After taking a break from Twitter for a few weeks my brain began to reflect on what Twitter is, or rather, how it seems to be functioning in our society.

Twitter, despite its wide breadth, eventual collapses into “flattened” cybernetic loop that we may be able to customize, but it is one that we do not control…

Cybernetics is an extremely deep science of study and I don’t claim to have mastered it. But I’ll share some thoughts on what I understand and how it is at work today. In cybernetics the idea is that a closed-looped system exists when you have an environment, a control system, and a way to evaluate the results of changing inputs to the system.

For us the system is our Twitter feeds which we initially curate. From there we follow friends and commercial accounts which prompt the Twitter (and other social media platform’s) algorithms to offer us new choices similar to what we are already following. I.e., a cybernetic loop what we participate in creating.

Despite having access to the “entire world,” no one’s twitter feed actually encompasses that. Even if you try and expand your feed it can be difficult or impossible to get a wide variety of inputs, in many cases we don’t even want that.

Social media data mining is a known quantity at this point. That said, how often to people take to the time to notice the directional “flow” of news stories and conversations online?

 I can tell you that there definitely are certain people who study the directional “flow” of conversation online. Some of those people even toy with the idea of influencing that flow.

Cybernetics is the study of control of man and the machine. In the 21st century the man and machine exist as embedded parts of each other. Online cybernetic loops continue the same process initiated by radio and television. We buy their products. We buy their logics. We buy their “truths.” We buy their despair. They record the data of our actions and interactions and dependent on the prevailing themes of desires of the day, “they” (advertisers, media companies, politicians, and others) inject inputs into the social media system in order to sell to us, promote us to think certain things, and influence our cognition.

Theorists of the past 70 years have gone out of their way to propagate this idea through their writings and inventions. The technocrats racing to the top of our social pyramid believe this to be true as well. The singularity of thought influencing and social engineering is what they naively expect to take place.

The main input remains the machine (soc media) and the results are read “IRL” as we the actors respond to changes in the loop.

So, what does the controller system want?

It wants to be able to eventually predict behaviors.

Now, Twitter, and all social media apps, run algorithms which track and monitor everyone’s preferred streams of information. We already know that FB and other apps have run actual psychological test studies on users.

Concerning Twitter we can see how news stories are injected into the ‘system’ the ‘environment’ is altered and our comments, shares, and likes provide feedback to the controllers as to the result of the injection. “They” can move on to creating new inputs, altered inputs, and other forms of coercion to change the environment and how we act in it. This type of action is literally what people back in the day were imagining: Forms of unobtrusive social control and influence.
Shadow banning, news advisories, site and content warnings, and even suspensions are a form of operant conditioning.
If Twitter or your browser ‘warns’ you about a site or its content, there are many ppl who will follow that directive without thinking. Not all warnings are legitimate but intended to alter and control your behavior.
 News stories flow through the system and using influencers and shares propagate ACROSS communities in a way that wouldn’t be possible if we weren’t online. In this regard you can spread “outrage” like a virus. You can spread disinformation as a virus.
Follow that up with another input from the “controller system” as cable news outlets follow up with the same content and reinforce the ‘reality’ that has been created in cyberspace.

Daily, it seems, we have a story that refreshes a prior story. A new tidbit of information to argue and get angry over, and a continuation of meta-themes of the time.

Day after day people engage these topics, either seriously or in jest…

Image result for twitter trending

Once it is complete, as if it is not already, “they” will be able to program and deliver: outrage, fear, introspection, doubt, suspicion or obedience. Where does it all end?

How do you get off this train? Can you beat or join or Them in a domain where they made the walls, mirrors, floors, doors and they control the lights?

Welcome to the West World of the Western World as it exists within the confines of a cybernetic loop erected in cyberspaces…




 “Today, everything serves war. There is not one discovery which the military does not study with the aim of applying it to warfare, not one invention which they do not attempt to turn to military use.”

—Nikolai Fyodorov, “Philosophy of the Common Cause, 1891”

In a world of rapidly increasing scientific and technological innovation, much of which is conducted under the auspices of corporate and defense contracts, it is reasonable to believe that types of technologies exist which would appear to be science fiction to the average person. But in fact are quite real. Some of these technologies can affect us in ways that could make someone appear mentally disturbed. Is the fact that certain neurological or physiological conditions could be caused by some variety of exotic corporate or military technology not worth determining? Would disclosure of such technology impact the medical field or improve treatment? If such technologies were treated as “real” by the media or academia in general, what changes and protections could arise from that?

Keywords: Scientism, Synthetic Telepathy, Non-lethal weapons, Defense, Microwave hearing, voice to skull



The following are profiles of potential neighbors trying to move into your neighborhood. Take a moment and reflect on whom you would co-sign for. You must choose one. No cheating. 

A.) A person moving from one block over who you suspected had stolen tomatoes from your garden and followed that up by being elected as president of the neighborhood watch association.

B.) A family whose child had falsely accused yours of theft and assault resulting in a nasty episode where you ran into the father at the park and he punched you in the face and smashed your windshield.

C.) An acquaintance you had previously met at a birthday party for a family friend where, having had too much to drink, they caused an ugly scene by using a racial epithet and mocking the religion of the host.

D.) A family from a foreign country who visibly practice a foreign religion but don’t interact with the other neighbors.

Continue reading MEET THE NEIGHBORS



This is the latest in a series of essays concerning a concept known as History in 4D. History in 4D on one hand is an assessment of the modern information space as being overwhelmingly influenced by political, corporate and military intelligence actors who through guarded communications with the public craft a version of reality using narrative structures embedded in mass media communications. On the other hand, History in 4D is a set of heuristics for use by students, teachers, analysts and information seeking citizens as they attempt to make meaning out of the endless waves of narratives thrown at them. In total, History in 4D is a method of viewing history and current events in an effort to improve media literacy and one’s general awareness about history and how the world operates. If 2016-2018 has proven anything they have proved that the Information Age has given birth to the Age of Information Warfare and our minds are all in the crossfire.

Keywords: Media studies, Narrative history, Politics, Content Analysis, Mass media, self education, History, Journalism


"According to the ancients, an author has two responsibilities: to entertain and to instruct. Here, instruction is in the subtext."