October 28, 2024 • 39 mins
Support my channel: https://www.patreon.com/c/PTPOP
My Youtube channel: http://www.youtube.com/@ptpop
In this episode of PTPOP: A Mind Revolution, based off of an article written by David A. Noelbel titled: Communism, Hypnotism and The Beatles, Peter explores the intriguing connection between pop culture, politics, and mind control through the lens of history. He delves into the fascinating theory of how communism, hypnotism, and even the Beatles may have played a role in shaping societal beliefs and consciousness. Was there an intentional effort to influence the masses through media and culture? Join us as we unravel the potential connections between these powerful forces and their impact on the human mind.
#Communism, #Hypnotism, #TheBeatles, #MindControl, #CulturalInfluence, #MediaManipulation, #SocietalBeliefs, #MindRevolution, #PopCulture, #PTPOP, #MassHypnosis, #HumanConsciousness #thebeatles
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
Hey there, everybody.
Pt Pop here with all four lobesof my brain securely bound
behind my back, and welcome toanother episode of A Mind
Revolution, where I lead you outof the rabbit hole one grain of
truth at a time.
Today, I've got a great show,an awesome show.
I'm very excited about this.
(00:30):
This is all about communism,hypnotism and the Beatles.
We've got a great show.
It should be exciting, doesn'tthat sound like an exciting show
?
So buckle up everyone.
Alert the dog, call the cat,tell the media we got a great
show for you here on A MindRevolution.
(00:51):
Before we get to the main topic,I'd like to invite each and
every one of you to check out myYouTube channel.
Just go to youtubecom, forwardslash ampersand PT pop and if
you want to support my channeland my endeavors, go to my
Patreon channel.
If you have some extra money onhand and want to support the
(01:12):
endeavors of this channel andall of my creative activities,
please go to that.
I'll leave a link to my Patreonchannel in the description.
All right, all of you, fellowinternet dwellers, buckle up
here, because today I'm divingdeep into something some of you
might consider pretty strangeCommunism, hypnotism and the
(01:35):
Beatles.
And you might be thinking what?
Yeah?
Yeah, I know, but stick with mehere because it's going to be a
really interesting topic andI'm going to be looking at this
publication from 1965 written byReverend David A Noble, called,
well, communism, hypnotism andthe Beatles.
(02:00):
And you know, keep in mind, thatwhen this article was written,
america was at the peak of theCold War.
Okay, we were at odds withcommunist Russia and people were
, well, a little on edge aboutcommunist influence.
And it was a time when peoplewere really worried about like
(02:25):
ideological subversion,especially when it came to young
people.
They were worried about youngpeople being influenced by the
communist party.
And this author, mr noble, hislittle paper here, um, really
played into that fear it was.
It was actually feeding off ofthat fear.
(02:45):
And if you look at it from ahistorical perspective, he was
basically saying the communistswere using this totally
unexpected weapon music, popmusic and the Beatles to
brainwash the youth of Westernculture and music.
I know what you're saying,you're like, hold on.
(03:08):
He was basically saying rockand roll was like a communist
plot.
And I know you're thinkingthat's a bit much to take on,
you know, and I know it soundspretty wild, but I'll give you
that it does sound wild, butNobel was serious and what he
titled this was he called itMental Side and it was basically
(03:30):
mental suicide.
And he thought, based off ofthis article now you can find
this article of this articleright on Google and it shows the
cover, it shows the picture ofthe author, the whole thing but
(03:54):
he basically thought this wasbasically like the musicals
being used to induce mentalsuicide in the youth, induce
mental suicide in the youth.
He thought they were trying toweaken the minds of young
Americans and make them easierto sway towards communist
ideology.
And if you think about it atthe time, the Communist
(04:20):
Manifesto part of their goal wasto undermine the integrity of
the American family and to eataway and chip away at the
foundation of the Americanfamily.
Now, if you think about apost-American times, you had the
basic family you had the fatherwas the breadwinner, the father
(04:40):
went out to work, the motherstayed home to take care of the
kids.
The father went out to work,the mother stayed home to take
care of the kids, and most ofthese guys were post-war
veterans that had moved into thesuburbs, built a house, a cozy
little bungalow with a pickawayfence, 2.5 kids and a dog.
They had one car in the garage,they had money, they had nice,
(05:00):
nice things and it was portrayedas being really stable, great
time.
Mom was just there with a dad'smartini when he walked in the
door and rub his feet and havedinner on the table.
The woman was very submissiveto the man.
But as I know from personalexperience in my own family,
things weren't quite asbeautiful as it was portrayed.
(05:22):
Now my family might be theordinary because both my parents
ended up becoming severealcoholics and you know my dad
was beating my mom and stuff anda lot of men were beating their
wives.
Back then it was commonplace sobut anyway, I'm not certain how
strong this version of thefamily really was.
But the Communist Manifesto wastrying to undermine and weaken
(05:46):
the American family, todisintegrate the ideologies of
the American structureinternally.
So he thought this authorthought that they were using
scientific techniques based onthe work of a gentleman.
(06:06):
You may all have heard of IvanPavlov and you've heard of
Pavlov's dog.
You know he's the bell guy.
When they'd ring a bell the dogwould salivate.
And I'm like you're thinkingwell, what does that have to do
with rock and roll?
You know Pavlov's experimentsright.
They showed how powerfulconditioned reflexes can be.
This is what Pavlov's studiesdid.
He.
They showed how powerfulcondition reflexes can be.
This is what Pavlov's studiesdid.
(06:26):
He showed how powerfulcondition reflexes can be.
So he trained these dogs by,like, always ringing your bell
at the right time before feedingthem so they would drool.
And of course I'm giving you a50,000 foot overview of Pavlov.
But after a while these dogswould start drooling, and just
at the sound of the bell, eventhough there was no food around.
(06:46):
So the author, noble, thoughtmusic could work the same way.
So he's basically saying musiccould be a trigger, like make
you react to a certain waywithout you even realizing it,
subconsciously triggering thingsin your mind.
And he thought being exposed tocertain types of music over and
over, especially with stuffstrong, with strong rhythms,
(07:07):
certain metal melodies and andthe like, could program you
almost like a computer.
And it's kind of like, I guessyou'd say it's how advertising
jingles get stuck in your head.
And even though, um, even thethought of this, this
manipulation, was targeted atdifferent age groups, you know,
(07:27):
you think to yourself wow, thisis pretty wild.
I mean, you never reallythought about rock music as
being this way and this is.
I think this is prettyinteresting because I never
really thought about this.
You think about how music youhear it all the time.
Everywhere we go today, there'smusic.
Today I was in the men's lockerroom at the gym and there was
classic rock playing in the gymwhile I'm taking a leak.
(07:47):
I'm like why do I need to hearclassic rock while I'm in the
locker room?
And it's out where I'm workingout, it's out in the parking lot
, it's in the malls, it's in theparking lot of the malls, it's
everywhere.
What kind of musical weapons didthe author think they were
using?
Something you've got to askyourself.
Well, he started with theyoungest believe it or not,
(08:15):
babies and toddlers, and he'snot saying lullabies or
propaganda, or is he?
So this gets really interestingbecause there's a type of music
that was imported into the US,strictly targeting young kids to
help them go to sleep, andNoble claimed that even the most
innocent little tunes could beused for, you know, creating
(08:37):
those conditioned reflexes.
And he pointed to companieslike Children's Record Guild and
the Young People Records, andit was said that their music was
designed to get specificreactions out of little, teeny,
tiny kids.
So basically he's sayingthey're coming for our babies
(08:57):
through lullabies as communistmind control.
Now I know that sounds crazy butif you look at the details of
this study might make you thinkit's not so crazy.
But you know, you've got toremember this was like the peak
of the Cold War paranoia.
(09:17):
But was it really paranoia?
You know, a lot of thingshappened back then.
And look at our country now.
Look at, as I said, thefoundation of the American
culture was based on the fatherworking.
One income could buy a house,get a car, have a couple kids, a
wife at home.
Everybody had new clothes, theyhad a nice yard, they could go
(09:39):
on vacation and nobodyquestioned anything.
Nobody questioned authority.
Everything was kind of justrunning right real smooth.
We had the post-industrial,post-war industrial buildup in
America new highways, newbuildings, new houses, new malls
.
People had money.
It was going well.
(10:00):
And then the 1960s hit and allthese kids had it in their mind
they got to rebel Rebel againstwhat I say and people at the
time were definitely afraid ofthe communist infiltration and
parents especially were worriedabout it.
Well, I mean, everythinginfluences kids Because, as I
said in another episode, thehuman brain, male and female
(10:24):
doesn't develop well into the20s.
So Nobel really tapped intothis, or did he?
Is it paranoia or is it reality?
Look at our country pre-1960sstable, strong, going forward
After about 1965, it starts tocompletely fall apart.
You know, were lullabies forbabies, were what?
(10:46):
Were they communist anthems inelementary school music class?
Not really, not quite.
They weren't anthems.
But he did say in this articleand you've got to read this
article, it's a fascinatingarticle and if you're of the
mindset where you believeeverything you heard about the
propaganda towards thecommunists and you think it was
all just hogwash, you're notgoing to buy into this article.
(11:08):
But if you can look into itobjectively, you're going to go.
Whoa, this has some merit to it.
But he did say that even themusic played in schools you know
, sometimes even slipped andeducational stuff could be used
for this conditioning.
So he's basically saying thekids are being bombarded with
these subliminal messages likefrom the cradle all the way
(11:29):
through school and that's likesomething out of a sci-fi movie,
but it does have a bit of adystopian vibe.
But there's some truth to itand you'd have to study these
songs, these children's songs.
(11:49):
Many of these songs werewritten and produced by Russians
and communists in communistRussia and they were presented
with certain tones and certainfrequencies within the music and
certain words and phrases andthe presentation of the music.
The production music wasdesigned to get into the mind of
the child and have it go tosleep.
Your mind goes into a differentmindset when you go into the
(12:13):
sleep world.
Now, I'm not a brain surgeon ora brain expert, but you're more
susceptible to things whenyou're asleep.
Were people buying this?
Did anyone take him seriously?
This article?
Yeah, yeah, his book.
It's not really a book, it'sjust an article written.
It's just it's a small book,it's only about 25, 30 pages
(12:37):
long.
But his book got a lot ofattention.
I mean, a lot of people thoughtit was he was onto something and
it really sparked a debate likethe power of music and how it
affects especially people'syoung minds, and I think that's
fascinating.
But did he actually have anyevidence about this?
Well, I mean it was like he wasmaking stuff up completely and
(13:01):
that's how I, when I read him,like how does he know this?
Does he really know this?
Is this reality?
But he was in, he was tappingto, like, the real anxieties of
the people at the time.
You know, and they even havethese today.
They're still pushing theRussian agenda right, russia
gate, and how they affected ourelections with all of these
(13:22):
presidential candidates.
But think about how music getsused, like in advertising,
jingles, movie soundtracks.
They totally mess with youremotions.
I mean, think about it.
I mean, the other day I wasagain.
I'm in the locker room againand this song from Journey comes
on by the band Journey and it'sa sad love song.
I can't remember the song, butit was a song from my high
(13:43):
school days that always made mesad because it made me think of
a girl that I wanted to date,that we had broken up and she
didn't want to go out with meanymore.
She went out with some baseballplayer and I was like, oh
listen, I heard the song come on.
I started feeling sad and Iwasn't hearing the song
consciously.
I heard music in the back, butI started feeling really down.
(14:05):
I'm standing there in thelocker.
I'm like, why do I feel so sad?
I'm like, oh my God, is thissong by Journey?
Is it full on mind control?
I mean, that's a differentstory, right?
So what were some of the genresthat this author Nobel was
really worried about, and he wasworried about a lot actually,
(14:25):
but most of it was about theBeatles and he was really
pointing out how the Beatlescame onto the scene and pretty
much punched a hole into ourculture and into the culture of
our youth.
I mean especially the kind ofmusic that was popular with the
(14:47):
college kids too.
I mean the Beatles initiallywere attractive and intriguing
to the younger kids, theteenagers.
But he pointed to groups likePeople's Songs, incorporated,
and singers like Pete Seeger.
They were known for beingpretty left-leaning.
Pete Seeger was a communist andNobel saw that like as a direct
(15:12):
threat.
I mean, like folk music oftenhas like messages about social
justice and protest.
So he does discuss folk music,pete Seeger, and how that
initiated or took part or playeda part in the protests and the
protest mindset of the 1960s andthe protest mindset of the
(15:33):
1960s.
So I guess in a way you couldsay in the Cold War times that
it makes sense that some peoplewould be suspicious and Nobel
thought they were using folkmusic to romanticize communism,
make it sound appealing to theyoung.
You know intellectuals tryingto, like you know, sneak in
(15:54):
those subversive ideas throughfolk music, like planting the
seeds for, you know, futurecommunist leaders or something.
It seems like he was seeingcommunist boogeymen everywhere.
But I have a feeling he savedhis best material for, like I
said, the Beatles, because backthen the older generation saw
(16:18):
the Beatles as if they werepublic enemy number one, you
know, the ultimate weapon inthis whole.
I guess you'd call it communistmusical plot.
But why the Beatles?
I mean they weren't exactlysinging about revolution or
anything, at least not until1968 when they had the song
(16:39):
Revolution.
But for Nobel, it seems itwasn't about the words, it was
about the music itself, like theway it sounded and the way it
made you feel.
And, as I've mentioned in this,I've often wondered why the
Beatles music had such an effecton me as a kid.
Now, I didn't discover theBeatles music until I was eight
(17:01):
years old and their musicconsumed me.
I was completely obsessed withthis band, their personalities,
their lifestyles, theirphilosophies.
I lived, ate, slept, dreamt,shit.
The Beatles, that's all Ithought about and they shaped
(17:21):
how I looked at the world, how Ilooked at what I wanted to do
for a living.
I wanted to become an artistthe whole nine yards.
But he called their musicprimitive.
He insisted that it wasdesigned to overload teenagers'
nervous system, making them, youknow, lose control, act
impulsively, which they did,myself included.
(17:44):
I was very impulsive once Iheard the Beatles music.
Think about all those screaminggirls from back then that would
go to their concert and justlose their absolute minds.
You know, I've read articleswhere these girls, teenage girls
, would go in, scream and get soexcited, so turned on, that
they'd wet themselves, they'dbring themselves to orgasm,
(18:05):
they'd pass out, they'd faint,they'd go absolutely mad.
I know, as I said in otherepisodes, sinatra, frank Sinatra
and Elvis had similar effectson girls, but not to the effect
that the Beatles did.
Now, why did this band of fouraverage-looking guys of average
music skills have this kind ofeffect, this mass hysteria and
(18:29):
all these people, worldwideInsanity.
And the author actually tied itback to Pavlov, as I mentioned
earlier, pavlov's dog.
You know, the dog guy, theconditioned reflex, and it's a
thing called artificial neurosis.
So artificial neurosis itreminds me of what is, you know.
(18:51):
Okay, basically, pavlov foundthat, if you like, create these
flipping condition reflexes indogs, it can cause a kind of
like mental breakdown.
Okay, so teenagers, right, theyhave like natural inhibitions
(19:13):
against doing crazy stuff.
So they're very reserved.
When I was a teenager I wasvery like oh my God, I don't
want to dance.
Oh my God, don't call on me.
In class You're very kind oflike self-conscious, you're
awkward, you don't want anybodyto look at you.
A lot of kids have a hard timewhen they're that age.
Look at you.
(19:34):
A lot of kids have a hard timewhen they're that age.
So they learn that from you.
Know, parents, society,developing a sense of morals, so
just basic rules.
But Nobel thought that theBeatles music, with all of its
driving rhythms and suggestivelyrics, it could overpower those
inhibitions, like short circuittheir brains, you know, turn
(19:54):
off their common sense, makethem do stuff they normally
wouldn't do.
So it's like you thought theBeatles were some kind of
musical pied piper leading allthese kids astray with hypnotic
rhythms.
It's a good way to put itreally, when you think about it.
I mean you thought their musicwas like a tool for social
(20:14):
control, turn teenagers againsttheir own country, you know, bam
, communist takeoverSubversively.
I mean, think about it.
Russia and America were at oddswith one another and still are.
But we're a massive countrysurrounded by water on three
sides and we have all differentkind of climates.
(20:36):
We have desert, we have winterclimates, we have all kinds of
things.
And would you think that theCommunist Party would want to
invade America Even 50 years ago?
Would they really want to puttheir ships onshore, offshore
and put landing craft and go upon our beaches like they did in
World War II and face an armedenvironment like today
(21:00):
especially?
But back then even everyone hadguns and guns weren't
restricted.
Back then Anybody and everybodyhad guns.
So it would be almost animpossible war to win because
you'd be attacking, you'd haveto attack from multiple sides,
you'd be up against armedmilitia of private citizens.
(21:20):
Um, it would be a very hostileenvironment to take over.
So why not try to take over thecountry without having to fire
a shot, by infiltrating itspeople, its culture and their
minds?
It seems to make perfectlylogical sense to me.
It seems to be a better way totake over a country than with
bombs and bullets.
(21:41):
I think you know he looked at itas the music was a way to take
over the minds of the youth,because the youth is the future
of the country.
And the music created masshysteria, which it did, and
Nobel points out things like theriots of Beatle concerts you
know just the general chaos ofBeatlemania and said it was
(22:02):
proof that music couldmanipulate people and turn them
into, you know, hystericalfreaks, which is what it did.
He even said in this articlethat the Beatles themselves were
being used like they were pawnsin this whole communist scheme.
And I know what you're thinking.
(22:24):
Oh come on, the Beatles, thosecute little mop top lads from
Liverpool, as like secretcommunist agents.
I know it sounds a bit hard tobelieve and it does seem pretty
far-fetched now.
But yeah, remember this was adifferent time, this was Cold
War.
Cold War between us and Russiawas huge.
But as I read it and I thinkabout it, this would be the
(22:47):
perfect way to take over acountry, undermine the mental
stability of the countryine themental stability of the country,
undermine the mental stabilityof the youth, disintegrate the
family unit and the countrybegins to fall apart.
Now think about that, 1964.
Think about now, 2024.
60 years later, and look whereour country is.
(23:08):
Our families are alldisintegrated.
Kids are angry and they startedgetting angry years ago, angry
and they wanted to rebel.
They hated their families, theydidn't want to work, they don't
want to go to school, theydidn't want to listen to
authority.
Everything in rock and rollmusic was about defying
authority.
And one thing I do know frompersonal experience from living
(23:30):
in that era is that in Russiayou weren't allowed to listen to
rock and roll.
You weren't allowed to watchAmerican TV.
You weren't allowed to see anyof that stuff.
And I wonder why.
Maybe because they were afraidthat their people would start to
rebel against the communistregime, who knows?
(23:53):
So people back then were afraid.
So Nobel was feeding off ofthat fear.
But I don't think he did it topush like a Christian agenda.
He did it to bring light topeople, to try to wake them up
(24:16):
to how much impact this bandactually was having on our
culture.
And a lot of people, especiallythose who were already kind of
freaked out about rock and roll,they bought into it.
And I think, as I look back onit, those people that bought
into it looked at it as freaksand what would have been called
back then, if the word existedconspiracy theorists.
(24:38):
And it's amazing back then howmuch cultural anxiety got tied
up into something as simple aspop music.
But was it really?
Is it a conspiracy theory or isit fact?
I mean whether it's lullabies orfolk songs, rock and roll, the
Beatles music really stirs upsome serious emotions.
(25:02):
I'm thinking about what it doesto you.
In some ways it can bringpeople together.
In other ways it tears peopleapart.
It can make you cry, it canmake you laugh, it can make you
feel melancholy.
I mean music really messes withyour head.
It can make you laugh, it canmake you feel melancholy.
I mean music really messes withyour head.
It really does, and I'm a primeexample of it.
I mean, I'm sitting here, I'msurrounded by five guitars.
(25:24):
I've got a mandolin and aguitar banjo.
For years I thought I was goingto be a rock star and you know
I don't have any delusions aboutthat anymore.
But how many people do we knowwere so affected by music?
They just had to play music.
It creates a delusionalenvironment where people think
(25:47):
more of themselves than maybethey, perhaps they should.
I think it, you know.
I think it makes you think alot about the role of music in
society and how people see it,how people get used to it and
how it can become like abattleground for all sorts of
big old cultural issues.
I mean there's always musicinvolved with political
(26:09):
campaigns, rock stars, countryartists that support the current
candidates.
You know they've always gotsome song that's part of their
campaign.
For me, this article waseye-opening because my next
episode is going to be with MikeWilliams and in a previous
(26:30):
episode I discussed frequenciesin music and how they can affect
the mind.
We've discussed frequencies inmusic and how they can affect
the mind.
Mike's going to talk abouthypnotism, because Mike Williams
of Sage Equay Radio is alicensed hypnotherapist and
we're going to talk about howmusic can put you in a trance.
But to get back to the articlehere, you know I don't know how
(26:56):
people reacted to this article.
I mean, did his book, did hisarticle have a lasting impact?
It definitely got peopletalking.
Now, this is an old article butfrom what I read it was like a
lightning rod to some people.
Some people especially thosewho are already on the edge of
communism, and how culture waschanging and they were paranoid
about it.
(27:16):
It really spoke to them.
And I had a friend, my friend'sfather in high school, didn't
like rock music.
He was a born-again Christian.
He would say you know, thedevil is in that music.
And we all laughed at him, wemade fun of him and stuff.
But now, as a grown man, lookback on it, I I don't know how I
(27:38):
think of the devil.
I don't think of the devil as a, you know, a red-skinned guy
with a forked tail and horns onhis head.
But the devil may be somethingthat undermines and destroys
cultural aspects or divides youor takes you away from peace,
and I think the Beatles did thatand rock and roll did.
(28:00):
But a lot of the people backthen thought the Beatles and
rock music were like a realdanger to America and others.
They just thought, you know allthose people were being
ridiculous, like totaloverreaction, you know, just a
bunch of fear-mongering aboutthis new kind of music.
That was, you know, shakingthings up a bit.
So it was a pretty bigcontroversy.
(28:21):
I mean to stand back and try totalk about the Beatles now.
It's hard to, it's impossibleto really encapsulate the
emotional and the overwhelmingexperience of Beatlemania,
because they really overtookculture.
They just shattered.
It's like the four band memberswalked into the world of music
(28:44):
with shotguns and just blewmusic.
At the very least they blewmusic just out of the water.
They blew it to pieces Becauseafter the Beatles and the other
British invasion bands hit theshores of America, music in this
country and around the worldcompletely changed forever.
It was actually obliterated andcompletely sent in a different
course.
While I don't think everyonereally believes in the whole
(29:05):
brainwashing thing anymore, itdid get people thinking about it
.
I think that's something wetalk about today and that's why
I bring it up, because I thinkmusic has really taken up a huge
part of everything in our lives.
I mean, it's in advertising,it's in campaigns, it's on TV,
(29:28):
it's on the internet, it'severywhere you can't escape
music.
It's in all the restaurants,it's in the gas stations.
Music it's in all therestaurants, it's in the gas
stations.
And what if there's a subliminalmessage that they're trying to
keep all of our brains in sometype of retractor being locked
in so we're like zombies?
Can a song actually make you dosomething you don't want to do?
(29:48):
I don't know.
It's been speculated a lot.
These kids that are goingaround shooting up schools and
stuff are influenced by music.
So Nobel definitely thoughtmusic could overpower your free
(30:11):
will, you know, turn you into acommunist zombie.
As I said, what does acommunist zombie look like?
Do they have a sickle and ahammer and they're bleeding from
the mouth or something I don'tknow, but that's a little
extreme, I mean.
But if you know you don'tbelieve in like mind control.
You can't deny that the musicis persuasive.
(30:31):
I think about how a certain songcan, you know, bring back a
memory.
It's very influential.
I think about how a certainsong can, you know, bring back a
memory.
It's very influential.
And you know, catchy jingles.
All that stuff influences us.
It, you know, makes us want tobuy products.
It catches our attention inadvertising.
It makes us want to buy a car.
Look at a girl, fall in love,hate someone, hate a group of
(30:53):
people.
It's used as a weapon.
I think Music is a verypowerful weapon.
So where does this leave us?
What's the big takeaway fromall this?
Well, I think the thing I takeaway from it is it's how I see
music and even art.
Art is tied up in all of thisstuff with what's going on in
(31:16):
society and politics of the time.
And we're right in the middleof a political campaign here
with Trump and Harris, andthey're both, as I said, they're
utilizing art, they'reutilizing music, they're trying
to get endorsements from artists, actors, musicians,
entertainers, because thegeneral public looks up to these
(31:37):
artists and entertainers asicons.
They hang on their every word.
So if XYZ person says vote forTrump, they're going to vote for
Trump, and certain artists andactors lean certain ways
politically, so they have acertain following that mirrors
that candidate's beliefs andpolitical attitudes.
(32:00):
So you know, back then this hasbeen labeled as a product of the
Cold War.
You know, all that fear andsuspicion shaped how he saw the
Beatles, this author Nobel, andhow we saw rock and roll.
It reminds us of something thatseems, you know, harmless.
(32:20):
Like pop, music can become thisflashpoint or like triggering
social anxieties.
It makes you wonder how peoplein the future will see music we
listen to now.
You know, even if the musicdoesn't affect people on purpose
, it makes you wonder.
It does make you wonder.
(32:41):
It makes you wonder why didthese four guys from Liverpool
have such power, have suchinfluence?
I was wrapped up in Beatlemaniaand I divorced myself from it.
I grew tired of it and now thatI've stepped away from it, I
look at it.
Here's how I summarize theBeatles.
(33:02):
He were four average lookingguys at best, with average
musical skills, that somehow,who at first were just a cover
band schlepping around dingybars in the Reeperbahn district
in Germany and around Englandwere just playing cover tunes by
(33:25):
Chuck Berry and the like.
Crappy Instruments had neverreally written many songs or
didn't play original songs.
They were only doing covertunes.
All of a sudden they becamegenius songwriters.
They were on the BBC radiostation long before they were
famous and all of a sudden theyhad a number one album and a
(33:45):
number one songs in England andin America.
It makes you wonder how didthese four average guys of
average abilities all of asudden get coined as being
genius songwriters, sink the topof all the charts?
So I'll leave you with that.
I mean, I don't know.
You know I'm theorizing basedoff this guy's article.
(34:07):
But as I have pursued this topicabout the Beatles, were they
really the band we think theywere?
Was there an agenda behindtheir music?
Did they write their own music?
Was their music written with aspecific purpose in mind, to
affect culture directly?
Or was the band strictly justout there to make a record
(34:29):
company money?
But where did these songs comefrom?
How did they write them soquickly?
But where did these songs comefrom?
How did they write them soquickly?
And were they produced in sucha way as to put the human mind
into some type of trance.
Are there hidden tones,frequencies in the music?
Is it structured and producedin such a way that would
(34:51):
captivate the human mind?
That's what I wonder.
What is the genius behind this?
There's something more to it,because when I hear some of this
Beatle music now, when I'm anolder man, I think this song is
not very good.
As I've said in other podcasts,you could take the songs Love Me
Do and Yellow Submarine andshoot them off into space.
(35:12):
Take every copy of them thatexists vinyl and shoot them off
into space.
Take every copy of them thatexists vinyl, cassette, 8-track,
mp3s, whatever it is.
Shoot them off into space andif they were never on the planet
again, the world would be abetter place.
These songs stink.
Love Me Do is a horrible song.
It's boring, it's dull, it'slifeless.
(35:33):
It's a weak attempt at tryingto write a pop love song, but
for some reason we're toldthat's great.
So because we're told it'sgreat and the Beatles wrote it,
oh, it must be great.
So what is this all about?
How did these guys get to wherethey got?
Why do they have so muchinfluence?
You know the song I saw herstanding there is about an
(35:55):
underage girl.
Well, she was just 17.
Okay, you know what I mean.
What are you saying there?
Paul, you like young girls?
I mean, those lyrics wouldn'tgo today.
And I know Chuck Berry had asong called Sweet Little 16.
That's creepy.
You got a've got a dirty oldman singing about young girls.
(36:18):
What are they trying to saythere exactly, and what agenda
are they trying to push?
As a man, I don't have children, but I have several nieces and
I definitely wouldn't want adirty old man going after my
young nieces.
So you know what is the there.
What are the lyrics saying?
(36:38):
What are the rhythms doing?
What are they doing to yourmind?
I'm of the belief.
I don't know if it was acommunist plot, but I think
there's far more to the musicthan our naive minds want to
admit to.
We want to.
Most people couldn't ever evenfathom that there could be more
to the music than just sellingrecords.
(36:59):
Most people would be sodisturbed if they found out the
music was manipulating theirminds and their emotions
intentionally.
There was an intention behindit.
Most people think there'sabsence of malice.
They think there's no.
Oh, come on, pete, it's justrock music.
What are you talking about?
Come on, pete, it's just rockmusic.
What are you talking about?
It's just Journey.
It's just Bruce Springsteen.
(37:20):
Come on, what could it possiblybe doing to us?
But let me ask you this when wasour country in 1960?
And where is our country today?
And what is one of the biggestfactors in our culture that
appeared?
It was rock and roll.
Factors in our culture thatappeared.
It was rock and roll and ChuckBerry and the like Elvis weren't
(37:46):
doing too much.
Beatles come on scene out ofEurope and all of a sudden, our
country just completely implodesDemonstrations, racial upheaval
, sexual upheaval, tensionbetween the sexes.
It was complete chaos in the60s.
And what one thing happened?
Rock and roll exploded duringthis time, giving kids some
reason to rebel, and I bet youmost of them are like I got to
(38:08):
go rebel.
But what are they rebellingagainst?
They had a strong father.
They had a mother staying athome.
They had money.
They had a roof over their head, they had food on the table.
Strong father, they had amother staying at home.
They had money.
They had a roof over their head.
They had food on the table.
They had security.
Their dads could work at thesame company for 30, 40, 50
years with a pension.
Now none of us have jobs, nobodyhas pensions, both parents are
working, the homes are destroyed, families are crushed, kids are
(38:31):
sitting around without fathers.
Doesn't matter your race, itdoesn't matter the color of your
skin.
Most of us didn't have fathersgrowing up.
Two of my friends didn't havefathers growing up and most of
us are lost, confused, dazed.
We're angry.
We listen to this music.
We get angry listening to music.
We're like what are we angryabout?
(38:53):
Think about it.
I mean, our country's a messright now.
Was rock and roll one of thebiggest wedges that destroyed
our culture?
Could it have been in acommunist agenda?
I don't know.
So think about it.
Let's leave that out there foryou.
And thanks for joining me todayon PT Papa Mind Revolution and
(39:14):
my deep dive into communism,hypnotism and the Beatles, and
it's been quite a journey,people.
And if you like what I do here,tell people about my podcast To
support my channel, go over toPatreon, make a donation, check
out my YouTube channel,youtubecom.
Forward slash at PT Pop.
(39:34):
And with that I bid you alladieu and thank you for watching
and hasta la vista, baby.
Hey there, everybody.
Pt Pop here with all four lobesof my brain securely bound
behind my back, and welcome toanother episode of A Mind
Revolution, where I lead you outof the rabbit hole one grain of
truth at a time.
Today, I've got a great show,an awesome show.
I'm very excited about this.
(00:30):
This is all about communism,hypnotism and the Beatles.
We've got a great show.
It should be exciting, doesn'tthat sound like an exciting show
?
So buckle up everyone.
Alert the dog, call the cat,tell the media we got a great
show for you here on A MindRevolution.
(00:51):
Before we get to the main topic,I'd like to invite each and
every one of you to check out myYouTube channel.
Just go to youtubecom, forwardslash ampersand PT pop and if
you want to support my channeland my endeavors, go to my
Patreon channel.
If you have some extra money onhand and want to support the
(01:12):
endeavors of this channel andall of my creative activities,
please go to that.
I'll leave a link to my Patreonchannel in the description.
All right, all of you, fellowinternet dwellers, buckle up
here, because today I'm divingdeep into something some of you
might consider pretty strangeCommunism, hypnotism and the
(01:35):
Beatles.
And you might be thinking what?
Yeah?
Yeah, I know, but stick with mehere because it's going to be a
really interesting topic andI'm going to be looking at this
publication from 1965 written byReverend David A Noble, called,
well, communism, hypnotism andthe Beatles.
(02:00):
And you know, keep in mind, thatwhen this article was written,
america was at the peak of theCold War.
Okay, we were at odds withcommunist Russia and people were
, well, a little on edge aboutcommunist influence.
And it was a time when peoplewere really worried about like
(02:25):
ideological subversion,especially when it came to young
people.
They were worried about youngpeople being influenced by the
communist party.
And this author, mr noble, hislittle paper here, um, really
played into that fear it was.
It was actually feeding off ofthat fear.
(02:45):
And if you look at it from ahistorical perspective, he was
basically saying the communistswere using this totally
unexpected weapon music, popmusic and the Beatles to
brainwash the youth of Westernculture and music.
I know what you're saying,you're like, hold on.
(03:08):
He was basically saying rockand roll was like a communist
plot.
And I know you're thinkingthat's a bit much to take on,
you know, and I know it soundspretty wild, but I'll give you
that it does sound wild, butNobel was serious and what he
titled this was he called itMental Side and it was basically
(03:30):
mental suicide.
And he thought, based off ofthis article now you can find
this article of this articleright on Google and it shows the
cover, it shows the picture ofthe author, the whole thing but
(03:54):
he basically thought this wasbasically like the musicals
being used to induce mentalsuicide in the youth, induce
mental suicide in the youth.
He thought they were trying toweaken the minds of young
Americans and make them easierto sway towards communist
ideology.
And if you think about it atthe time, the Communist
(04:20):
Manifesto part of their goal wasto undermine the integrity of
the American family and to eataway and chip away at the
foundation of the Americanfamily.
Now, if you think about apost-American times, you had the
basic family you had the fatherwas the breadwinner, the father
(04:40):
went out to work, the motherstayed home to take care of the
kids.
The father went out to work,the mother stayed home to take
care of the kids, and most ofthese guys were post-war
veterans that had moved into thesuburbs, built a house, a cozy
little bungalow with a pickawayfence, 2.5 kids and a dog.
They had one car in the garage,they had money, they had nice,
(05:00):
nice things and it was portrayedas being really stable, great
time.
Mom was just there with a dad'smartini when he walked in the
door and rub his feet and havedinner on the table.
The woman was very submissiveto the man.
But as I know from personalexperience in my own family,
things weren't quite asbeautiful as it was portrayed.
(05:22):
Now my family might be theordinary because both my parents
ended up becoming severealcoholics and you know my dad
was beating my mom and stuff anda lot of men were beating their
wives.
Back then it was commonplace sobut anyway, I'm not certain how
strong this version of thefamily really was.
But the Communist Manifesto wastrying to undermine and weaken
(05:46):
the American family, todisintegrate the ideologies of
the American structureinternally.
So he thought this authorthought that they were using
scientific techniques based onthe work of a gentleman.
(06:06):
You may all have heard of IvanPavlov and you've heard of
Pavlov's dog.
You know he's the bell guy.
When they'd ring a bell the dogwould salivate.
And I'm like you're thinkingwell, what does that have to do
with rock and roll?
You know Pavlov's experimentsright.
They showed how powerfulconditioned reflexes can be.
This is what Pavlov's studiesdid.
He.
They showed how powerfulcondition reflexes can be.
This is what Pavlov's studiesdid.
(06:26):
He showed how powerfulcondition reflexes can be.
So he trained these dogs by,like, always ringing your bell
at the right time before feedingthem so they would drool.
And of course I'm giving you a50,000 foot overview of Pavlov.
But after a while these dogswould start drooling, and just
at the sound of the bell, eventhough there was no food around.
(06:46):
So the author, noble, thoughtmusic could work the same way.
So he's basically saying musiccould be a trigger, like make
you react to a certain waywithout you even realizing it,
subconsciously triggering thingsin your mind.
And he thought being exposed tocertain types of music over and
over, especially with stuffstrong, with strong rhythms,
(07:07):
certain metal melodies and andthe like, could program you
almost like a computer.
And it's kind of like, I guessyou'd say it's how advertising
jingles get stuck in your head.
And even though, um, even thethought of this, this
manipulation, was targeted atdifferent age groups, you know,
(07:27):
you think to yourself wow, thisis pretty wild.
I mean, you never reallythought about rock music as
being this way and this is.
I think this is prettyinteresting because I never
really thought about this.
You think about how music youhear it all the time.
Everywhere we go today, there'smusic.
Today I was in the men's lockerroom at the gym and there was
classic rock playing in the gymwhile I'm taking a leak.
(07:47):
I'm like why do I need to hearclassic rock while I'm in the
locker room?
And it's out where I'm workingout, it's out in the parking lot
, it's in the malls, it's in theparking lot of the malls, it's
everywhere.
What kind of musical weapons didthe author think they were
using?
Something you've got to askyourself.
Well, he started with theyoungest believe it or not,
(08:15):
babies and toddlers, and he'snot saying lullabies or
propaganda, or is he?
So this gets really interestingbecause there's a type of music
that was imported into the US,strictly targeting young kids to
help them go to sleep, andNoble claimed that even the most
innocent little tunes could beused for, you know, creating
(08:37):
those conditioned reflexes.
And he pointed to companieslike Children's Record Guild and
the Young People Records, andit was said that their music was
designed to get specificreactions out of little, teeny,
tiny kids.
So basically he's sayingthey're coming for our babies
(08:57):
through lullabies as communistmind control.
Now I know that sounds crazy butif you look at the details of
this study might make you thinkit's not so crazy.
But you know, you've got toremember this was like the peak
of the Cold War paranoia.
(09:17):
But was it really paranoia?
You know, a lot of thingshappened back then.
And look at our country now.
Look at, as I said, thefoundation of the American
culture was based on the fatherworking.
One income could buy a house,get a car, have a couple kids, a
wife at home.
Everybody had new clothes, theyhad a nice yard, they could go
(09:39):
on vacation and nobodyquestioned anything.
Nobody questioned authority.
Everything was kind of justrunning right real smooth.
We had the post-industrial,post-war industrial buildup in
America new highways, newbuildings, new houses, new malls
.
People had money.
It was going well.
(10:00):
And then the 1960s hit and allthese kids had it in their mind
they got to rebel Rebel againstwhat I say and people at the
time were definitely afraid ofthe communist infiltration and
parents especially were worriedabout it.
Well, I mean, everythinginfluences kids Because, as I
said in another episode, thehuman brain, male and female
(10:24):
doesn't develop well into the20s.
So Nobel really tapped intothis, or did he?
Is it paranoia or is it reality?
Look at our country pre-1960sstable, strong, going forward
After about 1965, it starts tocompletely fall apart.
You know, were lullabies forbabies, were what?
(10:46):
Were they communist anthems inelementary school music class?
Not really, not quite.
They weren't anthems.
But he did say in this articleand you've got to read this
article, it's a fascinatingarticle and if you're of the
mindset where you believeeverything you heard about the
propaganda towards thecommunists and you think it was
all just hogwash, you're notgoing to buy into this article.
(11:08):
But if you can look into itobjectively, you're going to go.
Whoa, this has some merit to it.
But he did say that even themusic played in schools you know
, sometimes even slipped andeducational stuff could be used
for this conditioning.
So he's basically saying thekids are being bombarded with
these subliminal messages likefrom the cradle all the way
(11:29):
through school and that's likesomething out of a sci-fi movie,
but it does have a bit of adystopian vibe.
But there's some truth to itand you'd have to study these
songs, these children's songs.
(11:49):
Many of these songs werewritten and produced by Russians
and communists in communistRussia and they were presented
with certain tones and certainfrequencies within the music and
certain words and phrases andthe presentation of the music.
The production music wasdesigned to get into the mind of
the child and have it go tosleep.
Your mind goes into a differentmindset when you go into the
(12:13):
sleep world.
Now, I'm not a brain surgeon ora brain expert, but you're more
susceptible to things whenyou're asleep.
Were people buying this?
Did anyone take him seriously?
This article?
Yeah, yeah, his book.
It's not really a book, it'sjust an article written.
It's just it's a small book,it's only about 25, 30 pages
(12:37):
long.
But his book got a lot ofattention.
I mean, a lot of people thoughtit was he was onto something and
it really sparked a debate likethe power of music and how it
affects especially people'syoung minds, and I think that's
fascinating.
But did he actually have anyevidence about this?
Well, I mean it was like he wasmaking stuff up completely and
(13:01):
that's how I, when I read him,like how does he know this?
Does he really know this?
Is this reality?
But he was in, he was tappingto, like, the real anxieties of
the people at the time.
You know, and they even havethese today.
They're still pushing theRussian agenda right, russia
gate, and how they affected ourelections with all of these
(13:22):
presidential candidates.
But think about how music getsused, like in advertising,
jingles, movie soundtracks.
They totally mess with youremotions.
I mean, think about it.
I mean, the other day I wasagain.
I'm in the locker room againand this song from Journey comes
on by the band Journey and it'sa sad love song.
I can't remember the song, butit was a song from my high
(13:43):
school days that always made mesad because it made me think of
a girl that I wanted to date,that we had broken up and she
didn't want to go out with meanymore.
She went out with some baseballplayer and I was like, oh
listen, I heard the song come on.
I started feeling sad and Iwasn't hearing the song
consciously.
I heard music in the back, butI started feeling really down.
(14:05):
I'm standing there in thelocker.
I'm like, why do I feel so sad?
I'm like, oh my God, is thissong by Journey?
Is it full on mind control?
I mean, that's a differentstory, right?
So what were some of the genresthat this author Nobel was
really worried about, and he wasworried about a lot actually,
(14:25):
but most of it was about theBeatles and he was really
pointing out how the Beatlescame onto the scene and pretty
much punched a hole into ourculture and into the culture of
our youth.
I mean especially the kind ofmusic that was popular with the
(14:47):
college kids too.
I mean the Beatles initiallywere attractive and intriguing
to the younger kids, theteenagers.
But he pointed to groups likePeople's Songs, incorporated,
and singers like Pete Seeger.
They were known for beingpretty left-leaning.
Pete Seeger was a communist andNobel saw that like as a direct
(15:12):
threat.
I mean, like folk music oftenhas like messages about social
justice and protest.
So he does discuss folk music,pete Seeger, and how that
initiated or took part or playeda part in the protests and the
protest mindset of the 1960s andthe protest mindset of the
(15:33):
1960s.
So I guess in a way you couldsay in the Cold War times that
it makes sense that some peoplewould be suspicious and Nobel
thought they were using folkmusic to romanticize communism,
make it sound appealing to theyoung.
You know intellectuals tryingto, like you know, sneak in
(15:54):
those subversive ideas throughfolk music, like planting the
seeds for, you know, futurecommunist leaders or something.
It seems like he was seeingcommunist boogeymen everywhere.
But I have a feeling he savedhis best material for, like I
said, the Beatles, because backthen the older generation saw
(16:18):
the Beatles as if they werepublic enemy number one, you
know, the ultimate weapon inthis whole.
I guess you'd call it communistmusical plot.
But why the Beatles?
I mean they weren't exactlysinging about revolution or
anything, at least not until1968 when they had the song
(16:39):
Revolution.
But for Nobel, it seems itwasn't about the words, it was
about the music itself, like theway it sounded and the way it
made you feel.
And, as I've mentioned in this,I've often wondered why the
Beatles music had such an effecton me as a kid.
Now, I didn't discover theBeatles music until I was eight
(17:01):
years old and their musicconsumed me.
I was completely obsessed withthis band, their personalities,
their lifestyles, theirphilosophies.
I lived, ate, slept, dreamt,shit.
The Beatles, that's all Ithought about and they shaped
(17:21):
how I looked at the world, how Ilooked at what I wanted to do
for a living.
I wanted to become an artistthe whole nine yards.
But he called their musicprimitive.
He insisted that it wasdesigned to overload teenagers'
nervous system, making them, youknow, lose control, act
impulsively, which they did,myself included.
(17:44):
I was very impulsive once Iheard the Beatles music.
Think about all those screaminggirls from back then that would
go to their concert and justlose their absolute minds.
You know, I've read articleswhere these girls, teenage girls
, would go in, scream and get soexcited, so turned on, that
they'd wet themselves, they'dbring themselves to orgasm,
(18:05):
they'd pass out, they'd faint,they'd go absolutely mad.
I know, as I said in otherepisodes, sinatra, frank Sinatra
and Elvis had similar effectson girls, but not to the effect
that the Beatles did.
Now, why did this band of fouraverage-looking guys of average
music skills have this kind ofeffect, this mass hysteria and
(18:29):
all these people, worldwideInsanity.
And the author actually tied itback to Pavlov, as I mentioned
earlier, pavlov's dog.
You know, the dog guy, theconditioned reflex, and it's a
thing called artificial neurosis.
So artificial neurosis itreminds me of what is, you know.
(18:51):
Okay, basically, pavlov foundthat, if you like, create these
flipping condition reflexes indogs, it can cause a kind of
like mental breakdown.
Okay, so teenagers, right, theyhave like natural inhibitions
(19:13):
against doing crazy stuff.
So they're very reserved.
When I was a teenager I wasvery like oh my God, I don't
want to dance.
Oh my God, don't call on me.
In class You're very kind oflike self-conscious, you're
awkward, you don't want anybodyto look at you.
A lot of kids have a hard timewhen they're that age.
Look at you.
(19:34):
A lot of kids have a hard timewhen they're that age.
So they learn that from you.
Know, parents, society,developing a sense of morals, so
just basic rules.
But Nobel thought that theBeatles music, with all of its
driving rhythms and suggestivelyrics, it could overpower those
inhibitions, like short circuittheir brains, you know, turn
(19:54):
off their common sense, makethem do stuff they normally
wouldn't do.
So it's like you thought theBeatles were some kind of
musical pied piper leading allthese kids astray with hypnotic
rhythms.
It's a good way to put itreally, when you think about it.
I mean you thought their musicwas like a tool for social
(20:14):
control, turn teenagers againsttheir own country, you know, bam
, communist takeoverSubversively.
I mean, think about it.
Russia and America were at oddswith one another and still are.
But we're a massive countrysurrounded by water on three
sides and we have all differentkind of climates.
(20:36):
We have desert, we have winterclimates, we have all kinds of
things.
And would you think that theCommunist Party would want to
invade America Even 50 years ago?
Would they really want to puttheir ships onshore, offshore
and put landing craft and go upon our beaches like they did in
World War II and face an armedenvironment like today
(21:00):
especially?
But back then even everyone hadguns and guns weren't
restricted.
Back then Anybody and everybodyhad guns.
So it would be almost animpossible war to win because
you'd be attacking, you'd haveto attack from multiple sides,
you'd be up against armedmilitia of private citizens.
(21:20):
Um, it would be a very hostileenvironment to take over.
So why not try to take over thecountry without having to fire
a shot, by infiltrating itspeople, its culture and their
minds?
It seems to make perfectlylogical sense to me.
It seems to be a better way totake over a country than with
bombs and bullets.
(21:41):
I think you know he looked at itas the music was a way to take
over the minds of the youth,because the youth is the future
of the country.
And the music created masshysteria, which it did, and
Nobel points out things like theriots of Beatle concerts you
know just the general chaos ofBeatlemania and said it was
(22:02):
proof that music couldmanipulate people and turn them
into, you know, hystericalfreaks, which is what it did.
He even said in this articlethat the Beatles themselves were
being used like they were pawnsin this whole communist scheme.
And I know what you're thinking.
(22:24):
Oh come on, the Beatles, thosecute little mop top lads from
Liverpool, as like secretcommunist agents.
I know it sounds a bit hard tobelieve and it does seem pretty
far-fetched now.
But yeah, remember this was adifferent time, this was Cold
War.
Cold War between us and Russiawas huge.
But as I read it and I thinkabout it, this would be the
(22:47):
perfect way to take over acountry, undermine the mental
stability of the countryine themental stability of the country,
undermine the mental stabilityof the youth, disintegrate the
family unit and the countrybegins to fall apart.
Now think about that, 1964.
Think about now, 2024.
60 years later, and look whereour country is.
(23:08):
Our families are alldisintegrated.
Kids are angry and they startedgetting angry years ago, angry
and they wanted to rebel.
They hated their families, theydidn't want to work, they don't
want to go to school, theydidn't want to listen to
authority.
Everything in rock and rollmusic was about defying
authority.
And one thing I do know frompersonal experience from living
(23:30):
in that era is that in Russiayou weren't allowed to listen to
rock and roll.
You weren't allowed to watchAmerican TV.
You weren't allowed to see anyof that stuff.
And I wonder why.
Maybe because they were afraidthat their people would start to
rebel against the communistregime, who knows?
(23:53):
So people back then were afraid.
So Nobel was feeding off ofthat fear.
But I don't think he did it topush like a Christian agenda.
He did it to bring light topeople, to try to wake them up
(24:16):
to how much impact this bandactually was having on our
culture.
And a lot of people, especiallythose who were already kind of
freaked out about rock and roll,they bought into it.
And I think, as I look back onit, those people that bought
into it looked at it as freaksand what would have been called
back then, if the word existedconspiracy theorists.
(24:38):
And it's amazing back then howmuch cultural anxiety got tied
up into something as simple aspop music.
But was it really?
Is it a conspiracy theory or isit fact?
I mean whether it's lullabies orfolk songs, rock and roll, the
Beatles music really stirs upsome serious emotions.
(25:02):
I'm thinking about what it doesto you.
In some ways it can bringpeople together.
In other ways it tears peopleapart.
It can make you cry, it canmake you laugh, it can make you
feel melancholy.
I mean music really messes withyour head.
It can make you laugh, it canmake you feel melancholy.
I mean music really messes withyour head.
It really does, and I'm a primeexample of it.
I mean, I'm sitting here, I'msurrounded by five guitars.
(25:24):
I've got a mandolin and aguitar banjo.
For years I thought I was goingto be a rock star and you know
I don't have any delusions aboutthat anymore.
But how many people do we knowwere so affected by music?
They just had to play music.
It creates a delusionalenvironment where people think
(25:47):
more of themselves than maybethey, perhaps they should.
I think it, you know.
I think it makes you think alot about the role of music in
society and how people see it,how people get used to it and
how it can become like abattleground for all sorts of
big old cultural issues.
I mean there's always musicinvolved with political
(26:09):
campaigns, rock stars, countryartists that support the current
candidates.
You know they've always gotsome song that's part of their
campaign.
For me, this article waseye-opening because my next
episode is going to be with MikeWilliams and in a previous
(26:30):
episode I discussed frequenciesin music and how they can affect
the mind.
We've discussed frequencies inmusic and how they can affect
the mind.
Mike's going to talk abouthypnotism, because Mike Williams
of Sage Equay Radio is alicensed hypnotherapist and
we're going to talk about howmusic can put you in a trance.
But to get back to the articlehere, you know I don't know how
(26:56):
people reacted to this article.
I mean, did his book, did hisarticle have a lasting impact?
It definitely got peopletalking.
Now, this is an old article butfrom what I read it was like a
lightning rod to some people.
Some people especially thosewho are already on the edge of
communism, and how culture waschanging and they were paranoid
about it.
(27:16):
It really spoke to them.
And I had a friend, my friend'sfather in high school, didn't
like rock music.
He was a born-again Christian.
He would say you know, thedevil is in that music.
And we all laughed at him, wemade fun of him and stuff.
But now, as a grown man, lookback on it, I I don't know how I
(27:38):
think of the devil.
I don't think of the devil as a, you know, a red-skinned guy
with a forked tail and horns onhis head.
But the devil may be somethingthat undermines and destroys
cultural aspects or divides youor takes you away from peace,
and I think the Beatles did thatand rock and roll did.
(28:00):
But a lot of the people backthen thought the Beatles and
rock music were like a realdanger to America and others.
They just thought, you know allthose people were being
ridiculous, like totaloverreaction, you know, just a
bunch of fear-mongering aboutthis new kind of music.
That was, you know, shakingthings up a bit.
So it was a pretty bigcontroversy.
(28:21):
I mean to stand back and try totalk about the Beatles now.
It's hard to, it's impossibleto really encapsulate the
emotional and the overwhelmingexperience of Beatlemania,
because they really overtookculture.
They just shattered.
It's like the four band memberswalked into the world of music
(28:44):
with shotguns and just blewmusic.
At the very least they blewmusic just out of the water.
They blew it to pieces Becauseafter the Beatles and the other
British invasion bands hit theshores of America, music in this
country and around the worldcompletely changed forever.
It was actually obliterated andcompletely sent in a different
course.
While I don't think everyonereally believes in the whole
(29:05):
brainwashing thing anymore, itdid get people thinking about it
.
I think that's something wetalk about today and that's why
I bring it up, because I thinkmusic has really taken up a huge
part of everything in our lives.
I mean, it's in advertising,it's in campaigns, it's on TV,
(29:28):
it's on the internet, it'severywhere you can't escape
music.
It's in all the restaurants,it's in the gas stations.
Music it's in all therestaurants, it's in the gas
stations.
And what if there's a subliminalmessage that they're trying to
keep all of our brains in sometype of retractor being locked
in so we're like zombies?
Can a song actually make you dosomething you don't want to do?
(29:48):
I don't know.
It's been speculated a lot.
These kids that are goingaround shooting up schools and
stuff are influenced by music.
So Nobel definitely thoughtmusic could overpower your free
(30:11):
will, you know, turn you into acommunist zombie.
As I said, what does acommunist zombie look like?
Do they have a sickle and ahammer and they're bleeding from
the mouth or something I don'tknow, but that's a little
extreme, I mean.
But if you know you don'tbelieve in like mind control.
You can't deny that the musicis persuasive.
(30:31):
I think about how a certain songcan, you know, bring back a
memory.
It's very influential.
I think about how a certainsong can, you know, bring back a
memory.
It's very influential.
And you know, catchy jingles.
All that stuff influences us.
It, you know, makes us want tobuy products.
It catches our attention inadvertising.
It makes us want to buy a car.
Look at a girl, fall in love,hate someone, hate a group of
(30:53):
people.
It's used as a weapon.
I think Music is a verypowerful weapon.
So where does this leave us?
What's the big takeaway fromall this?
Well, I think the thing I takeaway from it is it's how I see
music and even art.
Art is tied up in all of thisstuff with what's going on in
(31:16):
society and politics of the time.
And we're right in the middleof a political campaign here
with Trump and Harris, andthey're both, as I said, they're
utilizing art, they'reutilizing music, they're trying
to get endorsements from artists, actors, musicians,
entertainers, because thegeneral public looks up to these
(31:37):
artists and entertainers asicons.
They hang on their every word.
So if XYZ person says vote forTrump, they're going to vote for
Trump, and certain artists andactors lean certain ways
politically, so they have acertain following that mirrors
that candidate's beliefs andpolitical attitudes.
(32:00):
So you know, back then this hasbeen labeled as a product of the
Cold War.
You know, all that fear andsuspicion shaped how he saw the
Beatles, this author Nobel, andhow we saw rock and roll.
It reminds us of something thatseems, you know, harmless.
(32:20):
Like pop, music can become thisflashpoint or like triggering
social anxieties.
It makes you wonder how peoplein the future will see music we
listen to now.
You know, even if the musicdoesn't affect people on purpose
, it makes you wonder.
It does make you wonder.
(32:41):
It makes you wonder why didthese four guys from Liverpool
have such power, have suchinfluence?
I was wrapped up in Beatlemaniaand I divorced myself from it.
I grew tired of it and now thatI've stepped away from it, I
look at it.
Here's how I summarize theBeatles.
(33:02):
He were four average lookingguys at best, with average
musical skills, that somehow,who at first were just a cover
band schlepping around dingybars in the Reeperbahn district
in Germany and around Englandwere just playing cover tunes by
(33:25):
Chuck Berry and the like.
Crappy Instruments had neverreally written many songs or
didn't play original songs.
They were only doing covertunes.
All of a sudden they becamegenius songwriters.
They were on the BBC radiostation long before they were
famous and all of a sudden theyhad a number one album and a
(33:45):
number one songs in England andin America.
It makes you wonder how didthese four average guys of
average abilities all of asudden get coined as being
genius songwriters, sink the topof all the charts?
So I'll leave you with that.
I mean, I don't know.
You know I'm theorizing basedoff this guy's article.
(34:07):
But as I have pursued this topicabout the Beatles, were they
really the band we think theywere?
Was there an agenda behindtheir music?
Did they write their own music?
Was their music written with aspecific purpose in mind, to
affect culture directly?
Or was the band strictly justout there to make a record
(34:29):
company money?
But where did these songs comefrom?
How did they write them soquickly?
But where did these songs comefrom?
How did they write them soquickly?
And were they produced in sucha way as to put the human mind
into some type of trance.
Are there hidden tones,frequencies in the music?
Is it structured and producedin such a way that would
(34:51):
captivate the human mind?
That's what I wonder.
What is the genius behind this?
There's something more to it,because when I hear some of this
Beatle music now, when I'm anolder man, I think this song is
not very good.
As I've said in other podcasts,you could take the songs Love Me
Do and Yellow Submarine andshoot them off into space.
(35:12):
Take every copy of them thatexists vinyl and shoot them off
into space.
Take every copy of them thatexists vinyl, cassette, 8-track,
mp3s, whatever it is.
Shoot them off into space andif they were never on the planet
again, the world would be abetter place.
These songs stink.
Love Me Do is a horrible song.
It's boring, it's dull, it'slifeless.
(35:33):
It's a weak attempt at tryingto write a pop love song, but
for some reason we're toldthat's great.
So because we're told it'sgreat and the Beatles wrote it,
oh, it must be great.
So what is this all about?
How did these guys get to wherethey got?
Why do they have so muchinfluence?
You know the song I saw herstanding there is about an
(35:55):
underage girl.
Well, she was just 17.
Okay, you know what I mean.
What are you saying there?
Paul, you like young girls?
I mean, those lyrics wouldn'tgo today.
And I know Chuck Berry had asong called Sweet Little 16.
That's creepy.
You got a've got a dirty oldman singing about young girls.
(36:18):
What are they trying to saythere exactly, and what agenda
are they trying to push?
As a man, I don't have children, but I have several nieces and
I definitely wouldn't want adirty old man going after my
young nieces.
So you know what is the there.
What are the lyrics saying?
(36:38):
What are the rhythms doing?
What are they doing to yourmind?
I'm of the belief.
I don't know if it was acommunist plot, but I think
there's far more to the musicthan our naive minds want to
admit to.
We want to.
Most people couldn't ever evenfathom that there could be more
to the music than just sellingrecords.
(36:59):
Most people would be sodisturbed if they found out the
music was manipulating theirminds and their emotions
intentionally.
There was an intention behindit.
Most people think there'sabsence of malice.
They think there's no.
Oh, come on, pete, it's justrock music.
What are you talking about?
Come on, pete, it's just rockmusic.
What are you talking about?
It's just Journey.
It's just Bruce Springsteen.
(37:20):
Come on, what could it possiblybe doing to us?
But let me ask you this when wasour country in 1960?
And where is our country today?
And what is one of the biggestfactors in our culture that
appeared?
It was rock and roll.
Factors in our culture thatappeared.
It was rock and roll and ChuckBerry and the like Elvis weren't
(37:46):
doing too much.
Beatles come on scene out ofEurope and all of a sudden, our
country just completely implodesDemonstrations, racial upheaval
, sexual upheaval, tensionbetween the sexes.
It was complete chaos in the60s.
And what one thing happened?
Rock and roll exploded duringthis time, giving kids some
reason to rebel, and I bet youmost of them are like I got to
(38:08):
go rebel.
But what are they rebellingagainst?
They had a strong father.
They had a mother staying athome.
They had money.
They had a roof over their head, they had food on the table.
Strong father, they had amother staying at home.
They had money.
They had a roof over their head.
They had food on the table.
They had security.
Their dads could work at thesame company for 30, 40, 50
years with a pension.
Now none of us have jobs, nobodyhas pensions, both parents are
working, the homes are destroyed, families are crushed, kids are
(38:31):
sitting around without fathers.
Doesn't matter your race, itdoesn't matter the color of your
skin.
Most of us didn't have fathersgrowing up.
Two of my friends didn't havefathers growing up and most of
us are lost, confused, dazed.
We're angry.
We listen to this music.
We get angry listening to music.
We're like what are we angryabout?
(38:53):
Think about it.
I mean, our country's a messright now.
Was rock and roll one of thebiggest wedges that destroyed
our culture?
Could it have been in acommunist agenda?
I don't know.
So think about it.
Let's leave that out there foryou.
And thanks for joining me todayon PT Papa Mind Revolution and
(39:14):
my deep dive into communism,hypnotism and the Beatles, and
it's been quite a journey,people.
And if you like what I do here,tell people about my podcast To
support my channel, go over toPatreon, make a donation, check
out my YouTube channel,youtubecom.
Forward slash at PT Pop.
(39:34):
And with that I bid you alladieu and thank you for watching
and hasta la vista, baby.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!