Index | Parent Index | Build Freedom: Archive


by Frederick Mann

Your Win-Lose SwitchThe Win-Lose Switch
Consider that each of us has a master "win-lose switch" in our mind. It is a graduated switch like those used for big direct-current electric motors. Rather than just "on" and "off" settings, it is a graduated switch with eleven settings from "0" to "10." If we set our master switch to "zero," we are completely turned off -- a total loser. If we set our master switch to "ten," we are the complete winner.

Of course, there isn't just one master switch that controls the extent to which we win or lose in life. We can think in terms of a win-lose switch in every area of life we care to specify. For example, I can think in terms of my health win-lose switch, my fitness win-lose switch, my relationship win-lose switch, my money win-lose switch, etc.

In each area of life, I can think of my win-lose switch as being a measure of my relative success in that area. Success is winning; failure is losing.

Now comes the question: How do I move the handle of the switch to a higher setting? In the case of the big DC motor, as the switch is turned up, more electricity is supplied and the motor runs faster. (If the switch is immediately turned from "0" to "10," the motor will overload and burn out.)

For the purposes of success or failure in life, humans can be said to run on information. The quality of information determines success or failure. Improving the quality of information is the equivalent of moving the switch to a higher setting. The human brain can be thought of as a computer. The information in the brain can be regarded as a program. To improve human functioning, we need to improve the quality of the program - move the switch to a higher setting.

As in the case of the DC motor, the switch has to be moved up gradually. A person with information at the level of "2" in an area of life, if suddenly confronted with level "8" information, may suffer overload and may not be able to handle and integrate the information. A person with level "2" information can handle and integrate level "3" information - if there is a motivation to consider this "higher level" information.

The problem is that many of us believe that much of our information is already at level "10" and that we have little further to learn. Suppose that in the area of health most people (including doctors) operate on level "2" information. Someone makes a series of breakthrough discoveries that boosts his health information to level "8." He presents his level "8" information to people with level "2" information. They can't handle or integrate the new information. They denounce the purveyor of level "8" information as a crazy crank.

This phenomenon applies to most humans, no matter how intelligent. In fact, it may even be that the higher his intelligence, the more difficult it tends to be for a person with level "2" health information to handle and integrate level "8" health information! With intelligence may also come vanity and arrogance.

So the first step in improving your information is to realize that in some areas of your life, the level or quality of your information might be lower than you think it is.

"Among the innumerable mortifications
which waylay human arrogance
on every side may well be
reckoned our ignorance
of the most common objects
and effects, a defect of which we
become more sensible by every
attempt to supply it.
Vulgar and inactive minds
confound familiarity with knowledge
and conceive themselves informed
of the whole nature of things
when they are shown their form
or told their use; but the speculatist,
who is not content with superficial views,
harasses himself with fruitless curiosity,
and still, as he inquires more,
perceives only that he knows less."
- Samuel Johnson

"Sit down before fact like a little child, and be prepared to give up every preconceived notion, follow humbly wherever and to whatever abyss Nature leads, or you shall learn nothing."
- T.H. Huxley

"Wipe your glasses with what you know."
- James Joyce

"Write what you "know" on a roll of toilet paper, wipe your backside with it, and flush it down the toilet."
- Frederick Mann

Freedom and Coercion
Report #TL02 indicated that reading two books was essential to understanding Build Freedom: How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World by Harry Browne, and The Discovery of Freedom by Rose Wilder Lane. For those who are relatively new to freedom, I recommend a third book: For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto by Murray N. Rothbard (Collier Books, NY; 1978).

Consider that it might be a basic principle that freedom and coercion are incompatible. Coercion is the initiation of force, threat of force, or fraud by which a person or group impose their will upon another or others. Coercion is the overwhelming of another's will. Coercion can also be used to forcibly or fraudulently take the property of others.

Many people believe that certain things can only be done through coercion and we must have a government to coerce people. For a New Liberty brilliantly makes the case that initiated coercion is evil and unnecessary.

Of course, two boxers enter the ring to coerce each other. The best coercer wins. This form of coercion is compatible with freedom because it is based on mutual consent with full knowledge. Similarly, if two people want to fight a duel, the believer in freedom will use no more than persuasion to attempt to stop them.

Obviously, anyone may also use force, threat of force, or bluff in self-defense against a coercer. If a burglar violates your property, you may use force in self-defense.

Suppose I see a young child about to run across the street into the path of an oncoming bus. I grab the child and forcibly restrain her. I coerce the child. I overwhelm her free will. By using coercion I save her life. Then I apologize for having coerced her. I have no right to practice such coercion. Nor do I have a duty. My coercion is, in a sense, evil. I use my superior strength to overwhelm another's free will. I justify my coercion by claiming that my superior wisdom and judgment enable me to foresee what the child didn't see. My superiority enables me to save her life.

Can we formulate a principle: The only permissible initiated coercion is that coercion - to prevent a greater evil - which I personally initiate, perform, and take full responsibility for?

Some people say, "I believe in freedom and individual sovereignty, except for... " The problem is that if you add up all the coercive exceptions of the people who profess their love for freedom and individual sovereignty, you get the modern slave-state such as the U.S.A.

Coercion is the essence of slavery. Coercion is the negation of individual freedom, self-ownership, and individual sovereignty.

Can we formulate another principle: Become wise, strong, and powerful - or suffer coercion?

Some forms of coercion imply that the information of the coerced or victim is no good and/or the victim can't think for himself or herself (can't process information). Therefore the coercer must decide for the victim. For example, compulsory state education and anti-drug laws imply that people are powerless victims, nothings, and nobodies who can't think for themselves. Most coercive bureaucracies operate on the same principle: creating dependency, helplessness, and powerlessness.

In a way, when you coerce someone you force your victim's switch towards the "zero" or "lose" setting. When you allow someone else to coerce you, that person has control over your switch and moves your switch towards the "zero" or "lose" setting.

Freedom technology (the knowledge, methods, and skills for living free) can also be described as the methods whereby you gain control of all your win-lose switches and move them towards the "ten" or "win" settings.

Outwitting tyrants and coercive bureaucrats and defending against their coercive incursions could be thought of as defending your switch. Blowing away the bogus power of tyrants is an advanced aspect of freedom technology. It is based on the fundamental that tyrants only have the power granted to them. Withdraw the power and the tyrants topple. The power of tyrants is primarily derived from the psychological control they exert over the enslaved "free will" of their victims. This principle is covered in Report #TL06: Discourse on Voluntary Servitude.

The first step, of course, is to take responsibility for your own switch. If you don't control your own switch, someone else will. When you obey someone else, you relinquish control of your switch. Become a master of your own life, or someone else will enslave you.

Does Power Corrupt?
Consider the possibility that ignorance, weakness, and coercion corrupt, while wisdom, strength, and power ennoble. Did Lord Acton -- "power corrupts" -- get it wrong? Maybe it is the weakness of those in power that corrupts. Maybe it is the weakness of the followers that sustains corrupt leaders. Author Stewart Emery wrote, "Weakness corrupts and absolute weakness corrupts absolutely" -- Actualizations (Doubleday, NY; 1978).

What are the consequences of the notion that power corrupts? It subtly plants the notion that power is evil; therefore weakness, powerlessness, and helplessness are good. The result is that people experience themselves as weak, powerless, and helpless. They believe they can't solve their own problems - government must solve their problems. They can't free themselves, therefore government must change itself to free them.

2,500 years ago Lao Tzu, a famous Chinese philosopher and author of the Tao Te Ching wrote that the biggest problem in the world was that individuals experienced themselves as powerless. Today this is still our biggest problem.

The Most Useful Information
If someone gave you information identical to information you already have, how much would you value the information given? Well, you might put a small value on it because it confirms your knowledge and maybe helps you feel more secure. But it is unlikely that you would pay much for it.

It follows that the most valuable information could be the most different from the information you already have. But there is a problem: New information could be different and useless or different and useful. We apply our minds to decide.

Please do not summarily reject information in this report because it is very different from what you now know. Even if initially you object strongly to new information, you may find that your objections are satisfactorily answered later...

Sometimes when two people communicate it is as if suddenly a brick wall jumps up between them. This usually happens when one person reacts with resistance to something the other says or does. And sometimes the other person then reacts with resistance to the resistance...

Such invisible brick walls become barriers to further communication. Probably the most prevalent way such brick walls are brought about is when one person says or does something that makes the other wrong - or when the other person feels or perceives being made wrong...

Another way such brick walls come about is when a communication is perceived as threatening. Consider the possibility that the information that would be most valuable to you might be information most different from some of the information you now hold. If this is so, then the information potentially most valuable to you could also seem the most threatening...

Some of us build invisible brick walls around us to "protect" and "isolate" us from people of different color, culture, class, race, age, sex, political or religious persuasion, etc...

We have the ability not only to control our own invisible brick walls, but also to influence the brick walls of others to a considerable extent. This is an awesome power wielded by the most charismatic...

By becoming more aware of our own brick walls and those of others, we gain control over invisible brick walls - and increase our power to communicate.

The American Way
The following was sent to me by a friend who moved to the U.S.A. from South Africa a few years ago. To what extent do you think his observations apply to Americans? To what degree do you think they also apply to other nationalities?

"Daily we are urged to do things "the American Way." But no-one tells us what the American Way is.

After much research, trial and error, and real-life experience, I have eventually figured it out. It can be summed up as "screw your mother if you can."

I have yet to meet an American I didn't like. Yet, given the slightest chance, they would do you in wherever they can. This leads to the next obvious conclusion: Americans are two-faced. While they are befriending you, they are actually figuring how they could make use of you.

Initially I was ashamed of my conclusions and fearful of mentioning my opinion, but on broaching the subject I find that most Americans are aware of it. The American Way is to watch your back, because if you don't you'll have a knife stuck in it.

This explains so many things about American life. We are not a particularly prudish family. When my five-year old wants to have a bath, he may get undressed in his room and walk naked to the bathroom. A 17-year old lad visiting my 15-year old daughter finds this distasteful. Yet by the age of 14, most American males have had sexual intercourse. As a matter of fact, he is in my house with the intention of getting my daughter into bed, but he is shocked at seeing someone naked. A colleague from the office won't let me take a cute photo of his kid and my kid in the bath, because they are naked. Four-letter words that appear in the Oxford Dictionary have been omitted from American dictionaries. But Americans have the greatest rape rate and sexual child-abuse rate in the world. One in five women are sexually abused, one in ten raped.

America has the highest litigation rate in the world. Everyone is involved with trying to screw everyone else, And no-one is prepared to take responsibility for his or her own actions.

A common occurrence in America is mass murder in the workplace. Those who live by fraud have a motto: When you screw someone you should always leave him with something to live for. Not in America. Once someone has no more to lose he is free to do anything, including killing all those he feels are responsible for his loss. Mass murder is simply the occasional small price to be paid for the fun of depriving an individual of his dignity.

The greatest rip-off is if you can sting everyone else. So the favorite American pastime is to see what you can milk from the government (all the other taxpayers). American politicians - symbols of the people they represent - are highly principled. Issues are voted on one principle only: how much will that put into my pocket. The American Way is to vote for the politician who will spend most government money and direct it to your State in your area of interest. The budget deficit is a symptom of the American personality. It won't go away.

The medical problem can never be solved, because the doctor is only interested in getting as much as he can out of the system. The patient wants to make sure he gets more out of the system than he puts in. And the insurers want to make a fortune off both doctor and patient.

The great "American Dream" is to amass a huge amount of wealth in a very short period by doing things the American Way.

So we discover this great land of the free, this deeply religious state, the country with the high moral code, is nothing but a sham. It is not free because government pervades every aspect of human action; its religion is pure pretense; its moral code is greed.

How did this come to be? It started right at the beginning. Jefferson, who inspired the Declaration of Independence, the drafter of the Constitution, the man who formulated the Bill of Rights, was a slave keeper. He was the originator of "apartheid." He believed that if slaves were ever set free they should be isolated in a different part of the country. He did not believe they were human or that individual rights should apply to them. If the father of America was a two-faced slimeball, what better can be expected from his offspring? They are but a nation of two-faced back stabbers."

So wrote my friend. He probably exaggerates. In Jefferson's defense, I must emphasize that probably no other politician in all history has been a greater friend of freedom than Jefferson (except in respect of black slaves). The original version of the Declaration of Independence was almost certainly drafted by Thomas Paine. It included a clause which denounced slavery in vicious terms. Jefferson and the other signers struck the anti-slavery clause from their Declaration. (See A Personal Declaration of Independence: To Complete the American Revolution by Paine's Torch. Will be available from Build Freedom Holdings within a few months.)

For a comprehensive overview of swindling in America, I recommend the book The Screwing of the Average Man by David Hapgood (Bantam Books, NY; 1975).

The Best Legal System in the World?
The following article by attorney Van O'Steen appeared in The Arizona Republic on June 16, 1993, under the heading, "Subject to failings of humans, U.S. legal system isn't perfect":

"We seem to demand a higher standard of excellence from our legal system than we do from other institutions. We probably should be less demanding and more reasonable.

Like everything else we create and administer, our legal system is a human endeavor.

Doctors, teachers, government leaders, police officers, journalists, professional athletes, product manufacturers and others make mistakes and sometimes produce bad results. We acknowledge that perfection cannot be expected in any field of human activity while irrationally demanding it of our legal system.

The problem may be our uncompromising insistence on justice. "Justice" suggests a result that always conforms to fairness and morality. Justice cannot be achieved in every situation.

The essence, if not the strength, of our legal system is trial by jury. Although most of our legal disputes are resolved without reaching trial, likely jury outcomes remain the standard by which all legal cases are evaluated and settled.

Jury trials are an exercise in problem-solving conducted by judges, lawyers and ordinary people.

Our fellow citizens who sit on juries and evaluate all the evidence presented to them are entitled to our utmost respect and the benefit of every doubt..

Of course, they occasionally make mistakes. They are only human. However, available data indicate that mistakes are rare.

One recent study analyzing jury verdicts concluded that approximately 96 percent of all damage awards fall within a range considered reasonable by statisticians. Of the remaining 4 percent, some are too high and some are too low.

Fortunately, our legal system includes procedures to correct errors made by juries.

Because of this, excessive jury verdicts are rarely paid, although widely reported.

Our jury system is respected all over the world - for good reason. The judgment of our fellow citizens is our protection against the arbitrary exercise of power by big business and governments.

However, we must be willing to settle for something less than perfection.

It may be reasonable to demand justice in every case, but not to expect it in every case."

Attorney Gerry Spence has a different view of the American legal system. He wrote a book With Justice for None: Destroying an American Myth (Penguin Books, NY; 1989). On the front cover of my copy is a quote from The Denver Post: "A scathing indictment of how law is taught, practiced, and administered in this country... One of the best books ever written on the law."

Attorney Thomas J. Devine has started an organization called Great American Scam (see Report #TL02). He says, The American Judicial System is a scam, a fraud and an organized extortion racket."

The following challenge appeared in AntiShyster: A Critical Examination of the American Legal System, Nov/Dec 1992 (Reprinted with permission from the AntiShyster, PO Box 540786, Dallas, TX 75354-0786 -- (214) 559-7957 -- annual subscription $25).


To Bar president Harriet Miers, to all attorneys serving in the Texas or Federal legislatures, and to any and all members of the State Bar of Texas:

The AntiShyster bets $10,000.00 (TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS) that you cannot produce FIVE practicing attorneys who can successfully argue in a one-hour public debate, that they are both

  1. Honorable human beings, and
  2. Proud to be members of the State Bar of Texas.

The AntiShyster will produce five opponents who will argue the contrary.

The public will determine the outcome of the debate. The audience watching the debate will vote for the winners and losers; if there is any electronic media coverage, the people watching on TV or listening on radio may vote by phone. The voters will be monitored to ensure that they represent a reasonable cross-section of the public and to prevent interested organizations from attempting to bias the votes.

To win, all five attorneys must convince the public they are each honorable persons and proud to be Bar members - if the public vote against just one of the five attorneys on either issue, the Bar loses the debate and the wager. If that seems like a difficult condition, bear in mind that there are 54,000 members of the Texas Bar who are all professionally trained to debate and argue issues in public forums. If there were any honor in the State Bar, at least 1 member per 10,000 should be able to argue the issue successfully.

The losers of the debate will donate $10,000.00 (TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS) to the winner's charity of choice.

We will schedule the debate to occur within 90 days of your notification of acceptance, and identification of the five attorneys who will enter the debate. The debate will be held in a public forum in one of the major metropolitan areas of Texas. Additional details will be worked out after acceptance of the challenge.

If you would like to double the bet, provide five JUDGES to represent the Bar. The bet would then be $20,000.00 - Twenty thousand dollars.

I don't have $20,000.00 at this time. In fact, I don't have $10,000.00. But I'll get it if the Bar accepts this challenge.

Frankly, I doubt that the Bar can find five members who have guts enough to stand up in public and argue for their Honor. You lawyers are big 'n bad in a court of law where no one watches but a judge and another attorney. Let's see what you can do in a Court of Public Opinion. Let's see what you can do in the open, without a judge to protect you or secrecy to conceal you. Let's see what you can do when the issue isn't the law, but the lawyers.

This is not a one-time challenge. Sooner or later the mainstream media will compel you to respond, if only to say something pompous, like "We won't dignify that challenge with a response."

But you will. You are being subpoenaed in the Court of Public Opinion. You will respond. It may take a while, but the Bar is going to answer or concede by default that there aren't even five honorable members in the entire State Bar of Texas.

We await your response. This is the TENTH month we've run this challenge. We've received no formal response to date."

Van O'Steen's information is very different from the other information on the subject. Somebody must be painting a false picture. Consider the possibility that most of the information you've been presented with during your life came from people painting false pictures.

Consider the possibility that in many areas of life you've been consistently lied to (often unintentionally) by parents, friends, teachers, preachers, journalists, politicians, bureaucrats, lawyers, lobbyists, doctors, scientists, etc. Maybe this is not only the American Way, but the Way of the World!

Overcoming the Semmelweis-Reflex.
Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis was a Hungarian physician who discovered in the 1840s that puerperal or childbed fever could be virtually abolished if doctors washed their hands in a chlorine solution. This is a superb example of a new inside angle (described below). The Semmelweis story is told in Betrayers of the Truth: Fraud and Deceit in the Halls of Science By William Broad & Nicholas Wade (Simon & Schuster, NY; 1982). In the 1840s puerperal fever typically caused a 10-30% mortality rate in maternity hospitals throughout Europe. Semmelweis reduced the mortality rate in the division of the obstetric clinic where he worked in the General Hospital of Vienna from 18 percent to 1 percent. But he failed to convince his colleagues and superiors. Instead of listening to him, and disinfecting their hands, they hounded, persecuted, and fired him - for daring to suggest that they wash their hands properly. In the autumn of 1860, after the dismissal of Semmelweis, in the same ward where he had demonstrated how to virtually eradicate childbed fever, 35 out of 101 patients died.

In a book published in 1861 Semmelweis presented his statistics and findings. He sent copies to medical societies and to leading obstetricians in Germany, France, and England. Despite his copious and undisputed statistics he was completely ignored.

Thirty years after Semmelweis's discovery, Lister and Pasteur succeeded in convincing doctors that they should disinfect their hands.

The Semmelweis-reflex is the automatic rejection of the obvious, without thought, inspection, or experiment. It was so named by author Robert Anton Wilson. The results that Semmelweis produced made it obvious that his possible discovery needed to be inspected, experimented with, and thought about.

You may think that in the enlightened age of 1993 humans no longer suffer from the Semmelweis-reflex. This could be a mistake. During the past twenty-five years numerous authors have written several dozen books - published by "mainstream" publishers - on why compulsory state education should be abolished. The results of this cruel form of mind destruction are obviously disastrous. Yet most people, when confronted with the suggestion that compulsory state education be abolished, will summarily reject the suggestion without examination. The Semmelweis-reflex in action.

Compulsory state education is one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels. Here is a partial list of authors who have exposed aspects of the cruel mind destruction I refer to: Samuel L. Blumenfeld, John Taylor Gatto, Paul Goodman, John Holt, Ivan Illich, Jonathan Kozol, Neil Postman, Ayn Rand, William F. Rickenbacker, Phyllis Schlafly, and Charles Weingartner

The Inside-Angle Orientation.
This is probably one of the most powerful success principles ever formulated. Here are its elements:

  1. In practically every activity or business there are inside angles.
  2. The inside angle consists of important information or knowledge that is not generally known.
  3. Whatever you "know" about any activity or business tends to blind you to new inside angles.
  4. An important aspect of the inside-angle orientation is to be willing and able to question everything you "know."
  5. A second important aspect of the inside-angle orientation is to open yourself wide to potential information and knowledge that may constitute new inside angles.
  6. In every activity or business there will always be new inside angles to be discovered and developed.
  7. Knowing inside angles can provide you with huge advantages in practically every activity or business, and in life generally.
  8. Knowing and applying inside angles can increase your personal power phenomenally.

During the past four years I have been studying the U.S. Constitution and the related issue of common-law jurisdiction. Knowing this information and how to apply it provides me with huge advantages when it comes to running a private business. However, people (such as most attorneys and accountants) who "know" all about "the law," tend to be blinded by their "knowledge" to the inside angles that can be applied to operate a real free-enterprise business. (By "real free enterprise" I mean operating according to the principles of free enterprise as described in Report #TL01.)

In order to adopt the inside-angle orientation there are certain obstacles you may have to overcome:

1. "Automatic knowledge" received from "authorities" and accepted without question - the inability or unwillingness to question this "knowledge."

2. "Automatic emotions" associated with the "automatic knowledge" - for example, the automatic fear associated with the "knowledge" of the "power" of politicians, bureaucrats, and police prevents many entrepreneurs from even considering the inside angles that will enable them to operate real free-enterprise businesses.

3. Blind obedience to "authority."

4. Regarding any "inside angle" as the "final word" - today's "inside angle" tends to become tomorrow's obstacle to the next inside angle.

5. Investment in "knowledge"; pride associated with "knowledge" - questioning what you "know" involves the risk of being "wrong" - the determination to be "right" at all cost.

6. The need to conform; fear of rejection - "If I think and behave differently, I will be cast out of the "in-group" (tribe) - in ancient times this meant almost certain quick death.

7. Habit; laziness - it is much easier to "think" the same old habitual thoughts, than it is to entertain new radical ideas.

8. Intellectual cowardice - human history is replete with examples of "different" thinkers "eliminated" for espousing new inside angles - it takes courage to swim against this stream.

9. Much of "education" (so-called) deals with what to think, rather than how to think.

10. Fear associated with the loss of "knowledge." For years my friend Ted Hampton has been operating his business according to the traditional advice of his attorney and his accountant. When Ted, who is wide open to new inside angles, found out about the constitutional and common-law inside angles, he naturally changed the way he operates his business. However, his attorney and accountant wouldn't even look at the inside angles. They had to protect their "knowledge." The practices of the attorney and the accountant had been built up over many years based on their "legal knowledge." The constitutional and common-law inside angles, if valid, would completely destroy the foundation of their professional careers. The fear of this prevents the attorney and the accountant from even considering constitutional and common-law inside angles. They know little about the U.S. Constitution and common law. Furthermore, their licenses to practice involve allegiance to statutory or legislated law. If they were to practice constitutional and common law, they might be disbarred.

Every single human being, anywhere on Earth, needs better inside angles. No matter where you live or what you do, there are inside angles you can apply to improve your wealth, your health, your happiness, your work, your business, your relationships, your sex-life... you name it. Everybody needs better inside angles.

The scientific and technological history of Earth is the history of inside angles that were discovered, developed, communicated, and applied. E=MC2 is an example of an inside angle. The notion that the earth is round was an inside angle at the time when most people believed it was flat.

Any subject, activity, or business you care to think of could be improved by new inside angles. Everybody needs better inside angles. The discovery, communication, and application of inside angles have increased human power phenomenally - and will continue to do so. Inside angles have repeatedly transformed the world - and will continue to do so.

Improving Your Information
The general formula:

  1. Be aware that everything you are told, everything you read, everything you see on TV is subject to falsification.
  2. Be willing to question everything. Adopt the speculatist's orientation of Samuel Johnson as described on page 1. Beware the Semmelweis-reflex. Adopt the inside-angle orientation.
  3. Particularly question what "everybody knows."
  4. From time to time consider the opposites of popularly held beliefs. Example: Power corrupts - no, weakness corrupts. Example: Some believe that if you open a new shoe store you should do so in an area where there are already several shoe stores, because that is where people go to buy shoes. Consider the opposite: You should open your shoe store in an area where there are no other shoe stores, because the people in that area won't have so far to travel to buy shoes. If most people believe food must be cooked, consider the opposite that food must be eaten raw.
  5. Visit bookstores and freedomries and systematically look for "opposite" information. Remember: The information most useful to you might be the information most different from the information you now have.
  6. Establish a network of people around the world to alert you to important new information.
  7. Send me any information you think I should know about.
  8. Obtain and devour all the information provided by Build Freedom.

The Programs in Your Brain
Since 1967 I have been working on improving the programs in my brain. I have read hundreds of books, attended numerous workshops and seminars, and involved myself in all kinds of meditations and brain-awakening disciplines. In my judgment, two techniques are head-and-shoulders above all the rest:

  1. Idenics (described in Report #TL12: How to Achieve Emotional Control).
  2. Self-Talk.

Self-Talk is described in a number of books by Shad Helmstetter, Ph.D., including What to Say When You Talk to Your Self (Simon & Schuster, NY; 1987) and The Self-Talk Solution (Simon & Schuster, NY; 1988).

Most people have many unconscious, negative, and debilitating programs in their brains. Some programs originate from all the times parents said "NO!", "You can't do that!", and "You'll hurt yourself!", etc.

What these negative programs effectively do is move our win-lose switches towards "zero" or "lose." It is primarily these programs that determine our failure or success in every area of life. Self-Talk is a most effective technique to move our switches towards "ten" or "win."

The most effective way I know for moving your switches towards "ten" or "win" is to repeatedly listen to tapes with new positive programs. For information on such programs contact Build Freedom.

Firing on All Eight Cylinders
Have you ever tried to drive a car that fires on only a few cylinders? It doesn't go very well. Consider the possibility that most humans fire on only a few cylinders. Imagine that each cylinder has a win-lose switch. Build Freedom and freedom technology have to do with persuading people to turn up their switches so they fire on all cylinders.

Of course, a human has many more than eight cylinders. There may even be several cylinders we have not yet discovered.

Personally, I continue to work on turning up my switches and finding more switches to turn up. I am completely open to others to assist me in this never-ending endeavor. I attempt to serve as an example and inspiration for others.

To the extent that I can turn on my selling-switch, I sell the ideas of Build Freedom to others. They continue the process. There is a basic principle here: Any one person can set in motion a process or sequence of events that will transform the world.

Human Consciousness is in its Infancy
Philosopher and psychologist Nietzsche indicated that human consciousness is in its infancy. Suppose the universe is four billion years old, humans have existed for about 200,000 to 300,000 years, and have been conscious for maybe 5,000 years. In evolutionary terms, our consciousness is in its infancy. We are at the level of a baby just beginning to learn to crawl.

Consider that all the problems in the world- unhappiness, crime, drug abuse, suicide, rape, terrorism, government, war, pollution, poverty, famine, child abuse, depression, unemployment, inflation, homelessness, unhealth, etc. -- are a consequence of the fact that human thinking skills are still at a very primitive infancy level.

What if we are like primitive, backward, barbaric infants who are yet to learn to crawl - but we deceive ourselves into believing that we are the finest Olympic athletes?

Let us learn to crawl, walk, run, and jump!

Index | Parent Index | Build Freedom: Archive

Disclaimer - Copyright - Contact

Online: - -