THE MIND CONTROL INTERVIEW
WITH JACK TRUE
FEBRUARY 26, 2011. In the early 1990s, hypnotherapist Jack True and I sat down and discussed his views on mind control. To say the least, Jack presents a very radical interpretation of this subject.
Q (Rappoport): Okay. What’s your definition of mind control?
A (Jack True): It’s the belief that your mind and/or its programming is a complex affair that needs to be unraveled a detail at a time.
A: You heard me.
Q: Sounds like you’re talking about a general approach to the mind.
A: Think it through.
Q: You made the statement. Clarify it.
A: What makes mind control mind control? What makes any kind of limitation limiting? Do you see? It’s the false belief that, in order to undo what has been done, you need to engage in…you need to walk back the way you came. You need to have a set of keys that allows you to unlock all the doors that have been locked in sequence.
Q: Okay. I get it.
A: This is what stops people. The real control factor is what they believe they need to do in order to undo what they believe has been done to them.
Q: And that’s–
A: That’s the cardinal factor of mind control. See, take a person’s life. He goes through all sorts of experiences. He has a few traumas or whatever. He buys some crazy ideas other people are selling. And so forth and so on. Now, he wakes up a little, and he wants to throw away all that and start fresh. But he thinks he has to enter into a systematic undoing of whatever negative energies and ideas he has picked up. Now he’s really stymied. Because he’s looking at mind as if it’s a closet hung very neatly with things, and he believes he has to find a way to unpack the closet one piece at a time. It’s a very big closet, he believes. It stretches from Alaska to Mexico.
Q: And you’re saying he has a wrong portrait of the mind. To begin with.
A: Right. Mind is much more fluid than that. Mind is not really the problem. The person is the problem.
Q: What about so-called trauma-based mind control? You know, the CIA MKULTRA-type stuff, or the Soviet version. What about that?
A: There are a lot of misconceptions about it. Those bastards used force and drugs. It was basically torture. Now, they might have gotten real cute, in order to create what they said was multiple personalities in a victim. But whatever system of trance or suggestion they employed, it doesn’t matter. It only matters if the victim, emerging from it, escaping from it, believes that, in order to undo what was done, he has to unpack the closet, he has to undo, a step at a time, what has been done to him. If he does believe that, you’re in a pickle. You now need to bring in a therapist who believes what the victim believes—and together they explore this territory. The therapist offers a complex a system of un-brainwashing that the victim can accept. Based on a shared belief, they can make progress. Here’s an analogy. Let’s say you’re lost in the woods. You’ve been lost for a month. You’re in bad shape. You’re eating leaves and roots. You believe the only way to get out is to walk the way you came—which is a complex task. But that’s what you think. As long as you think that, what else are you going to do? You might be able to make it work. Maybe. In the same way, a complex system of un-brainwashing might work, but to suggest it’s the only or best path is way overstating things.
Q: Some people are predisposed to playing chess.
A: Exactly! They look south and they see chess. They look north and they see chess. You try to sell them checkers or a helicopter and they turn you down flat. They don’t believe in that. They believe in chess. If they’re lost, you can get them out only if you present your solution so it looks and feels like chess. Otherwise, they refuse.
Q: So for them, chess is mind control.
A: (laughs) Yeah. It’s the filter through which they see reality.
Q: And where does THAT come from?
A: That’s not mind. That’s the person himself. He has chosen that filter and he uses it all the time.
Q: But why did he choose it to begin with?
A: See, we’re walking right back into the same trap. Suppose we say there was a long concatenation of events that FORCED this person to choose that filter. Then where are we? We’re about to conclude, well, the only way to get rid of the filter is to reconstruct the exact string of events that FORCED him to adopt the filter. To put that whole string under a magnifying glass so he can see it in every detail—and then he can throw away the filter. Which is nonsense. Because when you go back far enough, what you really see is, he chose that filter. He took it and placed it over his eyes. That’s what happened. It doesn’t matter why. It doesn’t matter what reasons he gave himself for choosing it. Sure, he can gain some insight that way, by scoping out the reasons. But really, he has to find a way to leap beyond that filter and start seeing reality in new and different ways—and then one day, he’ll remember the filter and laugh at the whole thing and how silly it was.
Q: What if he can’t?
A: Who are you? The devil’s advocate?
Q: I’m trying to be.
A: Well, if he can’t, he’s in the mud. It’s like asking me, if a guy is standing on one side of a river that runs from one eternity to another, and he wants to get across, and he refuses to step in the water, how will he succeed? He won’t succeed. He’ll stand on that riverbank for 50 lives or 300 lives or 50,000 lives, until he jumps in the water.
A: You’re a painter. So I’ll give you an analogy from painting. A painter is in his studio. He’s looking at the blank canvas. He has the brush in his hands. His filter is “Renaissance perspective.” He believes that everything he paints has to have that kind of perspective in it. But he wants to do something new at the same time. That’s his urge. How is going to proceed unless he gets rid of that filter, unless he dares to leap beyond it?
Q: Since anthropology became such a well-known field of study, we’ve had the premise that cultures have different customs, different filters, and “it’s all relative.”
A: This is the biggest bunch of baloney going.
A: Because it assumes that everyone in a given culture has the same filter. Nonsense. When you probe deeper, you find out every person is an individual. But that’s not a popular idea anymore. From my work with patients from all over the world, I’ve satisfied myself that every person has his own filters, which go a lot deeper than cultural artifacts. See, when a person is dreaming at night, he sometimes lets go of those filters. He takes a leap of imagination, and he’s out there in a new territory, and he’s experiencing things he really wants to experience. And if he remembers what happened when he wakes up in the morning, he feels that exhilaration. He got past the gates. He got past the filters. He was free. And why? Because he created a dream. He imagined his way past the filters. What I do in my work is try to bring that state of affairs into waking life.
Q: Talk a little more about filters.
A: Okay, you’ve got a person who is involved, in his job, with technology. He’s an engineer. He sees things in terms of problems and solutions. Everywhere he looks, there is a problem to solve, and the way to solve it is through rational exercise. Take a step forward. Formulate a way to make something work a little better. There is nothing wrong with that. Fine. But as his life goes on, he’s in that basic position. He’s a solver. He sizes up situations as problems, and he works to solve them. It doesn’t make him as happy as it once did. That’s the main thing. He doesn’t get the same kick out of it. Most people would say that’s a function of aging, but it really isn’t. It’s a function of the filter. His filter. His way of approaching reality. You’ve heard of this word entropy? It’s a goofy theory that all over the universe, available energy is running down. It’s dissipating. It doesn’t disappear, but it’s stored in, what could you call it, places of quiet, where nothing is happening. Like a warehouse. Well, what really runs down is a filter. It begins to deteriorate, because the person it belongs to is finding it less and less interesting and exciting. It’s like a book he’s read a thousand times. How much more can he squeeze out of it? This is what mind control comes down to. Your filter. And the general tendency is for it to deteriorate, which doesn’t mean it goes away. It just means it’s less useful and interesting, but nothing takes its place. That’s the problem. It’s a replacement problem. But you see, because this engineer has spent his whole life using that filter, he doesn’t see an alternative. He doesn’t know what else he can do. He’s like a one-trick pony. The trick is wearing out. He looks around for an answer. He looks here and there. He reads a few books. Nothing really clicks. He tries to formulate his own state of mind into a problem he can solve, but he can’t really define the problem. Well, how could he? He’s looking through the problem. The filter.
Q: And as I’ve suggested to you many times, the answer is imagination.
A: Yes, and in my work and in your work, the issue is, how do you get a person to make that leap? How do you get him to recognize, first of all, that he has this thing called imagination? How do you get him to use it? How do you open up that whole territory? It takes ingenuity. It isn’t just a problem that needs solving. It’s a lot different.
Q: People use filters that can’t process the fact that you can invent something that wasn’t there before.
A: This is true. So that needs to be overcome. You can trick a person into it, but that way has brief results only. You need to go deeper. Higher.