Skip to content

Asch Solomon’s Experiment. A Word Of Encouragement For Truth-Seekers

January 8, 2015

Dear friends, I am very thankful to you for coming to the blog even though I haven’t contributed to it lately. You should believe me that my abandoning it for so long could happen only due to exceptional circumstances. And the circumstances were exceptional indeed.

My country has started a war against a brotherly Ukrainian nation and doesn’t admit it, defying all logic and evidence. My fellow citizens have fallen into a delirium, and don’t realize or notice it. The ruling regime breaks every law, but the majority of the population seems to be still in support of it and is ready to endure any hardship, thinking that the ones to blame for all the trouble are – you will never guess who – Americans (of all people).

The regime is tightening its grip over those who disagree and calls them ‘national traitors’ and very soon there will be a time when the ‘patriots’ will be given free hand to do away with those in dissent (the ‘fifth column’). So it seems that for some of us trouble is only starting here.

When the campaign against Ukrainians – some of whom are actually ethnic Russians – only began, it already cost me an accusation by a Russian MJ fan that I want our country to be destroyed by the US (!). I wondered how the US comes into this and whether Americans know that they are allegedly to blame for the whole thing?

I also wondered how a fan of Michael Jackson could be in support of a war. War, aggression and belligerence had nothing in common with a man like Michael whose very essence was peace, love and compassion.

Well, if this delirium goes on being friends with Americans will be a somewhat fishy business. The Russian regime expects its subjects to be anti-American, you know. However the paradox is that it is exactly now that I want to be critical of Americans least of all.

WHEN THE MAJORITY IS WRONG

Now that millions of my compatriots have fallen victim to the absurdest kind of lies I am no longer surprised or resentful that millions of Americans were also led to believe the nastiest lies about Michael Jackson. Previously I could not understand it. Now I do and even know which emotional strings were pulled in people’s hearts to make them turn on an innocent person as an enemy and villain.

Someone extremely cynical skillfully brainwashed and manipulated the public into hatred and ridicule of Michael taking advantage of the best feeling people have – their natural instinct to protect children. This basic protective function of all normal adults was taken advantage of and used as a tool to incite a witch-hunt against an innocent person while real abusers continued to commit crimes against children walking about unnoticed. The devilish organizers of the game simply nominated Michael for the role and cynically directed the public rage against the man who never deserved it. 

In the same way our regime nominated Ukranians for the role of ‘fascists’ and raised a tide of noble anger among my compatriots who now sincerely think that our ‘heroic volunteers are liberating the neighboring country from the grips of neo-nazism’. And the majority is really imagining that they are only protecting the innocent. No joking – they really imagine it, and the genuineness of the feeling is where the whole problem is.

But is it possible to channel the fury of millions of people into a direction which is totally false?

Possible and very much so. All it needs is: 1) the idea 2) conductors of the orchestra 3) willing participants (media and others) to play the ‘right’ tune and beat it into people’s heads with a deafening noise. The success of the operation depends on the concerted effort of all players.

So yes, the hatred campaign against Michael Jackson was also an orchestrated effort, because only the unity of action on the part of all players can produce the desired unanimity effect on the targeted audience. Otherwise it won’t work.

Now that the same brainwashing campaign is raging in my country and it took just several months to turn the views of many people into their opposite, I can assert that the key factors to the ‘success’ of the operation is the totality and force of lies. When lies, half-truths and half-lies pour from every media outlet on a daily basis they are able to stamp out the last traces of doubt even if you were initially convinced of something different.  As a result public opinion reaches a stage when everyone relies on all others thinking that “all of them can’t be wrong”.

In fact this is one of the favorite arguments of Michael’s haters, as if the opinion of the majority can be equivalent to proof of anyone’s guilt.  So what if the majority doubted Michael’s innocence? The only thing it proves is that the majority was successfully led to believe lies about Jackson through an unprecedented campaign of slander, hate and disinformation.

Now we know that lots of allegations against Michael were obvious lies, often unrivaled in their absurdity – look, for example, at Tom Sneddon’s official timeline of Arvizo’s ‘molestation’ which claimed that the abuse took place after Bashir’s documentary with all its innuendoes. Tom Sneddon wanted us to believe that Michael Jackson, in his fear of being accused of child abuse, decided to commit the act right at the time when Neverland was in the center of everyone’s attention, including the media, police, D.A. Sneddon and Department for Family and Children Services? Nothing could be more idiotic and illogical, however it took the court half a year to finally understand the absurdity of the claim.

So the big question is – how does it happen that people start believing obvious lies? How can they fall into a mass delirium over things which are false to the point of being absurd?

Driven by my own motivation (amazement with my compatriots’ gullibility) I looked into the subject and came across a very interesting experiment conducted by an American psychologist in the 1950s among the students of American universities. The experiment provided irrefutable proof that under some circumstances 75% of the population side with a lie, though they know the truth, and their own eyes tell them that what they are saying is wrong.

SOLOMON ASCH’S EXPERIMENT

The text from http://www.age-of-the-sage.org/psychology/social/asch_conformity.html explains it all:

In 1951 social psychologist Solomon Asch devised an experiment to examine the extent to which pressure from other people could affect one’s perceptions.

asch_conformityAsch showed bars like those in the Figure to college students in groups of 8 to 10.

He told them he was studying visual perception and that their task was to decide which of the bars on the right was the same length as the one on the left.

As you can see, the task is simple, and the correct answer is obvious.

Asch asked the students to give their answers aloud. He repeated the procedure with 18 sets of bars.

Only one student in each group was a real subject. All the others were confederates (i.e. actors) who had been instructed to give two correct answers and incorrect answers on the remaining ‘staged’ trials.

The first two answers were meant to put the subject of the experiment at ease and the experiment actually started with the third question when the confederates were instructed to give their first wrong answer. This was the beginning of  a ‘staged’ trial.

Asch arranged for the real subject to be the next-to-the-last person in each group to announce his answer so that he would hear most of the confederates incorrect responses before giving his own.

Would he go along with the crowd?

Solomon Asch's experiment

Solomon Asch – right, the subject of the experiment – third from right

To Asch’s surprise, 37 of the 50 subjects conformed themselves to the ‘obviously erroneous’ answers given by the other group members at least once.

So 75% of the subjects of the experiment sided with the majority though the answer they were giving was obviously erroneous. 25% of the subjects stood their ground, answered honestly and disagreed with the rest – but that was only one person out of four.

Asch was disturbed by these results:

“The tendency to conformity in our society is so strong that reasonably intelligent and well-meaning young people are willing to call white black. This is a matter of concern. It raises questions about our ways of education and about the values that guide our conduct.”

Real subject leans forward to get a better view of the lines being displayed. This particular individual insisted that "he has to call them as he sees them" and disagreed with the consensus over each of 'staged' trials.

Real subject leans forward to get a better view of the lines being displayed. This particular individual insisted that “he has to call them as he sees them” and disagreed with the consensus over each of ‘staged’ trials.

Why did the subjects conform so readily?

When they were interviewed after the experiment, most of them said that they did not really believe their conforming answers, but had gone along with the group for fear of being ridiculed or thought “peculiar.”

Some of the subjects indicated afterward that they assumed the rest of the people were correct and that their own perceptions were wrong.

Others knew they were correct but didn’t want to be different from the rest of the group.

Some even insisted they saw the line lengths as the majority claimed to see them.

Asch conducted a revised version of his experiment. When the subjects were permitted to write down their answers after hearing the answers of others, their level of conformity declined to about one third what it had been in the original experiment.

Apparently, people conform for two main reasons: because they want to be liked by the group and because they believe the group is better informed than they are.

The results of the experiment are astounding.

Three-fourths of all people (75%) are ready to support the erroneous opinion even when their own eyes tell them that the answer is wrong.

Incredible as it sounds, but in a situation of social pressure these people prefer not to believe their own eyes but agree with other people instead.

The result is indeed incredible but it does explain why people side with a lie – when everyone around them is of the same opinion, they want to conform, even though the view they support is obviously wrong.

The desire to conform is actually not that bad as it helps the society to maintain peace despite difference of opinion, but when it is done at the expense of the truth, conformity becomes a danger. It allows lies and force to dominate. And those who have access to manipulation of information and a possibility to exert pressure on the public, take advantage of people’s tendency to conform and thus turn themselves into the ones who are always right.

This is how the ‘majority’ can be artificially formed and the beauty of the method is that after people are subjected to massive brainwashing, even those of them who know the truth, voluntarily choose lies – just out of conformity with others. And the organizers of the show can say with a clear conscience that ‘the people decided on their own’.

So in respect of Michael Jackson it is now safe to conclude that the opinion of three-fourths of the population was formed by the unprecedented media lies spread for very many years by all media outlets and it was only the amount, pressure and ferocity of lies that differed depending on the media source.

In very many cases the audience went along with the lies even though their own observations of MJ did not support what they heard from others. Hundreds of people witnessed Michael’s interaction with children and never saw him do anything inappropriate to a child, but they thought that their knowledge was just a separate instance and they ‘didn’t know the whole truth’, so even despite their own positive experience some of them sided with the negative opinion of others.

“I haven’t seen anything myself, but I wasn’t there round-the-clock…” We heard it about Jackson a thousand  times and instead of paying attention to the fact that thousands of people never saw anything bad, we were led to believe that their experience was inadequate because just several liars claimed something different and all the media talked about them only.

The impression that other people are ‘better informed’ if they are definite in their answer was actually one of the explanations given by the subjects of Asch’s experiment. Let us recall what other explanations were given by these people in justification of their lies.

EXCUSES FOR SIDING WITH LIES

1) Some said that they were not sure their perception was correct. If it isn’t another of their lies, this answer means that these people are not sure of themselves and even in the easiest of cases will doubt their ability to make correct judgment. In a dispute of two opponents they will side with each concurrently and will stay with the one who has the last say in the dispute. In a situation of choice between truth and lies these people will probably be hopeless.

2)  Some honestly admitted that they knew the correct answer but didn’t want to look different or peculiar and were afraid that they would be ridiculed by the majority. These people do know the truth ‘in private’ but will not stand up for it in public. The comfort of being part of the social group is more important to them than the truth. The fact that they are able to give a correct answer in writing (when others don’t see what they say) shows that they side with a lie to save themselves from the embarrassment or fear to look ‘different’. This is a cowardly feature but typical of many of us, alas.

The word ‘peculiar’ for these conformists was surely a decisive factor in the case of Michael Jackson. Most humans don’t want to be regarded as peculiar and Michael did look that way. He turned from black to white, had plastic surgery and his nose raised so many questions that when these people were incited by the media to ridicule Jackson it was easy for them to go over from a relatively neutral word ‘peculiar’ to a totally shameless ‘wacko freak’. After all, if journalists allow themselves so insulting a language in their official papers, why should ordinary conformists check their tongues in private conversations?

Mind you that none of those journalists ever apologized for their language about Jackson, and all of them got away with their lies. And most of them were even rewarded for it. This prompts people to believe that lies are an innocent business and can be freely practiced – a horrible conclusion corrupting many souls.

3)  As you also know some of the subjects taking part in Asch’s experiment conformed to the lies as they thought others to be ‘better informed’. Well, how can anyone be better informed about the length of three bars? If it is short it is short, if it is long it is long, and the third is a medium size and that’s it.

But if these conformists hesitated even in an easy case like that, how much more insolvable to them was the situation around Michael? Indeed, so many lies were told about him that to be able to learn some grain of truth one had to be doing individual research on a constant basis for 20 years or so. Of course it was much easier to go with the rest of the crowd and rely on those who were ‘better informed’. And the ‘better informed’ took their information from the media. And the media was mostly represented by characters like Diane Dimond and Nancy Grace – hence the public delirium around Michael as a result of all these factors.

4) But the most amazing finding of Asch’s experiment is that some subjects may be so stubborn that they insist that their answer was correct even when they are told that they were deliberately misinformed and the idea of the whole experiment was to test their ability to resist lies under the pressure of public opinion.

These people are evidently incapable of accepting their mistakes in principle. If they are right, they are right – even when they are wrong. They are probably so proud that when the experiment is over they will still never accept it as fact that they agreed to lie because of their cowardice and fear of rejection by the group. In their pride (or fear to be ridiculed) they will continue to call white black and vice versa even when it becomes completely ridiculous to deny the obvious.

Unfortunately it is exactly this bunch of people who are totally incapable of leaving Michael Jackson alone. No matter what facts of Michael’s innocence will be provided they will better ‘work’ on the facts and twist them inside out rather than admit that they were wrong. Truth is of no significance to these people – their boosted ego (or mental condition) demands that they should always be right, and in reaching this goal they will persist in any kind of lie.

HUMAN NATURE HOPELESS?

When Asch’s experiments continued and were made more elaborate, all of them confirmed the initial results. Now they are considered classic for the study of human conformity. Human nature does not change much and the opinion of different people in every new generation is generally formed along the same lines. Of course these days the requirements for conformity are not so strict as they were in the 1950s and freedom of thought has changed people’s reactions (in neutral situations).

However when we find ourselves under much public pressure or fear it is still difficult for people to decide whether to conform or stand up for the truth – should we support the colleague who speaks out against the boss’s obvious injustice or someone fighting the wrong done by the authorities? Especially when we are afraid that we may suffer for the truth told?

It is obvious that dilemmas like the above arise most often in a social environment with many wrongs (and many lies). Asch’s experiment has proven that when people are pressured by a mass of lies and many start repeating them, even in a situation of no danger for themselves 75% of the public will decide to conform. And when the fear factor also adds to it the number of conformists will invariably increase (incidentally, the number of conformists in my country is currently 85%).

So the higher the pressure is, the fewer are the doubters, and the bigger is the number of conformists, and the higher is the price of telling the truth – which by the way is very much true of the situation around Michael Jackson. The media pressure was enormous and only the staunchest of Michael’s supporters were able to resist. All the rest agreed with the ‘wrong’ answers and fell for the worst of lies, finding comfortable excuses for themselves – like ‘they were not fully informed’, for example.

As a result we have a huge trail of lies following Jackson and the restoration of truth is a very big job, which is also difficult as besides the sheer volume of work not every conformist will be ready to admit that he was wrong (see Asch’s results about it).

But if human nature is so weak and so susceptible to conformity, does truth have any chance to stand up to lies, especially when the pressure of lies is huge? Is there a hope?

It is amazing but Asch’s experiment is giving an answer to this question too.

THE CHANCES OF TRUTH

At some point Asch changed the rules of the experiment and permitted one of the confederates (i.e. actors) in the group to give correct answers to the questions. The correct answer was to be given before the turn of the real subject of the experiment to voice his opinion.

And it was found that this lone correct answer gave the real subjects of the experiment so much encouragement that the number of conformists among them fell by three-fourths. After hearing the truthful version from just one person, three people out of four began to give truthful answers and only one still agreed with the wrong opinion of the majority.

In other words when everyone lies the person feels so much pressure on himself that only the courageous few will stand by the truth, but if at least one person in a group says what he really thinks, the desire of others to conform decreases several times over. So what is extremely difficult for one person becomes much easier for the two of them.

When one other person in the group gave a different answer from the others, and the group answer was not unanimous, conformity dropped. Asch found that even the presence of just one confederate that goes against the majority choice can reduce conformity as much as 80%.

http://www.simplypsychology.org/asch-conformity.html

The subjects conformed much less if they had an “ally”. In some of his experiments, Asch instructed one of the confederates to give correct answers.  In the presence of this nonconformist, the real subjects conformed only one fourth as much as they did in the original experiment.

There were several reasons: First, the real subject observed that the majority did not ridicule the dissenter for his answers. Second, the dissenter’s answers made the subject more certain that the majority was wrong. Third, the real subject now experienced social pressure from the dissenter as well as from the majority.  

Many of the real subjects later reported that they wanted to be like their nonconformist partner (the similarity principle again).

Apparently, it is difficult to be a minority of one but not so difficult to be part of a minority of two.

Asch concluded that it is difficult to maintain that you see something when no one else does. The group pressure implied by the expressed opinion of other people can lead to modification and distortion effectively making you see almost anything.”

http://www.age-of-the-sage.org/psychology/social/asch_conformity.html

What a ‘fine’ conclusion which explains so many strange phenomena.

So if the pressure of lies is big enough, it is able to make people see almost anything. And they will readily conform with any kind of lie. And some of them with even believe that the lie imposed on them was actually true. And some will even insist on it – even when confronted by the real truth.

However the truthful position of just one person can crucially change the whole thing. And start a new chain reaction followed by many other similar chain reactions. And this is where the chances for the truth are.

All of it can be seen in the acted version of the experiment that was done in the 1970s. I highly recommend it – it is an interesting sight.

 ASCH’S CONFORMITY EXPERIMENT

A WORD OF SUPPORT FOR TRUTH-SEEKERS

I hope that all of us understand that in a situation when so many people are ready to conform to even the craziest of lies, the voice of every truth-seeker is as precious as gold.

The first of them breaks the wall of lies and makes it much easier for the second, and the two of them are already a big force – they alone are capable to reduce the desire of others to comply with lies by as much as 80%. And every new truth-seeker starts a chain reaction of his own and this is probably how miracles happen.

Asch’s findings also give an exhaustive answer to a question whether it is necessary to speak up for Michael Jackson when we talk to complete liars. Liars will certainly not change their views – they actually have none as they just repeat what they are told, but the arguments of truth-seekers made in a public dispute (private discussion with a liar is a waste of time) will enormously help those who are observing the discussion from aside.

It doesn’t mean that these people will necessarily agree with the truth, but the pressure of lies on them will dramatically decrease and they will be able to at least think on their own.

Can the above study help us in the current situation with con artists like Robson and Safechuck who want to make a billion out of a new slander campaign against MJ? I think it can, as Asch’s research discloses a deep psychological discrepancy in their stories, making them even stranger than they are.

First of all Asch’s study helps us to understand why Robson needs Safechuck at all. Not only does he want to bolster his shaky case, but he also hopes for a chain reaction described above and wants to inspire others to play the role of ‘victims’ (for a good prize). So his search of allies is nothing unusual – without them his case would not stand a single chance, and this is why he hopes to recruit more scoundrels to take part in his enterprise.

What is totally unusual though is the timing of his ‘revelations’. Asch’s experiment on conformity in human behavior would suggest something totally different, and would even help to find the moment when Robson was telling the truth.

WHEN DID ROBSON TELL THE TRUTH?

We know from Asch’s classic study that when there is a wall of silence over the truth and everyone is telling lies, the one who wants to reveal the truth will be under so much pressure that in 75% cases he will not be able to disclose it. And if he is also afraid of having to pay for it in some way, the number of conformists (the ones who will put up with the obvious wrong) may probably increase to 100%.

In other words, in a situation when the victim of abuse has to go against the whole crowd and thinks that no one will believe him, and that he will only suffer more as a result of the revelation, most victims will keep their mouth shut (turning into conformists this way). This is actually what happened to victims of real abusers like Jimmy Savile. All of them were silent as it was easier for them to put up with the injury than overcome their fear and break the wall of social resistance they were facing.

And now imagine that there is no wall of resistance. And your offender is very vulnerable at the moment. He is actually on trial now and exactly on the same charge. The public is outraged and the media and prosecution are looking for every possibility to put the offender behind bars. Almost everyone is dreaming of locking him up for life and is in search of proof of his ‘crimes’ – so your revelations will be met with nothing less than an enthusiastic applause.

Michael Jackson is led into the police station in handcuffs -Reuters

When MJ arrived at a police station they put handcuffs on him before allowing him to enter. From the start of it the authorities and media were beating into people’s heads that the man was a criminal – irrespective of what the future verdict said.

In a situation like this, when there is no pressure to keep silence and there is an opposite pressure – to speak up, even if you are the shyest of people you will take the opportunity to bring your offender to justice.

Especially since everyone is already looking at you and encourages you to talk, thinking that you are his victim anyway – whether you admit it or not. In the opinion of many it is an established fact, so it is not use denying and keeping it a secret any more.

Actually from the very start of it the authorities and media were beating into everyone’s heads that the man was a criminal – irrespective of what the future verdict said.

And if you are a real victim, how will you react to this open public invitation?

You will heave a sigh of relief, get the secret off your chest, turn over a new leaf in your life … and fall into the embrace of the grateful public. Every TV channel will aspire to your interview and Hollywood producers will compete for a chance to screen your life story. In your declining years you will write a book on “How you saved the nation from a predator” and at the final hour your name will find its place in the Hall of fame.

This was more or less the atmosphere of the Michael Jackson 2005 trial which made it the ideal time for Robson and Safechuck to speak out against Jackson. Both were grown-up people by then (in their mid-twenties) and if their silence and support for Michael in 1993 could be explained by the public by their young age, this time everyone was really waiting for them to contribute.

Needless to say that both were absolutely in no position of real child abuse victims who only by the age of thirty sometimes manage to summon enough courage to speak against their offenders – prosperous, famous, mighty, highly respectable and never doubted by the public or police.

And Robson didn’t even need to overcome the shame and indecision typical for the real victims as his ‘molestation’ was a matter of open discussion and no one would have been in the least surprised had he confirmed it.

nancy-grace-glove

The famous glove scene – Nancy Grace mocks at Michael Jackson as she announces her ‘news’ from the courtroom

As to Michael, he wasn’t powerful or respected at all. He was utterly humiliated and almost crushed by the two years of non-stop harassment that started after Bashir’s film. The court of public opinion had already sentenced him to be burnt in hell, so now the only thing that remained to be done was the final verdict which at the time was regarded by many as a mere formality.

You will agree that nothing could have been easier for Robson to tell his story then – especially since he says that he always remembered his ‘abuse’ and now insists that any talk of the repressed memory is out of the question.

But what did Robson do in 2005 instead of taking the matter off his chest?

From the point of view of Asch’s conformity studies he did an incredible thing – he went against the tide and testified about Michael’s innocence, getting a wail of disappointment from the public and bringing a lot of criticism upon his head. The public was still incredulous about what he and the other witnesses (Brett Barnes and McCaulay Culkin) said, and all the three were ostracized and made fun of for their friendship with Michael and the slumber parties they had.

Why was there so much ridicule? Because these three guys didn’t conform to people’s expectations. What they actually did was a totally non-conformist action as they voluntarily put themselves in a position of confrontation with the public, media and establishment.

And when now Robson claims that he was ‘coached’ by MJ he wants us to believe that he not only decided to speak for his ‘abuser’, but he also decided to confront the whole world and to his own detriment in the first place? Wasn’t it too much of a sacrifice – and what for???

And remember, when people have real inner conflicts to fight they don’t look so easy and relaxed as Robson did during the trial. If you read his testimony you will see that Robson was able to crack jokes and even express surprise at seeing some adult magazines in Michael’s possession. Genuine surprise, by the way.

Considering all these inner strings of human psychology we can assert in full confidence that if Robson had been a real victim, he would have testified against Jackson in 2005. If he had really had that secret, he would have surely taken the chance to relieve himself of the burden, especially since going with the tide was exceptionally easy and convenient for him at that moment. The establishment, media and crowd would have put him on a pedestal for ‘helping the justice’ and would have turned him into a hero ‘saving the planet from a terrible villain’.

However Robson chose the hardest of roads and told the innocent truth. He behaved like those rare non-conformists unwilling to side with the lie even despite the utmost pressure, and was brave enough to say ‘no’ in the face of the crowd which was prompting him in chorus to say ‘yes’.

Moreover, using the terms of Asch’s experiment, by sticking to the unpopular truth Robson, Barnes and Culkin put themselves in the danger of ‘falling out of the social group’ and looking ‘peculiar’ in the eyes of the majority.

So it was quite a feat on their part. And such a feat is possible only when people are sure of what they say and are ready to part even with all their conformity in order to fight for the truth. And this is a very rare occurrence as you remember.

Even when people have nothing to lose, in a situation of heavy public pressure they usually go along with the majority even though they know that it is wrong. And these three guys had a lot to lose by speaking in support of Jackson, in terms of their reputation, comfort and peace of mind – and nothing to acquire (except the ridicule of disbelieving public).

Imagine yourself in their place and you will understand that only those who were absolutely sure of Michael’s innocence were capable of so non-conformist an action.

This makes the words of support for Michael from Culkin, Barnes and Robson really precious and unique. And true too, because they passed the test of going against the trend and did it at a moment when telling the truth was hard (and telling a lie was easy). If you look for the analogy they behaved like that bespectacled guy in Solomon Asch’s experiment who gave correct answers in all the tests irrespective of what others said, insisting that “he has to call them as he sees them“.

What happened to Wade Robson afterwards is a different story. It is quite possible that he didn’t cope with the consequences of his then decision and could not withstand the repercussions that followed. I don’t know which form these repercussions took, but I do know that the society doesn’t like those who go against the trend because it makes it feel so much inferior to them. Look at the disgraceful way they are still treating McCaulay Culkin and you will realize that the lying majority is envious of the courageous few who are able to stand for the truth, and always looks for a way to sting them.

However even they might one day feel that lies are already becoming a life-threatening phenomenon – too many people see lies as a necessity now and teach others to conform, and this makes the society cynical and corrupt. In moments like these truth becomes an especially precious commodity.

So let us not lose heart and let’s keep going, and hope that one day truth will prevail over lies.

And now that we know that every new truth-seeker is able to start a chain reaction of cleaning the social environment, it does give some encouragement, doesn’t it?

Each of us counts!

Happy New Year, guys.

34 Comments leave one →
  1. March 1, 2016 5:35 pm

    This post is really interesting and makes me understand a lot. It reminds me of a personal experience: Once in class we had to make an essay on interracial marriages. One of my closest friends was engaged with a guy and this guy’s brother was having a secret relationship with a black girl, who was in my class as well. I didn’t know why, but my friend and this girl were having problems because of this. Taking the chance from the essay( which was intentionally asked, because our professor knew about this problem) my friend decided to write against. So did all of the other girls in class to ‘support’ her. I don’t know why, it seemed they all had something against the black girl in there. Initially, my friend asked me to write an essay against it and give it to her (I’m skillful at writting), then make my own essay with my personal opinion. I totally approve interracial marriages and felt outraged at the situation, so I refused to do that for here and honestly, my essay was striking and made them feel offended. That caused a discussion between us, where I still didn’t give up and as a result I didn’t speak with all my girl classmates a whole week. I knew something like that was coming, but the idea of someone hushing me or the idea of going with the crowd, even if that means to go against your ideals, it’s something I’m not Ok with. I’m proud of the fact that I stand for what I believe and this is one of the most important lessons I’ve taken from Michael. With his own words: “Stand for what you believe in, even if it means you stand alone. Speak the truth even if your voice shakes. Never regret doing the right thing no matter what the cost may be…”

    Like

  2. January 30, 2015 9:47 pm

    Helena, thank you so much for writing this piece. Very powerful and eye opening. Am going to share. Very sorry for all that is going on in your country and praying that things get better. (((HUGS))) ~ Debbie

    Liked by 1 person

  3. January 20, 2015 8:14 am

    Ofcourse AEG is behind this. I also wonder if Murray is getting a bit, of money I mean.
    Randy Philips with his fake smiles, fake sadnes etc. He was seen by Blanket on the grounds that night or evening.Also it is quite possiibe as you say Helena that WR has been molested by someone else and therefore can better talk about such an experience.

    Like

  4. January 19, 2015 10:40 pm

    My Dear Helena,

    I have not been on your site in a long time, for I have not been online very much at all. I was inspired to come tonight, as I was thinking and feeling about Michael’s sadness of being separated from the world for so much of His life. As many people are, I am spiritually connected to Michael, and this was a ‘hot topic’ tonight. It was so hard for so long, for Him.

    When I read your words…”Now that millions of my compatriots have fallen victim to the absurdest kind of lies I am no longer surprised or resentful that millions of Americans were also led to believe the nastiest lies about Michael Jackson. Previously I could not understand it. Now I do …” .. I just burst out crying….they were Michael’s tears,,,

    Indeed. Here was Michael, knowing who He was….yet so many people did not know Him, but only saw Him through a lens that was tarnished, distorting and destroying the image of who He truly was. And no matter what He did or said, He could not remove the stain splashed on His soul, by the frenzied media take down. This pain of having literally no one…no one who really knew Him (because of the ‘unique’ and ‘most powerful spirit’ that he was) no home, no family…no place where He felt He belonged and was understood… was the lonliest place a human could be. Even people who claimed to be friends, He felt, were still looking at Him through the same lens. Whether they belived the claims or not, the ‘lens’ still existed. And it never went away.

    I cannot tell you how much I appreciate all you do for Him. Your posts are always on topic, so well thought out, so well written, so from the heart, so comprehensive, so brilliant!!! You serve our Michael well. And that is what I truly wanted to say…thank you for all you have done for Him. As you can see, not all of us have the gift of the written word🙂 🙂 I used to be a good writer, but not anymore :0…but I do come from the Heart🙂 Much Love to you, please keep up the great work, and know that you are loved and appreciated very much!!

    Mary🙂

    Like

  5. January 19, 2015 4:21 pm

    “I believe them when they went to court and testified that Michael did nothing to them. No matter what their reasoning is, Wade and Safechuck are, committing a crime, lies, fraud, defamation of character. They aren’t even credible.” – Judy Morris

    As far as I remember Safechuck wasn’t summoned by the prosecution or the defense in 2005, but in the 90s when he was interviewed by the police he said that nothing inappropriate had ever taken place between him and MJ. So no matter what they claim now these people are not credible for a simple reason that they are contradicting their own prior testimony.

    And Wade Robson actually spoke for Michael twice and the second time he was an adult and it was a testimony under oath!

    If we assume that both times he lied, it means that lying is an inherent feature of his character. And those who tell a lie at least once and so confidently too (like Robson did) are able to lie again and again, and many times over. To cases like that a very good English proverb applies: “If someone deceives you once, shame on him. If someone deceives you twice, shame on you”. So if we allowed ourselves to be deceived by Robson once, we cannot allow ourselves to be deceived by him again.

    What if Robson was indeed molested at some moment of his life, but by someone different? For example, by his father who later committed suicide? Or by his agent who took care of his career when he was already in the US? However a suit against the agent will bring no money, while a suit against Michael’s estate will. And this suit is also a good way to revenge himself on the Estate managers for their refusal to hire him for their MJ projects.

    But how can we know that when Robson will be describing his abuse to the judge he will not talk about the abuse suffered by him from another person? If he lied once, he can lie again. And he will look quite genuine in his testimony, won’t he? Because he will actually be describing his real experience. Only it won’t be about Jackson but will be about another person.

    What allows us to think that Robson will tell a third lie? Our own assumption that on two previous occasions he already lied. The logic is very simple – if he lied twice he will easily lie again, so the person who lied twice cannot be credible in principle! In fact I can’t even understand what the judge is thinking about – he should have thrown the case out the moment the suit was filed.

    But the truth is that on both occasions – in the 90s and in 2005 Robson – Robson was NOT lying. He was telling the truth. He was NOT molested. At least not by Michael Jackson.

    Those who were abused in their childhood dream of a possibility to rid themselves of the haunting images of the abuse. And they want their abuser to suffer. They want him to be humiliated in the same way they were humiliated when the abuse took place. And the criminal proceedings already taking place against their abuser give a fantastic chance to the victims to speak up and throw this burden off their shoulders. It gives them an enormous relief after which they can start their life anew. And if the criminal trial is followed by a civil one, they can also get millions to compensate them for their sufferings.

    However Robson wants us to believe that he not only refused to get this enormous burden off his shoulders, but he also took upon himself the extra burden of lying in favor of his abuser and become the laughing stock of the public which expected exactly the opposite from him? And that he lied when he defended MJ in the face of the prosecutor who was very harsh in his examination of him?

    What for??? For the money MJ could have paid him (in theory)? But he could have got much more if he had spoken against him!

    No, nothing of it fits in. Robson was telling the truth THEN and is lying NOW. And why he is doing it is a different story.

    Like

  6. January 19, 2015 3:14 pm

    “To me All this stuff was orchestrated , not just by Wade and his lawyers , but for AEG too.. To me they started setting the stage with the McManus stuff in April and kept it going for some time while that trial was on” – Nan

    Nan, not only to you, but to many of us including Tom Mesereau. He said that he found it very curious that Robson made his allegations in the middle of the AEG case and right after the start of the trial. Tom Mesereau speaks about it here in this interview, for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mql8wgIQCQQ
    It is interesting that at that moment Robson’s version was still a case of a “repressed memory” which he later changed into another version that he “always remembered his abuse” (adding even more absurdity to the case).

    I know people who dont believe AEG was behind this

    And I know people who perfectly know that AEG is behind it but do their best to whitewash AEG and send MJ’s fans in a wrong direction. Some of them invited a member of the jury at the AEG trial to their fan community to explain how “correct” the verdict was and some calmly took interviews from Randy Phillips even after all of us learned that he had slapped Michael and humiliated him by throwing him in a cold shower and barking at him so that “the walls shook”.

    No real Michael’s supporter will ever talk to Randy Phillips after that, but some evidently have absolutely no problem with it.

    Like

  7. January 19, 2015 1:11 pm

    Helena thank you for such a great article. I am in total agreement with you. I do believe that Wade and Safechuck are attention seekers who are looking to get some large cash. And, who knows what other reasoning’s they have for the new allegations. I believe them when they went to court and testified tha,t Michael did nothing to them. No matter what their reasoning is, Wade and Safechuck are, committing a crime, lies, fraud, defamation of character. They aren’t even credible.

    Like

  8. Nan permalink
    January 17, 2015 4:17 pm

    I was just going to put these links here, because the subject came up of AEG possible putting this together regarding Wade and the accusations , which I believe happened, myself ..
    This first one I noticed on radar on line out of the blue ..They dusted off Adrian McManus for a story regarding MJ drug addiction..Now he was gone almost 4 yrs and I wondered why they were bringing it up in April of 2013
    http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/04/michael-jackson-messed-up-depraved-junkie-says-former-staffer/
    Then Wade gets on tv and makes his accusations and DD is right there to report it all..May , I think

    Then Radar goes looking for Jason, right after Wades accusations ..The month of May also
    http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/05/son-of-mj-maid-who-claimed-king-of-pop-fondled-him-says-hes-not-following-latest-molestation-case/
    I thought it was interesting that they would track down Jason who cant speak publicly about MJ and not bother to contact Gavin .( it wasnt until a few months ago anyone tried to get a comment out of Gavin)
    The scott thorson gets bailed out of jail at the time they are doing the Liberace HBO film, and yet at every opportunity , he brings up MJ and him having an affair , which we all know isnt true .

    He was on Howard Stern talking about MJ too.
    Seemed to be more about MJ than Liberace.
    And of course the flurry ot tabloid stories about all the payoffs , which werent true.
    To me All this stuff was orchestrated , not just by Wade and his lawyers , but for AEG too..
    To me they started setting the stage with the McManus stuff in April and kept it going for some time while that trial was on
    I know people who dont believe AEG was behind this , but to me , between all this stuff and Wade putting his condo on the market the day after AEG lost their appeal to stop the law suit, I am just always going to think they were involved .

    Like

  9. January 17, 2015 1:25 am

    You are welcome Helena. Sure I understand and appreciate your commitment to other issues. I am sure Michael would have appreciated it too, given his nature of standing up for the truth. It requires a lot of courage and selflessness.
    I realize that supporting Michael and the truth brings out the activist in us. Will follow this blog for more.🙂

    Like

  10. January 16, 2015 8:38 am

    I just had to post this. A man who died claimed he went to hell and saw Michael and Pope John Paul there…

    http://www.inquisitr.com/1754084/ghanaian-man-dies-sees-michael-jackson-and-pope-john-paul-in-hell/

    I guess no matter how good of a person you are, God will always find fault with you, according to this guy anyway.

    Give me a break.

    Like

  11. January 15, 2015 6:02 pm

    “With Michael, it was life-changing. Singing and dancing is a job Michael Jackson has done wonderfully, but behind all that was Michael, the person who was about loving, caring and kindness. I felt so small and lost. I don’t know how to put this but … Michael sort of gave me the answer. It was like, suddenly the dots were all connected and the seemingly complicated picture was completed.” – Denise

    Yes, with Michael it is like you are not alone any more. And when you come to think of it, he was that very first person in the crowd who stood his ground no matter what, broke the conformity pattern and this way helped us to be ourselves. He has set an example for being more genuine, gentle and caring. And not afraid to be different from the crowd.
    As to the message of his songs I think that people are only on the verge of discovering the real Michael Jackson.

    Denise, peace and love to you and everyone.

    Like

  12. January 15, 2015 4:41 pm

    “There are people who have implied Michael was paying after 2005 for lying.” -Dialdancer

    And there are people who imply that Wade Robson is being paid by AEG for lying about Michael (I am one of them). There are various reasons for it, one of which is the fact that he made his accusations right at the start of the AEG trial – to fully divert people’s attention from AEG this way.

    I can also imply that James Desborough is part of the plan too, as he broke his false articles about some “secret MJ files” when it was the turn of AEG’s defense to present their case. And that Conrad Murray is another part of it. James Desborough joined Murray in that infamous autopsy documentary where Murray also – what a tendency! – tried to portray Michael in an extremely unfavorable way. The documentary came after the trial, and therefore these three people – Robson, Desborough and Murray – covered the whole period of the trial with extremely negative information about Michael. Did they want to influence the jury and the court of public opinion which is no less important than the official verdict? Sure they did. In whose interests was it? AEG of course.

    “Here is my thought on that. If Wade or Jim had taken the stand and said; I was paid or coached or forced into coming here to tell a lie, but Michael did molest me Michael would be in jail. Wade or Jim would have had his pick of a multitude of attorneys who would have insured he got a percentage of Michael’s then still solvent Estate. Not the couple of bucks here or there or favors which ceased on MJ’s death as was so subtly implied, but 10’s if not 100’s of millions. The Media and Sneddon would have made them heroes. They would have been well fete, cossetted and protected. You can rest assured they were informed of these “opportunities” before and during the trial.”

    Dial, if I understand your idea right, the little cash Michael had at the time for a theoretical “pay off” to Robson (and the rest of them) was still incomparable with the money they would have received in case of a guilty verdict and the eventual civil trial – which was well on the way considering that Arvizos had already contacted Larry Feldman, the civil lawyer.

    Yes, I agree. The profit from an eventual civil trial would have been much higher if Robson had spoken out against Michael at the time, because those sums could have been charged independent of Michael’s will. His catalogue could have been forcibly sold, so the sums of compensations could have been multi-million ones.

    But besides all these money considerations the Asch paradigm proves that due to purely psychological factors Robson was telling the truth then, in 2005, and not now. If he had been a real victim he would have surely taken the chance to tell the truth – and enjoy all the benefits of it, including psychological and monetary ones. It is 100%.

    Following the Chinese proverb, it is better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick. To say that Robson took little money to his own detriment instead of making himself rich and healthy in 2005 is like trying to dispute this Chinese axiom.

    Like

  13. January 15, 2015 3:41 pm

    http://youtu.be/skcy-dxf9oc Here they call it the Asch paradigm.

    Dialdancer, thank you – a funny experiment in an elavator teaching us simple but great things.

    First of all, the conformity paradigm works, even with contemporary people who tend to be more individualistic. The answer of one of the girls is typical: “I thought they knew something I didn’t know”. It fits Michael’s situation perfectly – most people who took part in hounding Michael could say the same about themselves. All of them thought that his persecutors knew about him something they didn’t know (and joined in).

    The second part of the experiment shows that the same principle works for something good too. When the crowd starts moving to the music almost everyone joins in. If only one had done it, the rest would probably have not followed, but when the majority does, the few remaining can’t resist.

    Conclusion: The bigger the pressure, the more people join in and the fewer resist (if any). Who is capable of exerting the most pressure on the people now? THE MEDIA. So those who have access to the media can mold the reality. Hence the RESPONSIBILITY of the media towards people in reporting the situation as it is. If they don’t, they create a different reality and make people conform to it.

    Was Diane Dimond and Co. responsible towards the audience when she was reporting only the prosecution side from the 2005 court trial? NO. Is James Desborough responsible when he is now blatanly lying about the so-called “secret” FBI files about MJ? Absolutely not.
    Can we listen to people like them as truthful sources of information? You decide.

    Like

  14. January 15, 2015 3:09 pm

    Suparna, thank you for your video about Milgram experiment. I didn’t know about it before, and now have done some research. The experiment was harsh but eye-opening about human nature in general and what people are capable of if they are pressured by people or circumstances. I think it has a lot to do with the way Michael was treated by the crowd.

    If I have a chance I will write about it. These days I need more time to write articles as my attention is split over several serious things simultaneously. But since all of them focus on seeking the truth Michael would welcome it very much. At some point he also turned from Billie Jean to Heal the World and Earth Song, so this tendency is probably natural for Michael’s followers.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. January 15, 2015 12:57 pm

    Always a pleasure Helena.

    Like

  16. January 15, 2015 12:56 pm

    Thanks Helena for looking up the link and the video and for pointing out the differences between Milgram and Asch Experiments so well. Just thought of sharing with you that McDonald video- as it had to with the strip search and it reminded me of Michael’s case.

    Like

  17. Dialdancer permalink
    January 15, 2015 4:41 am

    A video came up on my Newsfeed just now and immediately thought of this conversation. About an experiment in human conformity. Here they call it the Asch paradigm.

    Like

  18. Dialdancer permalink
    January 15, 2015 4:04 am

    Helena,

    It is good you have been able to come back. I know that this is no small achievement.

    You have given us an excellent and though provoking post.

    “4) But the most amazing finding of Asch’s experiment is that some subjects may be so stubborn that they insist that their answer was correct even when they are told that they were deliberately misinformed and the idea of the whole experiment was to test their ability to resist lies under the pressure of public opinion.”

    Because it is easier to stand on the Court House steps and admit you murdered someone than it is to stand before people and admit you lied. Amazing when you consider the penalty for murder is far greater.

    There are people who have implied Michael was paying after 2005 for lying. Here is my thought on that. If Wade or Jim had taken the stand and said; I was paid or coached or forced into coming here to tell a lie, but Michael did molest me Michael would be in jail. Wade or Jim would have had his pick of a multitude of attorneys who would have insured he got a percentage of Michael’s then still solvent Estate. Not the couple of bucks here or there or favors which ceased on MJ’s death as was so subtly implied, but 10’s if not 100’s of millions. The Media and Sneddon would have made them heroes. They would have been well fete, cossetted and protected. You can rest assured they were informed of these “opportunities” before and during the trial.

    Like

  19. January 14, 2015 2:00 pm

    Beautiful Helena…. you are spot on with everything.

    Like

  20. Denise permalink
    January 13, 2015 7:33 am

    So happy to see you, Helena!🙂 I already commented once but I’ll say this again: your website is amazing! It’s very detailed, thorough, and truthful. I read some of the articles you posted about 1 – 2 years ago, and it’s incredible how Michael affected all of us in the exact same way.

    The Asch Solomon experiment is very interesting, I never thought such a research existed! I agree very much with it, once a person has an ‘ally’, being honest and expressing one’s true opinion (which is the same as the ally) becomes a whole lot easier. It gives the person the needed strength and courage to overcome the social pressure. And with the chain reaction, the truth will win in the long-run as long as people stand up to brave the lies in this world.

    I’m not really good at words when describing but I’ll try the best I can here … I’m gonna admit that I have been a fan of other celebrities, Michael’s not my first idol but, with Michael, it was life-changing. It was more than being a crazy fan, it was understanding the message and listening. Singing and dancing is a job Michael Jackson has done wonderfully, but behind all that was Michael, the person who was about loving, caring and kindness. I’ve been searching for an answer as to how to help and do something about the world. I see other people like me, but they don’t care about the things I care about. They were all about trends and materials … I’m not. I felt so small and lost. I don’t know how to put this but … Michael sort of gave me the answer. It was like, suddenly the dots were all connected and the seemingly complicated picture was completed.

    There’s so much wonder in the world humans haven’t discover yet… I never thought I would one day be admiring THE Michael Jackson … THE legendary star with all the hits… to be honest, back in 2009 I didn’t even search anything about him… Everything began when last year, I had the sudden urge to listen to ‘Earth Song’ and watch the live performance of it… The urge came out of nowhere! When I understood the lyrics and when Michael pushed down the soldier’s rifle in the performance, it had a huge impact on me and I broke down into tears (which is something I rarely do especially when it comes to performances and dramas.) I feel blessed that I was given the chance to truly discover, and understand, Michael Jackson’s words.

    Peace and L.O.V.E everyone. xx

    Like

  21. January 12, 2015 8:19 pm

    As far as Wade goes, I do believe he has mental health issues, but I also think he feels slighted. So in a way , I think Wade feels a sense of entitlement, and since he is on the outs with the estate , has decided to do a 180.

    Even now, after all Wade Robson did, I still need to say in his defense that we underestimate the social pressure the three guys who testified to MJ’s innocence experienced at the trial, and how much damage it did to all of them post-factum.

    This again requires a separate discussion, but if you remember Asch’s experiment and that bespectacled guy who insisted on correct answers defying the opinion of the rest of the group, just imagine that after the experiment no one explains to him that the others were telling lies and instead everyone accuses him of telling lies, and ridicules him for it. Imagine the way he should feel – he was telling the truth all along and as a result became the laughing stock of the university!

    This is the closest we can imagine about how Robson, Barnes and Culkin felt after that trial. No one in the media believed them (and MJ’s not-guilty verdict), every media outlet still hissed that they were the his “boys” and each person talking with them even about neutral subjects still had it in the back of his mind when looking at them. And they noticed it – by the questions asked, queer looks, half-serious jokes and stifled laughs behind their backs. And this lasted for years after the 2005 trial.

    I have every reason to believe that Robson, same as others, was frustrated with the consequences of their testimony and had very serious reasons for depression. Usually the truth is rewarding and gives a sense of satisfaction but in their case it was the opposite – though they did the right thing they faced nothing but ridicule and this social injustice and pressure were really too much.

    Some people are not able to withstand this kind of pressure. They don’t understand why they agreed to endure all this horror and what was the point of going into so much sacrifice. What did they gain by telling the truth? Nothing. Everyone still asks them questions about their “relationship” with MJ and hints that they are always ready to listen to a different version.

    A person like McCaulay would tell them to f*** off (and the media would repay him for it) and Robson would try to be polite and simply avoid such questions.

    But the pressure of it can break the willpower of some people. If you try to walk in their shoes you will understand that their post-trial situation very difficult indeed. Personally I think that this was the basic reason for Robson’s U-turn. All the rest was secondary to it.

    The social pressure he was going through was undermining his personality, eroding it from inside and was the real reason for his depression that made him turn on the innocent person who had never done him any harm. He wanted to find someone to blame for all his trouble and he did. How do I know that there was a depression? Well, I’ve seen his dance moves in the years after the trial.

    Like

  22. January 12, 2015 7:28 pm

    First off, I am really glad to hear from you and certainly have been thinking of you ….I say a prayer in hopes of things being resolved in a more peaceful manner

    Thank you, Nan for welcoming me back and for your prayers. All of us need them.

    As I read this latest article, it struck me how MJ had said , quite a while ago, that he feared his fellow citizens were being brainwashed. Evidently for such a “peculiar” person, he had a pretty good handle on what was actually happening in the media , and in turn ,how they tried to control peoples minds.

    This reminded me of Michael’s “Scream”. I looked it up – it was recorded in October 1994 which was right after a year-long police investigation and the two grand juries and no charges brought against MJ despite all their collective effort. Look at the lyrics of Scream – Michael is not just saying it, he is actually screaming about the lies, schemes and injustice, and the fact that they kept changing the rules of the game they were playing with him:

    Tired of injustice
    Tired of the schemes
    The lies are disgusting
    So what does it mean
    Kicking me down
    I got to get up
    As jacked as it sounds
    The whole system sucks

    Peek in the shadow
    Come into the light
    You tell me I’m wrong
    Then you better prove you’re right
    You’re sellin’ out souls but
    I care about mine
    I’ve got to get stronger
    And I won’t give up the fight…

    Tired of you tellin’ the story your way
    It’s causin’ confusion
    You think it’s okay
    You Keep changin’ the rules
    While I keep playin’ the game
    I can’t take it much longer
    I think I might go insane

    …”Oh my God, can’t believe what I saw
    As I turned on the TV this evening
    I was disgusted by all the injustice
    All the injustice”
    With such collusions don’t it make you wanna scream
    Your bash abusin’ victimize within the scheme
    You try to cope with every lie they scrutinize
    Oh brother please have mercy ‘Cause I just can’t take it
    Stop pressurin’ me
    Just stop pressurin’ me…

    Like

  23. January 12, 2015 6:19 pm

    Without these mechanisms in human psychology many events in human history perhaps wouldn’t have happened, like for example in my own country, when Hitler seized power in 1933. It was only possible because the majority of people was drawn into a hype and individuals stopped thinking on their own.

    Susanne, oh yes, now I truly understand how it could happen in Germany. Isn’t it amazing that our today’s experience is making us understand so many things about the past? And actually our common history?

    Standing up for the truth is what could bring us back on common ground. Real truth-seekers are interested in nothing but the truth and will meet each other at this point even when they come from different directions (= opinions). But the truth could unite them.

    Yes, it could. The truth could open their eyes to the world it really is. People will still have different opinions but having a dispute based on true facts is absolutely not the same as having a difference of opinion due to everyone operating false information and proceeding from false assumptions. In my opinion the world has reached a point in its history when truth will become the most sought-after element and will become as precious for survival as clean water. Otherwise lies will land all of us in a chaos with no one even able to understand reasons for it.

    What makes it difficult is that often there seem different truths existing within humanity, when people claim their truth as fact, as you can see in Robson’s case who said “my truth”, or in cases of fundamentalist beliefs that consider opinions as facts

    Oh, this is an extremely interesting subject I would like to discuss on a separate occasion. Despite what people say these days truth is absolute as light and there is no such thing as different truths. You are right – we need “to stand up to tell the real truth and insist on it by presenting evidence, so encouraging others to do the same, until the rest also commits to the truth.”

    The message from this post is clear: Let’s withstand the pressure and try to be these truth-seekers with the courage to stand up for truth and not to conform – to start the chain reaction – whether it is about Michael or about political and social events.

    Yes, I wanted to encourage those of us (me included) who sometimes think that one person is defenseless against the lies falling on us from various directions. At times it looks like this fight is futile.

    But when I learned that the voice of just one person can restrain 80% of potential conformists from their desire to conform to lies, it gave me a lot of hope. It turns out that one single person can make a huge difference and it is only due to our impossibility to see the word of truth reverberating and cleaning the air from lies that we sometimes feel so desperate. If it were a visual process it would be an amazing sight. Asch’s experiment helps us to imagine it.

    Like

  24. January 12, 2015 4:29 pm

    “We have Michael Jackson now to tie all our countries together in love and peace. We can look to his life for direction, rather than the media. WE need to be the news. We need to look to each other for the truth.” janeceliahatch

    Jane, I’m also thinking along the same lines. Look at the people Michael Jackson gathered around himself. Most of them are truth-seekers by nature. They can’t put up with lies and the liars who tell them, and are willing to work and fight for the truth even though it is not easy.

    So it just happened this way that due to so many lies told about him Michael Jackson collected around himself truth-seekers from all over the world who also happen to share his ideals of peace, justice and love, or otherwise we would not appreciate him as a human being (and would be just the fans of his music and dance).

    And now that we have to live in an environment of so many lies we can help each other in seeing the world as it is and not as the media and unscrupulous politicians present it to be. So indeed – WE can be the news and can look to each other for the truth.

    Michael would very much welcome this process, I am absolutely sure of it. This is probably what he always hoped for.

    Like

  25. January 12, 2015 3:32 pm

    Suparna, thank you for the videos. I’ve watched the first one and before seeing the second want to share my impressions. The gist of it for those who have not seen it: a nasty prankster called McDonald’s and introduced himself as a policeman to an employee. He said her younger colleague was suspected of a theft and asked the older woman to search the girl. She didn’t doubt he was a policeman and did as she was told. The search continued for long involving one more person and even forcing the young girl to agree to a sexual act with a man (!). Later it turned out that there were some 70 or so calls made by this caller – many of them successful. As far as I got he worked in jail as a prison guard, knew the ways of policemen and had a lot of police manuals at home. The woman following his orders at McDonald’s realized that something was wrong only in two hours. The psychologist explained it by the fact that people are used to listen to the authorities and don’t doubt the “policeman’s” intentions.

    The case is impressive but let us make it clear that it is different from what I was describing in Solomon Asch’s experiment.

    The case of a McDonald’s employee is that of abuse of trust in the first place. And also about people’s suggestibility which under certain circumstances increases to a point when people follow instructions without criticism. It happens when we speak to someone of authority or someone else supposed to work for public good AND also in a situation of stress. Stress significantly lowers the level of criticism (when we are in a panic we rarely think reasonably).

    In cases like these trust and suggestibility of the prank victim rise and it takes some time for them to start realizing that they are talking to someone who is just playing the role. This is how people allow into their house various criminals posing themselves as policemen, doctors, postmen, firefighters, inspectors coming to “check” the security of their gas facilities, etc.

    Con artists always act that way. They are not only shrewd but they are also the best students of human psychology. I remember one professor of psychology who was once persuaded by a con artist to part with a big sum of money. She told that story to her students with a laugh and said that the one who abused her trust deserved a degree in psychology as she knew how to press and use to her benefit the most vulnerable buttons of human nature.

    But Solomon Asch’s experiment is about something different. Over there people voluntarily sided with liars though they knew the truth but were willing to give it up because they didn’t want to look different.

    The experiment is not about obedience (no one instructed the students to side with a lie) and being truly misguided (most knew the truth all right), but about conformity – a voluntary choice to side with others when they tell a lie and you realize that they do, but you still agree with them as you want to be part of the crowd, don’t want to look ‘peculiar’ or are unsure of yourself. In very many cases conformists do have an opinion of their own and know the truth but prefer to keep it to themselves.

    In short it is about a side of human beings that helps us to survive in a social environment. No one wants to be a pariah, look “strange” and do something that will distance him\her from others. Everyone wants to be accepted by the world and not rejected by it. And this is why we often agree with others even when we see with our own eyes that they are wrong.

    Conformity gives you a feeling of being part of a flock, herd, gang, crowd, company, social group, etc. and you are enjoying the benefits of it. It gives you a feeling of comfort and being shielded. You are one of them. You wear the same, you think the same, you repeat the same. You are no different. You are accepted. And it feels gooooood.

    Unfortunately in the time of mass harassment of Michael Jackson it ‘felt good’ and was publicly ‘accepted’ to ridicule him and hound him like an animal, explaining to oneself that he ‘deserved’ it. The media and those who ordered the show spread about him unspeakable lies and using this pretext people allowed themselves to unleash the vilest of their instincts. And being part of that vile and raging crowd felt gooooood.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. January 12, 2015 3:11 pm

    “So good to have you back! Kudos to you for standing up for the truth yet again.”

    Suparna, Caro, Jane, Nan, Susanne, Katrina22, all my dear friends – thank you very much for welcoming me back. I do hope to be with you (and Michael) for long and be of some help to him and us and all the good causes he was in support of.

    Like

  27. January 11, 2015 2:29 pm

    Helena you may be knowing about the Milgram experiment which explores the human tendency to conform and obey authority even at the cost of morality and how this was exhibited in McDonald’s strip abuse of power in the U.S https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQ7zl7XUcJc and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3f6LLV3fkXg

    Like

  28. January 11, 2015 2:01 pm

    Hi Helena!

    So good to have you back! I pray that the strife in your country be resolved at the earliest. Kudos to you for standing up for the truth yet again.

    Like

  29. caroattwell@live.com permalink
    January 11, 2015 5:04 am

    How nice to hear from you again Helena. I have missed you and am so sorry for what is going on in your country. I know I was only there for 2 weeks as a tourist in 2012 but I found the people I met to be very kind, warm and helpful, and the sites I saw fantastic. With such a troubled past, it is such a shame to hear of it happening again for you. My thoughts and prayers are with you.

    This post is very interesting indeed, and I do agree that if enough people tell the truth, the real truth, then in time notice has to be taken of them. I for one will go on defending Michael’s innocence whenever and wherever I can, and I greatly admire you for your persistence. Please keep up the excellent work you are doing. Caro

    Like

  30. January 10, 2015 8:40 am

    Great work. We have Michael Jackson now to tie all our countries together in love and peace. We can look to his life for direction, rather than the media. WE need to be the news. We need to look to each other for the truth. As an American I have completely turned away from the media as a source of information. I see it more as a stage play, with the hands of evil moving the puppets. Blessings and Love from America. Jane

    Like

  31. susannerb permalink*
    January 9, 2015 9:37 am

    Helena, this is an outstanding post with a great lesson. It gives us an insight into a lot of developments right now on our planet. This is really not only about Michael’s history, it tells us a lot about the world’s history and also about current events.
    Without these mechanisms in human psychology many events in human history perhaps wouldn’t have happened, like for example in my own country, when Hitler seized power in 1933. It was only possible because the majority of people was drawn into a hype and individuals stopped thinking on their own.
    You can see it in Russia where individual opinions are not tolerated anymore by the majority as well as in various European countries right now where large groups of people begin to form up against an alleged islamisation, this way blowing up emotions and hate on all sides and leaving no space for individual solutions and talks to seek the truth. It can lead to the division of societies fighting against each other. Standing up for the truth is what could bring us back on common ground. Real truth-seekes are interested in nothing but the truth and will meet each other at this point even when they come from different directions (= opinions). But the truth could unite them.

    What makes it difficult is that often there seem different truths existing within humanity, when people claim their truth as fact, as you can see in Robson’s case who said “my truth”, or in cases of fundamentalist beliefs that consider opinions as facts. But this makes is even more necessary that individuals stand up to tell the real truth and insist on it by presenting evidence, so encouraging others to do the same, until the rest also commits to the truth.
    The message from this post is clear: Let’s withstand the pressure and try to be these truth-seekers with the courage to stand up for truth and not to conform – to start the chain reaction – whether it is about Michael or about political and social events.

    Like

  32. Nan permalink
    January 8, 2015 11:02 pm

    First off, I am really glad to hear from you and certainly have been thinking of you ….I say a prayer in hopes of things being resolved in a more peaceful manner
    The World is a crazy place at times .
    It is a shame more people cant listen to MJ words and try and help one another.

    As I read this latest article, it struck me how MJ had said , quite a while ago, that he feared his fellow citizens were being brainwashed ..Evidently for such a “peculiar” person , he had a pretty good handle on what was actually happening in the media , and in turn ,how they tried to control peoples minds.
    As far as Wade goes, I do believe he has mental health issues , but I also think he feels slighted, because of what you so eloquently described, his situation , back then to be.
    I have nothing against Branca or any of the estate people , but it wasnt Branca or Weitzman or others , now profiting off MJ, that came in and faced the wrath of the media and general public..
    Recently Luna put up a video, in which the narrator said that zonen basically ATTACKED Wade over his assertions of nothing happening..
    Zonen pointed out, that Wade has no formal education and has nothing for experience but the entertainment business and was indebted to MJ ..
    Well, I dont think that MJ could do anything positive for Wade, back then, he was like a pariah, so that isnt why he came in , same as Brett and Mac, he showed up to tell the truth…
    It is quite a carrot to have, simply to conform as you said, call yourself a victim , gets a book deal and accolades,and hope for a settlement too..
    So in a way , I think Wade feels a sense of entitlement, and since he is on the outs with the estate , has decided to do a 180 .., he has nothing to fall back on.
    I think that is a fast moving business and his prospects were dim.
    Same with Safechuck, big dreams , now he is working long hours for short money , as he said himself .

    The fact that Wade feels he needs Safechuck and also went on tv looking for fresh accusers , rather than go back to the pool , that had already made accusations is interesting to me.
    His lawyers didnt contact Gavin or Francia .at all…Of course the Chandlers run for the hills.
    When Alan Duke showed up at the Arvizo door recently and Starr answered the door, he was dumbstruck.
    That was the first interaction they had with anything having to do directly with this set of accusations..
    So his own lawyer didnt bother to contact these people, instead they contacted D Dimond for a tabloid story
    Why look for new victims when you are supposedly complying with the old ones .?
    That just doesnt make sense.
    I also think Wade felt this was going to somehow make him the center of attn again,get him the hero status , he perhaps craved and some cash., but it would seem to me, the general public , doesnt really care and has long forgotten about it , other than fans , who routinely call them out with their own words.,in articles
    ..
    On another note , I do speak up for MJ in social situations, as you mentioned in that study, and it isnt easy ,but I do it anyway..You are right about some people just dont want to say it publicly , because people have come to me afterward and said , they really didnt believe he was a criminal either.
    thanks for your insights into this and I hope to see more of you on the blog❤
    Please take care

    Like

  33. January 8, 2015 4:55 pm

    What a wonderful blog. Otlichna! Having studied in Russia, I totally get your analogy. Thank you for a thorough analysis. Let’s see what happens with Safechuck.

    Like

  34. January 8, 2015 3:41 pm

    The some people still must to pay like M. Bashir, like N. Grace and etc. etc. etc. to
    Michael Jackson:
    The genius artist.
    The beautiful human.
    The wonderful person.
    The greatest.
    Ever like him, no one like him.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: