The truth hurts, and the subconscious mind will do anything it takes to shield itself from emotional pain. Is this why activists end up being labeled "The Kooks" ? Could this be the reason why the greater American sector still has its head in the sand ? Most importantly, how have you, dear reader, dealt with this denial in an effective way? Please post: This could be valuable information to all of us! Thanks.

::::::::

“Denial can be so thick” someone once said to me. It’s so true. No wonder so many mainstream Americans (not Opednews bloggers) remain silent concerning so many things, from civil liberties violations to 9-11 pre-planning to martial law to god knows what else. And no wonder, given the scenarios below, so many activists face ridicule and are scapegoated.

The analogy of the cyclatron comes to mind. Built with lead walls fourteen inches thick, nuclear atoms are bounced off those thick lead walls for days at a time or even longer. What would it take to finally melt all those thick and heavy walls down? How much heat can the cyclatron take before it too begins to melt like candle wax?

The answer is: A LOT!

Such is the case with human denial. Those thick walls we build up from within, to shield our psyche. Yes, the key word here is “Shield”. From what? Emotional pain. Information which, once acknowledged as real, would turn our whole world upside-down, shock our psyches, embitter us to the world, change our sense of self and of reality over-all, alter our coping mechanisms, and who knows what else.

No wonder we build such thick walls, psychologically. Reality threatens to knock down our walls all the time, just like the atoms bouncing off the cyclatron. The mental tricks we as human beings come up with are endless, to prevent pain from shattering our psychological bubble:

Psychology recognizes “Patient identification” as a known subconscious trick, in which a perpetrator labels his/her victim as “The Problem” instead of looking in the mirror. People who have grown up in abusive homes themselves, when shamed excessively for the most minor mistakes, simply can’t bear to think that they, too, are capable of wrong-doing. The world at large becomes the object of blame, rather than face the pain of awareness that yes, we ourselves are human and flawed. Or, god forbid, that we ever did anything wrong. That truth simply is too painful for some shame-based people to accept. Thus, the victim is wronged twice: First, by the violation, then by being blamed for it. The end result lacks all logic: The perpetrator Is Right and the victim is “framed” as The Perpetrator.

How logical, then, is the human mechanism of denial? Yet we activists will be confronted by it, all the time.

Then there’s the good old mental game of projection. Politicians are so admirably talented at seeing themselves in others: Labeling “the other side” (such as 9-11 truth activists) as “terrorists” is only one example. What a brilliant self-description uttered by the politicians, eh? They discuss the horrors of the Holy Jihadists while themselves waging shock and awe against a nation which never attacked us. They think they are seeing the world at large for what it is, but in truth are seeing a stunningly accurate reflection of their own selves. And they are fully convinced of the truth of what they see in the world, and of every word they utter. Doubt it? Just watch them and decide for yourself what you think.

And what about blowing off the searing truths? The more the truth hurts, the more we humans need to rationalize it somehow, to prevent it from penetrating our conscious awareness. Example: An activist discussing 9-11 pre-planning or pending enforcement of martial law is labeled “paranoid” and a “conspiracy theorist”. Some people may even snicker. Anything a person can do to spare themselves the anguish of reality’s searing pains, they will do. Of course, it’s not conscious. Even the accuser is not aware of his/her own pain, such as when acknowledging that Bush and Cheney are murderers on the loose, capable of heinous things like pre-planning 9-11. Thus, “The Kook” becomes the excuse for the denier to rigorously protect himself/herself from the dawning of truth. The facts will no longer bear any relevance to the denier: Instead, “The Kook” will dominate their mental frame of reference. Period.

No wonder we activists have such a hard time. We feel hopeless to “get through” to these people. We may misperceive them as being of ill intent, lacking in good hearts that care. How far this is from the real truth, at least in most cases. If we can compassionately understand that these people are suffering emotional pain, the irony is that not only will we feel better, but our activism will take a much more effective turn. We will soften our judgments and therefore our manner. Our presentations become more convincing and sensitive at the same time. The sensitivity, in turn, only lends us credibility. We are much less likely to become emotionally heated and lose effectiveness. The cause itself is more likely to flourish, given this compassionate attitude.

Knowledge is power: The psyche will find any number of techniques to protect itself from information which it is not yet ready to process. Thus, it becomes evident that our role as activists is *not always* to provide the real and convincing facts in order to recruit “the other side” to our aid. Truthfully, the more accurate the realities, the more likely the denier is to reject that information. Either they will ridicule us, laugh outright, rationalize and twist the truths, or somehow find any other way to do the obvious: Hide their heads under the covers.

I believe we as activists must learn to respect the needs of the psyche. Those who are emotionally equipped to deal with harsh reality, will listen and probably learn, responding rationally and objectively when given the evidence and facts. Those who are not emotionally ready to receive the information, will simply not respond to our truths. In fact, they will only recoil and rebel. The more we try to make them see it our way, the more evidence we lay out on the table, the more they will twist and wiggle their way out of seeing reality in its true proportion. And the more we push the truth, the more we will turn them off to it. It’s just like a salesman harping in your face: It’s called, by experienced salespeople, very bad technique. The only way to win people over is to respect their boundaries, as signaled by the heated responses which, in sub-text, are really trying to tell us: “Back off! I am not ready to deal with this!”

“Father forgive them, for they know not what they do” is a good mantra for those of us who (like me, and I will confess it quite honestly) struggle with anger at the rest of the world for their lack of participation in the solution and, seemingly, their lack of caring about all the heinous crimes that are going on. I am finding it helpful to remind myself:

“Denial can be so thick” as to lead alcoholics to drink themselves to their graves. Talk about rationalizing as a tool of denial: The alcoholic suffers the illusion of control. After all, s/he can stay away from booze for months at a time…but ultimately, they also go back to it, losing house and home, friends, family and jobs in the process. If they end up on the street, “Denial can be so thick” as to whisper into their brain: “Really, you don’t have a problem. You can always stop. See? You did it before. You are in control. You are okay”. Yeah, right. Death, end of story.

Could this explain why Americans at large are still in a slumber regarding 9-11 pre-planning? After all, we Americans are so “into” watching detective movies, reading mystery novels, etc: Wouldn’t one think that we (as a broader American people) could have the Bush/Cheney crimes all figured out by now? Given our cultural proclivity to “play detective“, how is it even possible that Bush and Cheney are still walking free?

I’m sure you know where this is going.

It’s simply too painful for people to think that these guys could and would have done such a thing as plan 9-11, that they fully intend to declare martial law, that they lust for power and blood, that they rejoice in the pain of others, wreak revenge, stonewall continually and operate in secrecy, etc…

Yet, just as all the red flags are waving in the alcoholic’s face, and the alcoholic continues to believe that all is fair and square, so mainstream Americans are practicing a similar type of denial.

For example:

If it is a known fact that Bush and Cheney took us to war based on a lie, how can we put a single thing past those two men? That point needs no discussion with anyone on this forum, who have long since “gotten it“ in spades. However, for many average Americans, the absence of 2+2 clicking in their brains remains puzzling. In fact, one has to think: Truly, given the mainstream knowledge of wars based on lies, while attacking the wrong country, it doesn’t even make sense to ask the question. That is, of whether or not Bush and Cheney are capable of planning and executing 9-11, as a staged event leading us to wars for profit. After all, Bush is an oil man, and Cheney was former head of Haliburton. Avid amateur murder mystery solvers, here we come??? A nation full of them?? Oh my god. Talk about denial. Duh!

As activists, there comes a point that I suggest we ask of the public: Is denial really protecting us? At what point does denial actually become dangerous? At risk of repeating myself ad nauseum, having written this point often, I will lay it at your feet again: Who would ever have thought that the Nazi Concentration Camps were happening? And yet they did. (And, notably, a few people in rigorous denial still think they never happened).

I suggest that this point about the denial of the concentration camps’ existence is an important one to bring forward to the general public.

Any time a person or a group accuses you or someone else of being a “conspiracy theorist”, I suggest making that same point to them.

Another tool I have found useful to get people thinking is to ask them this question:

“If YOU were president of the USA and had to lead our nation to war based on the most legitimate of reasons, could YOU make such a fateful decision with joy and ease? Wouldn’t you be pacing the floor and sweating for nights in a row, with tears in your heart, before you sent our kids to war even for the best of reasons? And, could YOU honestly send our kids to war just for a lie?” The obvious response is always a solemn: “No”.

And that’s just the point. When two people take us to war based on a lie, that ain’t no normal psychology at work, folks. Normal people have empathy and concern in their hearts. Only murderers----pathological ones separated from any sense of reality----are capable of mass murder for lies and profit, with no remorse. Far from regretting what they have done, Bush and Cheney have only declared their bold intentions to wage more wars based on more lies.

Both men have a criminal record longer than any kid could rap. From withholding healthcare funding for children while using that money for a war based on a lie, to sending our youth to war lacking adequate body armor, to abandoning Katrina victims to die, to brazenly declaring their intentions to wiretap without warrant and step the program up, to endangering Valerie Plame’s life out of pure revenge (as only gangsters would do), to arm-twisting Congress into passing unconstitutional laws containing gag orders and torture and god knows what else….the criminality is smoking in our nostrils. Yet we still (as a nation, not people on this forum), don’t “Get it”.

How can this be?

Ahh, denial is The Great Enabler. Who wants to think? It’s much more fun to watch the ballgames and pass the beer. Repeat: Denial seeks to avert emotional pain, at all costs.

No wonder the field of psychology recognizes denial as the most difficult “emotion” to deal with. They don’t say that post-traumatic stress disorder or painful memories or anger or anything else ranks as “the most difficult” to break through. Repeat: It’s denial which scores the highest and the toughest on the scale of one to ten.

What, dear reader, have you found to be effective when coming up against this wall of denial? What tools can you tip us off to in dealing with such denial? Please post below. I believe this information can only be absolutely pivotal to our success as activists. Thank you for your help!

Oh, and a quick PS: Another tool I have found very effective is not to discuss intellectually at all. Instead, it’s simply to chant: “Charles Manson for President!” Just watch the faces fall. They don’t think. They prefer not to. They simply feel and believe what they are spoon-fed.

Hey, if mindless wordsmithing is what will win over the other side, why not use it as a tool? Sounds so disgustingly Republican, doesn’t it? Actually, I agree with you, by the way.

But, and here is the big “but”…when survival itself is on the line, when food is becoming more scarce, when more wars and lies and martial law are around the corner, you’d better believe it’s time to swing into emergency action. How much time do we have left? How unethical is it, then, to use the mindless stupidity of “The other side” to our advantage? “Charles Manson for President”, ahoy! Here we come, carrying our banners with us! Let's go shake people up by the collar, in whatever way works!

Authors Bio:
This quote summarizes the nature of my concerns and the content of personal experiences which stir my activism:

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement on human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves". --Paul Revere, House of Commons