Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:08 am
First off Hugh I have to say that personally I feel coincidence or synchronicity plays a much greater role in reality than many people would credit.
The idea of an associate universe makes a lot of sense to me, and after reading Prometheus Rising by RAWilson and doing some but not all of the experiments and exercises in it, I had that feeling reinforced stronlgly.
But actually I think your Naruto thing is a more likely to be a keyword hijack than many of your examples. For a start toys are a social conditioning thing, and Mattel are kind of sus when it comes to their social agenda. I don't know where the tentacles of ownership of matel lead, but I would not be surrprised if some lead directly to "we drink your blood inc".
But also because the association is so close.
To me examples like the paperclip one could serve to draw attention to one another rather than obscure each other, but the Naruto thing is too close. Based only on what you have said and a quick glance at wikipedia it seems that there are close correlations.
I also think I am starting to understand your keyword hijacking obsession, but I may be wrong on this.
Did you start to form this theory after numerous attempts to google information?
Did you find that often you found associations that directed away from the area you were searching?
Repeatedly?
Anyway the Naruto thing seems to make more sense to me.
The major flaw I find with the theory is that it is ... its too hard to hide associations by misdirection unless they are so close that they are almost the same. If you want people to confuse one thing with another then similarity is the key. Most of the examples you have quoted recetly aren't close enough to obscure each other, IMO. But possibly the Narut/Naruto one is.
One of the things about searching is that effective searching is best done with three four or five keywords at least.
I think the same thing applies for association in the mind.
Its probably got more in common with sleight of hand, a bit of a leap here, but sleight of hand and misdirection work by setting up a pattern (well imo anyway) of perception, and then introducing a small almost undetectable change in the pattern that achieves the misdirection you want.
The minimal differences that allow sleight of hand to work are the things that would work in your keyword hijackinh concept IMO, but several of the examples you cite don't seem similar enough, the differences are too great.
Tho they don't seem as great in the Naruto example. I still wouldn't be surprised if it was a coincidence or synchronicity, but at the same time it is a plausible thing, much more plausible given its popularity in the west than it would be if it was just a japanese program/comic.
I do think that the association you make with certain elements of our pop culture and promotion of military service is an accurate association.
I have been thinking about my past a bit and the camo thing. I actually first got into camo gear through cadets, but immediately started wearing it everywhere cos it was cheap and tough. This was back in the early to mid 80s btw.
But there was a certain coolness associated with it in the cadet unit I was in, and that probably influenced me right back in the day. I still have a tiger stripe cam shirt that a friends dad had in vietnam. I used to use it when I was growing pot, its a great camoflauge. Especially in sub tropical country and areas where there is a canopy and shadowy ground.
Although most of the people I knew outside cadets who got into it were usually pretty anti war and anti authority, and antifashion (in a cool way of course.)
So perhaps you are right about it to a certain extent, although I think that needs to be qualified with a recognition of the cheapness and the indy scene (pre Nirvana) and the role that had in popularising it.
When it comes to toys, well there have always been war toys, but the context does seem to have shifted. There is more glamourising of the actual conflict i think, and a kind of revelling in the violence and aggression, and use of power. Its not just the violent video games, but the brutality of warhammer figures seems to eclipse that of GI Joe.
There also seems to be a real focus on obedience and deference to authority. Its just my impression, from hanging out with people with kids and seeing the toys that they like. And a real glorification of violence, even in less obviously violent cartoons. But especially the idea of elitism, specifcally wedded to the idea of dealing with 'bad guys" or the other.
The themes that snippet and the original article from statecraft.org explore seem to fit with the impression I get.
Especially if you think about atrocity research, and the way our culture is going (the culture of atrocity post is a case in point.) Dunno if you have read Dune, but there are aspects of the way this goes that reminds me of the Saradur (?) the Emperor's elite troops.
BTW If you haven't read the Trial, do yourself a favour and read it.
The idea of an associate universe makes a lot of sense to me, and after reading Prometheus Rising by RAWilson and doing some but not all of the experiments and exercises in it, I had that feeling reinforced stronlgly.
But actually I think your Naruto thing is a more likely to be a keyword hijack than many of your examples. For a start toys are a social conditioning thing, and Mattel are kind of sus when it comes to their social agenda. I don't know where the tentacles of ownership of matel lead, but I would not be surrprised if some lead directly to "we drink your blood inc".
But also because the association is so close.
To me examples like the paperclip one could serve to draw attention to one another rather than obscure each other, but the Naruto thing is too close. Based only on what you have said and a quick glance at wikipedia it seems that there are close correlations.
I also think I am starting to understand your keyword hijacking obsession, but I may be wrong on this.
Did you start to form this theory after numerous attempts to google information?
Did you find that often you found associations that directed away from the area you were searching?
Repeatedly?
Anyway the Naruto thing seems to make more sense to me.
The major flaw I find with the theory is that it is ... its too hard to hide associations by misdirection unless they are so close that they are almost the same. If you want people to confuse one thing with another then similarity is the key. Most of the examples you have quoted recetly aren't close enough to obscure each other, IMO. But possibly the Narut/Naruto one is.
One of the things about searching is that effective searching is best done with three four or five keywords at least.
I think the same thing applies for association in the mind.
Its probably got more in common with sleight of hand, a bit of a leap here, but sleight of hand and misdirection work by setting up a pattern (well imo anyway) of perception, and then introducing a small almost undetectable change in the pattern that achieves the misdirection you want.
The minimal differences that allow sleight of hand to work are the things that would work in your keyword hijackinh concept IMO, but several of the examples you cite don't seem similar enough, the differences are too great.
Tho they don't seem as great in the Naruto example. I still wouldn't be surprised if it was a coincidence or synchronicity, but at the same time it is a plausible thing, much more plausible given its popularity in the west than it would be if it was just a japanese program/comic.
I do think that the association you make with certain elements of our pop culture and promotion of military service is an accurate association.
I have been thinking about my past a bit and the camo thing. I actually first got into camo gear through cadets, but immediately started wearing it everywhere cos it was cheap and tough. This was back in the early to mid 80s btw.
But there was a certain coolness associated with it in the cadet unit I was in, and that probably influenced me right back in the day. I still have a tiger stripe cam shirt that a friends dad had in vietnam. I used to use it when I was growing pot, its a great camoflauge. Especially in sub tropical country and areas where there is a canopy and shadowy ground.
Although most of the people I knew outside cadets who got into it were usually pretty anti war and anti authority, and antifashion (in a cool way of course.)
So perhaps you are right about it to a certain extent, although I think that needs to be qualified with a recognition of the cheapness and the indy scene (pre Nirvana) and the role that had in popularising it.
When it comes to toys, well there have always been war toys, but the context does seem to have shifted. There is more glamourising of the actual conflict i think, and a kind of revelling in the violence and aggression, and use of power. Its not just the violent video games, but the brutality of warhammer figures seems to eclipse that of GI Joe.
There also seems to be a real focus on obedience and deference to authority. Its just my impression, from hanging out with people with kids and seeing the toys that they like. And a real glorification of violence, even in less obviously violent cartoons. But especially the idea of elitism, specifcally wedded to the idea of dealing with 'bad guys" or the other.
The themes that snippet and the original article from statecraft.org explore seem to fit with the impression I get.
Especially if you think about atrocity research, and the way our culture is going (the culture of atrocity post is a case in point.) Dunno if you have read Dune, but there are aspects of the way this goes that reminds me of the Saradur (?) the Emperor's elite troops.
BTW If you haven't read the Trial, do yourself a favour and read it.