Please feel free to have a look at the first two parts of this series:

• Part 1 - PROPAGANDA
• Part 2 - DIVIDE AND CONQUER
• Part 3 - HEGELIAN DIALECTIC, a.k.a. PROBLEM-REACTION-SOLUTION, this post.
• Part 4 - POLITICAL CORRECTNESS / HATE SPEECH
• Part 5 - ASSAULT ON THE PINEAL GLAND (the physical brain)

PART 3 - HEGELIAN DIALECTIC, a.k.a. PROBLEM-REACTION-SOLUTION

Introduction

More and more people are now familiar with this tactic - the Hegelian Dialectic, or more commonly known as Problem-Reaction-Solution. But for those who aren’t here’s everything you need to know about this very effective tool of mind control that has been used to great effect for millennia.

The goal of this technique is to obtain a desired outcome (i.e., the Solution) by deceptively manipulating the masses into getting what you want.

The process works in 3 stages:

1. PROBLEM: Stage an event that will have a tremendous impact on people’s emotions causing a very large outcry (i.e., a strong expression of anger and disapproval about something by a group of people or by the public).

2. REACTION: Assess the reaction of the public (fear, outrage, disgust, etc.) and adjust your plan accordingly.

3. SOLUTION: Offer a solution to the problem that was covertly created.

Here is one of the earliest known examples of how this method of mind control was used on the masses in antiquity:

• In the 3rd century AD, the Roman Emperor Diocletian needed more money to support his government; he knew tax increases would be unpopular and unacceptable to his citizens.

Roman Emperor Diocletian (r. 284 – 286)

So, he created a new enemy to fight and used this as a way to justify tax increases (his goal) on the Roman population:

1. Problem: “We have a new enemy who wants to destroy us...”
2. Reaction (of the population): “Oh no! We can’t accept this...”
3. Solution: “We need money to supply our army to fight them!”

A really good explanation of this technique is also provided by our good friend David Icke in the following video (listen to the first 2 minutes):

Modern Example: September 11, 2001 Attacks

Although there exists countless modern examples of this method, perhaps the most significant (and elaborate) one of the 21st Century was the pre-planned attacks (by insiders) of the September 11, 2001.

September 11, 2001 Attacks, Image source

Even though the “official” story of those events do not state them as such (i.e., pre-planned attacks/event by insiders), an abundance of evidence has since revealed this is undeniably the case.

Let’s break down the 3-step process again but this time for this particular event:

1 - PROBLEM: They wanted to wage wars against many countries in the Middle East but knew it would be unpopular and almost unacceptable to Americans.

A strong desire (goal) was sought by the Shadow Government / Deep State / Military-Industrial Complex / Neocons faction (whatever you want to call them) that would give them justification for two important objectives: wage war against certain countries in the Middle East (through a façade of “War on Terrorism”) and take away rights and freedoms of Americans (and arguably of citizens from many other Western nations). Let’s see a bit more in detail how they had already planned these two objectives:

• Major Goal 1 – WAGE WAR in the Middle East: A report entitled Rebuilding America’s Defenses by The Project for the New American Century (PDF version here) dated September 2000 had already been prepared which outlined several countries that needed to be “taken out” under the (completely unfounded) pretext that they already had or were developing ballistic missiles capable of hitting the USA. These countries were: Iraq, Lybia, Syria, Iran, and North Korea.

A few notables from this work: Neocons Bill Kristol (chairman of the Project), Robert Kagan; the one and only John R. Bolton (who served as director, and is currently President Trump’s National Security Advisor); also the project was building upon the work of Dick Cheney (former Vice-President to President Bush).

They key thing apart from the middle-eastern countries listed, is the date of publication of the document: September 2000 - a full year before the Sept. 2001 attacks.

The second goal was latter openly affirmed to former decorated U.S. General Wesley Clark in the famous “7 countries in 5 years” recounting of what US Military commanders had confided in him; you can view this gripping and very telling video hereunder:

Video source link: The Plan - according to U.S. General Wesley Clark (Ret.), published by RBoon on Mar 17, 2007

A more detailed account of this from Gen. Clark can be viewed via this video entitled Wes Clark - America's Foreign Policy "Coup", published by FORA.tv on Nov 5, 2007.

The 7 countries listed to Clark were: Iraq, Afghanistan, Lybia, Syria, Sudan, Lebanon, “finishing off” with Iran. Apart from Lebanon, all of these countries have indeed been targeted by the US Military since 2001 either by a full invasion or by multiple military operations (overt & covert) within those countries.

• Major Goal 2 – Strip away Americans’ rights and freedoms: The main tool they had already devised to help them reach this objective was through the drafting (and eventual passing in October of 2001) of the USA Patriot Act (by a very corrupt US Congress, I must add). It has been proven that this (particularly lengthy) act was prepared before the actual attacks that took place on 9/11. You can refer to the article entitled The USA PATRIOT Act Was Planned Before 9/11 for details.

War has always been unpopular to the masses in America. Accordingly, a very strong pretext – a new “Pearl Harbor” type event – was needed to obtain their support. Even in their own document stated above they wrote [Emphasis Added]:

Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.

2 - REACTION: Of course after the events of that tragic and horrible day in September not only was every single American gravely emotionally affected but also billions others around the world with many quite angry and demanding justice. The desired effect or reaction was most effective, to say the least. A “new enemy” or “culprit” was needed quickly and it/they had already been (conveniently) established: radical Muslim terrorists from the Middle East. Of course, they used Osama Bin Laden as the first boogeyman only to be followed by Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Muammar Gaddafi in Lybia came later as did ISIS and others. Rinse and repeat.

3 - SOLUTION: Stronger “defense”, increased domestic security measures, and an [interminable] “War on Terrorism”.

I don’t think I need to elaborate on these, as they would encompass an entire encyclopedia in and of themselves.

Sadly, since that ill-fated day on September 11, 2001, hundreds of millions of Americans have been deceived, duped, cheated, manipulated whilst being stripped of many of their fundamental rights and freedoms.

Final Thoughts about this method

This mind control tactic works so well because it is particularly effective in that it feeds off of human emotions. Emotions, primal and primitive, most often trump logic and critical thinking – something that is lacking (by design) in the general population – and are very strong drivers. Thus, in terms of “mass” mind-control, it is one of the most powerful, if not the most powerful, method used by the Elites.

I think that the good news, however, is that more and more people are seeing through such tactics, likely due to it being exposed a lot in recent years by the alternative media, and catching on to the scheme.

A supplementary and efficient way to assess whether a particular (usually destructive or turbulent) event is of this problem-reaction-solution kind is to ask the question: Cui bono? It is Latin for Who benefits?.

Thus, when such events occur, we always need to pose such an important question with regards to who it benefits, as it could give us an indication (or at least a starting point) of who may be behind it. We also need to ask what is the benefit (or benefits) they are seeking. A new law? A change in policy? War? Money? Power?

By asking such basic questions, it is often not too difficult to pinpoint the culprits and larger agendas behind the tactic.

This concludes Part 3 of the series. You can continue with Part 4 - POLITICAL CORRECTNESS / HATE SPEECH.

Thank you for your attention. Comments and re-steems welcome.

In Peace & Liberty,

@libertyacademy