Failures of Human Attitude:
Maybe the Greatest Threat of All

Last Update: 30 May 2024

What is this Issue Concerning?

If we can accept as fact that our society has been making very poor decisions with dire consequences, as revealed in many other pages on this site, it is worthwhile to realize that a failure in our attitudes is the only reasonable explanation of so many poor decisions by so many people over a long time.

After all, decisions depend on perceptions, beliefs, and ultimately attitudes. For example, what kind of issues we prioritize as important, what kind of verification we choose to require to believe that information is true, and what we believe is an appropriate urgency and response to different types of facts are all attitude questions. If our attitudes are poor, our decisions will also be poor.

What is the Threat to Life of a Failure of Human Attitudes?

The Earth being under human management, poor human decisions, and the poor attitudes from which they arise, are a paramount threat to life on earth because of the mismanagement of life on Earth which results from them. This mismanagement affects all biological life on this planet, all being under human influence and none able to withstand this influence (at least as far as we know). Specifically we have:

1. Polluted the air, and not just in passing but intentionally.

2. Polluted the water, not just in passing but intentionally

3. Polluted the earth

4. Polluted the airwaves with electromagnetic radiation

5. Polluted the biome genetically with products of our genetic engineering

6. Ravaged aquatic life by catching

7. Ravaged terrestrial life by displacement and hunting

8. Implemented social systems whereby the few control the many, whether this is obvious or not, and even though we were all born equally human.

9. Build weapons which can destroy not only military enemies but most if not all life on the planet

10. Persecuted people who offered better ideas, including Jesus Christ.

11. Promote unempowering belief systems based on denying the existence of God, apparently for no other purpose than offending Him.

All of these poor decisions are caused by poor attitudes. The problem is at the foundation of our minds.

So what?

If we can identify the poor attitudes, and the error of them, and correct them, we can improve our world.

10 Major Failings of Modern Human Attitude:

1. Seeing population as a threat.

Due to accepting the mainstream environmentalist narrative that humanity as a useless scourge of the Earth, anything which results in the death of other people, without threatening self, tends to be accepted.

The truth is that our population is our greatest asset, humans have a potential for good, and it's only gross mismanagement of our resources and misuse of our ingjenuity which have caused the problems, such as pollution or shortages, blamed on population. This is a world of abundant resources and humans are a species of abundant ingenuity; there should be no problems except for reckless mismanagement which then blames the victims for existing. For example, the first application of Humanity of nuclear energy was to build an atomic bomb. It wasn't a fault of population.

2. A tendency to justify killing other people or easily accept its justification.

Killing should never be the ultimate goal of any moral endeavour, because self-defense is based on removal of threat and this doesn't always require killing the other person. Killing should only be justified when it is absolutely necessary to remove the immeidate and direct threat to life, but not to become a goal in itself.

We're in a society now where any killing done by Government, its agents, or its allies, tends to be portrayed as self-defense, and any amount of killing of by-standers in the process tends to be considered as acceptable.

For an example of practically unnecessary killing being touted as self-defense, in late 2023 Israel responded in a touted right of self-defense to a deadly 7 October 2023 raid by Hamas by heavily attacking Gaza to no apparent limit (except maybe their ammunition), and an extreme civilian death toll, despite the Gaza civiliians having no realistic responsiblity for Hamas (not being permitted an election for 17 years prior), and despite Israeli fortifications (starting with the 50' wall) and equipment being so vastly superior that Hamas should be no real threat if Israeli forces bothered to prevent or respond to raids (they took many hours to respond on 7 October, something for which their Prime Minister has so far refused to answer the Israeli people asking). Israel didn't need to obliterate Gaza in self-defense, because self-defense is based on threat elimination, which would have been realized by simply manning their impressive and existing fortifications instead of sleeping on the job. Instead, they used the justification of 'self-defense' to suddenly cut off food, water, medicine, fuel, and electricity to Gazans, after which they started bombing civilian areas and shooting civlians while actually paying less attention to the tunnels Hamas was known to be in. Anyone objecting was accused of not recognizing Israel's 'right to defend itself'. Related article: War against Hamas in Gaza is act of self-defence, Israel tells world court

Using the same war as an example of the growing acceptance of collateral killing of by-standers, any bombing of buildings was accepted if Israel claimed a Hamas fighter was there or under there and without any requirement to evidence that. For example:

• 17 October 2023 Israel eliminates top Hamas commander; 14 said killed as Haniyeh’s family home bombed

• 27 May 2023Israeli military says it killed 2 senior Hamas officials in Rafah strikes that left at least 35 dead

• November 1, 2023 Israel says new strike on Gaza refugee camp kills second Hamas leader, first evacuees reach Egypt

Similarly, the United States has long justified killing civilians to targets at a ratio of 50 to 1, including the bombings of weddings and funerals, and often strike soon after to kill the first responders, in drone-based assassinations. Example articles:

• 22 October 2013: Drones kill rescuers in 'double tap', say activists

• September 25, 2012: Outrage at CIA's deadly 'double tap' drone attacks

• Oct. 20, 2012: Predator Drone Strikes: 50 Civilians Are Killed For Every 1 Terrorist, and the CIA Only Wants to Up Drone Warfare

• February 20, 2014: A Wedding That Became a Funeral

3. A tendency to accept Government working on dramatically different moral principles than which they expect individuals to operate on.

Governments are typically accepted, in theory or in practice, to do things like: break agreements, kill for revenge, kill an unlimited number of innocent people alongside with their target, justify all violent action as self-defense, beat and/or imprison people voicing disliked opinions, keep unlimied secrets which the Public has a moral right to know about, launch the nation into violence on allegations later proven false, monitor everyone, arbitrarily increase claims over others (taxes), arbitrarily reassess claims to no limit, arbitrarily assume dictatorial powers over others, conscript people to work or die for their purpose, punish retroactively what was legal at the time done, evict people arbitrarily, and many other things which individuals are not permitted to do in their perrsonal lives. Yet when Government does it, it is usually not seen as tyranny or wrong but freedom and jusified.

Haven't you noticed this? For example, in your personal life, if someone throws a rock and hits your car, you are not permitted to throw a rock and hit their car in retaliation, but Governments are not only accepted to retaliate, but encouraged.

4. Failure to verify the truth of Government-lead issues which good-intentioned people intervene on. While our society does seem to recognize a threat of deception from unofficial sources, it tends to trust official sources and mock or even persecute those who show any distrust of them, as though Governments have no incentive to lie. This is despite the fact that it is publicly known that most Governments have many levels of information security, which means levels of information kept from the Public, and it is not uncommon for Government to enter into agreements binding the Public in ways which the Public is not permitted to read (such as was typical for COVID-19 vaccine contracts between Government and pharmaceutical companies), proving that the Public is not permitted to know about many things which affect them. Moreover, Governments are known to have launched even wars on narratives later proven false (such as Hitler claiming that Poland attacked them, or UK and USA governments invading Iraq on the false narrative that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

5. Failure to take any responsiblity or even interest in anything outside of direct impact self, family, and the community identified with. When most people don't care about almost everything that's happening in the world, not even tens of millions dying in other countries, for example, and especially in majority-rule political systems, it forms a base of tacit approval for literally any kind of evil Government might want to do against any minorities and especially non-voting living beings such as: foreigners, pre-born children, or animals.

6. Failure to recognize moral responsiblity for what your religion condones. Many people seem to live as though their religion failing to recognize something as a moral problem means that they are justified to ignore it. However their religion is not their compulsion, but their free choice, making them actually resposible for whatever it teaches if they choose to follow that. If, for example, your religion teaches you to maim or kill, because you chose to believe that, you are just as responsible as if you thought of maiming or killing on your own. Despite this truth, if it's a religion with political strength, whatever it teaches tends to be seen as justified even if it otherwise would not be. For example, many people will not consider animal rights issues because their religion doesn't teach animal compassion and therefore, in their view, they cannot be held responsible for it.

7. Failure to recognize any moral responsiblity towards animals.

Animals are beings more similar to us than differernt, especially at the cellular level, who are indigenous co-inhabitants of the Earth with us. Can it be that they really have no right to life or to share the Earth with us? Are they really only for us to exploit?

It's one thing to see humans as above the other animals ('other' because we are part of the Animal kingdom) whom we share the planet with.

It's another thing to consider ourselves so far above other animals that literally anything we do to them is acceptable, for example to destroy no limit of their habitat and to use them in no limit of medical experiments to their unlimited harm.

And if we kill them to extinction, even directly (such as with the dodo), is that a right or wrong? Do species have the right to exist?

Is there any moral limit as to how we should treat these indigenous co-inhabitants of Earth?

8. Failure to Recognize Any True Responsibilty to Care the Earth, by which is meant, to protect the life-supporting ability of the Earth. A false movement has emerged as attacking carbon, the basis of biological life as we know it, while ignoring obvious threats like trash and mercury pollution.

9. Failing to see what is out of sight but known to be happening as just as real as what is in-sight. For example, our society cares virtually not at all about the treatment of animals known to be exploited for meat, fur, dairy, eggs, and experimentation, and is irritated if someone brings these subjects to mind: they know it is happening but they don't want to think about it. In contrast, if you present them with any pet, most people are intensely concerned with how well you are treating that pet, even more than they are concerned about how you are treating yourself, seemingly only because that animal is before their eyes.

   Simply by keeping cruelty out of sight, even though known to be happening, much cruelty has been foolishnly condoned.

10. Positivity-Based Indifference

Positivity has become a popular psuedo-religion of preventing any attention to, or presentation of, anything against what you want, while maximizing focus on what you do want. It is promoted by successful celebrities, and it doesn't seem incompatible with anyone's formal religion, so it has tended to be accepted. The hope is that by simply choosing what to focus on, you can change the universe in the direction of what you focus on.

The theory of Positivity seems wise, ie. to only focus only on the positive, and it is self-empowering, but there are many harms of this ritual in practice due to subtle errors of its application which are rarely explaoined to followers.

One of those mistakes is that it's dangerous to refuse to discuss crisis issues just because they are 'negantive' topics: it leaves you without information or preparation on that topic in that crisis, which is a strategic failure.

Another error is to blame people in their trouble that their troubles must be only their own making somehow. This discourages anyone to help people in need, out of a sense of justice. It's an easy way to explain your way out of helping others.

Underlying Problems:

1. Human Devolution:

Sadly, at least some prominent humans with broad influence in society, if not the majority, seem to be devolving towards far lower levels of thinking and morality than they should have, at least from the benefit of learning from history. This includes:

1. Focus on Transient things and Disinterest in Eternal Things

2. Failure to Recognize our Creator or any rights towards Him

3. Failure to Recognize Any Kind of Rights for Non-Human Indigenous Life on Earth

4. Revenge-Based Thinking, even to Calls for Genocide

   For example, as discussed for the Israel-Gaza War 2023 in BLOODLUST: People are losing their minds, calling for GENOCIDE against the Palestinian people

Humanity should have already learned that: war is the worst way to settle differences, it's wrong to attack civilians and military indiscriminately, it's wrong it's wrong to prevent civilians from escaping a warzone, and it's wrong to dehumanize any human population and call and work for their destruction.

5. Fear-based insistence that everyone surrender their human rights to feel safer, which legislative measures tend to have unquestioned Majority support during any kind of public crisis. In bygone days, humans actually used to work to increase human rights. Now we're unravelling all of that.

6. Excessive trust in and pursuit of fiat money, as if we don't know that it has no intrinsic value whatsoever, and even if it did we're only in this world for a short time before we move on to the Afterlife, at which point we must leave all money behind. It's nowhere near the eternal importance of higher pursuits such as: truth, morality, compassion, and a relationship with God.

7. Excessive trust in Government such that its claims, no matter how wild or destructive, are not seen as requiring evidence.

8. Government-lead persecution of identifiable groups, such as the Unvaccinated were persecuted in the COVID-19 crisis.

9. Insistence to vote more debt and less rights for future generations rather than any concept of leaving them a better world than we found it.

10. Many of us don't even know what gender we are or declare gender an arbitrary decision, ignoring that it's a physical reality down to the molecular level, which we don't have the technology to change, even if we had the right to.

2. Pride-based Problems:

   Pride is the master attitude flaw which underpins most other faults, including:

1. Selfishness. When your pride leads you to believe that you are more important than others, you only work for your own benefit. Unfortunately this makes you a drain on everyone and everything else: no longer a contributor but a kind of cancer.

   Even by mere absence of motivation to do good, what remains is a motive to do evil, even if it wasn't directly chosen. Gradually many evils have become legal, funded, and protected by our society through our Governments.

2. Pride-based Misinterpretation: When you are proud, the tendency is to interpret the behaviours as others with the most degrading depiction of them the available facts will allow, which error leads to unjustified action. For example, if someone is not social, the proud might conclude that he or she hates others, on which belief they may be malicious towards that person. The reality might be completely different, such as the person maybe being depressed.

3. Pride-based unrepentance. When you're proud you don't easily acknowledge being wrong because the attitude is that you're more valuable than others. Subsequently you don't repent.

4. Pride of Choice When you are proud you start to ignore any responsibility to others; in particular your choice tends to be seen as choice only rather than choice with responsibility. For example, in the abortion issue, pro-abortion advocates portray it as a free choice, without ever mentioning the responsibiltiy for that choice, which is extremely serious.

5. Pride of Belief

Partly related to pride of choice, this is where people become so fixated on the all-importance of their choice that they actually come to believe that whatever they choose makes it true. The attitude has been surprisingly common, for example most major religions operate on the premise that if they believe it it's true without any need to hear what someone else has to say on the matter. Pride of belief, ie. that what is chosen must be true, is why very few people born into a religion ever question it or compare it to other offerings.

3. Problems with Reception of Truth:

1. Failure to Acknowledge the Existence of Truth

In our experience, sometimes encountered that some people don't seem to understand such a thing as 'truth'. They only seem to understand sides and what side they are expected to be and speak on.

2. Disinterest in Additional Truth Beyond your Present Model

One of the greatest disappointments with society today is that a disinterest in higher level of truth has become a dominant attitude. It is common now to approach someone with some new discovery of truth, even in a topic undisputedly of utmost importance, and the receiver not be interested to hear it at that time or any other time. They generally welcome any improvements in technology, and welcome unlimited criticism of existing technology which might lead to an improvement, because they love the power of technology and value any increase in it.

The reasons for this are three:

1. They've adopted a belief system which teaches they already have all the truth they need. It is common for religious to teach their followers to dismiss outside ideas because they already have the complete perfect truth (usually in the form of an ancient book), somuch so, that anything else is totally unnecessary at best or evil at worst and either way a threat of misleading the faithful. On this thinking, people with unorthodox ideas were often persecuted, even in horrific physical including lethal ways, believing that God will reward them for punishing you.

   “They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.” --Holy Bible, King James Version (KJV), John 16:2

   Talking to these people about new ideas on related topics (and religion touches many topics because it's supposed to be a complete worldview) is not only difficult to get interest on, but the interst you stir up might be persecution of you.

   But truth, like technology, requires a continual pursuit. That is lost on book-based religions.

2. They see truth as a matter of opinions without any practical value.

3. It takes effort to analyze truth and they don't understand any reason to put in that effort.

4. They know that accepting any unconventional ideas would put them outside of their herd. People like being an accepted part of a big and powerful community. They don't want to be separate. They would rather be wrong with 'everyone else' than be right alone.

5. They may have vested interests in the community based on the old ideas. For starters, if they adopt the new ways, it doesn't mean their family will; family has often been the first to persecute those with new ideas. They may even derive income in some way related to the community based on the old ideas. For example, in the Bible, one crowd of silversmiths were angry presumably to the point of intent to murder Paul when they realized his ideas were a threat to their business of making idols, but not for any of his ideas being actually wrong (Acts chapter 19).

3. Trust-Based Truth Evaluation

This is when people carefully decide who to trust, but not carefully what to trust. Rather they believe whatever flows from the one they have decided to trust.

Although a primitive mode of thinking, it has been amazingly common, even the primary way people decide issues. The reason seems to be that relying on experts (so that only choosing the right expert is required) is a lot easier than trying to understand a topic yourself. In fact, trust in experts has become so popular that contrasts in opinions of the average person are often only a contrast in which expert they trust, rather than evidence offered or accepted at all.

4. Success-Based Truth Evaluation

A method of evaluating truth which has become popular is judging it based on the success of that message in society. For example, when judging a religion using this method, the evaluator might claim that a certain religion proves its truth in being the most popular in society over the longest time. A popular claim based on this model is that many supporters cannot be wrong.

Of course, truth is very different from popularity, and although what is true should be more popular, there are so many assumptions in that thinking that, in practice, truth and popularity are mostly independent. For one thing, there is a time advantage in long-established beliefs compared to new discoveries. Second, some truths are deliberately kept secret. Most importantly, lies which the Establishment wants to promote typically have popularity effectively given to them, such as through donations of: money, credentials, coverage, and public policies, all of which the Establishment controls. The effect is so powerful that many obvious lies, even to the harm of the Public, have remained very popular in society due to Establishment support, such as that fluoride is so vital to human health that Government must add it to public drinking water.

5. Repetition-Based Truth Evaluation

It's been said that a lie told often enough becomes the truth, but of course it doesn't.

Rather a lie repeated often enough, by enough different credible sources, is accepted as the truth, in those who base truth on social pressures, either because that's their way or they get tired on some level of resting. Psychological studies have confirmed for decades that people will conform their statements even against obvious facts if they a social conformity pressure to do so. As another evidence, in marketing, advertising tends to motivate people the more it is repeated: not just to new people, but to the same people. The sheer repetition of a claims seems to wear down the human mind's resistance.

Of course, it is the influential Establishment who are in the best position 'hype' whatever product, service, or idea they want. Perhaps this is why, for example, over-hyped Bitcoin is the most expensive of all cryptocurrencies, despite being the first and worst technology in that sector.

6. Tribalistic Prejudice in Truth Evaluation:

This is the predisposition that:

1. you have chosen a side before discussion begins, and

2. you will support your side without question at every juncture

3. you will only do, say, accept, or even acknowledge what seems to benefit your side in that discussion.

4. you will consider any statements which seem to threaten your side in any way as malicious attacks

5. you will consider anyone who presents statements which seem to threaten your side in any way as an enemy

Tribalism leads people to support things which do not fairly deserve support, or to reject things which do not fairly deserve to be rejected, simply because tribalists considers that kind of analysis irrelevant (while they focus on and react to only what is for or against their side). Even hard evidence is ignored by sheer freedom of choice to do so. Tribalism permits national atrocities to continue for long after they are noticed to be wrong, because any critic of those atrocities is assumed to be the threat, for mentioning them, rather than the atrocities any threat. For this reason, atrocities in tribalist societies tend to stop only when the leader decides, or all the victims are ravaged, or when a foreign power overthrows the administration. For example, we can safely say that tribalism was the reason that persecution of Jews was not recognized in Nazi Germany as the evil it was, and why there is fierce resistance to recognizing wrongs which our own society does today. Tribalism is why many people accepted the COVID-19 vaccines while actually refusing critical information on it. Tribalism is also why it's so difficult to raise contrary religious ideas within an established religion without being persecuted for it. Tribalism is a major impediment to correcting the wrongs we are guilty of, as well as to identifying and shifting to better ideas when they become available.

Tribalism is supported by the popular belief that loyalty is the highest virtue.

4. Interest in Ease as the Highest Priority

Rather than higher levels of truth, society has become more interested in the most easy way out of any situation.

Based on this tendency, it is very easy to construct traps for society where, due to very slight increments of increasing torment, so slight that no one change is worth resiting, the easiest thing to do is to stay in the trap.

This is opposite to the attitude behind, for example, the American Revelution, where Great Britain attempted to impose extremely slight changes which the American colonists rejected, in the face of the greatest military power of the world, not because of the magnitude of the change, but only the principle behind them. For example, the Boston tea party was an event where colonists made a spectacle of their rejection of taxed tea, because they believed that Britain had no right to tax it, even though the tea, even with the tax, was cheaper than what they usually pay for tea. The psychology attempted to control the colonists was that they would not reject cheaper tea, and in so doing would accept the new tax with the tea, which could all be increased at a later date. That didn't work with the colonists, but it works all too often today.

5. Democratic Impunity.

   There is a phenomenon where if people feel that they won't be held accoutnable for their actions in a situation, they tend to act at their most wicked basic instincts in that situation. The phenomenon is commonly known as 'mob mentality' because being in a large group is a common situation where people might believe that there is no practical way for them to be held responsble for what happens.

   Voting by secret ballot is an unfortunate problem area for irresponsibility, because although it's the most important choice you make, the system means you cannot be held accountable for it in this world. It has been used to support the most shockingly anti-human policies, such as voting approval for mandatory vaccination or disapproval for protection of babies immediately after being born.

   In reality we are always accountable for what we do, including how we vote, and even if this accountability isn't enforced on Earth you can be sure of it being enforced on a spiritual level, from which there is no escape (not even in death). It's difficult to think of any religion which doesn't teach the consequence of surely reaping what you sow, on a spirital level, even if what you sow is done in secret.

   Unfortunately these people eventually reaping personal retribution, by a spiritual mechanism, in this life or the next, for their poor voting choices doesn't save our society now from those choices now.

6. Lack of Sense of Public Duty:

There doesn't seem to be many people left who understand that their right to vote is something entrusted to them to decide the best course of the nation, and there is a duty to vote in your best understanding for that goal, rather than your own selfish gain. Too many people treat it as their personal priviledge, to not vote, or vote to exploit future generations by Government deficit spending now, for example.

7. Emotional Decision-Making

Too many people decide emotionally rather than logically, and this hurts decision quality. For example, you might drink a soda because someone you like is seen drinking it, or you might refuse to believe someone, without explanation, because they don't sound confident about what they're saying.

We have minds and we should be using them in priority over emotions in making the most important decisions.

8. Help Exploitation.

This is exploitation of helpful people or programs in an attempt to derive the most possible benefit from those programs to the unlimited exploitation of the giver: even to their obvious harm. This is perpetrated by various tactics inluding exaggerating your need, misusing the help you receive, and returning to the giver never to repay them but to demand more.

This attitude eventually gets found out as the exploitation it is, and it creates suspicion or distrust when the next person asks for help.

9. Worship of Money and Technology:

Although most people won't admit it, our society worships money and technology by placing paramount importance on them. Our society is keenly interested in any way to get even a little more of them, and, on such topics, will not take offense if you criticize their current method for inefficiency (this is very different, for example, with religion).

The worship includes the ideas that science and markets must not be constrained but allowed to roam free and without limits, being of supposedly paramount importance to our progress.

In contrast, interest in truth, morality, theology, and afterlife have become relative non-priorities in our society, to the point that most people react like you're bothering them if you try to raise these topics for discussion. The foolishness of it is that those last four topics are eternal ones on which our eternal security most depends.

It's so bad that if a person had a direct encouter with God right now, and wanted to share His message witht he world, unless that person could leverage some existing influence they had, the main difficulty would be finding anyone interested to hear it.

10. Contempt for prayer.

Our society has come to see prayer as a foolish inaction whcih only seems like action. In fact watching television is considered more commedable and useful to society than praying.

11. Default Trust in Government

Our society has come to view distrust of the Government as something extreme and dangerous, but the fact is that Government is on one side of social power and the Public is on the other side, so Government has no incentive to exploit the People, and virtually all governments in history have. We need to be watchful of that. Government's incentive is to take everything from the People which they allow to be taken, and we can't expect them to stop themselves simply due to their own internal moral bounds.

12. Default Belief of the Largest News Agencies

The Public seems to think that the larger a news agency the more credible and therefore more trustworthy it is, ignoring basic questions like who owns it, their advertising revenue from Government or corporations, or whether they offer evidence for your own research. Typically it's the independent media who offer supporting evidence with their stories, while larger news agencies offer authorities and experts to take at their word.

What makes the 'mainstream' news 'mainstream' is typically partnership with the Establishment.

13. Excessive trust in clergy

People tend to choose a religion and then are simply told who their leader is, and this person is replaced periodically. For some nebulous reason, only the leader and whom the leader appoints is allowed to share ideas with the group, and if the leader approves or disapproves of an initiative that is the end of it. In most of these systems it's not only an explicit choice of god but an implicit acceptance of human masters also.

A logical reason to put such high trust in the infallability of these people or necessity to follow them is absent.

14. Trust in artificial pharmaceuticals rather than natural medicine.

It's as if our bodies are designed to work with synthetic chemicals, especially patented ones, rather than natural foods, herbs, or off-patent drugs. It's as if every new disease requires a pharmaceutical company to rescue us with an entirely new patented product, and as if our own immune system, nutrition, or healthy lifestyles are of no importance.

15. Opting for the least evil hope

A most amazing trait of many humans is that they will opt for what they recognize as evil if they believe it's the least evil option they have which has, in their mind, a realistic chance to win. In elections, his starves newer, less established candidates of the support their policies deserve, and growing gradually in support over time, and prevents our politics from evolving towards new parties with new ideas. It's literally as if a new candidate must show they have strong support before the Public will give them strong support; that's how insane it is.

Regardless, to choose an option which you, by your own morality, recognize as evil, is an evil act.

16. Disinterest in Silent Victims.

Our society seems only interested in protecting victims in proportion to the strength of the complaint they raise in the Public arena. Our society doesn't seem to care at all about any victims who can't complain, such as the unborn, or are otherwise hidden. This is not the path to world peace but only world ignorance.

17. Disinterst to support others' good initiatives.

Evildoers seem to understand a need to support any initiatives on their side, but 'good' people have been much more reluctant. Reasons to avoid supporting others' good initiatves include:

1. Not thinking of it yourself.

2. It not being aligned with your religion or approved by your religious leaders.

3. Your belief system doesn't teach you any obligation to help others' initiatives. So why bother?

4. They can't issue you an income tax receipt.

5. They aren't strong enough to win, and you're not going to support something until it doesn't need support.

18. Establishment-Lead Choice of Topics to Focus On

    This is a tendency of the public to focus on just the same topics the mainstream news is focusing on, in particular, anything mainstream news emphasizes enthusiastically as being important for our society (eg. professional sports results, celebrity gossip) and any topics mainstream news doesn’t or rarely talks about (eg. afterlife, abortion) as being unimportant.

    The first way the Public is controlled is not as much in which opinion to have on an issue, as which issues to focus on.

19. Prejudice.

Although the majority has learned not to prejudice someone based on their race or gender, they still do it based on many other superficial criteria, even if it makes no logical sense to base their decision on that. For example, it's popular to refuse any kind of financial advice or product from someone who doesn't appear to be wealthy themselves, no matter what the product is or how it is explained to you.

20. Failure to Defend Rights for Others

Although we humans are quite good at demanding rights for ourselves, we have been shamefully slow to demand or defend human rights for other people.

Unfortunately if there is no one else to defend your human rights, there are no human rights. The only established rights we have are the rights we consistently defend for each other.

This failure has opened a successful strategy for powerful enemies to destroy us: by simply attacking one minority group at a time, relying on the majority to fail to come to their aid, they can slowly conquer a large society.

21. Immoral Obedience

    Although obedience to authority is usually good, obedience to immoral orders is not.

    Exploiting this weak attitude, it is easiest to destroy human society by infiltrating positions of leadership.

    Unconditional oaths of allegiance or obedience are especially vulnerable to abuse.

22. Failure to Plan your Estate for your Passing.

    Since it won't affect them, too many people don't bother to make a Will or arrange anything to make life easier for others after their passing. Some others do make a will but include surprise elements likely to cause conflict. The more someone is in authority, the more easily they can flatly refuse requests to make a Will. Even Alexander the Great was guilty of this: making no clear succession arragenments in advance of his illness, despite a high-risk lifestyle, so that afterwards his kingdom was fractured with infighting a clear and dicussed Will would have almost certainly prevented.

Techniques used to Control Human Societies:

1. Denial of Reality Confirmation

One of the greatest weaknesses of human nature is our tendency to look to others to verify our perception of reality. For example, if you think you saw a ghost when you are with a friend, the first thing you do is ask your friend if they saw it. If not, the tendency is to self-doubt whether you saw it, even though you saw it, and certainly not speak about it.

The side of evil also has weaknesses, one of which seems to be that they need to reveal, or allow the revelation of, what they are doing on some level to reduce their responsibiltiy for doing it.

The combination of these two phenomenon has become a strategy of evil where they do evil, they allow it to be detected and revealed by a minority of reporters, in some cases even with hard evidence and strong logic shared publicly. But by preventing Government, politicians, maintstream news media, and universities from acknowledging it, humans are denied the confirmation of reality they like to have before acting on anything.

The more shocking the information, the more a confirmation of the reality of it from society at large is desired.

Such is the case, for example, with geoengineering: where despite hard evidence and clear rationale to prove that we are being sprayed, since social institutions won't acknowledge it as real, we question our own belief in these issues, rather than ever act to stop them.

2. Far-Future Indifference

This is where people accept drastic change so long as it's scheduled long enough away that it's of no effect now. For example, when the Canadian Government wanted to ban gas-powered vehicles, rather than try to do it now, they simply scheudled it for far enough away in the future that no one would feel immediately threatened, and therefore accept it: December 26, 2022 Trudeau’s Liberals inching closer to banning all sales of gas-powered vehicles by 2035

3. Option Limiting

When most people are presented with options they dislike, they simply choose the one they dislike the least, rather than rebel. They will even choose what they see as evil solong as it's teh least evil. Using this technique, it's not been difficult to get any evil leader elected so long as their competition seems worse.

4. Not reading before signing

It takes a long time to read and understand documents before singing them, so some people don't bother, and this includes legilsators voting on bills to become laws, bills which often contain hidden provisions.

5. Omission and emphasis

Although it's difficult to compel people to choose exactly what you order, by omission and emphasis of news, media, and political focus it is quite easy to get the Public talking about something unimportant or never talking about something important.

What to do About It:

Once we realize the flaws in our attitude, we can consciously correct them, to the improvement of ourselves and our society.