reality created by those who want us working,earning and buying consumer goods.
June 12th, 2005 at 2:35 pm
yeah im currently doing a lot of reading on general semantics. how does korzybski’s work fit into neuro-linguistic programming?
June 12th, 2005 at 3:08 pm
My background in politics leads me to draw you towards the GOP language maestro Frank Luntz, who has produced a memorandum of “The 14 Words Never to Use.” Here is an excerpt on a profile on his work…
Luntz teases, “I have included and expanded that document because effectively communicating the New American Lexicon requires you to STOP saying words and phrases that undermine your ability to educate the American people. So from today forward, YOU are the language police. From today forward, these are the words never to say again.”
Consider the first word expunged from our memory—government. It’s such a bad word to Luntz that it must be replaced by Washington. “The fact is, most Americans appreciate their local government that picks up their trash, cleans their streets, and provides police and transportation services. Washington is the problem.”
Never say privatization in reference to social security. It evokes images of fat cats on Wall Street picking our pockets. Reserve privatization for everything else related to the social good and collective security (education, health care, trade, criminal justice). The better choice is personalization and personal accounts. This sounds like ‘We The People’ have more control over our private, oops, I mean personal lives. Luntz explains: “Personalizing Social Security suggests ownership and control over your retirement savings, while privatizing it suggests a profit motive and winners and losers. BANISH PRIVATIZATION FROM YOUR LEXICON.”
Another zinger Luntz offers is to NEVER say global economy/globalization/capitalism. Never refer to the way things really are. Instead, refer to the way you’d like things to be and make that your reality. Luntz warns, “More Americans are afraid of the principle of globalization than even privatization. The reason? Globalization presents something big, something distant, and something foreign.”
“We should NEVER use the word outsourcing because we will then be asked to defend or end the practice of allowing companies to ship American jobs overseas. Rather, we should talk about the ‘root cause’ why any company would not want to hire ‘the best workers in the world.’ And the answer: ‘over-taxation, over-regulation, too much litigation, and not enough innovation or quality education.’ Because it rhymes, it will be remembered.”
Luntz is particularly jiggy with trade language. He implores us to stop using “foreign” or “global” and replace it with “international.” Foreign is just too scary to patriotic nativists. In his memo, “The Eleven Steps to Effective Trade Communication,” he says that wordsmiths must appeal to America’s greatness. “Americans love being told we’re the best, that we’re number one. We will do anything—ANYTHING—to remain number one, and will oppose anything that undermines our superiority. It is essential in any discussion of trade to declare that we are ‘the greatest economic power in the world’ and that ‘we will remain the greatest economic power in the world only so long as we continue to do business with other nations.’” Anyone who opposes “international” trade should be called a “defeatist” for giving up the fight to be number one. There’s just a tiny step further here to calling anyone who questions the fairness and justice of certain trade agreements as, dare I say it, “un-American” or even “anti-American.”
The ultimate irony is that Luntz points to a foreigner (my bad) internationalist Governator Arnold Schwarzenegger as the poster he-man for the most effective way to discuss the American economy’s relationship with trade: “To those critics who are pessimistic about our economy, I say: Don’t be economic girlie men.” Luntz tells us to pump up American exceptionalism, just like Arnold, and “talk about the economy, but talk about it in terms of perseverance, stamina, and WINNING.”
Luntz website:
http://www.luntzspeak.com/
14 Words never to use
http://watchingthewatchers.org/index.php?p=364
Scans of a 160-page briefing book by Frank Luntz on the lessons learned from 2004 as the GOP seeks to extend its winning streak in 2006.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/2/23/3244/72156
That gives you the current view of newspeak in politics today.
Enjoy!
June 12th, 2005 at 3:18 pm
it is important to be precise in your language and to draw your client into the same precision.the idea of pre-suppositions are a semantic construct that shapes a client`s reality.the pre-supposition that as i get older it becomes more difficult to lose wieght because my metabolism slows down with age,is a limiting belief and semantically inaccurate.by becoming more accurate with the meaning of words,in this instance”metabolism”,and challenging the pre-supposition as fact,it is possible to create a shift in a person`s understanding of themselves and therefore behave differently in response to stimulus,whether it be food,cigarettes or job stress or spiders or fear of flying.
korzybski`s work is finer than necessary for my work but is insightful into how language is constructed.
i am no intelectual.i am a craftsman and artist who wants to know the depth of my tools so that i can be more effective in my work.
i am a student of jimmy page.i play the guitar and i look at the masters that he learned from like django rienhart and muddy waters and get a different view on how j.p. does his stuff.it is the same with hypnotherapy.understanding a little of those who went before richard bandler help me to see more of the big picture.
i am,after all,still learning.
June 12th, 2005 at 3:36 pm
Of course, you could go the full gamut, like Terence McKenna did, and say that everything’s made of language. And I tend to agree with him, considering language is code, and they’re both symbols, and without symbols, we as a race could do precisely fuck-all.
But, also considering Korzybski’s admonition that the map is not the territory, all we really can say is that yes, the world is made of symbols, in that it is the filter, so to speak, between our nervous systems and the multiverse (i.e. Kether and the bits of the tree of life which is above the Abyss). So, yes, change the meaning of words, and you change reality. Most people are not aware of this, and I’m finding it more and more obvious.
Magic(k) rituals are the same thing, as far as I can see at least, that is, programming reality by swapping about symbols.
Oh, I just remembered a Phil Dick quote, concerning that last remark: “Thoughts of the brain are experienced by us as arrangements and rearrangements - change - in a physical universe; but in fact it is really information and information-processing which we substantialize.” As above, so below; symbols as apparent code in a holographic universe.
June 12th, 2005 at 3:39 pm
n.m.,it is as important to not say certain things as it is to say certain other things in any context.to say,”oh no ,don`t fall” when your child is stuck up a tree in a windstorm will make her fall.we can`t process a negative.it is neurologically impossible.we imagine the scenario and then either edit,delete or distort the information accordingly.try not to think about elephants.grey pachyderms come to mind.
frank luntz is the maestro but it is all textual.the subtext is where all the shifts come.the conclusions we draw as a response to the words used are the things that motivate us.thats why they are invisible to analysis.
granted,the semantic shift made in using the word international to replace the word foriegn is powerful,but……if any political strategy was really effective we wouldn`t see a virtual tie in elections consistantly.there are other games afoot.specifically what i like to call demopublicanism.or,politics is the game and we are the powerless spectators.the real trick is to keep us buying shit.if that stops all bets are off.and so are the lights,water,policing,etc.we had a little taste of that during the blackout two years ago and we didn`t like it.we are used to starbucks being open.
June 12th, 2005 at 3:45 pm
alistair: i see the reason behind split elections is because the competing platforms are two sides of the same option, rather than being two actual different options. of course they are going to be split if they represent roughly the same thing. it also promotes a false sense of competition, to distract people away from the underlying similarities between the two competitors. people get caught up in the display and say “what a good fight” instead of realizing that the fight was over nothing.
Z: that mckenna thing reminds me of something. you know movies with computer graphics? well, essentially computer graphics all break down to manipulations of code: language. so in a sense, watching computer graphics allows us to see language reified
i also like what you said about magick rituals as being an attempt to redefine meaning somehow. grant morrison has an interesting item about charging sigils. a sigil he says is
the sigil is then charged in a state of “no-mind” through any number of naturally occuring physical processes: severe tension, fasting, trance, orgasm, etc. it definitely does seem connected to the practice in scientology of redefining ____ as ____. in scientology, the way they “enforce” this reeducation is by hooking you up to the e-meter which then measures your physiological reactions to words and new definitions. in order to satisfy this machine, you have to reach a state where you don’t elicit a response from it - almost like a no mind state as morrison describes for charging sigils
June 12th, 2005 at 3:52 pm
the map is not the territory.one of the basic tenets of nlp.we are sold maps all the time.and then we get all pissed of if one map doesn`t agree with our map.maps need flexibility to be useful.that`s why gps is so popular.
the element of a system that has the most flexibility has the most control.again basic nlp from general semantics,applied to engineering,software design(artificial intellegence.),political analysis,military strategy,etc.
and,yes everything is made of language.and i might go further and say everything is made of the english language.
this line of discussion leads me to state,again that i believe that humans are an engineered species.otherwise we wouldn`t use language.it`s not an animal trait.it a human one.
June 12th, 2005 at 4:04 pm
we have the ability to codify the metaphysical into our map as easily as the physical.ritual is the method.an entrainment of intent through repetition.the catholic ritual of high mass in latin is so psychically charged as to be almost orgasmic to some and magical to others.on occasion a person manifests split personalities and demonic possession as a result of the ritual of high mass.it is interesting that demonic possession is virtually the sole domain of the catholic church.they should knock it off.
it is interesting that the latin high mass is the most popular with english catholics.it`s not so much the words as the rythmn.it is deep hypnosis.a two hour long induction into devotion to the virgin mary.and donations.
no wonder people keep seeing bvms everywhere.
June 12th, 2005 at 4:08 pm
possession is not even close to the sole domain of the catholic church. it can be found in religions the world over throughout all of history. and in many of them, it’s much more welcome - if not the prime component of the religion. i get what you’re trying to say otherwise though
June 12th, 2005 at 4:09 pm
in regard to computer graphics,carlos casteneda said that when you learn to see,you find that we are all actually luminous eggs with a spot where our assemblage spot lies on our bodies.source code?
i remember that when my dad recoverend from a stroke some years ago all he could see out of his left eye was circles,squares and triangles in different colours.source code?
it think we are an engineered species.these examples go to compounding my belief.
as my dad rebooted he saw source code until he reasembled the map into consensus.
June 12th, 2005 at 4:19 pm
regarding possesion by the devil.granted demonic possession is a global phenomina.i meant in the particularly catholic version where the demon has an intimate detailed knowledge of christ and the bible.it is a uniquely catholic behaviour.as you stated,in some cultures the manifestation of demonic possession is seen an honour bestowed upon the host.it is certainly a way to have a dialog in a non- fearful way.demons have a perspective that can be instructive.
i remember a discussion on art bell with a ghost investigator who had done research into the bell witch.the story was that a demon appeared and terrorised a family and was witnessed by a whole village until the demon demanded a meeting with the everone in the village and told them of a crime of abuse committed against a young girl by a specific person who was then admitted to the crime and was tried.the demon was never heard from again.
June 12th, 2005 at 4:20 pm
I actually toyed around with the Half Life 2 level editor (Hammer) a bit today, as I find that sort of thing interesting, and I remembered something from ye olden days when I did these things a bit more.
Basically, to build a level, you have to place brushes - boxes, really - and entities - lights, monsters, weapons, what have you - on a grid, and unless everything is tight - meaning that if there is a “rift” in the placement of these brushes - you can look out into “the void” from whence your graphical computer game experience comes and manifests as actual graphics on your screen, and if this happens, the game goes all to shit and probably crashes.
Sort of like Dark City, only you’d go bonkers and crash your brain, which would make it more Lovecraftian, really.
June 12th, 2005 at 5:29 pm
eventually games,as with all a.i. will become indistinguishable from reality.right at the arrival of the eschaton.
June 12th, 2005 at 6:08 pm
i actually had a dream last night where i was myself but i was physically inside of a game. it was a series of rooms and objects which i knew to have been designed, and which i had to systematically and sequentially utilize in order to progress.
June 12th, 2005 at 7:56 pm
interesting metaphor for life.
June 13th, 2005 at 11:13 am
Consider your internal monologue. The words you think with were not invented by you. The allowable combinations (the grammar) was not created by you. You can literally not think a thought of your own.
Since Dark City was mentioned, lemme say I have been interpreting that movie esoterically, in that the trains which run around the city in circles are your trains of thought. The “track” is the set of allowable word/symbol configurations you can reach from your present position, the implied domain or world. I did not lay the track, and have only recently realized that it runs in circles.
(Now, if you buy into the nous, or higher self, then non-symbolic cognition is possible.)
June 13th, 2005 at 11:41 am
ive never actually seen that movie. is it worth seeing?
June 13th, 2005 at 12:55 pm
it’s *way* worth seeing!
June 15th, 2005 at 7:22 pm
[…] ck upon this truth a few days back without realizing it. L. Ron Hubbard himsefl is said to have written about a common propaganda technique: The trick is - Words are red […]
May 30th, 2006 at 5:15 pm
[…] In either case though, the cultural potency and historic importance of the actual original event is diluted each time the ad slogan is repeated, and the original meaning of it is twisted. It’s a technique that Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard made heavy use of, and which he said was adopted from the Nazis by PR practitioners: redefining the meaning of words. […]