I have long noticed the trend of 'wealthy landowners' seeking to use their position to overpower other people in their local area and attempt to 'gain favours' from others as a result. This is a well known thread in human history and those who watched the blockbuster movie 'Braveheart' might recall how the Lords of the land used their military forces and intimidating form to basically rape and pillage the people of their (allegedly) 'own country'.
As with so many constructs in society today that have been effected by the epidemic of heartlessness and denial, there are at least two major 'versions' of the reality of these groups of people. The 'PR' / 'public friendly' image is one of 'tradition', 'national pride', 'service', 'greatness' and various other kinds of patriotic rhetoric and idealism. Behind the makeup and theatre though, there is typically a very different dynamic and reality involved.
Have you ever noticed that 'wealthy landowners' in Britain (especially the alleged royal family) are highly invested in killing large numbers of animals using guns, dogs and whatever else they can find? I always found this intriguing since they tend not to get involved with doing any hard work of any kind on a daily basis, so why are they so 'passionate' about killing animals? The PR explanation is that they are 'controlling pests', 'maintaining tradition' and 'providing a valuable rural service' - however, as we shall see, the actual lived reality and measurable facts are quite different. The reality is that the vast majority of people seem to be able to grow food and live off the land without needing to resort to such organised (and inefficient) killing (or even any killing at all in my case). In truth, I already know that the optimal way to live involves no deliberate killing and finding far more evolved methods of interaction with non-humans.
The Example of Fox Hunting
I want to use British fox hunting as an example here because it is well documented and has quite clear patterns and logic involved in it. For those who are unaware, the basic idea is that groups of people (typically wealthy families) come together, get dressed up in specific uniforms (red/black jackets) and go out on horseback with large numbers of hunting dogs - blowing horns and hunting foxes. For them it is something of a social event, perhaps like a game of Cricket - except it involves killing creatures.
The reality that this is largely an activity carried out by the wealthier in society (inherited wealth usually) has created a major clash between these groups and others who dislike them for a variety of reasons. Reasons range from those who are pro animal rights (seeing the hunts as barbaric), through to those who live locally simply not liking the noise and destruction to land/property that the hunts can bring with them.
First of all, let's look at whether the claims of the 'hunters' are valid. Do fox hunts reduce the level of 'pests' (foxes) in a meaningful way?
Here's a summary of results from a scientific study into this question:
David MacDonald from the University of Oxford published the results from a series of questionnaires of over 200 local farmers and 13 interviews with Wiltshire's Masters of Pack Hounds in the Journal of Rural Studies. These questions centred around whether or not farmers believed foxes were pests and on the pest control methods that were in use. Only a third of farmers in this area regarded foxes as pests and far fewer believed foxes were responsible for domestic livestock loss. Those that did were more likely to own chickens, which the majority farmed domestically and non-commercially. In terms of control, more foxes were shot by farmers themselves in areas where there were concerns for farmed livestock than in areas of the county where the hunt occurred, with evidence suggesting that the hunt contributed to as little as 5% of fox deaths in the county. Most interesting of all, the areas where fox hunts tended to take place were not those in which the fox was considered to be a pest, but in those in which the landscape favoured the accessibility for horses and presented fewer challenges. Farmers in this area concluded that fox hunting was recreation first and pest management second.
Another survey, this time by Stephen Harris and colleagues from the Universities of Bristol and York published in 2003, also failed to find a link between areas where foxes were considered to be pests and where fox hunting tended to take place. This survey also highlighted the general public's opinion that hunting foxes with dogs was among the least acceptable methods of pest control presented. Most practitioners, and indeed the authors of this paper, concluded that a ban on fox hunting would have a minimal impact on the maintenance of foxes as pests.
The authors of this paper make reference to the number of foxes in the UK and their breeding rates to suggest that in order to keep the number of foxes from increasing, you would need an annual death rate of around 64%. The evidence from their research would suggest that pest management in the form of fox hunting with dogs does not make a significant contribution towards this figure of 64%.
Source: thenakedscientists.com
Given that the facts and data here show that the measured reality of fox hunting actually does NOT match up with the PR version of events put forward by those involved, what else might be the reason for it?
Harming/Killing Animals Unnecessarily Is A Scientific Marker Used to Diagnose Serious Mental Illness
When children are found to be torturing and killing animals (for no valid reason - regardless of what they may invent that doesn't make sense) - it is often considered to be a marker that may represent a tendency towards extremely anti-social behavior and psychopathy. This is understandable, since to do this to innocent creatures suggests a lack of empathy, respect for life and an absence of care/compassion that leaves them open to committing all manner of evil acts. Empathy is very much a key function of humans that holds balance and ensures the survival of life, without empathy we are in deep trouble.
Real Reasons for Fox Hunting
Given that fox hunting has been shown, somewhat scientifically, to be of little value to actually holding any kind of balance in rural areas, we are left with only a small range of possibilities as to it's real cause/purpose:
- The people involved have inherited the ideas and simply believe they are more effective than they are.
- The people involved are seriously mentally ill.
- The people involved intend to continue the actions because they have some other benefit to them which is not disclosed.
Option 1 is possible, except that I am not aware of supporters of fox hunting generally changing their position following publication of the scientific studies.
Option 2 is possible, considering that humanity is hugely imbalanced and it is likely that most of us have some kind of lingering mental dysfunction that holds us back from enjoying full health.
Option 3 is also possible and that is what I want to look at in the remainder of my post here.
The Psychology of Social Control And Conditioning
Our brains operate on vibrations, resonance and impulses which can be manipulated in ways that we don't typically use deliberately on a daily basis. 'Pavlov's dogs' refers to a famous experiment whereby it was shown that it is possible to create conditioning in beings such that physiological responses are caused in them in indirect ways due to associations being made between certain stimulation/experience and other kinds of experience. In the example of Pavlov's dogs, he 'programmed' into the dogs an association between hearing a bell ringing and them being given food, so that they would salivate on hearing the bell, even when there was no food present.
If we take this understanding and look back at history, we might think about the 'heads on sticks' that were used over the River Thames in London to intimidate others:
Source: British History
I actually once worked next to this bridge and wasn't aware of the history there (there are no such spikes there today!) - however, instead, we have police in uniforms with guns, flashing lights/sirens and cameras everywhere that have replaced the pikes. Both approaches are intended to remind us that if we go against what we are told not to go against (by those at the top of artificial power hierarchies), the results might be harmful to us. This conditioning does not involve people with sticks physically beating us as would have occurred in slave plantations with the 'wild people' who weren't yet 'tamed' - instead it relies on exploiting pre-existing conditioning in the people who already feel that these reminders of threats to their survival are enough to represent actual threats to their survival, without it having to be outwardly stated with big signs or men with big sticks.
This control through conditioning is what I see occurring with Fox hunts. Could it be that fox hunts, through the noise, death, heavy vibration and intimidating form (that somewhat resembles a full army on horseback) is primarily intended to control the local people and UNCONSCIOUSLY remind them of what has intimidated them for centuries? Namely, that those who own the manor houses are untouchable and have the 'social standing' (money, connections and ability to direct the armies) necessary to destroy anyone who gets in their way? It would be 'impolite' to outwardly threaten people with violence, but 'quite acceptable' to attack alleged 'pests' (in the form of foxes) as a way to more subtly continue the intimidation.
The Unspoken Psychology Of Fox Hunting
In a world that has developed technology that can bring some degree of equality to people and that can allow the creativity of even the poorer people in society to find an audience so as to allow them to break free of artificial, financial hierarchies - those 'at the top' need to invent ever more techniques to maintain their position. In a truly free world, those who are most creative and those who HELP the planet the most will thrive, but in an enslaved world, the reverse is true.
Given the history of social control and overt enslavement on our planet, it is safe to say that this dynamic continues today - despite it's form having changed along the way. Could fox hunting really be a useful method of reinforcing psychological conditioning of dominance and hierarchy in society?
There are some people who simply will never be intimidated by such things and who are effectively broken free from enslavement programming, so in those cases (as evidenced by hunt saboteur groups) the answer is, for me, 'not consciously'. The intimidation is not having a conscious effect on them that is strong enough to stop them standing up for the animals and themselves. However, that does not mean that they do not have any sense at all of being intimidated by the noise, violence and heartlessness involved.
There are though, plenty of others, who will be either consciously or unconsciously intimidated - and here is the core of the issue that I want to highlight. It is possible to be 'running programs' in our unconscious self which get triggered when we see certain sights, hear certain sounds and smell certain smells. Just as animals are born with programs in them that tell them how to eat, breath and find food, we also inherit programs that can at times be quite complicated. In my own exploration of my unconscious self, for example, I have found emotional imprints relating to my grandparents' time in World War 2 - they are like finding an old photo from a time that you were not present for, but they are in your own brain stem and cellular memory, rather than in a photo album. You may have no idea they are there, but they are recorded none the less and influence thinking and behavior until found, healed and cleared.
These unconscious and semi conscious memories mean that 'traditions' are often just 'hacks' and 'exploits' that are being passed on that serve a function in society of some kind and currently I am having difficulty thinking of any that can't be attributed to being present to elicit some form of hierarchic control and dominance (aka denial of free will).
While I or my children may have never witnessed 'The Lord of the manor' raping and pillaging villages, our collective cellular memory DOES hold imprints of such things and so we have a subtle, felt guidance telling us that this could happen and to be careful. Having a hunt that replicates this genetic memory in various experiential ways is a reliable method of maintaining intimidation factors that ensure the power imbalance continues in the local society. In other words, the 'hunt' is not a fox hunt at all, but a trick designed to 'hunt dissenters' or 'silence opponents who aren't in the club'. By challenging 'the hunt', we challenge imbalance in society and for some that 'just isn't cricket, old boy'.
Further Research
There are many great works that expose some of the mechanics of mind control and enslavement as they apply to us covertly through society. One that stands out in my mind is 'human resources':
Wishing you well,
Ura Soul
Vote @ura-soul for Steem Witness!
View My Witness Application Here
