A question of ethics in the application of RV/RI…

[Guest guest]

Well, the " ethical " or " moral " question regarding influence becomes " irrelevant "

once they start to try to take a dump on YOUR plate at YOUR table!

 

You said something, though, about causing them to go from exploitation to

benevolence. That is somewhat difficult, unless you are Jacob Marley and can do

MASS RV/RI to turn every " Scrooge " into a " nice guy " .

 

Remember, the Tibetans THOUGHT they could defeat Chinese rifles and tanks with

superior psychics.

 

China has more psychics than Tibet, and they sure as hell have more bullets.

 

It is MUCH better to use their own weaknesses against them. You might find some

moral weakness that keeps them from showing up to vote, or some weakness that

gets them in trouble. Or you might do as Trout and Reiss suggested in one of

the Marketing Warfare series books that Doc sent me awhile back: Find their

STRENGTH, and locate the WEAK POINT IN THEIR STRENGTH.

 

If they are stuck up snobs, then you might influence disent between them and the

lobbyists who are trying to buy them off. Or you might influence the lobbyist's

moral weaknesses so that no sane politician would give them the time of day,

because it would be political suicide.

 

Sort of like what's the chance of The Boy Scouts hiring Michael Jackson to do a

fund raiser? No one with an ounce of common sense would go for that.

 

And you think it's " mean " or " unfair " to influence people in those ways to

discredit the competition? What the heck do you think those on the opposite end

of the issue do? They paint a picture of the supplement users as ignorant

idiots who overdose on Ephedra and Ephedrine or the wacko Witch doctors or

weirdo psychics. Or the Christian (ahem) Scientists who neglect their kids and

let them die. The so called uneducated and ignorant and stupid, while the so

called intelligent people are the doctors and researchers with the

pharmaceutical companies. Anyone who uses natural remedies is compared to the

patent medicine quacks of the 19th and early 20th centuries.

 

Anyway, RV / RI is a GOOD start. And you also MUST back it up with congruent

action in the physical world if you want good results. You would need to also

condition people to be aware of how they are being manipulated, give them better

choices, and condition them to actually TAKE THOSE BETTER CHOICES.

 

Most people are brainwashed to do whatever someone else who is a perceived

authority tells them to do.

 

So a little brainwashing in the other direction might do some good too!

 

Jim

 

 

www.mindcontrolcentral.com AMAZING " GPS Of The Mind " Secrets That Give YOU

Remote-Control Access To What Others Think And Do!

" The techniques that Jim showed me how to do helped me quit my job and become my

own boss! " --Ron T., Shawnee, OK

[Guest guest]

Just a quick few thoughts:

 

Whether you physically write a letter to your elected official or try

to influence them with RV/RI, what's the difference? You are still

trying to influence them " remotely " . Is one way more ethical than

another? I presume your desired result is the same for either

approach. In other words, why would the ethics of doing it with your

mind be any different than doing it physically with letters or phone

calls?

 

In either case, it's still up to the person(s) you are trying to

influence to make up their OWN mind once they receive the letter or

the remote mental influence.

 

If what you are wanting them to do is in alignment with their beliefs

good chance it will work. If not, then it's probably not likely to

happen. Sort of a checks and balance at work in the both physical and

the non physical.

 

Lori

 

 

, " marangneng "

<marangneng> wrote:

> Group, here's a question that has recently popped into my head and

I'd

> like to hear your thoughts about it. According to what I've learned

> thus far in the RV/RI CD course, the skills we develop are to be

used

> for the benefit of humanity and that these skills are very potent.

As

> you've seen from my previous posts, our elected officials are

preparing

> to take action which, if passed, will prove devastating to those of

us

> that choose to use natural vitamins and supplements as an integral

part

> of our health maintenance and health care. This will lead to

massive

> law suits and could disrupt or end completely our access to things

as

> benign as Vitamins C and E, CoQ10, Saw Palmetto, Black Cohosh, etc.

> So if one believes that one's elected officials are about to take

> action that will be to the detriment of humanity (or at least the

> people in the U.S.), is it ethical to use RI to endeavor to change

> their mindset from one of exploitation to one of benevolence. I've

> thought about this quite a bit since the idea occurred to me and I

can

> see that there is merit to both sides of the discussion.

>

> What do you think. Is it wrong to use RV/RI in such a manner?