We are the victims of the “science of organization” • Imola Ogi

We are the victims of the “science of organization” • Imola Ogi
Armando Manukia

When the French Revolution gave way to disillusionment, philosopher Claude-Henri Saint-Simon became one of the most famous thinkers of the nineteenth century. […] She identified an “introduction to socialism, technocracy, and totalitarianism”.
Like Bacon, Saint-Simon believed that science and technology would solve most social and technical problems.
However, for the technical experts to judge the company, The “ignorant masses” had to be controlled.
This, in turn, implies the need to abandon democracy and, accordingly, to abandon mass politics.
In its place, he proposed the creation of a new science that would govern all others, called “organizational sciences“.

Therefore “organization science” is seen as a superstructure that governs “ignorant masses” through “experts”.

Regardless of the context in which they operate, they have only one goal: to create consensus, and to change people’s perception of the world to include it in science and technology.

The strong presence of “experts being experts” in all media, since the outbreak of the PSICO pandemic, has shed light on this phenomenon.

The most attentive readers/listeners will not escape using technology manipulation and indoctrinationseasoned with the typical paternalism of those who find themselves in a position to protect masses too “ignorant” to understand the gravity of a complex problem.

The blunders and countless undoings would not have escaped, which was not followed, however, by any excuse, let alone a less emphatic account of one’s own statements.
From the famous sentence of Burioni who on the broadcast of “Che Tempo Che Fa” he said: “I think the risk of contracting this virus in Italy is zero, because the virus does not spread” to the messianic slogans on the COVID vaccine advance the narrative with certainty. It doesn’t matter if he’s immediately rejected.

See also  Corona virus disease. Topol (USA): “Alternative BA.5 is the worst seen so far. We need vaccines, masks, ventilation systems and social distancing”

This stupid language, intended to create a prior consensus, is hermetically closed to any opposition or reflection, described by Geoges Orwell in Principles of Speechappendix to its famous owner 1984. The process of embodying reality, the new language (New Speech, or “New Speech”) is an expendable capable of To cut off the possibility of expressing an opinion that deviates from the official version of the foundations Made by masters of speech.

Gradually, thanks to the use of precise strategies implemented over time, language became impoverished, so that every reflection is eliminated and thought reduced to a mechanical and unconscious act of enslavement.

Specific end of the speech It was not only to provide, for the benefit of the followers of Socing (a modern term used by Orwell to refer to English socialism, ed.), an expressive medium that replaced the old world view and mental habits, but Make any other form of thinking impossible.

It was believed that once the new language had been completely adopted and the main language forgotten, any heretical thought (that is, any thought that deviated from the principles of Socing) would be literally impossible, at least in relation to those matters. Forms of meditation that depend on words. […]

All this is happening today under our very eyes. Creating new words, surgically eliminating others (through political correctness), mediating traits capable of numbing alternative thinking (see conspiracy theory, denier), creating a task force against fake news… The climate in which we live is completely miserable and nihilistic.

The goal is not the so much vaunted “salvation” for our health, like Systematic destruction of critical thinking Hence democracy.

See also  Lollobrigida, We Depend on Science in the Wild - Trentino AA/S.

This hidden face represents, at the same time, the most violent face of PSICO’s COVID-19 pandemic.

This, in my opinion, is the most dangerous question we find ourselves obliged to confront at this moment, for the ultimate aim of propaganda and censorship is not to prevent the free expression of thought, but to create conditions for people to no longer be able to formulate it.

Armando Manukia


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *