can psychedelics help us see through propaganda?

[zezt]

I am planning on doing a blog about this subject, and thought I would ask at various forums dedicated to psychedelics and experience about this to deepen the research:

I am going to think of 4 significant set and settings for psychedelic experience. IF you can think of any others please don't hesitate to let me know:

1) when you take psychedelics and are in nature, and have eyes mostly open and look at and feel the wonders of nature. Look into a river and see the amazingess of water and light on water, and life in water. Look at a tree, animals, birds, the wind (I have actually seen the wind swirling )

2) A more introspective kind of tripping favoured by the therapeutic community--especially Stan Grof which is based on the psychoanalytical model of looking within, and expericning fears, desires, past memories--and this can involve feeling you are becoming others, and groups, and animals, and nature and even the universe.
This form of psychedelic experience is ancient as well of course, and was called 'Incubation', where the experiencer would take the psychedelic in a cave in total darkness, etc. This contrasted with the 'Field' mode of experience which would be more ritualistic --dancing , and orgiastic in a communal set and setting.

3) Observing people who aren't tripping, and looking at mass media in a way of seeing through social personas and propaganda

Now it is the 3rd one I am interested in talking about. Are any of you familiar with doing this?

See, many sciency types will tell us that when we look at 'reality' we are seeing 'it' in a 'distorted' way---implying that there is a generalized normal rational way of being and seeing. Do you agree with that, and if so why?

But do any of you have the experience of getting insights from seeing through propaganda. If so please let me know and I might include it in my blog.
It could involve being aware of body language---of really being aware of lying eyes, etc etc etc. Whatever please share. I see this as a really important subject.

I see propaganda as a form of magic where spells are put on people, on MASSES of people--and they don't know it's even been done to them.

Let me know your views and experiences please?

 

[MrEmo]

yes.
you know what is right and wrong anyway. psychedelics just strip away the bullshit and leave the truth gibbering in your face. all night sometimes

 

[Teonanacapilli]

^ like he says, you already know it. Psychedelics just wipe away the programming and conditioning, "squeegee your third eye".

 

[zezt]

Is this IT--is this the only effort the people here can muster. is this question so passe that it doesn't deserve any effort on anyones part.
I cannot dig such apathy.
IF this question has been explored here or anywhere else then please show me? I am not familiar with it being asked anywhere.

 

[MrEmo]

sorry Zest. would you like us to use bigger words?

 

[Teonanacapilli]

I have never looked at mass media while on psychedelics. But the psychedelic experience opened my eyes, expanded my thoughts so that I could see some colours that I could not before. With change of thought and wakefulness came a change in cares, I became interested in what is actually going on in the world on a deeper level, this led to research and learning which continues now.

I had awareness and deep emotional concern for what has been/is happening environmentally, to a lesser extent for what has been/is happening politically to indigenous peoples (psychedelics greatly increased care here). Psychedelics mostly opened me up to the darkness of our own governments and neighbours in the developed world.

I was raised in a conservative family, when I asked about the ridiculous state of things, I would always get some form of "that's the way it is, get used to it." But I always thought "just because that's the way it is, doesn't make it right." Psychedelics moved my mind to a more radical viewpoint, now I am making conscious decisions and making/planning change.

When you come to them as a student, psychedelics generally make you more aware (naturally a weak veil like propaganda is swiftly lifted).

 

[VerusDeus]

Zezt, what do you expect? There is virtually no way of validating this theory scientifically. We could all try to write speculative essays about this, but isn't that what you were going to do then?

Statistically though, I think the vast majority of people who have experience with psychedelics would agree with the statement. But there is just no simple way of arguing why this would be true.(aside from the third-eye thingy, but yeah that won't persuade any sceptics ).

I like the idea but you might want to adjust your plan a bit. Or better yet, start off with an easier theory.

 

[darkwolfunseen]

I agree with the above. Personally I think you can learn to see "through" things by reading a book in the same way you can lighting a joint. Now, both of these have a quality and capacity measure. Quality of the book, and your capacity to understand it. Same with psychedelics. It's not like you take mushrooms, and boom all questions have been answered permanently. What it allows for is the ability of the user to pull back the veil for a short period of time. What he/she chooses to do with that time is up to them. Therefore I would say that psychedelics are a tool (cliche I know), but more importantly they're a neutral item. That's where the difference lies between a book, a song, or even art. All of the latter, can change your perception, but each still has a function of another human beings perception blinders on. The psychedelic you take in an environment where you are alone can only expand or contrast on the base it is provided (your experiences, your fears, your manipulations).

So in it's essence then, psychedelics can only do what we can do without them to begin with. They may help on the journey, but they can't create something that wasn't there before.

 

[sopor]

I have seen the fnords!

like said, the mechanism behind propaganda is obvious. all it takes to see it is objective observation. you don't have to be trippin, it just makes it easier (in some ways).

if you need some brain food regarding the topic, look into 8 circuit consciousness by r. a. wilson (6th or neuroelectric circuit especialy or even better whole prometheus rising) and then some memetics (art of memetics gave me great insights and "useful" terms)

 

[zezt]

Zezt, what do you expect? There is virtually no way of validating this theory scientifically. We could all try to write speculative essays about this, but isn't that what you were going to do then?

Statistically though, I think the vast majority of people who have experience with psychedelics would agree with the statement. But there is just no simple way of arguing why this would be true.(aside from the third-eye thingy, but yeah that won't persuade any sceptics ).

I like the idea but you might want to adjust your plan a bit. Or better yet, start off with an easier theory.

I was partically inspired to ask this question which I have asked at a couple of other forums dedicated to psychedelics after becoming involved with a group at a blog devoted to science. The disscussion was 'can you prove a soul?'---An online friend drew my attention to it after he said he had tried to participate but had suffered ad hominem (you cant get a more polite dude than this guy)...Now, hmmmm, after my experiences at the Richard Dawkins forum where I was subjected to foul-mouthed abuse and unfair treatment by mdos when I tried to defend myself, I had sworn never to try my hadn in a pit of 'skeptics' agin LOL, but I did----So they NEEDED scientific evidence for there being soul. And essence of my 'argument' was that they will never find their question as long as their criteria is MEASUREING. That when you try and do things like that in areas that out of bounds to the scientific method it becomes scientism.
Of course I brought up the subject of entheogens, and one guy who claimed he'd had LOTS of psychedelic experience, when I asked him if he had gotten any insights he said: "psychedelics fuck with your perception".
So that reponse reminds me of other people who have claimed psychedelic experience but also embrace science--who have said, eg "psychedelics distort reality", "they are just a chemical ride" --etc. They reduce it to their verions of materialism and seem to leave out meaning
They like yourself would ask--'so PROVE what psychedelics can do--in relations to what scientific achievment has don---like the the smallpox vacination' and so on. In effect trying to undermine the life-changing effects psychedelics can have for people
You also repaet this attitude when you ask above: "There is virtually no way of validating this theory scientifically."
Which I thank you actually for highlighting this, because it HAS to make us think about this! What does it mean to claim there is no scientific evidence when I say that I saw, for example, people body language when on LSD? Does it mean I am 'hallucinating'? I thought the defination of hallucination was seeing something that is not there---like a flying pink elephant kind of vision? BUT we DO know that psycholists talk about body language don't we, and that they can spot 'micro-expression' which can only be seen on film when they are shown in very slow motion. And there are other moves that contradict when the person is saying---like touching the mouth, the feet pointing opposite direction--and on and on. THAT some people respect as sceintific, but my observation when bemushroomed not. Why?
Is SCIENCE propaganda? It is when it become scienctism and devalues your very meaning from experience until IT can 'measure it'.

 

[ararat]

what exactly do you mean by propaganda? maybe this will spark the kind of discussion you want to see.


talking with dogmatic materialists can be utterly tiring. I don't know what you mean by "Is science propaganda?", but I'll agree with you and say that science can act the same way as a religion, the belief in the scientific method replaces the belief in god. this appears especially true in the case of the crowd around richard dawkins.

 

[VerusDeus]

Okay, apparently I misunderstood your target audience then. I thought this whole idea was more or less to rid the scientific community of it's tunnelvision regarding psychedelics and sorts.(just because that's been on my mind) So my point was to start with an easier notion to objectify.

Apparently you were never interested in the scientists anyway, so we're just speculating? What is your goal then? Is your blog going to be an edifice of separate people giving their point of view about why psychedelics cause you to see through things?

And as people have said in this thread it's not so much the psychedelics that do the magic. The psychedelics can help you reach a more objective(or more subjective) state of mind, which would help you see through propaganda. However psychedelics are not a necessity in this process. In fact I had a course called 'critical thinking' which also helped me 'see through' propaganda.

 

[zezt]

what exactly do you mean by propaganda? maybe this will spark the kind of discussion you want to see.

This video I saw very recently really inspired me also:
PSYWAR -
But as well as this, have you read Shamanism and the Drug Propaganda, by Dan Russell Both go deep into propaganda, but the latter includes the role of entheogens, and how the banning of them allows the rich ruling class coopt our natural collective imagination for their own purposes of slavery, war, and consumerism, etc.

talking with dogmatic materialists can be utterly tiring. I don't know what you mean by "Is science propaganda?", but I'll agree with you and say that science can act the same way as a religion, the belief in the scientific method replaces the belief in god. this appears especially true in the case of the crowd around richard dawkins.

Yes exactly. And a big reason for when some of them gang up and become very aggressive and even using swear words is because their worldview is threatened. JUST like any fundamentalist cult they will try and jump on you. But it is like oil and water. They want to measure 'soul'. Soul involves feeling and meaning and interelationship without boundaries---like for example love. So how can you measure, or 'prove' it according to the crteria of their scientific method---it is absurd. But you see they wont even examine biblical myth and how it was composed and go into meaning of mythology and its deep connection with entheogenic vegetation which in itself is a science. It is looking AT language, at patterns and meanings rather than taking the surface stories literally. Much of the Bible is propaganda for example.
In the Genesis 'creation myth' the writers subvert the IMAGES which are very ancient and benevolent into something they demand are evil and off-bounds via the script. Look deeper into the script and there's other layers of meaning also. (Allegro)

 

[zezt]

Okay, apparently I misunderstood your target audience then. I thought this whole idea was more or less to rid the scientific community of it's tunnelvision regarding psychedelics and sorts.(just because that's been on my mind) So my point was to start with an easier notion to objectify.

I am not anti 'scientists'. IF I could convince them that is fine. But often when your intheir pit or domain and they gang up the proceedings can deteriorate into a slang contest. I will give as good as I get lol, but then the real exploring is sacrificed. Also if the keep demanding you 'prove it'---without understanding the limitations of what they ask it can become STUCK---is like oil and water. And when you get ones who HAVE even had psychedelic experience and yet still don't get it, you realize just how stuck they are in their scientism paradigm.
But in those sitations I always think that if just one or two people get it that's cool. Often the conscious part of us can be the most rigid (I have noticed this in myself), but the unconscious part can feel things that take effect later? Something said has a reverberating effect.
I actually found my two days at that science blog a buzz--a challenge, but after the mod gave a warning of how many posts i had done (because i was trying to anser the gang's many questions, and insults) I left before I was busted. One of the others begged him not to ban me ---most likely because she thought I was an easy target for their 'superiority' I dunno.

Apparently you were never interested in the scientists anyway, so we're just speculating? What is your goal then? Is your blog going to be an edifice of separate people giving their point of view about why psychedelics cause you to see through things?

No I am interested in everyone . In my blog, and here, I am exploring propaganda and if entheogens --as well as critical thinking and observation--can help us see through propaganda and its techniques. I cannot assume that everyone observes like I have, and often do, after taking psychedelics. Especially since coming online and communicating with quite a few people who are psychedelically experienced, some (not all) still do seem to underestimate entheogens as just 'distorting reality'etc. BUT what do they mean by 'distortion' and by 'reality'? Are they aware of propaganda and how it manipulates our worldview (please watch the Psywar video I have linked this thread to). So look:

Propaganda does stuff to our conscious and unconscious manipulating our worldview/sense of reality

Psychedelics can reveal to us what is usually unconscious.

So I find this a very interesting continuum to look into, don't you?

And as people have said in this thread it's not so much the psychedelics that do the magic. The psychedelics can help you reach a more objective(or more subjective) state of mind, which would help you see through propaganda. However psychedelics are not a necessity in this process. In fact I had a course called 'critical thinking' which also helped me 'see through' propaganda.

YES, critical thinking is vastly important, but I am wanting to also see that as a continuum with ecstatic observation! I think that the propaganda of our 'education' system has made it appear that 'reason' is somehow superior to other forms of knowing and feeling. There is something strange going on here which I find hard to articulate.

One is tempted by the use of our language to separate the ecstatic experience--in this case psychedelic experience, as I think is the origin of the meaning of ecstasy--from reason/critical thinking, as we do other abstracted concepts like 'light' and 'dark' and 'male' and 'female' and 'death' and 'life' etc. But I see reality as continuum, and not conecptualized constructs having some kind of independent existence.
So surely critical thinking is also involved with ecstasy? By this I mean that ecstasy could be understood as a 'Chaotic' state of being that isn't the usual abstracted mode we are 'educated' in--where we have been made to feel that 'reason' is superior and cut off from other feelings. This is imposed on us, so much so that people are oppressed with a 'normalcy' expected of them which is policed by a mental illness myth. Thus if you question the propaganda/world view, for example, then you can be in danger of being labeled 'irrational', 'superstitious' etc. They will say this whilst at the same time not being aware of propaganda

 

[IJesusChrist]

I once went on a trip to a good camping place, ate mushrooms and smoked the entire time.

When I came back, I saw a giant pepsi ad.

It made me feel good. It made me feel good because I felt as if, I could bring this ad up to everyone, and they would know what I was talking about. I felt connected to all of he consumer world I was visiting - as if I was gone for a long time. I missed it, I couldn't wait to talk to all these busy people trying to buy things and make money. They seemed to much simpler than the vast chaos of nature - the indefinite amount of struggle, wonder, and awe it brings. I felt like I could be at ease, in the arms of western society...

There is always two ways to look at things, but usually many many more

That was the only time I had felt comforted by an advertisement...

 

[VerusDeus]

Okay zezt now were talking(or rather you're talking i'm nagging ) You are very spot-on with this observation: "Propaganda does stuff to our conscious and unconscious manipulating our worldview/sense of reality. Psychedelics can reveal to us what is usually unconscious"

But as you are already one step ahead(by making the link between psychedelics and propaganda), could you give me your view or explanation of how/why psychedelics uncover our unconscious processes?

And yeah about the ever-debunking-while-barely-even-giving-it-a-thought scientists, that's what I was trying to point out: If you want them to take you seriously you have to play their 'game', and even still it would take forever and a bunch more people to claim the same thing for them to feel safe enough to explore these uncovered areas.

In regard to IJESUSCHRIST's anecdote: yep, it's safety in numbers and safety in a man-created bubble. We hide behind our 'cultural' walls, because the chaos of nature frightens us, and we rather have absolute control of our lives than to surrender to haphazard. "it's an eminence front"
And this indeed also counts for the scientist community.

 

[IJesusChrist]

Right, we are subjected to endless streams of consumerism, capatilism, governmental, political, policy-enforcing ideas every day. Every time you step on public transportation, or rather the first time you step on public transportation (I love this example) you are immidiately creating an ideology of what it should be like to get on a bus.

When you see a Sears ad or a home depot ad and it shows clips of the inside of a persons home, you are being subjected to what the inside of a house should look like.

Whether you are consciously aware of these placements of ideas is not good or bad, it just shows your level of awareness or care. Those who are unaware of these ideals that are constantly streaming are usually content with their living condition or they do believe that these ideals, these ideologies, these morals of what is right and wrong are actually correct.

Every time you purchase something you make a decision based on your ideals. You make a conscious or unconscious effort to project your ideology outwardly or inwardly. By buying a bicycle from a second hand shop, you are telling yourself, the cashier, and the people who witness your second-hand bike that you support the idea of reusable goods.

The reasoning behind this is not always direct, in fact, some are even unaware of why they buy the items they buy. Usually, those of us who take psychodelics for introspection and observation become aware of our ideologies. These are usually very profound findings, whether or not the uncovering of our subconscious ideals is pleasent or not, we have a greater chance to see them while our neurotransmitter's equilibrium changes dramatically.

I believe psychodelics allow one to see one's own ideals - some are fundamental, some are very superficial. We will never be able to see all of our ideology, some are so deep in our subconscious I don't think there is any way to interpret them into the conscious observer.

When we see our own ideologies, we can either accept, change, or analyze them. The second choice is a very confronting process, and is the study of meditation, yoga, insight, enlightenment and has been attempted since we became conscious of ourselves.

Back to the original topic - psychodelics help us see ideology. That which seemed "natural" and "logical" can soon become a very blunt manifestation of power, greed, intentions, good or bad opinion, etc...

Not every kitchen needs a microwave, and not every house in a suburb needs a dog and 2.1 children. Not all women are better home makers then men, and not all men are more logical than women. A credit card is not required to live and there is no reason for a man not to wear a dress.

Life is a lot of ideas being pursued and pushed, the ability to see them all is a very confronting and emotional subject.

 

[zezt]

Hey Jesus Christ, some cool insights there. Yes many of us are influenced positively and negativeley, knowingly and unknowingly, but to try and keep this 'simple' I feel, it is wise to focus on how we can see through negative propaganda. It could be argued that there is positive propaganda, I suppose. The actual term was started by the Catholic church to propagate the faith against the competition of Protestantism, but previous it was used against women called 'witches' and 'heretics by their Inquisition. So that propaganda can be seen as the precursor to the Nazi propaganda against the Jews, the disabled, the gays, etc etc
negative propaganda is what happened to millions of men in the First World War, and their families-----made to believe they were 'figthing for democracy' and so on. Same with the invasion of Iraq. And on and on. So it is a worthwhile question to consider.

I know that the CIA and MKULTRA was trying to find--amongst other things--whether LSD could be used as a 'truth drug' (though THAT could be propaganda), so that they'd give it to their prisoners of war and be able to get the truth out of them
(actually it works. I find it impossible almost to lie when I am on psychedelics). But what IF we turn this around and say it allows us --the takers of psychedelics to see directly? Ie., see the truth.

using that as a hypothesis, how would we 'test' it according to the scientific demand (I hate all this shit, but am willing to contemplate it). Reason I hate this kind of approach is because it is mechanical. It is wrong. Stiff, rigid, conveyor-belt-like, crude. But that's just my opinion, and pisses sciency types off because science to them is a religion---for those in the Cult of Scientism it is the ONLY way to find the real truth

But anyhow--how would we test it? One way would be to have someone tell you a lie when your tripping, and see if you could spot any signs they were not telling the truth. Could this be natural. Ie., could anyone do it, or would you have to research body language and microexpressions and rhthyms beforehand? Well that could be tested too. Ideally this 'testing' could be done out of the rigid confines of scientific demands. Ie it could be fun and yet serious at the same time

For the 'scientist' (in commas to mean those that are ANTI any other form of wisdom other than got thru the scie. meth.) to see 'directly' would mean for them using rationality, and the sci. method. and sober doings to create the smallpox vacination, etc etc (and don't get me wrong. I am not putting that mode of intelligence down). BUT they can think that but support a culture which tortures millions of animals and send millions of young people off to war. I have more to say, but will leave it there for now

 

[zezt]

Okay zezt now were talking(or rather you're talking i'm nagging ) You are very spot-on with this observation: "Propaganda does stuff to our conscious and unconscious manipulating our worldview/sense of reality. Psychedelics can reveal to us what is usually unconscious"

But as you are already one step ahead(by making the link between psychedelics and propaganda), could you give me your view or explanation of how/why psychedelics uncover our unconscious processes?

OK, a massive question of course--- first I would want to 'define' what is meant by 'unconscious'. It is a farly modern term that comes from Sigmund Freud...lol I love your question. Thing is that I am not in role as teacher-who-knows. That is dead. WE are exploring this now. I admit i may know stuff you aren't aware of, but so do you that I may not. So when we explore deep stuff like this it inspires deeper looking. You asking that for example inspired me to Google The History of the Unconscious, to get a frame for some kind of summary. And I found this amazing site that has death masks of people including William Blake that I wouldn't have maybe seen if not for your question The Somnambulists
I also found this--I intend to read the rest but this first paragraph gives me what I need:

"The unconscious mind is a term coined by the 18th century German philosophy romantic philosopher Sir Christopher Riegel and later introduced into English by the poet and essayist Samuel Taylor Coleridge.[1] The unconscious mind might be defined as that part of the mind which gives rise to a collection of mental phenomena that manifest in a person's mind but which the person is not aware of at the time of their occurrence. These phenomena include unconscious feelings, unconscious or automatic skills, unnoticed perceptions, unconscious thoughts, unconscious habits and automatic reactions, complexes, hidden phobias and concealed desires." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscious_mind

Before reading that I had assumed the term was an English translation from a term Sigmund Freud would have used---you live and learn. So let us reflect then on this part of that definition:

"The unconscious mind might be defined as that part of the mind which gives rise to a collection of mental phenomena that manifest in a person's mind but which the person is not aware of at the time of their occurrence."

In other words that we are conscious of them, but not aware of the contents. Would you agree with that? WHY would we not be aware? Is our worldview made so that we are not likely to be aware of contents. Has 'education' and mass media and peer pressure got something to do with this 'blindness and deafness'? That is what propaganda is right?
A big part of propaganda is repetition---dig the adverts for example. Over and over your told what is 'reality', day in day out so the belief in that becomes habituated as your worldview. Psychedelics seem to suspend that rigid pattern, and allow us to become aware of things directly.

You know that Freud and Jung, said to be two giants in western understandings of the psychology of mind yet still harboured their own unconscious prejudices according to the propaganda of their times--which feminists have more so exposed.
So it doesn't NEED an 'expert' to explore this is what I mean. We are wondering if we can see through propaganda using both critical thinking and inspiration from entheogens. Both ways will inspire each other surely?
To be honest, from first psychedelic experience onwards, it always has been obvious to me that i am seeing into reality deeper. This is why I was surprised and shocked later to hear some psychedelic experiencers repeat the materialistic mantra that they 'distort' reality, and other put down terms and thus undermining their power. That to me is propaganda. A very powerful one because it even undermines the means to see through it. Somehow your 'education' has you by the balls and will insists that it is 'all just chemicals' and there's no meaning. But as I say, I see through that propaganda. Do you?

And yeah about the ever-debunking-while-barely-even-giving-it-a-thought scientists, that's what I was trying to point out: If you want them to take you seriously you have to play their 'game', and even still it would take forever and a bunch more people to claim the same thing for them to feel safe enough to explore these uncovered areas.

Well I am suspcious that these people who seem forever to be policing these online science forums are true scientists. I think they are more followers of the Cult of Scientism. An example----I was at the Richard Dawkins forum and was trying politely to have a reasonable discussion about the UFO phenomena. I had recently watched a video where Dr Mack was talking about his research and anomalies that mainstream science cannot explain. When I posted a transcript of it this gang really layed into the late Dr Mack, and me, with such foul-mouthed disrespect. There was no addressing points in an adult manner--it was simple potty mouth time. I realized that place was geared to not ALLOW reasoned exploration--because the mods would back-up their behaviour--encourage it. So anyone trying to explore issues that may be threatening to the materialistic scientific viewpoint is attacked by Dawkins pitbulls lol.

So what about 'real scientists'? IF we agree that science is very important but has limitations, then there are areas it's better staying out of IF it demands measurement for all of reality and experience.

In regard to IJESUSCHRIST's anecdote: yep, it's safety in numbers and safety in a man-created bubble. We hide behind our 'cultural' walls, because the chaos of nature frightens us, and we rather have absolute control of our lives than to surrender to haphazard. "it's an eminence front"
And this indeed also counts for the scientist community.

I dig, but we are NOT safe. Far from it. Nature--our home (we ARE nature)--is acceleratingly under threat, and the very abuse being done by big power guzzling, consumerist, ecocidal places like the 'developed' western world is being copied by China, India, etc. So we are in a right deep shit if this continues. I think that people experienced with psychedelics need to be the brave ones who dare look into all this. See what is the propaganda driving this and expose it for ourselves and then speak out about it. But in order to do this we HAVE to look and bring it to the table for discussion don't we?

 

[VerusDeus]

Allrightey! Nice post, and I am glad I made you retrace your steps a bit.

After a quick scan I found you imply that we have an unconscious-ness because of propaganda: "Is our worldview made so that we are not likely to be aware of contents. Has 'education' and mass media and peer pressure got something to do with this 'blindness and deafness'?"

Our unconscious mind, if you will, also has a very functional aspect. For instance: when you look at a pretty girl, your brain has already calculated how symmetrical her face is.(might ring a bell) Now, this process is an unconscious one because it would be rather tedious work to keep calculating how symmetrical the face of any passer-by is. (of course this is just an example, and not the best one for that matter) I am just making sure you realise that the origin of unconsciousness is not propaganda or does it have anything to do with our worldview. (of course our current worldview does, in a way, sort of imbue us with a lot more unconsciousness. A fair point that is)

I do not consider unconscious processes as bad per se, though of course the more conscious you are of your actions and thoughts, the better.

I may just have misinterpretted you though.

(on an unrelated matter, why is Jung prejudiced according to you or the feminists? I am kind of fond of his writing and general thoughts on the psyche)