I AM YOUR FATHER... OR MOTHER... Whichever the case may be...

Hit "Play" first, and then read the article below ~you'll understand.

 (Darth Vader)

Nearly every person on the planet has been metaphorically implanted with a little switch in the back of the head that, when flicked or pushed, causes us to feel less like a confident adult who is quite worthy and mentally sound and more like a  child, and an inept, socially awkward child to boot.

Nearly all of us have it because most of us were pretty normal kids for most of our youths.That switch was installed by the bigger people around us who had the authority to tell us what to do, and punish us when we did something out of line.

Some humans learn about that switch from a Big Person's perspective, and learn how to flick it at will, or at least try to, so they can use it against us. They use it for all kinds of things.

If I want to create the image of authority around myself, but don't necessarily have the brain power, discipline, or knowledge it takes, I can instead use that switch. Instead of actually being experienced or well-studied, I can just ACT like I am, and treat others like they're NOT.

By cranking up the contrast between myself and others, and pressing on their subconscious, I can create this image pretty quickly. This created image will be MUCH more effective at making people see me as highly intelligent and experienced than the impression I would make from actually being intelligent and experienced, because it plays on people emotions and memories, not on the reality of myself.

All I have to do is throw out a few social signals, subtle ones work best, and walk away.


These social signals can be in person, or from a distance, in direct interaction or seen from afar in media. They can be in the form of appearance, like the way I comb my hair, the jewelry I wear, and the clothing I choose. They can be a facial expression, a vocal tone, the words I use, and body language, Behaviors such as refusing to make eye contact and refusing to acknowledge another person's presence, words, or meaning are very effective. Silent treatments, cold shoulders. puffing up, and condescension; all ways of hitting that switch and building the facade. Another currently popular practice that seems to work is personally insulting other people and/or things, continually making criticisms and complaints about everything and anything (look at that stupid car... look at that ugly dress... look at that hair...what a dumb song...), but since it's been taken way too far so many times it has become generally less effective.


Many who are in the "public eye" use this as a way of convincing the public that they do indeed know MORE than the rest of the population, and therefore should keep their very lucrative jobs because no one else can fill their shoes. From politicians to journalists to radio DJ's, this is a common practice; giving YOU signals that you are (or someone else is) an ignorant idiot, and THEY are the authority on everything; their opinion is as close to "fact" as possible... ("Yes, that's right ~  the ocean is 3.5 % saline, dogs are descendants of wolves, the tax rate in Brooklyn is 18.569% if you're Class 1, and Superman CAN, indeed, beat up Batman. And Jimi Hendrix is the best guitar player, not Jimmy Page... I was right about the other stuff, therefore I'm right about everything I say...")

Simply the act of having a "stern face" or a "stern demeanor" can flick the switch in most humans, it looks a lot like the way Mom or Dad, or the teacher, or the coach looked when they were about to deliver some discipline. Doesn't it...?  

What is an actor, a comedian, a blogger, a lawyer, or a radio show host doing with a permanently stern demeanor? What is it that they're so serious about, all the time? Why are they standing, acting, and talking to people like a Mom or Dad, or Officer Flynn, or the elementary school Principal, or an evil Emperor or Queen? 

Why? Because, it works. 

They behave that way, giving signals to our subconscious, and we humans just believe that they know more than someone else does. If Stephen Hawking, Jane Goodall, and one of these "Image Maker" people were in a room together, talking to us, we would most likely assume that the "Image Maker" person is the "Leader", and the most intelligent person in the group. We would most likely ignore Mr. Hawking and Ms. Goodall, and LISTEN to the "Image Maker", just because they are giving "I AM AN AUTHORITY" signals and the others are not. We don't do fact checking, we don't get to know people first, we just assume that they are an "authority", or intelligent, or NOT, based on the signals they give us.

 

So that means the most intelligent person on the planet will not be seen as an authority on anything, unless they have some kind of documentation to prove it or someone else in authority saying so, and may even be treated as if they are quite stupid, just because they are not giving "I Am An Authority" signals. And walking right next to them, one of the most obnoxious, self-centered, non-thinking, arrogant wankers on the planet is getting all kinds of attention and followers because he or she knows how to do ONE THING: give "I Am An Authority" signals. And because nearly all of us have that little metaphorical switch, we say "yes yes that person knows what they're talking about... you should listen to them, like we do..."

Of course that is NOT to say that all humans who have been credited with having a clue about something, or being good at something, doesn't deserve it. It's simply that we humans will and do, quite often, FOLLOW one person who does NOT have a clue, and IGNORE another person who DOES, just because of the signals they give or don't give.  

Some other people find the humor in this phenomenon too~:)

Which Point Of View

In any society and region, it is common for one race or sex to be seen as "more powerful", or literally to have more power, due to the usual human control desires in the species. Whichever race or sex has acquired more power in a given region is who's in control, and that's what seems NORMAL to the entire society.

(OBVIOUSLY, the race or sex that holds more power changes from region to region. In many regions, controllers oppress their OWN race or sex. This article uses skin color as a demonstration only, not to represent any specific people, region, or era.)

It's "normal", for example, in a region where the race who has more power is dark-skinned, for dark-skinned people to hold most of the government positions, and for dark-skinned people to dominate the business and educational environment, and make most of the budgeting decisions.

They will CONTINUE to hold these positions because of one simple fact: when one human group acquires power, anyone who can identify themselves as a member of that group will usually claim entitlement to that power.
(If light-skinned people had acquired the power in that region, the roles would be reversed. If polka-dotted people acquired the power in that region, then they would be in the "power" position over everyone else. Physical traits including race and sex are the most common identity factors in human power entitlement belief.)

This means that nearly all of the dark-skinned people in that region will feel completely normal and fine with this feeling of entitlement, and won't think twice about the light-skinned people NOT having the same power. Most of the dark-skinned people will feel like getting any job is NORMAL, and if a person is not getting hired they will say that it's because they're not trying hard enough, they're not smart enough, or they don't have what it takes. They don't seem to be able to grasp that they are being given favoritism by the other dark-skinned people who are in the positions of doing the hiring.

Further, and strangely, the light-skinned people will also be "normalized" to dark-skin people having more power, and tend to have BIAS TOWARD dark-skinned people. Because they grew up in this environment, they subconsciously believe the bias to reflect the NATURAL world. So, hiring a dark-skinned person feels like "common sense" to them, especially since everyone else seems to agree. Their doctor is probably dark-skinned, their lawyer, their government representative. They probably would rather hire a dark-skinned person to fix their home and their car. They were raised to see dark-skinned people as having a natural ability to get things done, and light-skinned people to only be able to do certain things. So, they will not believe that another light-skinned person is really that intelligent or that capable, and they will commonly DEFER to a dark-skinned person for just about anything.

In this region, those who are actually more emotionally reactive are the dark-skinned people, because they are more used to getting what they want, and to people listening when they speak. When they don't get what they want easily, or when they feel ignored or insulted, dark-skinned individuals are much more likely to react emotionally and with anger or rage than light-skinned individuals, who are acclimated to more obstacles, or being blocked from getting what they want or need by others, and not being listened to when they speak.

Both dark and light-skinned people in a dark-skinned-biased region will raise their children with the same bias, more or less, and will usually "shush" them if they ask any questions about the disparity, or explain it away. When a light-skinned person has a dark-skinned child, they will commonly invest much more of everything into that child than the other children. When the local school system has obvious bias for the dark-skinned children than the light-skinned children, with more budgeting, more classroom interaction, and more encouragement and attention being given, it is not questioned by either dark or light-skinned parents. The dark-skinned parents of course WANT the bias, and the light-skinned parents are either extremely "normalized" or afraid to speak up about it for fear of rejection or retaliation.

No one thinks much at all about how their children are being taught the same bias, whether they're dark or light-skinned. The negative impact this makes on all of the children is not studied but ignored, because those who have the power want to keep it, and those who don't are either so acclimated that they believe the power imbalance to be natural, or they don't want to draw negative attention from retaliators for themselves and their children.

In the newspaper and on TV in this region, much more coverage is given to dark-skinned people than light-skinned people, and that includes children and groups. Much more positive language is used when referencing dark-skinned people than light-skinned by most journalists. It is more common for journalists and others to use an excited and enthusiastic TONE when referencing dark-skinned people; both because of their own bias, and because they want to be LIKED and remembered by dark-skinned people.
When someone points out this disparity, they are shouted down. When a dark-skinned person points it out, they are called names in an attempt to humiliate them into silence. When a light-skinned person points it out, they are attacked by both dark and light-skinned people, and called names that reflect blatant contempt and hatred.

In this region, dark-skinned people seem to constantly make demeaning  jokes and cruel references about light-skinned people, not only with one another, but in public as well. If anyone points out this practice they are immediately dismissed as "oversensitive" and "hyper reactive"...  by BOTH dark and light-skinned people. However! When light-skinned people make any kind of similar demeaning reference about dark-skinned people, they receive huge backlash about how "cruel", "crazy", and "controlling" they are... and that's from both dark and light-skinned people.

The ONLY reason this entire disparity and power imbalance has taken place is because a group of dark-skinned people amassed wealth and weapons a long time ago, and appointed themselves the ones in control of the region. Not ALL dark-skinned people actually have "power" in this area, but they don't fight against the disparity because they MIGHT get power some day, since they ARE dark-skinned, they feel it to be their "birth right". They don't defend their light-skinned coworkers, relatives, or neighbors when they are not treated with fairness or respect, because they kind of WANT things to stay the way they are.

Many want things to stay the way they are because they're afraid of the light-skinned people gaining power; will they retaliate if they gain power? Will they oppress the dark-skinned people? Will they take over?

Many light-skinned people want things to stay the way they are because one of their children is dark-skinned, and they feel that this child brings them power as a parent. They may also not actually want the responsibility that power brings, or they may not want the negative consequences. Some may not want other light-skinned people to achieve much, because it will injure their own ego; they like to think of light-skinned people as a "WE", and "WE can't do this thing or that thing, WE'RE not naturally good at it, WE aren't as clever or as strong as dark-skinned people." So they disparage and help oppress other light-skinned people, even their own family members.

Apply this to any region at all by just changing the groups to what they actually are in that area, it could be race, it could be ancestry within a race, it could be religion or anti-religion, it could be wealth or lack of wealth; it could be sex/gender. It may be more than one of these.

Whichever group believes they are most entitled to power over others in a given region is the group that fights to get and to keep power. And then, whatever group has acquired power is what everyone in the region gets conditioned and acclimated to. No human group has more "natural intelligence" than any other human group, no race and neither sex, and yet the vast majority of societies are controlled by only one group. The only common denominator in all of these regions is the desire for power over others.

A region where there is no power imbalance between groups SHOWS IT, and individuals have no qualms in talking about the subject, there is very little conflict about it, it's a conceptual topic that can be discussed any time without dramatic reactions, defensiveness, or refusal to talk about it, on anyone's part. Regions where there is great power imbalance show it as well, and many or most individuals show a dramatic aversion to talking about it.



M.M.Black