/bmw/ - The Bureau of Memetic Warfare

1. NAME CALLING or STEREOTYPING: Giving a person or an idea a bad label by using an easy to remember pejorative name. This is used to make us reject and condemn a person or idea without examining what the label really means. Examples: "Republican", "Tree-Hugger", "Nazi", "Liberal", "Environmentalist", "Special-Interest Group".

2. VIRTUE WORDS or GLITTERING GENERALITY: These words are used to dupe us into accepting and approving of things without examining the evidence carefully. Examples: "Natural", "Democratic", "Sustainable", "Organic", "Scientific", "Healthy", "Ecological".

3. DEIFICATION: This is when an idea is made to appear holy, sacred, or very special and therefore above all law. Any alternative or opposite points of view are thereby given the appearance of treason or blasphemy. Examples: "God-given right to…", "Mother Earth", "Gia".

4. TRANSFER: Transfer is when a symbol that carries respect, authority, sanction, and prestige is used along with and idea or argument to make it look more acceptable. Examples: American Flag, University Seal, Medical Association Symbol (or something that looks like it). This method is also called GUILT- or VIRTUE-BY-ASSOCIATION.

5. TESTIMONIAL: When some respected celebrity (or alternatively someone generally hated) claims that an idea or product is good (or bad). This technique is used to convince us without examining the facts more carefully.

6. PLAIN FOLKS: This is a way that a speaker convinces an audience that an idea is good because they are the same ideas of the vast majority of people like yourself. Examples: "This is the will of the People", "Most Americans…". Another example would be when the speaker tells a story about a family or people that are "just like you" to reinforce the speaker's point of view.

7. BAND WAGON: This common propaganda method is when the speaker tries to convince us to accept their point of view or else we will miss out on something really good. The Band-Wagon technique is often used in advertising. Examples: "This is the wave of the future", "Be the first on your block", "Act Now!". You might ask yourself "What if I was the only one on my block because no one else was interested (duped)?".

8. ARTIFICIAL DICHOTOMY: This is when someone tries to claim there are only two sides to an issue and that both sides must have equal presentation in order to be evaluated. This technique is used to dupe us into believing there is only one way to look at an issue, when in fact there may be many alternative viewpoints or "sides". Like most propaganda techniques it simplifies reality and therefore distorts it, often to the advantage of the speaker. A classic example is the "intelligent design" versus "evolution" controversy, or "You are either with us, or against us".

9. HOT POTATO: This is an inflammatory (often untrue) statement or question used to throw an opponent off guard, or to embarrass them. Examples "Have you stopped beating your spouse", "When will you pay the taxes you owe?" The fact that it may be utterly untrue is irrelevant, because it still brings controversy to the opponent.

10. STALLING or EVADING/IGNORING THE QUESTION : This technique is used to play for more time or to avoid answering a pointed question. Examples: "More research is needed…", "A fact-finding committee is working on this issue…" "I am calling for an investigation on this failure.." When asked about a tax increase possibility a senator replies: "I have always met the obligations I have to those I represent."

11. LEAST-OF-EVILS is used to justify an otherwise unpleasant or unpopular point of view. Example: '"War is hell but appeasement leads to worse disasters".

12. SCAPEGOAT: This often use with Guilt-by-association to deflect scrutiny away from the issues. It transfers blame to one person or group of people without investigating the complexities of the issue. Examples: "Bill Clinton got us into Bosnia", "President Reagan caused the national debt".

13. CAUSE AND EFFECT MISMATCH: This technique confuses the audience about what is really cause and effect. In fact the causes of most phenomena are complex, and it is misleading to say just one of the following: "Tuberculosis is caused by bacteria", "Tuberculosis is caused by un-regulated capitalism that creates poor working conditions", "Tuberculosis is caused by a lack of effective antibiotics".

4. CHERRY PICKING or CARD STACKING or DISTORTION OF DATA or OUT OF CONTEXT: This technique is used to convince the audience by using selected information and not presenting the complete story. Examples: "A study was done that showed eating peanut butter causes liver cancer" (the fact that later the study was later shown to be flawed or funded by the peanut butter haters and therefore suspect, is not revealed). A variation would be "Raising the speed limit to 65 mph resulted in many fewer traffic fatalities". Such statements need to be checked with how many people were driving before and after the change in speed limit. Fewer people may be driving after the speed limit change, even though the fatality rates (deaths per 100,000) may be higher, leading to the overall result of fewer fatalities.

15. WEAK INFERENCE: Weak inference is when a judgment is made with insufficient evidence, or that the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the evidence given. For example: Ducks and geese migrate south for the winter, therefore all waterfowl migrate south for the winter. Or, most rich folks vote republican, therefore most people who vote republican are rich.

16. FAULTY ANALOGY: This is when a comparison is carried to far. Example: "The economy is following the same path as right before the great depression, therefore we will experience a stock market crash soon!"

17. MISUSE OF STATISTICS: Some examples: Average results are reported, but not the amount of variation around the averages. A percent or fraction is presented, but not the sample size as in "9 out of 10 dentists recommend…". Absolute and proportional quantities are mixed as in "3,400 more robberies occurred in our town last year, whereas other cities hand an increase of less than one percent". Graphs are used that, by chopping off part of the scale or using unusual units or no scale, distort the appearance of the result. Results are reported with misleading precision. For example, representing 13 out of 19 students as 68.42105 percent.

18. FEAR: "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

Hypnosis

Crowd psychology

Memetics

Richard Dawkins on memes

Memetic engineering.

Weaponizing meme

Memetic decay

Memetic evolution

Danke Thread Bruder

Rule from the shadows

>>4174

Bitte

Gustav la bon :The crowd (audio book)

What is charisma?

Charisma is hard to define as a personality trait, but despite this difficulty, scholars have attempted to define charisma for centuries. The first definition might have been offered by Max Weber, a 19th century German sociologist, who claimed charisma as “a certain quality of an individual’s personality by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional qualities” (Merolla, Ramos & Zechmeister, 2007). In Weber’s terms, charisma seems to be the type of personality that increases others’ tendency to view the self as “larger than life.”

Is charismatic leadership more effective?

Research on charisma in psychology is limited but suggestive. For instance, when Dean Keith Simonton of UC Davis studied charisma, he examined the biographies of 39 Presidents to determine the personality factors that contributed to their success or failure in office. Simonton identified a charismatic factor in personality which included the characteristics “Finds dealing with the press challenging and enjoyable,” and “has a flair for the dramatic.” Interestingly, Simonton found that presidents with more charisma were more likely to pass acts of legislation, to win more legislative victories, and to deliver special messages to Congress (Simonton, 1988). In this work, charismatic leadership appears to inspire action among one’s subordinates.

Charismatic leaders also inspire people to take more financial risks—investing in the potentially risky vision of their leader. In one study, Flynn and Staw (2004) examined financial investments after exposure to a charismatic presentation by Steve Jobs in the beginning of his career. Following this presentation, participants took more financial risks by making investments in stocks like Apple, and decreased their investment in less-risky money market funds relative to participants who made their investments before watching the charismatic speech. It appears that charismatic leadership has the power to inspire people to take financial risks.

Finally, being in a position of leadership during a time of crisis may increase judgments of a leader’s charisma. In brief, demonstrating leadership during tough times may lead others to view the leader as amazing, powerful, and even charismatic. These judgments may even mask the actual performance of the leader. In one study, Merolla, Ramos, & Zechmeister (2007) investigated perceptions of leadership performance during a time of crisis—before the 2004 election, following the terrorist attacks in 2001 in New York and Washington. Participants were exposed to a control condition, a “good times” condition in which crisis was downplayed, and a “crisis” condition in which participants were presented with warnings of impending terrorist attacks. Participants who viewed the crisis message felt that the current President, George W. Bush, was a stronger and more charismatic leader than in the other two conditions.

Charisma is a fascinating construct and though it is difficult to define, may prove to be an important component of one’s leadership style. Does your boss have charisma? Let us know in the comments.

Emily Plutov is an undergraduate at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. She is currently majoring in Psychology and Russian Language & Literature. Having gained experience in the field of clinical psychology, she is now focusing on social psychology, particularly power and dominance.

1. Presence

Believe it or not, toddlers have charisma. These little creatures, wide-eyed and curious, can capture the attention of a roomful of adults without saying a word. Do you remember the last time one of these little guys captivated you? Did you wonder why what was? Obviously they’re super cute, but a lot of it has to do with presence. Toddlers are often fully in the moment, and there’s something magnetic about anyone who’s giving 100 percent of their attention and effort to what’s happening here and now.

Think of Michael Jordan’s presence during playoff games as his Chicago Bulls won consecutive NBA titles from 1991 through 1993. His focus on each game and every play was so contagious that his teammates were able to elevate their games as well. Millions wanted to see the Bulls win. It probably explains why Jordan’s line of athletic clothing continues to sell well for Nike almost 20 years later. Jordan is far from a toddler, but the similarity is his fully engaged presence.

We can quickly tell when someone is in the moment, and when they’re thinking about other things. Adults are frequently in a state of continuous partial attention. We aren’t fully engaged with our employees or co-workers, our children or spouses, or the grocery clerk.

To master the first part of charisma, then, you have to practice being present.

There are many practices to help you become more present and engaged in a given moment. One is to focus on your breathing. Wherever you are, feel the air entering through your nose and filtering into your lungs. Now attend to the feeling as you exhale. As the last bit of air leaves your lungs, note the sensation of your muscles relaxing all the way down to your fingers and toes.

Another practice to become more present is to make eye contact with those you talk to. We often think we’re looking our conversational partner in the eyes when really we’re looking at them in the “general eye area.” Take the time to note the color of their eyes. Are they deep brown or green-brown? Don’t give a hard stare, of course—that would be creepy. But warm, friendly eye contact lets your partner know you are present and interested in what they have to say.

In many cases, our body language reveals an apparent lack of interest. Our shoulders may be turned away, or we may be distracted by a stream of texts. This instantly tells the other person we aren’t fully present. So square up your body and shoulders to those you are conversing with, and look them directly in the eyes.

You don’t have to be fully present in each and every moment—that’s not realistic (or possible). But when you can, and when it’s important, make the most of your time with others, and let them know you’re present.

2. Power

Power is defined in many ways but when it comes to charisma, it refers to the perception by others that you have agency and influence—that you can make things happen.

Some people are assigned power automatically as a result of their wealth, physique, or position of authority. But you don’t have to possess any of these things for people to see you as powerful. Perception of agency and influence are determined in large part by body language and other nonverbal cues, like posture, dress, and voice. Here are a few simple cues that can help communicate personal power:

Widen your stance a bit, open your arms, and own your space—not like a superhero, but like you are comfortable with who you are.

Sit up straight like your mother told you. Stand tall and hold your head up.

Know when to be quiet and listen. Dominating a conversation doesn’t necessarily make a person more powerful. It can actually have the opposite effect when people begin to realize it’s become a one-sided discussion.

Nod your head selectively when something important is brought to light, rather than nodding constantly at every idea.

Drop the pitch of your voice at the end of a sentence rather than increasing it, which makes your comment sound like a question rather than a statement.

You can probably think of other cues that increase the perception of personal power. But be aware that power-grabs through intimidation or deception will be short-lived. (Think of ex-President Nixon) Charisma is strongest when presence and power are combined with genuine warmth.

3. Warmth

If power is the perception that you can make things happen, warmth is the perception that you will use that power for the good of others. Warmth, like presence, is hard to fake. We can appear polite with manners and a smile, but warmth comes from a deeper place than being pleasant. Most of us notice when we are in the presence of someone who has genuine affection for us.

Since we can’t really fake warmth, we must remove the barriers to feeling genuine warmth for others. The biggest barrier may be a lack of warmth toward ourselves. This is typical when we attach more credibility to the negative thoughts we have than the positive ones. A quick and helpful practice to develop warmth, according to Cabane, is to close your eyes and envision someone who would have great affection for you. This might be a historical figure like Jesus or Gandhi, or someone closer to home, like a grandparent or even a loving pet. Feeling their warmth and total acceptance can help you share those feelings with those around you.

Do you have it?

Consider the aspects of charisma you already possess: Do you have warmth for others and display a certain degree of power, but find you’re rarely in the moment? Do you have power in spades, but often let it overshadow your feelings of warmth? All of us possess charismatic traits in varying degrees. The secret to becoming more charismatic is to embrace the things you already do well, and work to improve the areas that may be limiting you.

Take a few minutes to note the behaviors and attitudes you’re good at and those you could work on. Consider people you believe are charismatic and note what they do that you find appealing. Then consciously spend time practicing these traits as you go through your workday and conversations with others. You’ll find that over time, these habits are likely to manifest in a more charismatic you.

Science of persuation

Public speaking

The art of debate

Wagner : philosophy of revolution

Scott Adam's blog posts on Trump's persuasion techniques are great too:

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/126589300371/clown-genius

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/129215160011/why-trump-insults-people-part-of-my-trump

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/129713033741/the-reason-for-trumps-success

>>4189

This looks interesting too:

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/129784168866/the-persuasion-reading-list

This is an example of simple but effective propaganda.

This guy is misinformed about national socialism but his speech and delivery is powerful.

>>4190

>>4189

Awesome, thanks kamerad.

Here he uses poetry and powerful imagery.

The story of your enslavement

Occam's razor

A short introduction of semiotics.

Psyops: the invisible sword (US army training video)

The eternal jew