What do you think?
Rate this book
Brainwashing
A courageous soldier robbed of his will to resist...a Negro POW subjected to tortures that only sly and subtly cruel minds could devise...a brilliant young scientist reduced to a puppet...a kindly missionary who "confessed" to being an international spy...
- GenresPsychologyHistory
286 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1956
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
May 3, 2020
In mid-century America, a publishing house called Pyramid Books mass produced lowbrow novels for mainstream public consumption. The subject matters of their pulp paperbacks usually revolved around action and adventure stories, westerns, thrillers, war stories, and detective fiction. One of their more unusual titles was a supposedly a journalistic account of communist P.O.W. camps during the Korean War called Brainwashing. Its author, Edward Hunter, claimed that communists had developed a powerful technique of mind control which they used to turn ordinary citizens into robots who were unquestioningly subservient to the state apparatus. But Brainwashing is not a work of scholarship nor is it a product of scientific inquiry. Its publication by a cheap book company churning out fluff literature for people of average intelligence and mediocre tastes should be a good indication of what it really is.
An interesting man in his own right, Edward Hunter was no psychiatrist not was he a sociologist or even a political scientist. He was an OSS and CIA agent who worked for the for propaganda bureaus of those governmental branches. He oversaw an impressive archive of communist propaganda from the USSR and China. He was also in charge of creating and disseminating propaganda pushing America as the greatest and most truthful of all nations, a messianic titan ordained by God to save the world from anything un-American, a harbinger of truth that all nations must bow down and submit to or else be condemned to the hell of being on the wrong side of history. Hunter coined the term “brainwashing” and used it to explain why people, who otherwise would be good, would choose to take sides with those the American government hates. Some of these people were citizens of communist countries and some of them were American soldiers who gave up sensitive military secrets to communist officials and sometimes even renounced their American citizenship.
Hunter starts off this book by presenting it as a scientific history of mind control. The great discovery of the neurological scientist Ivan Pavlov is described; you know the one where he rings a bell and gives the dog food and watches as it starts to drool; later ring the bell but in the absence of the food and the dog still drools. Transfer this practice to the human population and you have a powerful formula for controlling the masses of humanity, right? Hunter claims that Pavlov went on to secretly refine this technique and gave the results to Nikolai Lenin, a claim that has since been debunked by legitimate historians.
The bulk of Brainwashing consists of anecdotal evidence or should we say “case studies”? Probably not because Edward Hunter was not enough of a scientist to be able to properly use the concept of case studies in the writing of a research paper. Each sleep-inducing account is written in a dull, dry prose of short declarative sentences that drone on and on. The soldiers all tell stories about life in Pak’s Palace, the military’s name for the P.O.W. camps located in North Korea. A perceptive reader might quickly notice that their descriptions of brainwashing techniques are not only minimal but also vague, muddled, and unclear. Most of what they say involves things they do to amuse themselves, often at their captors’ expense, descriptions of the miseries of their prison, self-criticism sessions, and torture.
Using canned responses, the soldiers all answer questions about how they resisted brainwashing and survived the ordeal. Without variation, their explanations come down to two stock answers: religious faith and patriotism. Ring a bell and the dog starts to drool. Invoke the sacred ideals of God and country and any human will feel the strength and courage to survive any trial. Are the emotional responses to faith and patriotism conditioned reflexes? Pavlovian psychiatrists would say yes. Does America brainwash American citizens the way communists brainwash Soviet and Chinese citizens? The communists would say yes. But Hunter claims that communists always lie, are never capable of telling the truth; only Americans tell the truth so when communists condition their citizens it is mind control and when Americans do the same it is not. Black is black and white is white; there are no other colors and there are no shades of grey. Hunter claims the shades of grey are for weaklings and liberals who are no different from communists or anything else that does not fall into lockstep with the American way. You don’t want to be a weakling or a liberal, do you? Jump on the bandwagon, take your place in line, and conform to what the American authorities say you should be, schmuck.
If you think the testimony from those G.I.’s is not enough, some clinical analysis is provided by the great Dr. Leo Freedom. Yeah right. And you might be surprised to learn that Dr. Freedom has a brother named Captain America. I mean, if you are just going to make stuff up at least try to make it believable. In the end, the doctor’s analysis is little more than a reiteration of everything the soldier’s supposedly said in their descriptions of the P.O.W. camps, albeit in slightly altered language. He does not cite any peer-reviewed research, he uses no technical jargon, refers to no statistics, and his dialogue is no more sophisticated than that of a junior high school biology teacher. Dr. Freedom was probably never even a real person. Of course, he ends his explication by explaining the importance of religion and patriotism when it comes to resisting brainwashing. One of the indoctrination techniques mentioned by Hunter is the repetition of ideas to the point where they become an unquestionable part of a man’s mind. It’s kind of like a catechism, praying before a meal, or recitations of the Lord’s Prayer which they teach to children. But religion is true and communism isn’t so when the church conditions the minds of its sheep (the Lord is my shepherd so believe what we tell you to believe, you little piece of mutton) it is for the common good but when the communists do the same it is brainwashing.
One point that Hunter makes about communist rhetoric is that they never offer proof for any of their claims. Their method of argumentation involves stating a premise, making some brief comments on it, then restating the premise. But this is also how Dr. Freedom states his case in the chapter allotted to him. In fact, Hunter does the same when he makes his own commentaries on brainwashing techniques. For example, he says that religious faith is necessary for resisting mind control with the explanation that having a belief in a higher purpose makes torture bearable and that is why we should all be religious. He does say that prayer helps to focus the mind on something other than the pain but that is the most explanation he gives. In the end we should all be religious because that is the right thing to do. He uses the same circular logic that he accuses the communists of using. If you read carefully, you might notice that Hunter often uses the same conditioning and rhetorical strategies that he claims are brainwashing techniques. You can accuse him of being a hypocrite but he probably was something worse; he knew how to manipulate emotions and knew most readers will just swallow everything he says without skepticism. He would piss in your face and tell you it’s raining because he’d assume you are too gullible and submissive to challenge him on the matter.
In fact, Brainwashing is not actually a book about emptying the contents of a person’s mind and replacing them with what the communists want them to think. The scenarios described by the soldiers are all scenes of torture. The prisoners are given insufficient food rations, denied medical treatments, subjected to violence and verbal abuse, put into solitary confinement, questioned endlessly, force to make false confessions, rewarded for good behavior and punished for disobedience. This book is really about interrogation methods used by intelligence agents to learn military secrets from their captives. Individuals subjected to cruelty will often say anything their interrogator wants to hear in order to make their suffering stop. Mind control has little or nothing to do with what Edward Hunter is writing about. The interrogation techniques he describes are the same ones used by American intelligence agents and law enforcement officials anyhow. But certainly if the people on our side do it, it is not a problem.
To make matters worse, at the time this book was published the CIA had already initiated their MK-ULTRA program. Although Hunter’s concept of brainwashing was little more than a propaganda ruse, the intelligence agency was fascinated with the idea of mind manipulation. Therefore they began a two decades long program exploring the possibilities of brainwashing, not because they wanted to combat it but because they wanted to develop a powerful coercion system of their own. They experimented with control techniques involving hallucinogenic drugs, truth serums, electro-shock therapy, hypnosis, and violence. It is as if Hunter’s book was written to say, “Hey look at what those commies are doing over there. We are the good guys. We would never do anything like that, would we?” Edward Hunter was the type of old-time grifter would direct your attention to a crime being committed in the distance while he slides your wallet out of your pocket, empties it of its contents, and slides it back in without you ever noticing it. He was the kind of conman who would forcibly anally rape you and then convince you to see a therapist because he just proved you are gay.
Time has not been kind to theorists of brainwashing. Neuroscientists and psychiatrists have dismissed it. Hypnotism is possibly a pseudoscience. Mass hypnosis has been relegated to the realm of conspiracy theory kooks. Mind control is the content of science fiction and for anyone smarter than one of Pavlov’s drooling dogs it is not hard to see that it is an oversimplification, a term used to describe the practices and beliefs of people who differ radically from your own point of view. It is too complicated for some to grasp the idea that Asian or Russian people are different from Americans because we live in geographically distinct regions of the world. We grow up in different cultures, speak different languages, and are the products of different histories. When Chinese or Korean communists give evasive answers to questions, speak indirectly, drop hints, or use face-saving behavior, it is not because they are sneaky or dishonest; it is because those are ordinary communication styles for Asian people and other cultures that are defined as “high-context” by sociologists. This reality is too complex for many people to understand so it is easier to say they have been brainwashed and leave it at that. Then again, there are times when most humans do seem to be little more than trained animals.
Edward Hunter’s Brainwashing is a work of propaganda. The Chinese communists are always ugly, vicious, and tricky but never smart enough to see that the morally upright Americans are always outwitting them. Stereotyping, demonizing, and vilifying the enemy is a common propaganda technique, one that is abundant in the pages of this book. At one point the author address the moral conflict some soldiers might feel about lying to their interrogators to protect American military information. He says it is morally acceptable because deceit is a necessary part of war. He deliberately neglects to mention that the authorities’ deceit of the people on their own side is a part of that equation. Do not make the mistake of thinking that the leaders of your own country are more righteous than the leaders of any other country because the are not. The style may be different but the result is the same. You can choose to be a dupe for communists or you can choose to be a dupe for capitalists but either way you are nothing more than a dupe in the end.
Brainwashing is, however, an interesting sample of Cold War propaganda. It is also an interesting window into the mindset of the American government. You can use it to familiarize yourself with propaganda techniques and be all the wiser in the end. Poke holes in Hunter’s flimsy theories and watch this house of cards collapse.
https://grimhistory.blogspot.com/
An interesting man in his own right, Edward Hunter was no psychiatrist not was he a sociologist or even a political scientist. He was an OSS and CIA agent who worked for the for propaganda bureaus of those governmental branches. He oversaw an impressive archive of communist propaganda from the USSR and China. He was also in charge of creating and disseminating propaganda pushing America as the greatest and most truthful of all nations, a messianic titan ordained by God to save the world from anything un-American, a harbinger of truth that all nations must bow down and submit to or else be condemned to the hell of being on the wrong side of history. Hunter coined the term “brainwashing” and used it to explain why people, who otherwise would be good, would choose to take sides with those the American government hates. Some of these people were citizens of communist countries and some of them were American soldiers who gave up sensitive military secrets to communist officials and sometimes even renounced their American citizenship.
Hunter starts off this book by presenting it as a scientific history of mind control. The great discovery of the neurological scientist Ivan Pavlov is described; you know the one where he rings a bell and gives the dog food and watches as it starts to drool; later ring the bell but in the absence of the food and the dog still drools. Transfer this practice to the human population and you have a powerful formula for controlling the masses of humanity, right? Hunter claims that Pavlov went on to secretly refine this technique and gave the results to Nikolai Lenin, a claim that has since been debunked by legitimate historians.
The bulk of Brainwashing consists of anecdotal evidence or should we say “case studies”? Probably not because Edward Hunter was not enough of a scientist to be able to properly use the concept of case studies in the writing of a research paper. Each sleep-inducing account is written in a dull, dry prose of short declarative sentences that drone on and on. The soldiers all tell stories about life in Pak’s Palace, the military’s name for the P.O.W. camps located in North Korea. A perceptive reader might quickly notice that their descriptions of brainwashing techniques are not only minimal but also vague, muddled, and unclear. Most of what they say involves things they do to amuse themselves, often at their captors’ expense, descriptions of the miseries of their prison, self-criticism sessions, and torture.
Using canned responses, the soldiers all answer questions about how they resisted brainwashing and survived the ordeal. Without variation, their explanations come down to two stock answers: religious faith and patriotism. Ring a bell and the dog starts to drool. Invoke the sacred ideals of God and country and any human will feel the strength and courage to survive any trial. Are the emotional responses to faith and patriotism conditioned reflexes? Pavlovian psychiatrists would say yes. Does America brainwash American citizens the way communists brainwash Soviet and Chinese citizens? The communists would say yes. But Hunter claims that communists always lie, are never capable of telling the truth; only Americans tell the truth so when communists condition their citizens it is mind control and when Americans do the same it is not. Black is black and white is white; there are no other colors and there are no shades of grey. Hunter claims the shades of grey are for weaklings and liberals who are no different from communists or anything else that does not fall into lockstep with the American way. You don’t want to be a weakling or a liberal, do you? Jump on the bandwagon, take your place in line, and conform to what the American authorities say you should be, schmuck.
If you think the testimony from those G.I.’s is not enough, some clinical analysis is provided by the great Dr. Leo Freedom. Yeah right. And you might be surprised to learn that Dr. Freedom has a brother named Captain America. I mean, if you are just going to make stuff up at least try to make it believable. In the end, the doctor’s analysis is little more than a reiteration of everything the soldier’s supposedly said in their descriptions of the P.O.W. camps, albeit in slightly altered language. He does not cite any peer-reviewed research, he uses no technical jargon, refers to no statistics, and his dialogue is no more sophisticated than that of a junior high school biology teacher. Dr. Freedom was probably never even a real person. Of course, he ends his explication by explaining the importance of religion and patriotism when it comes to resisting brainwashing. One of the indoctrination techniques mentioned by Hunter is the repetition of ideas to the point where they become an unquestionable part of a man’s mind. It’s kind of like a catechism, praying before a meal, or recitations of the Lord’s Prayer which they teach to children. But religion is true and communism isn’t so when the church conditions the minds of its sheep (the Lord is my shepherd so believe what we tell you to believe, you little piece of mutton) it is for the common good but when the communists do the same it is brainwashing.
One point that Hunter makes about communist rhetoric is that they never offer proof for any of their claims. Their method of argumentation involves stating a premise, making some brief comments on it, then restating the premise. But this is also how Dr. Freedom states his case in the chapter allotted to him. In fact, Hunter does the same when he makes his own commentaries on brainwashing techniques. For example, he says that religious faith is necessary for resisting mind control with the explanation that having a belief in a higher purpose makes torture bearable and that is why we should all be religious. He does say that prayer helps to focus the mind on something other than the pain but that is the most explanation he gives. In the end we should all be religious because that is the right thing to do. He uses the same circular logic that he accuses the communists of using. If you read carefully, you might notice that Hunter often uses the same conditioning and rhetorical strategies that he claims are brainwashing techniques. You can accuse him of being a hypocrite but he probably was something worse; he knew how to manipulate emotions and knew most readers will just swallow everything he says without skepticism. He would piss in your face and tell you it’s raining because he’d assume you are too gullible and submissive to challenge him on the matter.
In fact, Brainwashing is not actually a book about emptying the contents of a person’s mind and replacing them with what the communists want them to think. The scenarios described by the soldiers are all scenes of torture. The prisoners are given insufficient food rations, denied medical treatments, subjected to violence and verbal abuse, put into solitary confinement, questioned endlessly, force to make false confessions, rewarded for good behavior and punished for disobedience. This book is really about interrogation methods used by intelligence agents to learn military secrets from their captives. Individuals subjected to cruelty will often say anything their interrogator wants to hear in order to make their suffering stop. Mind control has little or nothing to do with what Edward Hunter is writing about. The interrogation techniques he describes are the same ones used by American intelligence agents and law enforcement officials anyhow. But certainly if the people on our side do it, it is not a problem.
To make matters worse, at the time this book was published the CIA had already initiated their MK-ULTRA program. Although Hunter’s concept of brainwashing was little more than a propaganda ruse, the intelligence agency was fascinated with the idea of mind manipulation. Therefore they began a two decades long program exploring the possibilities of brainwashing, not because they wanted to combat it but because they wanted to develop a powerful coercion system of their own. They experimented with control techniques involving hallucinogenic drugs, truth serums, electro-shock therapy, hypnosis, and violence. It is as if Hunter’s book was written to say, “Hey look at what those commies are doing over there. We are the good guys. We would never do anything like that, would we?” Edward Hunter was the type of old-time grifter would direct your attention to a crime being committed in the distance while he slides your wallet out of your pocket, empties it of its contents, and slides it back in without you ever noticing it. He was the kind of conman who would forcibly anally rape you and then convince you to see a therapist because he just proved you are gay.
Time has not been kind to theorists of brainwashing. Neuroscientists and psychiatrists have dismissed it. Hypnotism is possibly a pseudoscience. Mass hypnosis has been relegated to the realm of conspiracy theory kooks. Mind control is the content of science fiction and for anyone smarter than one of Pavlov’s drooling dogs it is not hard to see that it is an oversimplification, a term used to describe the practices and beliefs of people who differ radically from your own point of view. It is too complicated for some to grasp the idea that Asian or Russian people are different from Americans because we live in geographically distinct regions of the world. We grow up in different cultures, speak different languages, and are the products of different histories. When Chinese or Korean communists give evasive answers to questions, speak indirectly, drop hints, or use face-saving behavior, it is not because they are sneaky or dishonest; it is because those are ordinary communication styles for Asian people and other cultures that are defined as “high-context” by sociologists. This reality is too complex for many people to understand so it is easier to say they have been brainwashed and leave it at that. Then again, there are times when most humans do seem to be little more than trained animals.
Edward Hunter’s Brainwashing is a work of propaganda. The Chinese communists are always ugly, vicious, and tricky but never smart enough to see that the morally upright Americans are always outwitting them. Stereotyping, demonizing, and vilifying the enemy is a common propaganda technique, one that is abundant in the pages of this book. At one point the author address the moral conflict some soldiers might feel about lying to their interrogators to protect American military information. He says it is morally acceptable because deceit is a necessary part of war. He deliberately neglects to mention that the authorities’ deceit of the people on their own side is a part of that equation. Do not make the mistake of thinking that the leaders of your own country are more righteous than the leaders of any other country because the are not. The style may be different but the result is the same. You can choose to be a dupe for communists or you can choose to be a dupe for capitalists but either way you are nothing more than a dupe in the end.
Brainwashing is, however, an interesting sample of Cold War propaganda. It is also an interesting window into the mindset of the American government. You can use it to familiarize yourself with propaganda techniques and be all the wiser in the end. Poke holes in Hunter’s flimsy theories and watch this house of cards collapse.
https://grimhistory.blogspot.com/
April 8, 2021
A little too journalistic for the palete.
October 4, 2023
Olen monta kertaa törmännyt tästä Edward Hunterin kirjasta peräisin oleviin haastatteluihin, ja päätinkin lukea CIA-mielenhallintaspesialistin tekemän kirjan, joka keskittyy kymmenessä luvussa määrittelemään (pitkälti myös tapauskertomusten perusteella), millaista on kommunistien harjoittama aivopesu ja lähinnä Korean sodan aikana amerikkalaisille sotavangeille tehdyt julmuudet ja käännytystoimet.
Alkupuheiden jälkeen lähdetään liikkeelle venäläisestä Nobelistista Ivan Pavlovista, jonka koirakokeet tekivät läpimurron myös mielenvaihtotekniikoissa silloin joskus Venäjällä. Lenin kutsuikin Pavlovin Kremliin, jolloin Hunterin tietämän mukaan eläinten ehdollistamismenetelmiä alettiinkin soveltaa ihmisiin Pavlovin laatiman opaskirjasen mukaisesti. Venäläiset bolševikit ymmärsivät jo tuolloin, että Pavlovin yksinkertaisia löydöksiä olikin helppo käyttää poliittisiin tarkoituksiin, jotta oikeanlainen ”neuvostoihminen” saatiin luoduksi.
Ison osan kirjasta haukkaavat tapauskuvaukset, jolloin jopa vuosikausien vankeuden aikana yhden jos toisenkin amerikkalaisen mieli murrettiin ajamalla vangit kuoleman porteille kerta toisensa jälkeen, ja luvut onkin nimetty mahtipontisesti ja raamatullisestikin. Leirielämän kokemuksista Hunter on koonnut myös luvun vuosia vapautumisen jälkeen, ja osa niistä lienee osittain ihan kuviteltuja dialogeja.
Kirjan loppupuolella onkin vuorossa aivopesun tarkempia määritelmiä ja luonnehdintoja annettujen esimerkkien avulla, mitä aivoissa oikein tapahtuu, kun ajetaan äärirajoille ja epätoivon ylikin. Ihan viimeisessä luvussa esitetään selviytymiskeinoja, jollaisia voi noudattaa kuka tahansa kaiken mediapropagandan keskellä yksilön pyrkiessä säilyttämään oman mielenhallintansa ja ajatustensa kirkkauden.
Hunter määrittelee aivopesun erittäin monimutkaiseksi manipuloinniksi, eikä sitä kaavamaiseksi voi kutsua. Erilaisiin yksilöihin tarvittiin toisistaan poikkeavia tekniikoita. Nälkä ja väsymys olivatkin kova yhdistelmä, ja niillä ajettiin vastustuskykyisimmätkin yksilöt hulluuden partaalle. Kun vangeille ei annettu pitkiin aikoihin hetkenkään rauhaa, toimilla vaikutettiin kommunistisen propagandan syövyttävään vaikutukseen alinomaisella toistamisella, kunnes vastustus saatiin murretuksi.
Aivopesun pidemmälle menevää muotoa Hunter kutsuu aivojen muuttamiseksi (ei siis brainwashing vaan brain-changing), ja tämä tarkoittaa ikään kuin kirurgintarkkoja psykiatrisia toimenpiteitä, ja toisinaan sitä tehtiin lääkkeillä ja huumeilla (nälkiinnyttämisen ja muiden kidutusmenetelmien lisäksi). Tällöin pyrittiin vaikuttamaan suoraan uhrin muistiin ja poistamaan vanhoja tapahtumia sekä lisäämään uusia ja sepitettyjä tarinoita tilalle. Tällaista haastateltu ”Dr. Freedom” kutsui käsitteellä ”corticovisceral psychiatry”.
Paras keino niin vankileireillä kuin nykyään siviilissäkin on välttää altistumasta indoktrinaattorien viesteille. Leireillä monet selvisivät hyvin, kun eivät kuunnelleet ollenkaan, mitä heille tuputettiin, ja monille usko tai jonkinlainen kiinnekohta vapaudessa oli asia, joka antoi toivoa kaiken epätoivon keskellä ja uskoa tulevaisuuteen ja omaan selviytymiseensä. Jos kuitenkin tulee katsottua elokuviakin laidasta laitaan, on hyvä olla tietoinen, että niillä voidaan vaikuttaa vastaanottajien mielen kerroksiin ja salakähmäisesti uudistaa mieltä (mind reform) ja uudelleenkouluttaa (re-education). Tällaista Hunter kutsuu ”ryhmäterapian” parodiaversioksi ja ”henkiseksi hygieniaksi”, jollaista Pavlovin nykyiset seuraajat puskevat eettisiin. Viihdeohjelmien narratiivitkaan eivät olisi sitä, mitä katsoja ensin tulee ajatelleeksi, vaan ne voidaan tulkita ennemminkin eräänlaisiksi resepteiksi, joilla pyritään mielenhallintaan niin kuin jotkut äiteläksi kuorrutetut Barbie-tarinat.
Vaikka Hunterin esimerkit ovat vapaa maailma vastaan kommunistit -narratiiviin liittyvää, ihan samoja mielenhallinta- ja -muokkauskeinoja käytetään nykyäänkin kuin 1950-luvulla, jolloin tämä kirja kirjoitettiin. Punaisten eli kommunistien sotakoneisto keskittyi mieleen hyökkäämiseen (mind attack) aivopestäkseen niin vangit kuin omat kansalaisensakin. Siksi Hunter näkeekin kansalaistaitona selviytymiskoulutuksen hankkimisen, jotta osaa erottaa tällaiset manööverit ja jotta osaa puolustaa omia arvojaan median ja indoktrinaattorien eksyttäessä meitä erilaisten poliittisten agendojen ideologiseen hetteikköön.
Kun yksilöllä on punnittuja mielipiteitä ja kun ne eivät perustu harhaluuloihin, mieli ja ajattelu voivat olla kirkkaita. Tällaista mieltä onkin vaikeaa ellei mahdotonta aivopestä, mutta toisin on muiden vietävänä olevan ja aivosumussa tuskailevan surkimuksen, joka ei edes tiedä mihin uskoa, ei edes omiin aisteihinsa, kun näkee nälkiintyneen jääkarhun rimpuilemassa pohjoisen luonnon armoilla jäälautalla jossain propagandapläjäyksessä. Epäröinti ja päättämättömyys ovat juuri niitä ratkaisevia tekijöitä, kun aivopesun uhri luopuu omista periaatteistaan ja antautuu terrorin armoille. Pelokas ja tuskainen yksilö onkin helpoiten alistettavissa, niin kuin kommunistimanipulaattorit hyvin ymmärsivät jo Korean sodan aikoina. Jos ajatellaan asiaa aivopesurin näkökulmasta, tavoitteena oli jo tuolloin saada aikaan uhreissa käsitys, että painostajat ovat kaikkivoipaisia ja kaikkitietäviä ja ettei ole muuta vaihtoehtoa kuin alistua heidän tahtoonsa, sillä he pystyisivät tekemään mitä tahansa.
”Truth is the most important serum and integrity the most devastating weapon that can be used against the totalitarian concept.”
Alkupuheiden jälkeen lähdetään liikkeelle venäläisestä Nobelistista Ivan Pavlovista, jonka koirakokeet tekivät läpimurron myös mielenvaihtotekniikoissa silloin joskus Venäjällä. Lenin kutsuikin Pavlovin Kremliin, jolloin Hunterin tietämän mukaan eläinten ehdollistamismenetelmiä alettiinkin soveltaa ihmisiin Pavlovin laatiman opaskirjasen mukaisesti. Venäläiset bolševikit ymmärsivät jo tuolloin, että Pavlovin yksinkertaisia löydöksiä olikin helppo käyttää poliittisiin tarkoituksiin, jotta oikeanlainen ”neuvostoihminen” saatiin luoduksi.
Ison osan kirjasta haukkaavat tapauskuvaukset, jolloin jopa vuosikausien vankeuden aikana yhden jos toisenkin amerikkalaisen mieli murrettiin ajamalla vangit kuoleman porteille kerta toisensa jälkeen, ja luvut onkin nimetty mahtipontisesti ja raamatullisestikin. Leirielämän kokemuksista Hunter on koonnut myös luvun vuosia vapautumisen jälkeen, ja osa niistä lienee osittain ihan kuviteltuja dialogeja.
Kirjan loppupuolella onkin vuorossa aivopesun tarkempia määritelmiä ja luonnehdintoja annettujen esimerkkien avulla, mitä aivoissa oikein tapahtuu, kun ajetaan äärirajoille ja epätoivon ylikin. Ihan viimeisessä luvussa esitetään selviytymiskeinoja, jollaisia voi noudattaa kuka tahansa kaiken mediapropagandan keskellä yksilön pyrkiessä säilyttämään oman mielenhallintansa ja ajatustensa kirkkauden.
Hunter määrittelee aivopesun erittäin monimutkaiseksi manipuloinniksi, eikä sitä kaavamaiseksi voi kutsua. Erilaisiin yksilöihin tarvittiin toisistaan poikkeavia tekniikoita. Nälkä ja väsymys olivatkin kova yhdistelmä, ja niillä ajettiin vastustuskykyisimmätkin yksilöt hulluuden partaalle. Kun vangeille ei annettu pitkiin aikoihin hetkenkään rauhaa, toimilla vaikutettiin kommunistisen propagandan syövyttävään vaikutukseen alinomaisella toistamisella, kunnes vastustus saatiin murretuksi.
Aivopesun pidemmälle menevää muotoa Hunter kutsuu aivojen muuttamiseksi (ei siis brainwashing vaan brain-changing), ja tämä tarkoittaa ikään kuin kirurgintarkkoja psykiatrisia toimenpiteitä, ja toisinaan sitä tehtiin lääkkeillä ja huumeilla (nälkiinnyttämisen ja muiden kidutusmenetelmien lisäksi). Tällöin pyrittiin vaikuttamaan suoraan uhrin muistiin ja poistamaan vanhoja tapahtumia sekä lisäämään uusia ja sepitettyjä tarinoita tilalle. Tällaista haastateltu ”Dr. Freedom” kutsui käsitteellä ”corticovisceral psychiatry”.
Paras keino niin vankileireillä kuin nykyään siviilissäkin on välttää altistumasta indoktrinaattorien viesteille. Leireillä monet selvisivät hyvin, kun eivät kuunnelleet ollenkaan, mitä heille tuputettiin, ja monille usko tai jonkinlainen kiinnekohta vapaudessa oli asia, joka antoi toivoa kaiken epätoivon keskellä ja uskoa tulevaisuuteen ja omaan selviytymiseensä. Jos kuitenkin tulee katsottua elokuviakin laidasta laitaan, on hyvä olla tietoinen, että niillä voidaan vaikuttaa vastaanottajien mielen kerroksiin ja salakähmäisesti uudistaa mieltä (mind reform) ja uudelleenkouluttaa (re-education). Tällaista Hunter kutsuu ”ryhmäterapian” parodiaversioksi ja ”henkiseksi hygieniaksi”, jollaista Pavlovin nykyiset seuraajat puskevat eettisiin. Viihdeohjelmien narratiivitkaan eivät olisi sitä, mitä katsoja ensin tulee ajatelleeksi, vaan ne voidaan tulkita ennemminkin eräänlaisiksi resepteiksi, joilla pyritään mielenhallintaan niin kuin jotkut äiteläksi kuorrutetut Barbie-tarinat.
Vaikka Hunterin esimerkit ovat vapaa maailma vastaan kommunistit -narratiiviin liittyvää, ihan samoja mielenhallinta- ja -muokkauskeinoja käytetään nykyäänkin kuin 1950-luvulla, jolloin tämä kirja kirjoitettiin. Punaisten eli kommunistien sotakoneisto keskittyi mieleen hyökkäämiseen (mind attack) aivopestäkseen niin vangit kuin omat kansalaisensakin. Siksi Hunter näkeekin kansalaistaitona selviytymiskoulutuksen hankkimisen, jotta osaa erottaa tällaiset manööverit ja jotta osaa puolustaa omia arvojaan median ja indoktrinaattorien eksyttäessä meitä erilaisten poliittisten agendojen ideologiseen hetteikköön.
Kun yksilöllä on punnittuja mielipiteitä ja kun ne eivät perustu harhaluuloihin, mieli ja ajattelu voivat olla kirkkaita. Tällaista mieltä onkin vaikeaa ellei mahdotonta aivopestä, mutta toisin on muiden vietävänä olevan ja aivosumussa tuskailevan surkimuksen, joka ei edes tiedä mihin uskoa, ei edes omiin aisteihinsa, kun näkee nälkiintyneen jääkarhun rimpuilemassa pohjoisen luonnon armoilla jäälautalla jossain propagandapläjäyksessä. Epäröinti ja päättämättömyys ovat juuri niitä ratkaisevia tekijöitä, kun aivopesun uhri luopuu omista periaatteistaan ja antautuu terrorin armoille. Pelokas ja tuskainen yksilö onkin helpoiten alistettavissa, niin kuin kommunistimanipulaattorit hyvin ymmärsivät jo Korean sodan aikoina. Jos ajatellaan asiaa aivopesurin näkökulmasta, tavoitteena oli jo tuolloin saada aikaan uhreissa käsitys, että painostajat ovat kaikkivoipaisia ja kaikkitietäviä ja ettei ole muuta vaihtoehtoa kuin alistua heidän tahtoonsa, sillä he pystyisivät tekemään mitä tahansa.
”Truth is the most important serum and integrity the most devastating weapon that can be used against the totalitarian concept.”
May 20, 2014
too many stories. way way repetitive.
November 26, 2023
Edward Hunter??
Edward Hunter: CIA operative?
Historians generally agree that the coining of ‘brainwash’, in English, can be credited to Edward Hunter (1902-1978), an American journalist and propaganda expert.
While working as a foreign correspondent in Asia during the 1950s, Hunter wrote news articles and books about the People’s Republic of China’s programme to re-educate the masses in communist ideology.
His earliest reports on brainwashing (1950a, 1950b) were teasers for Hunter’s book, Brain-Washing in Red China: The Calculated Destruction of Men’s Minds (1951), which is considered the first full monograph to describe the Chinese process of ‘brainwashing’.
In this early account, ‘brainwashing’ meant intensive indoctrination in Maoism and the harsh repression of alternative political ideologies.
Yet this history of how ‘brainwashing’ entered the English language is not as straightforward as it may seem, because Hunter was no ordinary journalist.
He was a keen student of propaganda who, in addition to reporting from the Far East for various news services, amassed a large collection of Chinese political pamphlets and ephemera.
For two years during World War II he worked for the Morale Operations Section of the U.S. Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the forerunner of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
After the war, he not only wrote popular texts about communist brainwashing in China, Korea and the Soviet Union but also gave lectures on propaganda and psychological warfare.
He served as a witness on communist brainwashing for the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee and the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
In the 1960s, he edited and published a newsletter, TACTICS, which focused on psychological warfare and propaganda as it related to American national security.
One of the enduring mysteries surrounding Hunter is whether his contribution of ‘brainwashing’ to the English language was mere reportage, or was orchestrated by the CIA.
Some scholars have considered Hunter’s employment in the OSS in the 1940s as indication that he had links to the CIA in the 1950s, and thus may have been helped by the CIA in his efforts to promote ‘brainwashing’ as an eminent threat (Marks 1979, Melley 2011, Young 2014; cf. Dunne 2013, pp. 23-24).
This hypothesis seems supported by the fact that the word ‘brainwashing’ has been found in government documents that may have been written prior to Hunter’s first publications on the subject (Melley 2011, p. 28).
Indeed, Timothy Melley notes that a document found in the CIA’s MKUltra papers, ‘Narrative Description of the Overt and Covert Activities of [Redacted]’, references the term ‘brainwashing’.
Melley gives the date of this document as 1 January 1950, several months ahead of Hunter’s first publication to use the phrase.
However, the actual date of this document is unknown–the index to the MKUltra papers assigns 01/01/1950 merely as a placeholder.
Though it is likely that the document was created sometime in 1950, and could certainly pre-date Hunter’s writings on the subject, it seems implausible to therefore conclude that this documents proves a connection between the CIA and Hunter, or that the CIA invented the term ‘brainwashing’.
Meanwhile, our project’s PhD candidate Charlie Williams has come across another relevant document, one that uses the term ‘brainwashing’ and is dated 14 September 1950 (ten days ahead of Hunter’s article in the Miami News).
The document is a report by the propaganda scholar-cum-novelist Paul Linebarger (aka Cordwainer Smith) on his observations on the Korean peninsula in the early stages of the Korean War.
Linebarger describes seeing ‘an endless process which is called by the nick-name of “brain washing”’ in which teams of communist interrogators attempted to convert Chinese and Koreans to submit to communist authority.
----
Edward Hunter: CIA operative?
Historians generally agree that the coining of ‘brainwash’, in English, can be credited to Edward Hunter (1902-1978), an American journalist and propaganda expert.
While working as a foreign correspondent in Asia during the 1950s, Hunter wrote news articles and books about the People’s Republic of China’s programme to re-educate the masses in communist ideology.
His earliest reports on brainwashing (1950a, 1950b) were teasers for Hunter’s book, Brain-Washing in Red China: The Calculated Destruction of Men’s Minds (1951), which is considered the first full monograph to describe the Chinese process of ‘brainwashing’.
In this early account, ‘brainwashing’ meant intensive indoctrination in Maoism and the harsh repression of alternative political ideologies.
Yet this history of how ‘brainwashing’ entered the English language is not as straightforward as it may seem, because Hunter was no ordinary journalist.
He was a keen student of propaganda who, in addition to reporting from the Far East for various news services, amassed a large collection of Chinese political pamphlets and ephemera.
For two years during World War II he worked for the Morale Operations Section of the U.S. Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the forerunner of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
After the war, he not only wrote popular texts about communist brainwashing in China, Korea and the Soviet Union but also gave lectures on propaganda and psychological warfare.
He served as a witness on communist brainwashing for the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee and the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
In the 1960s, he edited and published a newsletter, TACTICS, which focused on psychological warfare and propaganda as it related to American national security.
One of the enduring mysteries surrounding Hunter is whether his contribution of ‘brainwashing’ to the English language was mere reportage, or was orchestrated by the CIA.
Some scholars have considered Hunter’s employment in the OSS in the 1940s as indication that he had links to the CIA in the 1950s, and thus may have been helped by the CIA in his efforts to promote ‘brainwashing’ as an eminent threat (Marks 1979, Melley 2011, Young 2014; cf. Dunne 2013, pp. 23-24).
This hypothesis seems supported by the fact that the word ‘brainwashing’ has been found in government documents that may have been written prior to Hunter’s first publications on the subject (Melley 2011, p. 28).
Indeed, Timothy Melley notes that a document found in the CIA’s MKUltra papers, ‘Narrative Description of the Overt and Covert Activities of [Redacted]’, references the term ‘brainwashing’.
Melley gives the date of this document as 1 January 1950, several months ahead of Hunter’s first publication to use the phrase.
However, the actual date of this document is unknown–the index to the MKUltra papers assigns 01/01/1950 merely as a placeholder.
Though it is likely that the document was created sometime in 1950, and could certainly pre-date Hunter’s writings on the subject, it seems implausible to therefore conclude that this documents proves a connection between the CIA and Hunter, or that the CIA invented the term ‘brainwashing’.
Meanwhile, our project’s PhD candidate Charlie Williams has come across another relevant document, one that uses the term ‘brainwashing’ and is dated 14 September 1950 (ten days ahead of Hunter’s article in the Miami News).
The document is a report by the propaganda scholar-cum-novelist Paul Linebarger (aka Cordwainer Smith) on his observations on the Korean peninsula in the early stages of the Korean War.
Linebarger describes seeing ‘an endless process which is called by the nick-name of “brain washing”’ in which teams of communist interrogators attempted to convert Chinese and Koreans to submit to communist authority.
----
Read
October 9, 2019WOULD LIKE TO READ IT.
September 23, 2010
When I picked up this book, I was expecting to find some anti-Communist propaganda-type stuff. It is far from that. It covers the history of brainwashing and it's development, based in Pavlov's research on behavior control. The part that is really interesting though is all the personal stories of people who were prisoners in communist China or Korea and the author's interviews with them. After reading these stories, I feel proud to be human. They survived brainwashing and prison camps with nothing to rely on but, God (not religion), a poem like "If" by Rudyard Kipling which spread among all the prisoners, comedy, and belief in Truth and Goodness.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews