The 2010 film Inception explored a world in which the subconscious mind may be infiltrated, manipulated, subverted and deceived as a form of corporate espionage. The general method of such criminal activity was to enter into a shared dream-space (sometimes a dream within a dream) with the targeted individual and extract a vital piece of information from their mind.
But the really impressive - and nearly impossible - task was not to extract information but to implant an idea so deep into a subject's subconscious that it germinated on its own and fooled the target into believing that this idea was genuine and spontaneous.
As described by one of the film's characters, "You need the simplest version of the idea - the one that will grow naturally in the subject's mind. Subtle art." While broad concepts can be suggested to the target's conscious mind, the feat of inception is achieved by going deeper and deeper into levels of the subconscious (dreams within dreams) so that those concepts may be translated by the target's subconscious mind and fed back to him/herself. That way, the target "gives himself the idea," which, we are told, is "the only way to make it stick. It has to seem self-generated."
Successful inception, therefore, is essentially a perfected form of brainwashing and propaganda. It forces someone to be fed an idea that they would not have otherwise generated by a self-interested second party in such a way that the target is wholly unaware that the idea - an idea then acted upon and which would change the course of one's life or belief system - is not his or her own. It is a foreign idea foisted upon the target by external forces but disguised as one's own.
Writer-director Christopher Nolan came up with the concept for the film in 2001 while, in his words, "exploring the idea of people sharing a dream space-entering a dream space and sharing a dream. That gives you the ability to access somebody's subconscious. What would that be used and abused for?"
But Nolan was not the first to tread such ground. In fact, the exact concept of inception had been articulated in an almost identical fashion about eight decades earlier by a leading Zionist recruiter Kurt Blumenfeld. Blumenfeld was the secretary of the German Federation of Zionists from 1909 to 1911 and the secretary general of the Executive of World Zionist Organizations from 1911 to 1914. In April 1921, he enlisted Albert Einstein, whose scientific theories had made him somewhat of a international celebrity and one of the world's most recognized and respected Jews at the time, to travel to the United States alongside WZO president Chaim Weizmann to help raise funds to to establish the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.
Before the trip, Blumenfeld wrote to Weizmann, warning him about Einstein's personal feelings about the Zionist cause:
"Einstein, as you know, is no Zionist, and I ask you not to try to make him a Zionist or to try to attach him to our organization... Einstein, who leans to socialism, feels very involved with the cause of Jewish labor and Jewish workers...
I heard...that you expect Einstein to give speeches. Please be quite careful with that, Einstein...often says things out of naiveté which are unwelcome by us."
It was not so much "naiveté," but Einstein's opposition to nationalism that worried Blumenfeld. The renowned scientist overtly opposed the creation of a "Jewish State" in Palestine and spoke often of the importance of Jewish cooperation with indigenous Palestinian Arabs, rather than the colonization of them.
Einstein biographer Ronald W. Clark explains the shrewdness with which Blumenfeld, who knew that for Einstein "Zionism and Palestine were only peripheral concerns," brought the eminent physicist into the Zionist fold:
Utilizing him for publicity purposes was thus a delicate matter and "was only successful if I was able to get under his skin in such a way that eventually he believed that words had not been put into his mouth but had come forth from him spontaneously."
Thus was Blumenfeld's own conception of inception - the subtle manipulation of religious/cultural affiliation to help raise money for the Zionist cause - clearly articulated. Similarly, in response to Inception's main protagonist Dominick Cobb's explanation that because "the subconscious motivates through emotion, not reason...we have to translate the idea into an emotional concept," his associate Arthur wonders, "How do you translate a business strategy into an emotion?" The answer, at least for Blumenfeld, was obvious: hasbara.
But Einstein, to put it mildly, was no fool. He had no illusions as to why he had been asked along on this fund-raising tour. Shortly after agreeing to join Weizmann, Einstein wrote to his friend, Romanian mathematician Maurice Solovine:
"I am not going entirely willingly to America, but I am doing so only in the interests of the Zionists, who are obligated to ask for dollars for education in Jerusalem, and on this occasion I am to play the role of a little tin god and a decoy."
As longtime Einstein expert Fred Jerome reminds us, he also wrote,
"Of course they don't need me for my abilities but only because of my name [which] they hope will have a fair amount of success with the rich kinsmen of Dollar-land."
Though the trip was a success and Einstein did not at all regret undertaking the task, the fundraising tour offered him a glimpse of the true face of American Zionism. Upon his return to Germany, he sent a letter to his close friend, physicist Paul Ehrenfest, in which he lamented that, in certain circles of affluent Zionists, "a high-tensioned Jewish nationalism shows itself that threatens to degenerate into intolerance and bigotry; but hopefully this is only an infantile disorder."
Tragically, that infantile disorder remains the guiding force behind Zionism and the racist, discriminatory and violent policies of Israel today.
this is one of those examples where a writer exceeds his subject matter – the post essentially says Einstein was willingly used – for a time – to use he celebrity status to raise money, okay
… but we got a lot of high-highfalutin over-analyzing of the lame movie Inception (in my IMDB review I called it Insiption) and some ultra-arrogant claim by this guy Blumenfeld that he could somehow plant a thought/belief into Einstein’s brain (yeah, and Schrödinger’s cat is writing Shakespeare in that box until we look)
not sure the reason for this article
You’re welcome.
i, on the other hand, loved it.
;)
the rich kinsmen of Dollar-land !!!
yowza.
Better, far , than Hymie-town.
i’m with you radii, so far as the film goes. ‘inception’ was a big budget excuse to slap together a ‘matrix’/'bourne’/'oo7′ horseshit sandwich, each level of consciousness revealing another action ‘blockbuster’. i go to the movies about 3-4 times a year at most, and wadda waste of 7 bucks and three hours that was. but i take nima’s more serious point, although it needs a bit more development.
radii is incorrect. there are two points to the post:
1) that the early zionist were interested in Einstein as a PR ploy (Einstein knew such and allowed to a limited degree, but still deeply distained zionism) and
2) these zionists were loony enough to contemplate weird psycho-suggestion stupidity with an intellect like Einstein.
radii confuses gets caught up in analyzing the movie analyzing.
I share radii’s dislike for the movie (Nolan’s Memento was much better) but Nima’s post is otherwise fascinating. I would add that the Zionist effort to co-opt the great Einstein continues unabated today. They love to point out that he was offered the presidency of Israel even though he turned it down and was non-racist to the core, valuing cooperation over conquest.
“non-racist to the core?”
I disagree. Einstein in Berlin, during the Weimar years, displayed major ethnocentrism, you can read about it here
link to ebookee.org
RE: “Successful inception, therefore, is essentially a perfected form of brainwashing and propaganda. It forces someone to be fed an idea that they would not have otherwise generated…” ~ Nima Shirazi
MY COMMENT: I am reminded of “Homeland Security”!
SEE: “10 things you might not know about security measures”, By Mark Jacob and Stephan Benzkofer, Chicago Tribune, 4/08/12
* To elaborate, the neocons in Cheney’s office and at the Pentagon succeeded in having it named “Homeland Security”. Why were they so determined to introduce the concept of the “homeland” into the American vernacular? Where else in the world had the “homeland” concept been used (besides Nazi Germany)? What were the neocons trying to associate (perhaps via “transference” and/or similar techniques) the U.S. with in the minds (at least subconsciously) of Americans and perhaps other “Westerners”?
P.S. • NOTE: What Does “Homeland” Mean to You?, by Ronald Bailey on July 19, 2007
SOURCE – link to reason.com
• AND LISTEN TO: “HOMELAND” IS A NAZI TERM (AUDIO, 37:44)
The origins of this term are discussed at length in this Paul Craig Roberts interview on the Thom Hartmann show.
Program contains an audio clip [at about 13:30], taken from a Nazi rally, that is an example of how the term was used (in German).
LINK – link to a1135.g.akamai.net
• AND WATCH: Rudolf Hess opening speech (English Subtitles), [VIDEO, 04:00] – link to youtube.com
In this four minute clip from the film Triumph Of The Will, Hess is speaking at the 1934 Nuremberg Rally and introduces the Heimatland (Homeland) concept that he and Hitler had devised during the writing of Mein Kampf while they were in prison together at Landsberg as a consequence of their convictions for involvement in the Beer Hall Putsch of 1923.
As Hess explains it (at about 3:05), Hitler is creating a homeland for all the ethnic Germans of the world wherever they might happen to live (not just those residing within the borders of Germany).
As translated by the subtitles, Hess says (as if speaking to Hitler): “Thanks to your leadership, Germany will be attainable as the homeland. Homeland for all Germans of the world.”
And be certain not to miss Hess’ “eroticized passion” for der Fuhrer at the conclusion of the clip.
Dickerson: Heimat and Heimatland are German, not Nazi terms. The Nazis spoke German. You can argue that they used or imprinted existing German words and concepts in ways that went beyond previous meanings but you can’t argue they invented them. That is as true for Heimatland as it is for Lebensraum. On the concept of Heimat since the 18th century see
link to books.google.ca
RE: “Heimat and Heimatland are German, not Nazi terms. The Nazis spoke German.” ~ Antidote
REPLY: It is my understanding that Hess and Hitler took the “homeland” (heimatland) idea* directly/specifically from the Zionists. I believe Thom Hartmann refers to this in the audio clip from his radio program (which no longer appears to be available).
* As Hess explains it (at about 3:05 in the video clip), Hitler was creating a homeland for all the ethnic Germans of the world wherever they might have happened to live (not just those residing within the borders of Germany). They modeled this after the Zionist idea of Israel being the “homeland” of all the Jews of the world wherever they might happen to live (not just those residing within the borders of Israel).
“And be certain not to miss Hess’ “eroticized passion” for der Fuhrer at the conclusion of the clip.”
You mean when he yells “Sieg Heil!”?
“The Nazi rallying call, “Sieg Heil!” was inspired by American football cheerleading techniques, supposedly imported by his friend Ernst Hanfstaengl, who studied at Harvard. Hanfstaengl was so impressed by the rousing qualities and camaraderie inherent at American sporting events, that he passed this on to Hitler, who would in turn seek to emulate the atmosphere at his rallies.”
link to military-history.org
link to guardian.co.uk
RE: “The Nazi rallying call, ‘Sieg Heil!’ was inspired by American football cheerleading techniques” ~ Antidote
REPLY: And frankly, I would just as soon not hear any of it!
P.S. Many of Goebbels propaganda techniques were apparently based on Edward Louis Bernays’ public relations techniques, but it is hardly fair to blame Bernays for the use to which the National Socialist’s adapted some of his (and Freud’s) ideas.
“Where else in the world had the “homeland” concept been used (besides Nazi Germany)?”
Wiki lists the Soviet Oblasts, South African Bantustans, and the “Homeland Movement” in Australia, as well as “Homeland Security”
Obviously, alternatives to homeland listed in this article — Fatherland, Mother Country – would sound archaic and sexist. The Roman term “Patria” is loaded as well (Imperialism, Militarism).
link to en.wikipedia.org
1. iirc ‘Homeland Security’ was conceived by Joe Lieberman and has been under his wing since it was hatched. link to lieberman.senate.gov
“in 2001 and 2002, Chairman Lieberman was a leader in the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. “
2. re the increasingly bruited claim that, whatever it is, if it’s bad, “the Nazis did it first,”
This movie sounds very similar to Phil’s bizarre dinner party in New Haven, complete with a very weird dream. What could possibly have been implanted in Phil’s subconscious? The plot thickens.
What could possibly have been implanted in Phil’s subconscious? The plot thickens.
It was red wine and Japanese whiskey, fer sure.
I am of the [firm] belief that Einstein wouldn’t have come up with anything substantial had he not worked at a Swiss patent office and be married to t/his brilliant wife Mileva. I know I must be one of the very few people who doesn’t look up to the guy, but my gut instinct tells me something’s fishy here and over the years I’ve learned to listen more to my guts and less to my ‘brain.’
- So, Kurt Blumenfeld of the Zionist Organization of Germany coached (?) Albert Einstein into the Zionist cause?
Kurt Blumenfeld was in line with the Nazi ideology. He believed Germans and Jews were two different people who should stay apart. At a Zionist Congress in Frankfurt in 1932 he warned his fellow Jews not to “transcend” the boundary between German and Jewish culture. “It is neither our right nor our business/mission to shape the German culture”, he said.
The Zionist Organization of Germany promoted the emigration of German Jews to Palestine and of course, the Nazis approved of that and supported it. In 1934 the German government had a coin printed with the Star of David on one side and the swastika on the other side. A Nazi publication praised “the young pioneers of Palestine …”.
when einstein comes up i have to link to this… or just whenever, cause it is such an amazing 1948 editorial, signed by einstein and other prominent US jews.
link to physics.harvard.edu
talks unflinchingly of the fascist terrorist menachem begin, mentions deir yassin, and jewish terrorism (even jew-on-jew terror), and the fascist roots of begin’s party (likud being a descendant of this party).
….those were the days…. if we could only get the NYTimes to quote itself, let alone report like it used to.
MW on using the (old) NYT to refute the (current day) NYT-
link to mondoweiss.net
I shouldn’t say ‘coin’. It wasn’t currency. It was a token with the Star of David on one side and the Swastika on the other that was distributed at newspaper stands along with the Berlin Nazi paper ‘Der Angriff’/Attack (founded and published by Joseph Goebbels) that ran a series of articles called “A Nazi goes to Palestine”.
“A Nazi goes to Palestine”
Maybe I should elaborate on that. This Nazi, who went to Palestine, the author of the series of articles mentioned above, was the well known travel journalist Leopold von Mildenstein. He praised “the young pioneers of Palestine”. The point is: There was absolutely no ideological, political difference between the Nazis and the Zionists.
Why the desperate need to denigrate Einstein’s association with Zionism? Why is this so important to people like Shirazi?
It comes from an insidious, desperate need to delegitimize an icon of Zionism, imagining that by doing so the structure can be made to collapse. Albert Einstein speaks here declining the offer of Presidency of Israel:
“I am deeply moved by the offer from our State of Israel [to serve as President], and at once saddened and ashamed that I cannot accept it. All my life I have dealt with objective matters, hence I lack both the natural aptitude and the experience to deal properly with people and to exercise official functions. For these reasons alone I should be unsuited to fulfill the duties of that high office, even if advancing age was not making increasing inroads on my strength. I am the more distressed over these circumstances because my relationship to the Jewish people has become my strongest human bond, ever since I became fully aware of our precarious situation among the nations of the world.”
Are these the words of someone who is disenchanted with the idea of a Jewish state or the concept of Zionism?
- “Why the desperate need to denigrate Einstein’s association with Zionism? “-
_______________________________________________________
Because Albert Einstein was good and Zionism was, and still is, bad.
- ‘The notion of a chosen people is evil” – said Karl Popper, one of the most important philosophers of the 20th centuary. (He came from a Jewish family that had converted to Protestantism in Vienna, Austria.)
Mayhem –
Actually, you’re wrong. Einstein’s relationship with Zionism, Judaism, and Israel is well documented. I urge you to read Fred Jerome’s excellent book “Einstein on Israel and Zionism” for an in-depth look.
As Jerome himself explains,
Furthermore, here are some choice quotes from Einstein himself, spanning from well before World War II and the Holocaust to just before his death in 1955 (again, credit goes to Jerome, who compiles these quotes on his site):
Now, ask yourself, “Are these the words of someone who is disenchanted with the idea of a Jewish state or the concept of Zionism?”
” but to implant an idea so deep into a subject’s subconscious that it germinated on its own and fooled the target into believing that this idea was genuine and spontaneous.”
I don’t know that the zionist suceeded with Einstein but imprinting on the subconscious is practiced all the time….and works to a large degree on the average unaware person. Knowing what people value or fear or desire, which is similar in most people, and then using certain words or question, deliberate but unrelated off hand remarks, can spark an idea in a person that they think came to them without any outside imput or suggestion.
Nice article.
When you decide you want to start your own country…it’s always nice if you can also control your own people.
He wanted a free trip. Wouldn’t you? That’s what being popular is often about in the scientific community. Just like everybody else.
I do regret all of the free trips I passed on. Too busy. Tell them what they want to hear, almost. As long as they pay, your not responsible for the excesses, maybe.
Hej! Tumta
This is great! I wish I were a member of this blog when the story was written by Shirazi back in April to comment further.