Obama uses a communication technique called Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP.) The idea is that the words being used are simply a vehicle to implant an underlying message.
For example, when he says that “the parents of Sandy Hook deserve a vote” on gun confiscation – the underlying message is that gun owners are aiding and abetting child killers. When he says that “all scientists agree that CO2 caused Sandy” the underlying message is that climate skeptics are planet killers.
I have had experience dealing with an NLP trained adversary, and it is simple to shut their BS down. You have to argue against their message, not their words.
For example – you say “Everyone wants to protect children, and your attempt to conflate legal gun owners with psychotic murderers is disgusting and unacceptable. Sandy Hook parents deserve a constructive discussion about how to prevent violent crime, not a knee-jerk destruction of the Bill of Rights”
You can also say “Hurricanes, floods and droughts have plagued man since the dawn of history. Blaming your political opponents for the weather is the worst kind of McCarthyism.”
NLP only works on people who have been trained to politely accept blame. Don’t be a victim. If you respond to their message, rather than their words – the NLP aggressor gets confused and disoriented because their plan failed.
Do you think NLP works then do you?
Absolutely. Obama has confused hundreds of millions of people using it. It is an extremely effective technique.
I’m sceptical. I think it might give people who use it an extra confidence boost. That is certainly helpful of course. But I have my doubts about whether it is any more effective than placebo.
Steve, it’s called the “Delphi Technique,” further developed by the Rand Corporation as it expanded on the ideas of Saul Alinsky, the political mentor of Obama and the subject of Hillary’s graduate thesis. Here’s an excellent article that further explains the machinations of the technique:
http://www.freedomadvocates.org/articles/sustainable_development/the_consensus_process_20060603181
It’s the “sustainable” method of brainwashing for those who went to public schools before the late sixties and early seventies.
If you can get people to accept the concept they are actually responsible for the weather, you can get them to believe and do just about any crazy thing, like standing in 35 degree weather to protest how hot it’s getting and how it’s going to destroy everything unless we willingly submit to their instructions, which comes from a modern crystal ball called a “model.”
Like Bill McKibben and his Rockefeller-funded acolytes from Middlebury College?
Pretty soon people will believe they can control the tides.
“The Central Committee of the Viet Nam Communist Party is developing a resolution to respond to climate change and protect the country’s environment and natural resources.”
The point of global warming is to unite the globe in a single purpose which just happens to be complete control. When you have a govt. official telling people, by law, they can’t have a 2 liter soda with their pizza or anything more than 16 oz and the people don’t tell him to go eff himself, then we are well on our way to that control. These little things are just a test to get people used to being denied that “which is not good for them”.
The inventor of NLP, Richard Bandler, shot his girlfriend in the face and she scrawled a message in her dying blood to “stop them” but he convinced the court that it was an accident and he went on to milk the recent seduction community craze of millions of dollars, selling audio tapes of seminars originally targeted at New Age life coach psycho-therapists. Eventually a whole syndicate of online marketing gurus arose promoting Internet era pyramid schemes who trade each other’s telephone lists for their network of boiler rooms to use NLP etc. to extract the critical information they need to scam desperate pre-bankruptcy retirees and cancer patients out of their money, namely the credit limits on each and every one of their credit cards. The Salty Droid blog is on the case, releasing insider info of how Tony Robbins was dragged into the mess as be got up to speed with online marketing.
Interesing. It was the drug dealers prostitute/girlfriend. Hard to imagine what the jury was thinking when they let him off..
http://richardbandlerinfo.blogspot.com/
Yeah, I second that. And Nik good to see you back in good forum, though I liked your poem or whatever. Kind of reminded me of some Tool lyrics.
Con men are good slick talkers. You can stick a label on it, and say “that’s the power of NLP”, but at the end of the day, it’s just the art of high performance bull shit.
@ least I got 2 erics on me side 🙂
Also, Nik, I saw your excellent posts at phys org: http://phys.org/news/2013-02-sea-ice-disturbs-greenhouse-gases.html
Outstanding! There is growing number of skeptics that have joined phys org to counter the propaganda. Phys org is a great science site, with the exception of the agw bs. I encourage us all to join.
Boards like that have been overrun with crazies. It’s like fighting a loosing battle against The Zombie Apocalypse. Yes their arguments are easy to kill off because they are slow and dumb but eventually your supply of ammunition will be exhausted.
I disagree. Check out the link, and you see that we are holding our ground, thanks in part to Nik here. And I don’t know what you mean by crazies, other than scientists that believe in agw. We need to take the fight outside of our self-contained skeptic circles. This is the perfect place where we can have impact — at no cost, For the scientifically inclined skeptic, go for it. And Will I think you would actually be a perfect candidate to help our side out at phys org.
I mean like someone declaring that the rise in CO2 and the industrial revolution correlate therefore CO2 caused the warming over the last 300 years. Then, when you point them to the paragraph in the last IPCC report which states that CO2 could not have been a significant climate driver prior to 1950, they… don’t care. The IPCC is too “conservative” or something.
(But maybe the climate is changing recently.)
So then, increasing CO2 caused the Industrial Revolution …. hmmm …..there’s a grant there somewhere, I’m sure.
I see what you’re saying. It’s certainly not going to be as “sterile” a place as here (albeit crazy Appell). Of course we are not going to change the minds of any of the arguers making comments. It’s for the readers. Just get our point of view out there, if nothing else. Show the flag. It could make a big difference at the pivotal science site phys org because we might be able to start changing some opinions of conventional scientists, and start a trend. First the battles, then the war.
Like any technology NLP can be used to benefit people or harm them. NLP was developed to help people.
If Obama studied it and is using it to deceive people that is quite a shame.
It should be noted that the techniques of NLP existed in one form or another for many thousands of years.
Please don’t blame NLP for the people use misuse it for you do a great disservice to those that NLP helps.
Julia Gillard uses NLP to convince Australians they are having a never ending drought and only her carbon tax will save us. This is what never ending drought looks like on 02/25/2013…..
http://www.bom.gov.au/products/national_radar_sat.loop.shtml
If she uses NLP I wouldn’t use that as a testimonial. Latest poll numbers: Gillard’s Labor 44 to Coalition’s 56.
Much to Julia’s dismay I’d guess, Aussies are born with an above average BS detector and the demeanor to shove it back from where it came..
The liberals accuse the right of using this all the time, they call it “dog whistling”. The reason they are so quick to say that is because they themselves do it so they project their own behaviors on other people. Most people like to believe they are “normal” or “average” and that other people think like they do themselves. So if they are doing something, it is natural for them to assume others are, too.
Want to REALLY get inside their head, tell them that “progressive liberalism” is a right wing plot to get people who agree with it to kill themselves off through things like abortion, birth control, sterilization, and euthanasia leaving only right wingers to take over. That really causes some serious dissonance.
Oh, and it helps to wait until they are good and stoned to tell them that.
You forgot to add the newest sort of marriage.
the left wing, and the right wing, are singularly made of statists. They are not opposites, they are diffrent means to the same ends, a centralized monopoly applied to a geographical territory in which an oligarky may hold the exclusive right to the initation of force and coercion against its inhabitants.
The conventional political spectrum, its aims is not to diffrentiate opposites, but to get people
to self identify as falling within a particular range of choices, that always give the right answer
for the objective of statists, and never to those who wish to be truely free.
Is it effective “….Obama uses a communication technique called Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP.) The idea is that the words being used are simply a vehicle to implant an underlying message.
For example, when he says that “the parents of Sandy Hook deserve a vote” on gun confiscation – the underlying message is that gun owners are aiding and abetting child killers.”
NLP, a curious term. It is effective on many. A man with an incredibly piss poor economic performance, whose sheeple, the middle class and poor, are progressively doing far worse under his term then any most any other, still fooled many and was reelected, (by hook or crook) But I call it a simple strawman argument, yes with the sophistory of an underlying message. In the case above the clear strawman is that no one is saying the parents of Sandy Hook DO NOT deserve a vote. (If I was a parent I damm well wish I was at the school that day and had possesion of a gun; which leads to the first part of Obumer’s messsage based on the first strawman, that he knows what their vote is, and that wnyone who disagrees with that is for the tragedy, and thus the underlying message as Steve pointed out.
Another clear example was the Trevor Martin story, Obama made incredible leaps of logic, insisting that we all must collectively reflect on racism in that incident, (the mass white man guilt) The man has zero respect for the truth, he only used the incident as a political ploy. He did not even call down the New B.Panther party and their threats of vilgante homicide. By virtue of his portraying the incident as racist he supported them, just as CNN has supported the recent Donner case. Playing on collective guilt is a strong card.
Particularly those who so badly want to believe.
See also Suzette Elgin, “The gentle art of verbal self defense”, and Patricia Evans, “The verbally abusive relationship”. The models are parallel; the real message is in the (abusive) unspoken assumption. The trick is to ignore overt message, and challenge the covert one.
“Obama uses a communication technique called Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP.) The idea is that the words being used are simply a vehicle to implant an underlying message.” – Let’s talk about the message you are trying to send. You are attempting to manipulate your reader. The reality is all language has a surface meaning and a meaning that comes from the deep structure of our experience. This concept comes from linguistics and does not originate from NLP. However, you choose to use NLP, because it includes the term programming in the title. NLP is also little known to the majority of people, so it implies special or exclusive knowledge. The reality is both conservatives and progressives have think tanks actively working to frame their message. The manipulator here is you; for example, “the parents of Sandy Hook deserve a vote” on gun confiscation. You quote Obama but no comma before your insert of “gun confiscation”. You distort the message deliberately, to push the fear button in your readers.
Obama used to give lectures at the University of Chicago saying that citizens should not be allowed to own guns. So piss off.
Obama-types (politicians) have been doing this manipulation stuff for thousands of years. The first NLP book came out in the 1970s.
Don’t blame NLP for people’s behaviour, blame the people!
NLP simply modelled what effective communicators already do and also how you can know when they’re BS-ing you (not that it was phrased that way).
Speaking as an NLP Practitioner (for 30 years) I noticed you missed the first significant contribution of NLP to sanity called the Meta-Model which goes through the precise steps/questions you can use to find out the actual truth from politicians. Eg “We will benefit from climate legislation”, with the appropriate response being “Who EXACTLY will benefit?” and then of course, “How do you know this?”.
Because the models are genuinely accurate (unlike some we know of) they attract those who want to be effective communicators and unfortunately people who want power are included in that category. As are dedicated teachers, doctors, nurses, managers, scientists, parents etc.