A theory on mind control from a dream I had

One day last week I woke up from one of the strangest dreams I've had in some time & I'm still rather bemused by my subconscious.

I've forgotten most of the fine detail but from what I remember it was seen from a first-person perspective as somebody walked around what appeared to be a generic city scape which didn't correspond to a particular location as I didn't recognise anything. Whether the perspective was that of a person or a camera I'm not entirely sure. Whoever it was had conversations with various people, the content of most of the conversations is beyond my recollection.

What did stand out, and was therefore the part I remember most, was a conversation with what fictional TV shows & films present as a generic government agent: someone in a dark suit & black shades who was seated with a young-ish boy, estimated age 12-15, sat next to him. Amusingly enough he introduced himself by saying, "I'm a government agent."

Then he proceeded to demonstrate how he had complete control over the mind of the young boy, however in typical dream fashion he never said why the need for control was warranted. The dream perspective person asked how this control was achieved and the agent's explanation was thus:
The young boy spoke in sentences which consisted of a maximum of ten words, the reason behind this was it limited his self-expression to a very high degree and was thus an essential part of his 'programming'. By placing such strict limits on his self-expression those same limits are imposed upon his imagination. The strict limiting of his imagination is the means through which mind control is achieved.

Reading that back I can't help thinking that it sounds like something my subconscious has pulled from its backside, to coin a phrase. Am I right in thinking that or is this theory plausible in some way?

It sounds plausible to me.
If you take away someone's imagination then they have no hope and if they have no hope then they can be controlled because they have nothing they are fighting for. If you hope/have faith that there is a life after death and that life depends on how you act then you will "fight for" whatever that invisioned afterlife is about. If you believe that brushing your teeth three times a day gets you into heaven, you'll brush your teeth three times a day. But if you think that there is nothing and no point to anything then why not go with whatever someone says.
"If you don't stand for something you'll fall for anything" can't remember who said that.
I guess it also depends on the person and how willing they are to be controlled. Some people want to be controlled because then they don't have to do anything and if something goes wrong it was the controllers fault.

reply to post by Microwaved


I would say its your own intelligence revealing to your everyday consciousness, how a being can be limited. Once you know how this is achieved, the answer on how to reverse the process is revealed also.It not really something to be feared rather to be understood and overridden, for many this is a trauma and fear leaving this state. Kind of like a child that prefers living in the pram, to walking on its own.You may find that playing around with your own forms of expression will boost your freedom.

This reminds me of the wisdom of Gene Roddenberry, some lines from the Star Trek episode Return of the Archons... you remember, the one with Landru, the computer controlling everyone and forcing them to be peaceful and content, thus taking away their free will, their soul, in exchange for a "utopia?"

Kirk: Without freedom of choice, there is no creativity. Without creativity there is no life, the Body dies.

Landru: Peace, order, and tranquility are maintained. The Body lives. But I reserve creativity to me!

Spock: Then the Body dies. Creativity is necessary for the health of the Body.

(Landru explodes in logical fireworks)

Gene clearly understood the importance of creativity; those without any have to rely on others to tell them what to do. I think everyone should watch that episode. Clearly we could use the reminder.

Happy communing!

reply to post by tinfoilsrule

The logic of your train of thought is flawless and I'm in complete, yet slightly surprised, agreement with the destination it reached. The surprise comes entirely from the fact that mind control is not something I've read about or really contemplated at all so the theory basically sprang up from nothing. As odd as it may sound I feel rather proud of my brain because of that

reply to post by ancientthunder

That's a very encouraging way of viewing things and it gets my wholehearted approval
As for the fear aspect I learned, after some harsh lessons, that complete self-acceptance is the key to inner harmony. I acknowledge the darker aspects of my personality but I've never really feared them.

reply to post by Thought Provoker
The only Star Trek series I watched more than a few episodes of was TNG so no, I don't remember. If you'd quoted Babylon 5 or Red Dwarf I'd be on much more familiar ground.
TV programs aside I'm very pleased to have matched the creativity of someone as renowned as Gene Rodenberry, even if it wasn't quite intentional


As I was trying to add something to this post I came to a rather disturbing realisation. I had the thought that this while this seems simple in theory it'd be more difficult to do in practice but when it came to the reasoning behind it I came to a dead end due to being awake for 20 hours. Lack of sleep put a discernible limit on my self-expression which was achieved without any effort (other than copious amounts of caffeine). What else could be achieved with a great deal of effort is enough paranoia fuel to supply the population of the world until 50,000 A.D..

I don't think I've ever impressed myself & scared myself in the same post before, I'd mark this down in my diary if I kept one

Mind control exists as barriers to the negative tendencies of man, however, if you can prove yourself, then you can be trusted to exist above the barriers.