Normality

As was said in “The Myth” :-

One of the biggest enemies of mankind is his view of NORMALITY. As individuals we each grow up, from birth, in a set of surroundings, and with individual experiences, which are peculiar to us, and the totality of these has got to be viewed by each individual as "normal", simply because he has experience of no others.

Our first affirmations of normality occur in infancy when we accept our parents, our siblings, our home, our food, our family relationships, our total way of life as "normal", since we know no other. As we grow, we go out and have experiences which are, a) in line with what we have known before, and are therefore "normal", or are, b) different, and are therefore "abnormal".

Our strongest and most long-lasting affirmations of normality are associated with home, and are built up, subconsciously, in childhood. Therefore anything that is regularly experienced in the home, will become normality. If the things that are experienced in the home are what society as a whole call "good", then normality becomes "good", and if things that are experienced in the home are what society as a whole call "bad", then normality becomes "bad". As a result, the problem for us all is that, generally speaking, we view our own personal "normality" as being "right" or "acceptable" (and it may well be so).

There is, within the majority of  infants, an innate sense of what can only be described as “universal rectitude” (yes, these things can be inborn or instinctual… look at the way in which the baby cuckoo, never having seen either parent, flies to South Africa several weeks after its parents, (and its foster parents do not even know where South Africa is!) and returns to breed, in exactly the same way as it was bred, the following year ). It is fortunate that this property exists because, if it did not, many children, who have started out on the “wrong” path, would end up being in a much more pitiable mess than they are in. Sadly, however, the childhood “conditioning” normality that is experienced, can overlay, or even supplant this.

The question of T.V. and its effects has been touched on earlier (in The Myth). Its effect is without doubt one of the big reasons for the growth in crime and degeneration in moral standards. Sadly there are vast numbers of  individuals (many of them adults and ‘apparently’ of sound mind) who seem unable to differentiate between TV fiction and the physical world in which we live. This leads to such ludicrous incidents as sending birthday cards or wreaths to TV soap opera characters. If this can occur to minds that are supposed to have “developed”, what is going to happen to those minds at the beginning of their journey? These poor little souls are bombarded with all the facile outpourings of  “Yoof TV”, with its constant shouting and screaming, vying with ear splitting  cacophony, masquerading as music, and overlaid with non-yoof programmes featuring drugs, robbery, murder and sex. Some of it is on the news, some in documentary form, some in “drama” and some in advertising. All this is fed to them in the one place that they understand as “normality”. There is so much of this stuff poured over them that drugs, robbery, murder and sex become a common place reality in their ambit. Little wonder then that the wee souls take in a very different view of what life is all about and have very great difficulty is separating acceptable behaviour from unacceptable behaviour. All the more so when, for entirely the wrong reasons (OBE’s, blatant moral posturing and political capital), “the sanctity, cherished importance and untouchability ” of children is trumpeted incessantly by those who should know better.

The matter of the debasement of the English language is a prime example of the power of  television (and pop radio to a lesser extent). The inclusion of meaningless American words and phrases in the speech of children less than school age must mean something. There is so much American content (bought in cheaply) on TV that American slang/pop/slum/street vocabulary is rapidly supplanting English, (both in pronunciation of legitimate words and usage of  rubbish words.)  We have got to the stage where many “celebrities” appearing on TV can only mumble “Well… yer know… like”, “ Do yer get my meaning”,etc. Even the BBC news broadcasts, once the epitome of good English, includes, in every bulletin, more than a sprinkling of American dross. Before too long we can look forward to notices in our Supermarkets (another one) saying “Check out our check out and then check out”.

A child is much more susceptible and “tuned in” (American for ‘attuned’) to what is often referred to as atmosphere or ambiance. I am certain that many of my own guiding values were ‘acquired’, not because I received parental instruction in them, but  because they formed part of my parents unspoken behavioural standards. I obviously picked up these unspoken values through ‘soaking them up’ as an infant, because several occurrences during my later childhood reflect their effects.  There were, however, many things which I received as “normality” which I have since discarded, which were quite dear to my parents standards, but which, my experience has told me, do not challenge ‘universal morality’ (or at least that part of ‘universal morality’ with which I have been in contact). It must be said that I did not have the “benefit” of TV in my formative years. A fact for which I am extremely grateful to both the tv manufacturers and the BBC. (The sets were too expensive and in any case the BBC signals were confined to the affluent South).

Another factor which conditions and hypnotises is education. In Reality the education of a child is the responsibility of its parents. How they choose to do this is up to them. Up to the age of five this does occur, but thereafter the ‘state’ claim responsibility. The way in which this has come about is again through hypnosis. The original colleges of the mediaeval era were set up, by the church, to provide a supply of clerics and administrators, who were articulate in Latin and Greek, and who could ensure the continued wealth and well being of the church by keeping the populace meek and the money coming in. The crown was also aided with an unofficial civil service. The dissolution of the monasteries did not end their education system, since the crown, having seen the benefits of an “educated” bureaucracy, “nationalised” them. This educated bureaucracy was drawn from noble families, and of course they could pay for this education of their off spring. After all it was an investment in their family’s fortune, whether they went into the clergy or the administration.

At some point it was deemed necessary to ensure that the family idiot was not fed into the system and so a means, of ensuring that only those capable of absorbing “education” were admitted, was conceived. This was the start of the “entrance exam” system.

During the ensuing centuries grammar schools were founded to educate the sons of gentry up to the level needed to pass these entrance exams. Since these were, in the main, privately run, and the need for a high percentage of  successes was paramount, only boys who could pass their entrance examination would be allowed in (unless of course daddy had ‘serious’ money). Prior to the age of grammar school entry, boys would be educated by private tutor.  Although some charities (again usually religious) had provided a form of schooling, the Elementary Education act of 1870 was the real turning point for the educational mess that many children find themselves in today. Local education boards were set up and were obliged to provide schooling up to the age of thirteen. Those who could not “keep up” with the pace of learning were allowed to leave at ten, conditional upon a prior good attendance.

Those education authorities who opted for providing secondary education  built a ) High Schools, which were a form of local authority grammar school,  and b ) other ‘secondary’ schools, which were not. Additionally they needed some means of assessing the potential of their school children to absorb this grammar school learning. They knew from previous experience that the grammar school type education would be lost on many, and so  some sort of selection process would be necessary, and, yes, you’ve guessed, another entrance exam was born. But this time it was carried out prior to leaving the primary school. It was often referred to as “a scholarship”, since it could carry with it a free entry to the High School ( without it even those who gained enough marks to take up a High School place would be expected to pay for their education, just as they had before). Quite obviously only a certain number of  High School places were available each year and so, although the number of marks gained  in the exam was calculated, the “pass” level was different each year, being set at the figure needed to ensure that the number of scholars that “Passed” did not  exceed  the number of places available in the High Schools.

This “selection” process was seen as beneficial in as much as it would ensure that the output of the High Schools was potentially on a par with the grammar schools.  The Universities meanwhile had become embroiled in setting exam papers for these High Schools to help decide which students were suitable for “Sixth Form” education, and which sixth form students were suitable for University education. This continued the theme of defending the Universities’ ability to turn out well educated citizens. What was not made common knowledge was the fact that the “pass” mark varied each year, for just the same reason as explained above, in order not to have a university intake that was too big for the available places.

Fast forward to the present time, when all this has been forgotten, and suddenly  all these selection examination results are seen as a true indication of  academic achievement. They are, but only in part, because many of those who have learned the most can not necessarily reproduce “knowledge” at exam time, but as long as a “selection” process is necessary the “pass” level will always be fixed by the number of places at the next stage. This is hypnosis again in action, as, due to years of political dogma and interference, the public’s perception is that any examination must measure academic achievement. Whereas in reality it only measures the retention ability of the students memory. This is born out by the number of  highly intelligent and successful  businessmen and industrialists who did not have the “benefit” of a Grammar/High school + University education. Conversely the value of a University degrees is somewhat tarnished, depending upon subject and university. 

Many of today’s educational problems stem not from the distant past but from the  relatively recent political dogma that everyone shall be equal (apart from the politicians, who shall be more equal !)  It is a proven fact that given the same opportunity some people come out better/worse than others. The idea is just as ludicrous as the “one size fits all” farce with men’s socks etc. Political Correctness has decreed that “every person has a right to …[     ]?” (fill in as needed), and as a result men have the right to be women, men have the right to marry men, dogs have a right to be cats, and idiots have a right to university degrees. Perfect….Heaven….Shangrila!

Another of the factors overlooked in this educational hypnosis is the fact that what is taught, is mostly for the purpose of examination passing, and not for the proper conditioning of children to enter the adult world as useful, honest, helpful citizens. This is not a modern phenomenon. I sat what was known as “School Certificate” in 1949 and one of the questions that we knew would be asked in the chemistry paper was “What is the smallest indivisible particle of matter?”  We also knew that the “correct”  answer was “The atom”. We also knew that the atom had been divided in 1944 because the atom bomb had been dropped on those poor souls in Japan!!! We were expected to forget reality and give arrant nonsense as the answer.  Because many of the “education establishment, including lecturers and teachers, have never tasted the outside world, having spent all their lives in academia, simply moving from school desk to lectern, their personal knowledge of educational requirements is based on examination criteria and a severe hypnotic handicap. They can not see that what a person needs is teaching about life and reality, and they are certainly not in a position to do so. Providing the three Rs are absorbed successfully much of the rest of  Knowledge is easily acquired as needed.  All the current “lifelong learning” etc. furore, created by the present bunch of muffins who are ruining the U.K. beyond repair, is nothing but a political ruse to disguise its failed promise on unemployment.

As was pointed out in the first paragraph of The Myth, virtually the whole of our lives is held in check by hypnosis and political double-speak. The above, far from completely explored, example of educational hypnosis can be paralleled by the development of taxation, the development of pseudo democracy, the development of law (both civil and criminal), the abject “development” of the National Health Service. All these, and much more, have been initiated by the power seekers in order to raise money and at the same time appease and control the populace.

Great Britain is not unique in this, it goes on, and has gone on, throughout the world. With the veil only slightly drawn aside virtually every item on a typical day’s T.V. news bulletin can be seen for what it is……..another example of double-speak or the result of  hypnosis. (Very often the utterers of the double-speak are persons who are habitually more asleep than the rest of us. Remember the Emperor’s new clothes?)