Admittedly, we're fishing in murky waters on this one. But this stuff is pretty weird. And I am watching the X-Files right now. So there.
The Stanford Research Institute. Their role seems to fall under the totally forgotten second evil complex Eisenhower warned us about! Everyone and their mom knows by now that the 'military-industrial complex' is the root of all the dang problems. I agree with that a long ways.
But recently a different pattern has become apparent: the Doctor Strangelove kind of Establishment Troll. Really, it's an obvious pattern that lacks a name, another shady feedback loop of authority and federal spending that wants to control All of Existence. The Neo-Cons cruise in this sector, but they don't define it.
Eisenhower saw this as a Threat. Let's listen in on that famous speech where he coined "military industrial complex":
.......But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise.
Of these, I mention two only.
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system – ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.
Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we – you and I, and our government – must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without asking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.
Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.
Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war – as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years – I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.
Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road......
Heady stuff. So what would the evil scheme of the scientific-technological elite look like, circa mid-1970s? What utopian vision would secure elite control in all possible futures?
Answer: The Stanford Research Institute's "Changing Images of Man", a 1974 classic! It got around on BitTorrent before, with this description:
Changing Images of Man - Stanford Research Institute (now SRI International) released a report in 1974 that has become a classic in the "alternative futures" literature. It has been adopted as a text in non-traditional courses at more than a dozen universities and reprinted repeatedly by SRI. Changing Images of Man explores the reasons why changes may have to take place in the fundamental conceptual premises, laws, attitudes and ethics once suitable for guiding the development of the United States and other highly industrialized nations if a humane (and "workable") future is to be achievable. It discusses the evidence that such changes may be occurring and the possibility that an evolutionary transformation may be underway that is at least as profound as the transition in Europe when the Medieval Age gave way to the rise of science and the Industrial Revolution. SYSTEMS SCIENCE AND WORLD ORDER LIBRARY -- Explorations of World Order 255 pages - 1974, 1982 O.W. Markley, Willis W. Harman (DIGICAM PHOTOS OF ORIGINAL - PDF FORMAT)
Here's the PDF link: DOWNLOAD "Changing Images of Man" (30 MB) in PDF. Check out the site I got it from: “Changing Images of Man” in PDF Format // Skilluminati Research.
There is plenty of weird and creepy stuff in here, but I would recommend seeking out the chapter about paranormal activities to put under control. These guys were doing the research themselves! As some put it, a bunch of evil establishment dudes taking lots of LSD to figure out how to beat the hippies!
Here are some tiny, vaguely menacing JPEGs from the book. I would recommend starting in around Page 80, when the stuff about paranormal ESP and psi phenomenon really gets going. These guys were way into this stuff. (Sorry I can't make these more clear- a software glitch tonight: use your psi/imagination? Or else just go to those barely squintable page numbers?)
Joe Delgado’s “Physical Control of the Mind” , Willis Harman shows up in the darndest places and Scientists on Acid: The Story Behind “Changing Images of Man” which quotes from something called "Mind Control, World Control":
One associate of Hubbard's was New World Order theorist Willis Harman at the Stanford Research Institute. SRI had earlier recieved grants from the US Army to research chemical incapacitants. When visited by a representative of the underground press at SRI, Harman told the man, "There's a war going on between your side and mine. And my side is not going to lose."
This sounds suspiciously like The Big Lebowski: "THE BUMS LOST!"
Hubbard was specifically assigned to the Alternative Futures Project, which performed future-oriented strategic planning for corporations and government agencies. Harman and Hubbard shared a goal "to provide the [LSD] experience to political and intellectual leaders around the world." Harman acknowledges that "Al's job was to run the special sessions for us."
As a bonus, today's post includes the profoundly elitist "The Crisis of Democracy; Report on the Governability of Democracies to the Trilateral Commission" by Samuel Huntington and other suspicious eggheads. I have to throw in some more nuglets from those dang Skilluminati: PDF: DOWNLOAD "Crisis of Democracy" -- 1975 Trilateral Report
The Democratic Challenge to Authority
The essence of the democratic surge of the 1960s was a general challenge to the existing systems of authority, public and private. In one form or another, this challenge manifested itself in the family, the university, business, public and private associations, politics, the government bureaucracy, and the military services. People no longer felt the compulsion to obey those whom they had previously considered superior to themselves in age, rank, status, expertise, character and talents. Within most organizations, discipline eased and differences in status became blurred. Each group its right to participate equally -- and perhaps more than equally -- in the decisions which affected itself.
A Question of Vision
What is in short supply in Democratic societies today is not consensus on the rules of the game, but a sense of purpose as to what one should achieve by playing the game. In the past, people found their purposes in religion, in nationalism, and in ideology. But neither church, nor state, nor class now commands people's loyalties. In some measure, Democracy itself was inspired by manifestations of each of these forces and commitments.
Protestantism sanctified the individual conscience; nationalism postulated the equality of citizens; and liberalism provided the rationale for a limited government based on consent. But now all three gods have failed. We have witnessed the dissipation of religion, the withering away of nationalism, and the decline -- if not the end -- of class-based ideology.
The Dangers of Freedom
The democratic spirit is egalitarian, individualistic, populist and impatient with distinctions of class and rank. The spread of that spirit weaks the traditional threats to democracy posed by such groups as the aristocracy, the church and the military. At the same time, the pervasive spirit of democracy may pose an intrinsic threat and undermine all forms of association, weakening the social bonds which hold together family, enterprise, and community. Every social organization requires, in some measure, inequalities in authority and distinctions in function. To the extent that the spread of democratic temper corrodes all these, exercising a leveling and homogenizing influence, it destroys the bases of trust and cooperation among citizens, and creates obstacles to collaboration of any common purpose.
Now that's what I call some authoritarian discourse! So apparently all this utopian stuff comes from a bunch of Theosophists, the mysterious super-religion invented by Madame Blavatsky...
Anything about Theosophy gets pretty weird. It's like Scientology minus the lie detectors and Applied Satanism? But Scientologists were running the remote viewing programs at SRI too apparently... I think I'll stop there....
In any case, I found this stuff to be a classic angle on the exact evil Second Complex of Scientific-Technological Elite and their plan to dominate public policy! Which Eisenhower warned you about, and all your acid-dropping Hippie Professors forgot to teach you about too!
The plan has a second face, indeed, General Eisenhower!