Yes. Tavistock is its own subject to try to tackle. It's huge. Much of what informs the behaviorists, psychology comes from the research and experiments done there. And MK Ultra and too many named and unnamed research and development programs on the human brain. Many that violate(d) all ethical norms. Mengele wasn't a one and done. He had predecessors and descendents.
Wow. I'm only part-way through the links. But it is obvious the huge amount of effort and expertise ($$$) spent by governments and their institutions around solving "vaxx hesitancy". I think they have failed in that endeavor and are a bit stumped. The behavior scientists are flummoxed! And that is at least a small victory.
They've been at it a long, long time. I've shared a lot of research and analysis on other Substack writer's pages who have larger readership, not yet put that work on my own, trying to go forwards and backwards is a project. But here's an important related subject I've written a lot about in comments under other stacks that I'll just drop for now and come back to later as a stand-alone. Bioethics.
And Nuffield Bioethics Council is a major player in the field. It's out of the UK, funded by Wellcome Trust (Glaxo-Wellcome, Big Pharma). A peer of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Actually it's older and more prestigious, and arguably more influential in shaping global public health policy. Including behavioural health.
Bioethics is one of the most important fields there is in shaping the future of mankind. From eugenics to euthanasia, to biotechnology+ AI, transhumanism, infectious disease, psychological operations on an unwitting public, coercion, manipulation, all of it is in theory constrained by bioethics. Mrs. Anthony Fauci, Christine Grady, is the NIH's Chief Bioethicist. If that helps understand what values bioethics embraces.
Here is a 225-page guide that Nuffield put out in 2007 to help public health officials develop public health policy that uses coercion and manipulation, psychological trickery to make a population behave as authorities believe they should. They describe their policies as practicing "good stewardship," balancing the desire for individual freedom and civil liberties with the need to protect the collective's public health and safety. It's a mental masturbatory exercise on how to rationalize and justify collectivist authoritarianism in the name of public health, while patting themselves on the back for including concerns for individual freedom and civil liberties into the conversation...to be summarily dismissed in the conclusions. But at least they mentioned individual freedom, WooHoo!! This is the mind. This is the inside of the minds of those who seek to "help" us poor little creatures who they must be good stewards for, lest we hurt ourselves or others. Like livestock they must ethically care for. It's a massive subject, with tentacles that reach everywhere. A lot of which are linked directly to the Behaviorists I describe in A Narrative. Stand-alone deep dive coming soon. Sneak preview of this important resource that shapes "ethical" public health policies all over the world today if you care to trudge through it. Have a barf bag handy.
Check out The Tavistock Institute for Human Relations, a real group. A 2005 downloadable book by John Coleman wraps it all up with a bow.
Yes. Tavistock is its own subject to try to tackle. It's huge. Much of what informs the behaviorists, psychology comes from the research and experiments done there. And MK Ultra and too many named and unnamed research and development programs on the human brain. Many that violate(d) all ethical norms. Mengele wasn't a one and done. He had predecessors and descendents.
Wow. I'm only part-way through the links. But it is obvious the huge amount of effort and expertise ($$$) spent by governments and their institutions around solving "vaxx hesitancy". I think they have failed in that endeavor and are a bit stumped. The behavior scientists are flummoxed! And that is at least a small victory.
They've been at it a long, long time. I've shared a lot of research and analysis on other Substack writer's pages who have larger readership, not yet put that work on my own, trying to go forwards and backwards is a project. But here's an important related subject I've written a lot about in comments under other stacks that I'll just drop for now and come back to later as a stand-alone. Bioethics.
And Nuffield Bioethics Council is a major player in the field. It's out of the UK, funded by Wellcome Trust (Glaxo-Wellcome, Big Pharma). A peer of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Actually it's older and more prestigious, and arguably more influential in shaping global public health policy. Including behavioural health.
Bioethics is one of the most important fields there is in shaping the future of mankind. From eugenics to euthanasia, to biotechnology+ AI, transhumanism, infectious disease, psychological operations on an unwitting public, coercion, manipulation, all of it is in theory constrained by bioethics. Mrs. Anthony Fauci, Christine Grady, is the NIH's Chief Bioethicist. If that helps understand what values bioethics embraces.
Here is a 225-page guide that Nuffield put out in 2007 to help public health officials develop public health policy that uses coercion and manipulation, psychological trickery to make a population behave as authorities believe they should. They describe their policies as practicing "good stewardship," balancing the desire for individual freedom and civil liberties with the need to protect the collective's public health and safety. It's a mental masturbatory exercise on how to rationalize and justify collectivist authoritarianism in the name of public health, while patting themselves on the back for including concerns for individual freedom and civil liberties into the conversation...to be summarily dismissed in the conclusions. But at least they mentioned individual freedom, WooHoo!! This is the mind. This is the inside of the minds of those who seek to "help" us poor little creatures who they must be good stewards for, lest we hurt ourselves or others. Like livestock they must ethically care for. It's a massive subject, with tentacles that reach everywhere. A lot of which are linked directly to the Behaviorists I describe in A Narrative. Stand-alone deep dive coming soon. Sneak preview of this important resource that shapes "ethical" public health policies all over the world today if you care to trudge through it. Have a barf bag handy.
https://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Public-health-ethical-issues.pdf