Christina Aguilera's upcoming album is called Bionic.
The first thing that I thought of when I saw this picture/graphic was how similar it was to a picture of Miley Cyrus that I had seen recently.
True, this is a cartoon depiction of Miley/Hannah, and this is from an episode of Family Guy not from a Miley Cyrus album cover. All that is true, but I still feel that this is a case of pre-conditioning. We are being trained, like Pavlov's dog salivating in anticipation of the food that is to come.
The similarity is that these are both young female pop artists. And they are both being de-humanized in a remarkably similar fashion.
The next thing I noticed about the CA (Christina Aguilera) album cover is that if you remove the odd tuffs of hair along the bottom, what you are left with is a short-haired and very androgynous David-Bowie-style image.
It also reminds me of Liza Minelli from Cabaret, or is it Joel Grey that she reminds me of? Here they are together singing "Money makes the world go a-round". The gender bender aspect of Liza's short hair is probably lost on today's audience. Back then it was highly unusual for a woman to wear short hair.
And notice how the word Bionic is split in syllables - "Bi-on-ic". Perhaps to emphasize "bi", as in bisexual, whereas the original intent of the word is to emphasize "bio" as in biology.
In the beginning
Way back in time, before Terminator and cyborgs, there was "The Six Million Dollar Man". It premiered in 1974 and it was a hugely popular show.
The intro to the show featured this monologue (in a slightly robotic voice).
"Gentlemen, we can rebuild him. We have the technology. We have the capability to build the world's first bionic man. Steve Austin will be that man. We can make him better than he was before. Better, stronger, faster."You can watch the slightly cheesy - by today's standards - intro here. Don't worry, when your kids grow up they'll think Avatar is just as cheesy.
Note the term "bionic man". This was meant to be a combination of bio and electronic. Later a spinoff show appeared in 1976. It was called "The Bionic Woman".
In the show, the development of "bionic" technology is attributed to the "OSI" (Office of Scientific Investigation or Office of Strategic Intelligence) which was supposed to be a branch of the CIA. Shows like this have to be sponsored and supported by the military in order to make it on network TV - especially back in 1974 when there were only 3 networks.
What a coincidence! Christina calls her album "Bionic". Another coincidence! Kanye had a song in 2007 called "Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger" with a distinctly robotic sounding audio.
Translation: Transhumans are good. In fact they're better than regular old natural-style humans.
When I first heard Kanye's song on the radio, I assumed the lyrics referred to the Olympic motto, "Citius, Altius, Fortius" , which is Latin for "Faster, Higher, Stronger". It never occurred to me that there could be a connection to transhumanism until I saw the video.
In fact the video for Kanye West's "Stronger" looks like an updated and longer version of the "Six Million Dollar" man intro. Both involve a man on an operating table being made "stronger" by being turned into a transhuman. The transhuman element in the "Stronger" video includes robot surgeons. At one point the robot surgeon makes the obligatory OK-666-Horus-eye sign. This Kanye video could be the subject of a post of its own.
Hurry, hurry! Transhuman upgrade special - today only!
There is a similarity between "The Six Million Dollar Man" and Avatar. In both cases the person who was "upgraded" was damaged. The Elite wouldn't just depict upgrading a perfectly healthy normal human being, because this would create a moral dilemma for the audience. So instead they take someone who is crippled or in danger of dying and "fix" him with a transhuman enhancement. And the audience cheers and applauds.
It's part of their art of deception. Find a special case where the unthinkable becomes thinkable. And then expand that special case until it becomes the norm. Bingo! Societal norms and attitudes are changed. There's no more need for propaganda because the society has been changed from within.
That's the ultimate end goal of advertising or public relations. To get the public to believe that it was their idea all along. It's done through subtle manipulations and associations, slowly breaking down any internal resistance through preconditioning and desensitizing. Until in the end the mind welcomes and even desires that which it once rejected.
It's not called a publicity or ad "campaign" for nothing. It's part of a war. It's a battle. And the battle is going on in our minds. It's a battle for control of territory consisting of ideas and concepts - and yes, symbols.
The sale of the century
Edward Bernays is one of the father's of Public Relations. He devised techniques for breaking down people's barriers of resistance to new products and ideas.
Here is an example.
In 1915 Edward Bernays was hired to promote a Russian Ballet tour. At the time “Americans thought masculine dancers were deviates, and that ‘dancing was not nice,’ and of limited interest.”
And here are the results of his PR campaign (war campaign).
“The ballet was sold out before the opening. By the time the ballet toured American cities, demand had already dictated a second tour and little girls were dreaming of becoming ballerinas. Bernays had remolded biases to get his story told. The American view of ballet and dance was changed forever.”
How did he achieve such remarkable results? He broke his audience into different groups and devised a plan of attack to break down the mental barriers that each of those groups had towards ballet. His ultimate goal was to replace that with a real desire for ballet (even a need) in the person's psyche.
And he created a sense of anticipation. He flooded the newspapers and magazines with articles about the crowds in Europe standing in line to see the Russian Ballet. When they finally arrived in New York, there were eager crowds waiting to welcome them. (Some of those in the crowds were probably hired by Bernays.)
Of course this should remind us of the British music invasion of the 60s led by the Beatles. And it is the same technique being used to promote the "eagerly anticipated" Bionic album by CA. And yet the public falls for it every time. Are we really that predictable? In a word - "Yes"!
- For the "vain people" cosmetic surgery is used as the first step in breaking down resistance.
- For the scientific crowd, it is presented as a new and exciting technology.
- For the environmental crowd, you have the Avatar fantasy of a Brave New World.
- For the spiritual crowd, you have New Age religion and its sold as part of a major change accompanying the "new age".
- For the sports crowd, it's a way to enhance performance.
Just as it was necessary to sell the moon project to the public through publicity campaigns and TV shows and movies with these themes, so it is happening now with the transhumanism agenda. The big difference is that this is a hidden agenda, while the moon project was overt. Of course there were other parts of the space program that were kept hidden from the public - like spy satellites and weapons in space - so perhaps there is not as big a difference as there would first appear to be.
And the closer the Elite get to achieving their goal of transhumanism, the more overt and public are their statements in favor of this goal. By the time the technology is actually unveiled, the public will be clamoring for it because they have been pre-conditioned to expect this eventuality and also trained to welcome and even embrace it. Those who are still opposed by that time will be ridiculed. No amount of logical arguments will be able to dislodge the belief system put in place in the public through decades of pre-conditioning.
And here we see Bernays' techniques utilized on a massive scale over many decades. And we see the very predictable results as well.
Who is their enemy?
Who would be opposed to transhumanism anyway? Permit me to provide you with some food for thought. You don't have to agree with my argument, but I at least ask you to give it some consideration.
There is a worldwide organization which has a very large membership and does wield considerable clout in the discussion of public morality. I'm referring to the Catholic Church. The Church has a doctrine declaring the "sanctity of life". And the Church has been very stubborn and unwilling to change with regards to some of its core beliefs.
In particular, with regards to the issue of abortion the Church has been leading a battle for decades against those who insist on "a woman's right to choose". Ignoring of course the rights of the unborn child - usually referred to as "the fetus" by the "pro-choice" movement. What "choice" does the child have?
And indeed what "choice" will women have in a transhuman future with regards to having children? The pro-abortion movement of today can easily become the population control movement of the future. And its clear that the transhumanism movement has its roots in the eugenics movement of the past. (But I'll have to get into that in a future article.) In the future women may not have a choice about when to have children or how many children they can have. This is already true in China.
And a significant part of the Green movement which is pushing the "global warming" agenda, believes already that people are at the root of the problem. This is again linked to the eugenics movement.
It is then, I believe, no coincidence that we find the Catholic Church under constant attack by the corporate media. This is not to in anyway an apologia for the acts of molestation by particular Catholic priests, nor for acts of those in power who did not do all they could to put an end to those abuses.
However, why is it that we never hear about the systematic ritual abuse of children at daycare centers in the military. When this has been public knowledge since at least the 80s? Shouldn't the same standard be applied to the US military and the Catholic church? (But again, this could be the topic of a whole new post.)
The point is that the Church's doctrine of "the sanctity of life" puts it squarely in opposition to the transhuman agenda, and coincidentally the Church is under attack. Could these two seemingly unrelated forces actually be a cause and effect? This is the seed that I want to plant in you mind.
I am not Catholic by the way, but I have an affinity for the Catholic Church.
