[Book] 180° How We Win I – Tactics and Communication

IN Book Notes
  • Updated:1 year ago
  • Reading Time:17Minutes
  • Post Words:4354Words
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Author of 180 Degrees: Unlearn The Lies You’ve Been Taught To Believe goes through the solutions – Part I of How We Win.

Presentation with Slideshow by Author Feargus O’Connor Greenwood:

11 Feb 2023 Rumble (23mins)

(this post is approx timestamp 22mins-45mins of the full video – Rumble | Odysee)

How We Win

Okay, that’s the end of the dark bit, we’ll come back to it at the end just to tie up a couple of loose ends, but let’s get on now with all the solutions. So part one of How We Win is called Tactics and Communication.

How We Win (Part I): Tactics and Communication.

1.) Invert the inversions.

They’ve taken the truth and inverted it, so in order to get back to the truth, we need to invert those inversions. That’s why the book was called 180 degrees, but there’s a technique within this as well, which is, if you reverse something, quite often the lie becomes more visible. What do I mean?

Well, if we take the last three years, you were told to look through lens one. Lens one is the following:

The Covid-19 control measures were introduced because of the virus.

Flip that around and look through lens two, and you see

The virus was released as an excuse to introduce the control measures and the Trojan horse vaccine.

Unlikely that any ‘virus’ was ‘released’ ~ Penny #JustSaying… book was published Dec 2020.

If you look at what the government has done and all the decisions made through lens one, pretty much none of it makes sense. If you look through lens two, everything then at least is logical and makes sense.

Here’s some of the principles that they use.

So the flip side of that, you just again reverse those principles.

  1. Exclusivity, the few know best.
  2. Opacity, we’re not going to show you what we’re up to.
  3. Reductionism, particularly the case in climate change where they try and take a very complex system and reduce it to one point, which is CO2, which is taxable.
  4. They like to centralise because centralised systems are easier to control.
  5. Censor, so you can’t see what they’re up to.
  6. Depersonalise
  7. Blackmail for control reasons. Why? Because quite often psychopaths know because they’re a psychopath they can’t trust themselves, so how are they going to trust anyone else? So what they want is enough skin in the game that they know that that person can’t do anything but what they’re told.
  1. Exclusivity we have inclusivity.
  2. Opacity we have transparency.
  3. Reductionism we look at systems from a holistic perspective.
  4. centralise decentralise.
  5. Censor freedom of speech.
  6. Depersonalise empathise with our fellow humans
  7. Blackmail look to find trustless systems. These are not systems without any trust, this is a term from cryptocurrency, which means no one can fuck around with the system and therefore you can trust them.

2.) Non-Violence

Okay, tactic two is non-violence. They want you angry. Why? Because when you’re angry you’re easier to control. I’m not saying don’t get angry, but don’t act angry because that’s where they’re going to get you.

And also remember, whoever fights monsters should see that in the process he does not become a monster himself. James Corbett said,

“The only revolution that will change anything… is the revolution of the mind. Because unless we understand the system that’s enslaving us and unless we know who our enemy is, and unless we know what they expect us to do, we will never be able to put up a resistance that matters.”

James Corbett

Every problem I tend to come across, it all comes down to a battle for consciousness and awareness.

3.) Withdraw Consent

Number three, withdraw consent. This one’s easy because it doesn’t involve you having to do anything, it just involves you doing nothing. Étienne de La Boétie, gave us this tip in 1553.

“There is no need of fighting to overcome this single tyrant, for he is automatically defeated if the country refuses consent to its own enslavement. It is not necessary to deprive him of anything but simply to give him nothing.”

Étienne de La Boétie

4.) Resist the Coercion

Tactic four, resist the coercion. If someone comes to me and says, right Fergus, if you don’t get jammed you’re not going to be able to participate in society. I’ll go, okay, I’d like to introduce you to my friend, the I-don’t-give-a-fuck-a-saurus.

5.) Memetic Warfare

And while we’re on memes, we might as well stick with some memetic warfare. Why? Because this is one field where we have complete spectral dominance because evil can’t meme, apparently. So here’s four of my favourites.

Number one, “That one family member that refused the vaccine”

Next up, because I’m a mathematician, I have to include the Venn diagram, which gives a really detailed insight to exactly what’s been going on.

Third is probably my all-time favourite meme. “You are here, paying taxes to paedophiles.”

And because we’re in so much trouble, we’d better call on JC to finish. “Flood it again!”

6.) Exposing the Lies

Okay, let’s get on with tactic six, exposing the lies. So, simple diagram here.

  • This is pretty much the system we live under.
  • So, at the top we have some power hungry sociopaths.
  • At the bottom, that’s us, the collective population.
  • In the middle, the control is done by a hierarchical structure.
  • There’s two power lines running around the outside.
  • On the right, we’re giving them power, by listening to them and voting for them.
  • On the left, and in return, they kindly feed us all the lies, so they can keep us confused and under control.

  • So what can we do?
  • We’ll break the power lines.
  • So, on the right left, expose those lies, and on the right, withdraw consent.

If there’s anyone in the room having difficulty with the withdrawing consent part, can I suggest you take the advice of an eight-year-old girl?

This is Fiona Lashells. She was in Florida. She got suspended 38 times from school and still didn’t give in. Reference the mask mandates.

Remember her face, remember her name, and remember the following:

You cannot comply your way out of tyranny.

7.) Decentralize

Seven, decentralise, as mentioned earlier. Milton Friedman said,

“Our minds tell us and history confirms that the greatest threat to freedom is the concentration of power.”

Milton Friedman, 1982

If we go back to our little diagram again, you go, OK, well how does this work in practice? Because it’s quite hard to get psychopaths to change their behaviour. It also seems it’s quite hard to get the whole collective population to come together.

So, one area that does work in the medium term is getting rid of hierarchical structures, because if they’re not there, everyone’s harder to control, and that means decentralised networks.

8.) Slice it right

Number eight, slice it right. If you notice in the media, you will always be presented with the long slice. What I call it is like slicing a cake horizontally. So, it’s old versus young, it’s black versus white, it’s rich versus poor, it’s gay versus straight, it’s Muslim versus Christian.

All those represent a horizontal slicing of the cake. The real problem is the vertical slice, because that’s where the sociopaths live.

And if you look at every problem in these terms, then we’re much closer to getting focus on the individuals involved.

9.) The D&C Model – Divide & Conquer

Number nine, the D&C model, divide and conquer. So, this is sort of helicoptering above the whole situation, I’ll spend a minute just explaining this.

  • So, we have two pillars, one on the left, one on the right.
    • The one on the left is New World Order 2
    • The one on the right is New World Order 1
      • Both pillars are controlled from above by “they”, in the book I call that “The Hierarchy Exploiting You.”
  • We have a horizontal arrow, which covers:
    1. Left versus Right
    2. Globalism versus Nationalism
    3. East versus West
    4. Marxism versus Capitalism
    5. Communism versus Zionism
      • All those are your distractions.
  • The only arrow that matters is the vertical one, which is the black one:
    • Freedom versus Tyranny.

They are playing the vertical, while nearly everyone else is playing the horizontal. Bear that in mind.

10.) Create the new

Ten, create the new. As Buckminster Fuller said,

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”

Richard Buckminster Fuller

You don’t always have to fight it, you need to make them completely and utterly irrelevant. The world as we know it is gone forever, lament it if you must, reinvent it as you like.

11.) How to communicate the truth to others without alienating them

And that brings us to the trim tab experiment, which is how to communicate the truth to others without alienating them.

Five Hurdles

Okay, so we start off with five hurdles. Number one, as Walter Lippmann said in public opinion in 1922,

“For the most part we do not first see and then define, we define first and then see.”

Walter Lippmann, 1922

What does he mean? He means that we’ll decide on a story first, then we’ll go and collect the evidence that supports the story we’ve already decided on, not the other way round. So you need to bear that in mind. Two, gets attributed to Mark Twain,

“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they’ve been fooled.”

Misattributed to Mark Twain

When you’ve moved someone into a position, that was much easier than moving them back out of that position. This is why the media normally have so much power, because they get their story in first.

Third up is from an interview with Yuri Bezmenov, KGB defector with G. Edward Griffin, made in 1984, so when the Soviet Union was still in existence.

“A person who is demoralized is unable to assess true information.”

So just a word on this, demoralized just doesn’t mean demotivated, it means demoralized, i.e. you remove the morality from society. Why? Because low ethics and low moral societies are much easier to control.

“A person who is demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell him nothing. Even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents, with pictures, even if I take him by force to the Soviet Union and show him a concentration camp, he will refuse to believe it.”

Yuri Bezmenov

Okay, so what does that mean? It means probably 10-20% of the population are unreachable. Is this a problem? Not really, because we’ve still got the other 80%.

Backfire Effect

We’ve also got something called the backfire effect. So if I’m having a discussion, say, with this gentleman, and I’m making my point of view, I’m hoping he’s going to listen to me, maybe weigh up what I’ve got to say and alter his position accordingly, and he’ll do the same speaking back to me. That’s how it works, correct? Wrong!

When you’re dealing with people with very solidified beliefs, their beliefs being challenged will mean that those beliefs go deeper, not shallower. You’re actually making the situation worse by showing them evidence. That sounds like a big problem.

This last one is sort of counterintuitive.

“So people will forgive you for being wrong, but often won’t forgive you for being right.”

That’s a bit unlucky. What’s going on there? So, we all have a counter in our head, it’s like on our subconscious, and we all want to be at a high level within society, let’s say, and at high elevation. If you were knocked down that ladder, basically your subconscious knows that your life is going to be more difficult, and therefore it doesn’t want knocking down that ladder, and therefore you don’t want to be shown to be wrong. So bear in mind,

“Always remember that to argue, and win, is to break down the reality of the person you are arguing against. It is painful to lose your reality, so be kind, even if you are right.”

Haruki Murakami

So, the truth movement doesn’t have an evidence problem, it has a communication problem. And this is a classic communication trap I’m sure a few of us might have fallen into, I’ll ask you in a sec. This is how it goes.

The Communication Trap

  1. Learn the truth.
  2. Get angry at being lied to. This also inflames the truth teller’s need to be right.
  3. Communicate that truth, while still annoyed at being duped, in an unconsidered way, triggering the backfire effect, i.e. rejection of the message.
  4. Become frustrated at people for not seeing the truth, try again with even more evidence and conviction, and fail bigger.

Anyone in the room gone through that experience?

Ten Solutions that Work

Okay, so I’ve shown you the trap and I’ve shown you the problems. I’m now going to give you ten solutions that work.

Number one, as James Clear said, (quoting Japanese writer Haruki Murakami)

Be kind first, be right later.

It’s a bit like if you were going to pick up a traumatised puppy from Battersea Dogs home. You’re not going to walk in there and try and teach the dog a new trick immediately. You’re going to try and win its trust and you’re going to do that with love, compassion, empathy, maybe even feed it. The same works with the human variety.

You win by not winning.

If your aim is to convince the other person of your position, you have already lost before you open your mouth. Let me repeat that.

If your aim is to convince the other person of your position, you have already lost before you open your mouth.

Why? Because you’ve got the wrong objective. A good objective, for example, might be to get them to ask you a question or just to keep them out of combat mode.

You need to seed, not succeed.

This is a bit like planting an apple pip in the garden in the evening and expecting to see a fully grown tree the next day. It’s not going to happen.

Why not? Because you’ve forgotten you need a time factor. There is always a time factor when you’re talking to people. Give them absorption and processing time.

Sponge up the vitriol spew.

If you’re talking to someone who’s been heavily propagandised, quite often they’re going to regurgitate over you everything they don’t know immediately, sometimes in quite a vitriolic manner. If you know this is coming, you can behave like a sponge, not a tennis racket. So the idea is not to bat any of this back, it’s just to absorb it, absorb it and absorb it, until it’s out of their system. Then, and only then, can you come back with anything.

If the person speaking to you is talking a complete load of bollocks, that’s fine but please don’t tell them that because it won’t be welcome. If you want to continue a conversation without agreeing or disagreeing, you can use the zen phrase, is that so? It keeps the conversation going.

Your aim is to keep them in listening mode, not combat mode.

Combat mode is anything like folded arms, frowns, any body language where you can see they’ve gone negative. Why? Because when they’re in combat mode, they have stopped listening to you. You might as well be speaking Swahili to a non-Swahili speaker. So keep them out of combat mode.

Questions, not statements.

Asking a question opens the mind, a statement tends to close the mind. Ask questions, and even better, get them to ask you one.

Here’s one question you can try but I’m even not in favour of this one. Would you rather be right or know the truth? Why? Because you’re implying that what you’re about to tell them is different to what they already believe, is too combative. But it’s a good question, in the right circumstances.

People slide from A to Z, they don’t jump from A to Z.

So if you’re speaking to someone who believes the government is telling them the truth, they are at A. There is absolutely no point in starting talking about things like satanic ritual abuse because they will look at you like you’ve got three heads.

So one of your tasks is to understand where they are on that scale and adjust your pitch accordingly. And remember, if they’re at A, they’ve got to move to B, then to C, then to D and all the way through. You cannot jump them from A to further down that scale. It’s like a breadcrumb trail.

I’m picking up that you might have had this experience already, yeah?

So here’s a couple of sentences I’ve pulled off the internet which brilliantly sums up part of the trim type approach.

Everyone needs to stop trying to red pill people who are in a coma. I’ve been pink pilling people. I take one small truth and show it to them. Then let them think about that. They will then start asking questions. Then I will show them another one and it is working. I know these techniques work because I’ve given them out to people who are having zero success and suddenly their success went exponential.

Facts don’t change minds, friends do.

This isn’t a battle of evidence, it’s a battle on emotion. The fact they’re already friends with you means you’re not having to get over that initial hurdle quite often of trust and that first. It also is great news because it means this becomes a word of mouth battle.

I’m only one person…

People often say, yeah, but I’m only one person, what can I do about it? My answer to that is very simple. Everything. And I’m about to show you how.

To be a trim tab.

So the expression comes against the Buckminster Fullerism. He explained that on a supertanker you have a big rudder and within the big rudder you have a smaller rudder. In order to turn that supertanker around, you don’t move the big rudder first, you move the tiny rudder. The tiny rudder moves the big rudder, the big rudder moves the supertanker. An individual is basically a trim tab, you can do more than you think.

The Many vs The Money

So the conundrum we face really is the many versus the money. They have the money in the media, we have the numbers. So all it means is leveraging those numbers in a meaningful way to maximum advantage.

It also means that we do this one mind at a time, because we’re back to word of mouth. Why? Because…

“People go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly one by one.”

Charles Mackay

That is what is happening now with what’s been done to us in the last three years. So now is as good a time as any time to redouble your efforts. And here’s a maths on how we’re going to go about it.

  • If I speak to one person and then speaks to another person and then speaks to another person, to get round everyone in the world we’ve got to have 7 billion conversations.
    • The chain’s quite weak, it’d probably break and not happen.
  • But what if I have two conversations and they have two conversations and they have two conversations.
    • Instead of 7 billion steps we’re down to only 33 steps.
  • But what if we have three, three and three conversations?
    • Well then you’re down to 21 steps to get to everyone in the world.

And in a group of this size, around 70, if you were willing to have 10 conversations each and give people the tools on how to have those conversations beyond, you could get to everyone in the world in 10 steps and everyone in this country in just 6 steps. How?

  • So 70 times 10 is 700.
    1. step 1. 7,000
    2. step 2. 70,000
    3. step 3. 700,000
    4. step 4. 7 million
    5. step 5. 70 million
    6. step 6. There you go.
  • Just each individual in this room being prepared to have 10 conversations and pass on the tools, you got to everyone in 6 steps.

However, you don’t need to do it in 6 because you can do it in 5. Why? Because in order to enact radical change as Erica Chenoweth studying at Harvard said, “You only need 3.5% to 5% of the population on board so you can knock a step off. Ok?

Researchers used to say that no government could survive if just 5% of its population rose up against it. Our data showed that the number may be lower than that. No single campaign has failed during that time period after they had achieved the active and sustained participation of just 3.5% of the population. And lots of them succeeded with far fewer than that.

3.5% is nothing to sneeze at. In the U.S. today, that’s like 11 million people.

But get this: every single campaign that surpassed that 3.5% was a nonviolent one. In fact, the nonviolent campaigns were on average four times larger than the average violent campaigns, and they were often much more inclusive and representative in terms of gender, age, race, political party, class, and the urban-rural distinction.

Civil resistance allows people of all different levels of physical ability to participate

Erica Chenoweth, TedX, 2013

So my talk and my book. Let’s do a quick wave. It’s my ripple in the pond, to help with your ripple in the pond. Or as Gandhi said,

It’s the action, not the fruit of the action, that’s important. You have to do the right thing. It may not be in your power, may not be in your time, that there’ll be any fruit. But that doesn’t mean you stop doing the right thing. You may never know what results come from your action. But if you do nothing, there will be no result.

Mahatma Gandhi

If Cameron decided not to take any action a couple of years ago, no one would be sitting in this room at the moment. Correct? Don’t underestimate what you can do.

The tide is turning because their narrative is burning, and that brings us onto the next section which is how we win part 2, know yourself.

  1. Part One: Unlearn The Lies You’ve Been Taught To Believe
  2. Part Two: How We Win I – Tactics and Communication
  3. Part Three: How We Win II – Know Yourself
Penny (PennyButler.com)
Penny (PennyButler.com)

Truth-seeker, ever-questioning, ever-learning, ever-researching, ever delving further and deeper, ever trying to 'figure it out'. This site is a legacy of sorts, a place to collect thoughts, notes, book summaries, & random points of interests.