Who is paying you Masked IBOFB?

Shyam

I notice that the masked 'Amway' Lord Haw Haw is still steadfastly pretending moral and intellectual authority on your Blog by now claiming that he gave up his sparkling academic career for 'the world of Entrepreneurship.' Since for the previous 50+ years (effectively) 100 % of several millions constantly-churning so-called 'Amway Entrepreneurs' can be proved to have been de facto slaves, Steadson's latest absurd claims don't even begin to explain how he currently makes his living? It would seem rather suspicious that someone who claims to be a qualified psychologist and who also claims to have studied anthropology and sociology, is the omnipresent propagandist for a criminogenic organization which steadfastly denies a mountain of evidence that it uses co-ordinated, devious techniques of social, psychological and physical persuasion in order to steal people's money and then load them with guilt to prevent them from complaining.

In the same way that the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob have sought to obstruct investigation of their clandestine crimes by infiltrating the legislative process and government Trade Depts. in the USA, using slick public relations companies and pro-'MLM' sophists, and by employing expensive private law firms staffed by legally-qualified, former, senior government officials and law enforcement agents, other cult leaders have sought to obstruct investigation of their clandestine crimes by co-opting individuals with authentic academic titles; particularly sociologists. Unfortunately, an authentic academic title (like an authentic law degree) is no guarantee of moral or intellectual authority. Like their legal equivalents, the only important question to ask this particularly obliging type of intellectual prostitute is: Who is paying you?

Bearing this in mind, it is interesting to note that the masked 'Amway' Lord Haw Haw, Mr. 'IBOFB' Steadson, has (apparently) begun to pretend that: 'mainstream sociologists and psychologists' have refuted the existence of pernicious or criminogenic cults presented externally as traditional associations; and that : these same academics have proved that: cults cannot be arbitrarily defined by their instigators as almost any banal group (‘religious’, ‘cultural’, ‘political’, ‘commercial’, etc.); and that: internally, cults are never totalitarian (i.e. they are never centrally-controlled nor do they require of their core-adherents an absolute subservience to the group and its patriarchal, and/ or matriarchal, leadership above all other persons); and that: by their very nature cults always present themselves in their true colours. Consequently, an individual only become involved with one as a result of his/her fully-informed consent.

Mr. Steadson also (apparently) pretends that: 'mainstream sociologists and psychologists' have refuted the existence of co-ordinated, devious techniques of social and psychological persuasion (variously described as: ‘covert hypnosis’, ‘mental manipulation’, ‘coercive behaviour modification’, ‘group pressure’, ‘thought reform’, ‘ego destruction’, ‘mind control’, ‘brainwashing’, ‘neuro-linguistic programming’, ‘love bombing’, etc.): and that: these same academics have proved that these non-existent techniques were not designed to fulfil the hidden criminal objectives of the cult leaders by provoking in the adherents an infantile total dependence on the group to the detriment of themselves and of their existing family, and/or other, relationships; and that: pernicious cults do not manipulate their adherents’ existing beliefs and instinctual desires, creating the illusion that they are exercising free will; and that: in this way, adherents cannot also be surreptitiously coerced into following potentially harmful, physical procedures (sleep deprivation, protein restriction, repetitive chanting/ moving, etc.) which are similarly designed to facilitate the shutting down of an individual’s critical and evaluative faculties without his/ her fully-informed consent.

Shyam, the masked 'Amway' Lord Haw Haw would now have your readers believe that 'mainstream' academics have proved that Totalitarianism itself does not exist and that independent academics, like Prof. Robert Jay Lifton, who spent years researching the subject before publishing detailed analyses of the characteristics which identify the evolving historical phenomenon of (what Prof. Lifton labelled) Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, are not mainstream and, therefore, can have no validity. In other words, a self-confessed adherent of 'Amway' hiding behind a comic-book alter ego (who claims to hold a degree in psychology), has come out on your Blog as a reality-inverting propagandist for all forms of criminogenic cultism, not just the group known as 'Amway.'

Amazingly, there really are a flock of co-opted individuals around the world, with authentic academic titles, who, essentially, bleat all of the reality-inverting claims above, but, obviously, not in such specific terms. On this occasion, Mr. Steadson has not invented them, but then as the English Poet, Alfred Lord Tennyson, rightly observed:

'A lie which is all a lie may be

met with and fought outright.

But a lie which is part a truth

is a harder matter to fight.'

David Brear (copyright 2010