What Hitchcock Taught the Social Engineers

by | Jan 24, 2022 | Newsletter | 18 comments

You’ll recall that late last year I was exploring the central role that narrative plays in shaping our lives. Although it may sound trivial at first glance, story-telling is not just a fundamental part of the human experience, it is one of the primary ways we come to an understanding of the world around us.

From earliest childhood—listening to our parents reading stories to us at bedtime—we learn that the events that shape our world don’t just happen. Instead, they follow familiar plot trajectories in which protagonists set out on quests, encounter obstacles, surmount challenges, battle antagonists and ultimately resolve their conflicts by using what they have learned along their journey. This isn’t just how story works; for the narrative mind, this is how the world works.

This is one of the central insights of my Film, Literature and the New World Order series: movies, books and TV series aren’t mere popcorn entertainment. They reflect our understanding of the world, and—in the hands of the would-be social engineers and predictive programmers—even the dumbest B-movie can be used to implant an idea in the public’s mind. By this method, fiction writers and film producers play a part in indirectly controlling the public’s perception of the world.

So it only stands to reason that those who are trying to write the script of history and steer world events would steal a trick or two from the fiction writer’s playbook, right? And if you want to keep your audience hooked to a far-fetched adventure tale, who better to steal from than the “master of suspense” himself, Alfred Hitchcock?

This week in The Corbett Report Subscriber, James pulls back the curtain on a favourite narrative device of The Great Narrative gang. Thankfully, we can disarm this weapon merely by being aware of it. And as always, Corbett Report members can stick around for James’ recommended reading, listening and viewing, plus a coupon code for 25% off Corbett Report DVDs at the New World Next Week shop.

For free access to this editorial, please CLICK HERE.

The Corbett Report Subscriber
vol 12 issue 02 (January 23, 2022)

by James Corbett
corbettreport.com
January 22, 2021

You’ll recall that late last year I was exploring the central role that narrative plays in shaping our lives. Although it may sound trivial at first glance, story-telling is not just a fundamental part of the human experience, it is one of the primary ways we come to an understanding of the world around us.

From earliest childhood—listening to our parents reading stories to us at bedtime—we learn that the events that shape our world don’t just happen. Instead, they follow familiar plot trajectories in which protagonists set out on quests, encounter obstacles, surmount challenges, battle antagonists and ultimately resolve their conflicts by using what they have learned along their journey. This isn’t just how story works; for the narrative mind, this is how the world works.

This is one of the central insights of my Film, Literature and the New World Order series: movies, books and TV series aren’t mere popcorn entertainment. They reflect our understanding of the world, and—in the hands of the would-be social engineers and predictive programmers—even the dumbest B-movie can be used to implant an idea in the public’s mind. By this method, fiction writers and film producers play a part in indirectly controlling the public’s perception of the world.

So it only stands to reason that those who are trying to write the script of history and steer world events would steal a trick or two from the fiction writer’s playbook, right? And if you want to keep your audience hooked to a far-fetched adventure tale, who better to steal from than the “master of suspense” himself, Alfred Hitchcock?

Full credit for this insight goes to David Knight, who, on his most recent broadcast, used a clip of Hitchcock explaining an old storytelling trick to illustrate a point about how politicians and others get the public on board with their agenda:

In the clip, talk show host Dick Cavett asks Hitchcock to explain a narrative device that the famed British-born film director often employed in his films: the so-called “MacGuffin.”

“A MacGuffin,” explains Hitchcock, “you see in most films about spies. It is the thing that the spies are after. In the days of Rudyard Kipling, it would be the plans of the fort on the Khyber Pass. It would be the plans of an airplane engine and the plans of an atom bomb. Anything you like.”

Coined by English screenwriter and Hitchcock collaborator Angus MacPhail, the meaningless of the name “MacGuffin” is reflective of the fact that, for the audience, the actual nature of the MacGuffin in a particular story is ultimately inconsequential. Its only function is to motivate the characters in the plot. Or, as Hitchcock sums up, “It is the thing that the characters on the screen worry about but the audience don’t care [about].”

David Knight’s keen insight is that the “MacGuffin” is not just a narrative device that spy fiction writers use to spin out an exciting action story. It is also employed by the writers of the “Great Narrative” to keep the public on board with their agenda.

Think of it this way: imagine you’re a eugenics-obsessed billionaire supervillain who wants to erect a technocratic control grid to micromanage the lives of billions of people around the planet. How do you actually go about doing that? Do you simply announce yourself as ruler of the world and threaten to destroy the planet if you don’t get your way? Of course not. That’s comic book supervillain-level thinking.

No, you invent a MacGuffin as a pretext so that the masses can delude themselves into thinking that you’re taking over the planet in order to save it.

Now that’s real-world supervillian-level thinking!

But just as the actual identity of the MacGuffin doesn’t matter to the fiction writer—the plans to a fort on the Khyber pass, the Ark of the Covenant, a mysterious glowing briefcase—the actual identity of the Great Narrative MacGuffin is similarly inconsequential. Whether it’s a virus or a shadowy terror group or the threat of manmade climate change, as long as the global “audience” can be convinced that there is something menacing out there, then they will, more often than not, willingly embrace the proposed “solutions” of the globalist technocrats.

One of the most obvious examples of this phenomenon comes in the 1991 book, The First Global Revolution, where the gaggle of would-be world controllers at The Club of Rome plainly admit that they worked backward from their proposed solution (finding “a common enemy against whom we can unite”) to arrive at their environmental MacGuffin (“the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like”).

“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”

As the authors of the book themselves admit, the threat of environmental damage isn’t actually their concern. No, it’s merely a convenient way to explain to the masses why the takeover of $100 trillion in global assets and the consolidation of control in the hands of the financial elite is happening.

But here’s a more recent and lesser-known example of the same MacGuffin strategy being used to bamboozle the public into supporting an ulterior agenda. It occurred in May of 2014, when Lynn Forester de Rothschild (who else?) gathered together 250 of the globalist “superclass” for a conference in London.

But this wasn’t just any gathering of globalists. These 250 corporate and financial chieftains represented $30 trillion of investment wealth, i.e., 1/3 of all investment capital on the planet. In one room. At one time. All of them assembled for a conference by a Rothschild (by marriage).

What’s not to trust?

But still, the sight of so much wealth and power gathered in a single soiree was too much for even the mainstream mockingbirds to ignore. So how did National Petroleum Radio cover it?

World’s Richest People Meet, Muse On How To Spread The Wealth

Of course, the Powers That Shouldn’t Be are not dumb. They are at least smart enough to recognize that the plebs know that the trillionaire class does not convene to talk about how to “spread the wealth.” No, if they gather in one room, they are going to talk about their favourite topic: how to increase their own wealth, power and influence.

So, in order to set the narrative and get the credulous public on board with their quest for consolidation of control, they needed a MacGuffin. In this case, the MacGuffin was “inclusive capitalism,” the ostensible topic of discussion at the conference.

But what is inclusive capitalism, exactly? You might as well ask Hitchcock what is a MacGuffin, exactly; you’ll get roughly as meaningful an answer. Maybe it’s the plans for a nuclear weapon. Or a device for hunting lions in the Scottish highlands. Who cares? It doesn’t matter.

Humorously, even NPR was forced to concede as much in their puff piece on the conference:

“That phrase, ‘inclusive capitalism,’ is deliberately broad,” the report concedes. “People talked about it as valuing long-term investment over short-term profits. Some mentioned environmental stewardship; others focused on treating workers well.”

Then, as if to demonstrate the entire point, they detail the definition of “inclusive capitalism” proffered by one prominent attendee: “Christine Lagarde, who runs the International Monetary Fund, said it is a way to rebuild trust in the financial system.”

Ahhh, of course. Environment? Long-term thinking? Treating workers well? Whatever, who cares? As long as the public is tricked into putting their trust back into the financial system, it doesn’t really matter.

And this is how the MacGuffin is used by the scriptwriters of world events. There is no shortage of examples of this narrative device being employed if you keep your eyes peeled for it in the daily news coverage, and now that you have a name for it you will be able to spot it in an instant.

Recommended Listening and Viewing

Recommended Reading

Bill Gates, Indian Government Targeted in Lawsuit Alleging AstraZeneca Vaccine Killed 23-Year-Old

This Week in the New Normal

Is Star Trek’s Dream of a World Without Money Utopian or Dystopian?

Recommended Listening

The FBI calls Ernest Hancock

Recommended Viewing

Unregistered 195: Richard Grove (VIDEO)

Dr. Michael Yeadon: The harm caused by Covid vaccines is strategy!

Gates ID2020 Quietly Succeeded

Just For Fun

via Corbett Report member mkey:

Then Canada said…

SUBSCRIBER DISCOUNTS

CLICK HERE to visit the New World Next Week shop and use the coupon code subscriber25 at checkout to receive a 25% discount on any Corbett Report DVD just for being a Corbett Report member!

To access this week’s edition of The Corbett Report Subscriber, please  and continue reading below.

Not a Corbett Report member yet? Sign up to BECOME A MEMBER of the website and read the full newsletter or ACCESS THE EDITORIAL FOR FREE on my Substack.

18 Comments

    • For the record, I got it off telegram. I’m not the author of the montage as great as it is.

  1. “the guy looked up and said, then it is not a Macguffin” hahaha. So good.

  2. I really enjoy Corbett’s writing style. He walks you through the story, step by step, helping you to digest the concepts.

    Honestly, I have always been hazy about the Hitchcock Macguffin term. I just didn’t get it…until now.

    The first link in Corbett’s article goes to
    Writing A New Narrative – #SolutionsWatch
    https://www.corbettreport.com/solutionswatch-narrative/

    This is one of my top favorite Corbett works.

    • Well said.

      I think there’s a parallel universe out there where James is an evangelist preacher.

      Drops you into a story about one thing, cuts to the real topic, then sews the ideas together – whether it’s aesop’s fables, al qaeda terrorists or Hitchcock’s MacGuffin.

      • I USED to love star trek… but one day I realized that in TheNextGeneration it only worked because they killed off all the people who did not fit in to society….. Barclay’s Gene’s somehow squeaked thru.

        I saw a video on YT one time where it explained how the culture was so different in old series and TNG ….he said the Universal Translator subtly altered the meaning of words as people spoke until, NewSpeak style, their minds were conformed to the will of the controllers.

        That infantile or autistic desire to shape everyone into what you see as perfect is something normal people grow out of…sadly evil people like Marx and Gates do not.

        On a lighter note this novel length and quality fanfic actually discusses the way society brainwash kids to fit into them…. via TV or Holodeck and how people of different era are somewhat horrific to each other

        https://www.tthfanfic.org/Story-24717/ShayneT+Legend.htm

        • I still really like Star Trek (original series and TNG). Remember the episode called “the game” on TNG where people were programmed by playing this video game. I thought that was a good episode. There were some really excellent episodes on TNG I thought anyway.

          I would have to rewatch them. I didn’t like Voyager as much and couldn’t stand star trek discovery. Discovery is just a bunch of woke programming and blatantly obvious.

          Remember the episode in the original series about the self operating star ship? I thought that was a good commentary on the limitations that should be placed on technology.

          I admit I am a sci-fi junkie.

          • I think I recall that…. Dr Daystrom puts his computer in charge? And it’s crazy because he copied it off his brain engrams or something?

            Got to say that TNG was at least positive in outlook …. the Picard show thing appears to be what happens when you reach end cycle on creativity and culture though I am just going off what I hear since I don’t want to pollute my mind by actually watching it

            • Yes, that’s the one and that’s how they got it to self destruct in the end, because the ship had murdered people. The human engrams were the only thing that saved them.

              I also like how TNG explored the Borg species, which also demonstrates the danger in collectivism and “hive mind” and also the merger of man and machine.

              Man cannot be merged with machine.

              • Yes. He can.
                But he becomes weaker and more dependent.

                If you like science fi have you read Sm Stirling?
                The ‘dies the fire’ series was good (the first three anyway) and the little I have done of the Draka series was good too….his Halls of t he Crimson king was great retro futurism too but I think I liked Peshawa Lancers best.

                His work has a weird vibe, kinda like it wants to be Victorian imperial fiction, but is good

        • When the original Star Trek episodes first came out, my brother sent off for an autographed photo of Spock.

          The flip-phone like communicators of Star Trek…
          I remember thinking to myself that I will be long dead before our society has a non-landline phone technology like those communicators.

          • I loved my flip phone for just that reason 🙂

  3. A critique of Is Star Trek’s Dream of a World Without Money Utopian or Dystopian? from recommended reading

    Just another puff piece from austrian-economics (AE) kitchen with an obligatory denigration of, no surprise, Marx.
    Authors are not far away from Yusaku Maezawa, who is criticized in the article, both live in their own “reality”, that doesn’t have much in common with the reality. Yeah, it’s easy to shit when your butt is full, people are saying.

    “Capitalism, to the extent it has existed, has been incredibly successful at lifting most of humanity out of poverty….”

    To the extent it has existed….that can only be said by AE believer, ordinary people don’t have a problem recognizing which is the prevailing socioeconomic system for quite some time.
    Check whose data are used in support of claim “lifting most of humanity out of poverty”? Mf World Bank, that is primarily working for the dark side, for monopoly capitalists, as John Perkins the economic hitmen explained. Among many of its goals is also alleviating poverty and you bet, they are very interested to show some results, even if there is none.
    Notion of extreme poverty is defined by UN, an institution we all praise so much, don’t we. Here is a link, with more charts painting not so beautiful picture.
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty

    An excerpt from wikipedia: “The reduction of extreme poverty and hunger was the first Millennium Development Goal (MDG1), as set by the United Nations in 2000. Specifically, the target was to reduce the extreme poverty rate by half by 2015, a goal that was met five years ahead of schedule. In the Sustainable Development Goals, which succeeded the MDGs…”.

    Goal was met five years ahead, damn, they’ve outdone goebels and stalin combined. I wonder why millions of immigrants are entering capitalist fortress, when according to UN and WB, milk and honey is just to come to every village on the world, by 2030 certainly and sooner, you know, five years ahead.

    “…who’s going to build the free Ferraris that Maezawa has dreamed up…with no incentive? But for those who don’t find such commonsense thought experiments convincing—or who think, as Marx did, that human nature will somehow mysteriously change…”

    If something is certain about human nature, 100% truth and nothing but the truth, is that it is very very malleable, very dependent upon circumstances. It’s reasonable to believe it had already changed in the past, therefore it’s possible to change again. Try the following thought experiment:

    Anarchism: Vignettes Against Hobbes
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcMyJ3BgM1k

    • …continued…

      “In other words, a handful of technocrats would somehow make possible a couch potato’s paradise. That’s not an idea that resonates with me or with the ambitious young people I know.”

      Couch potatoes, shirkers, one must always be on alert of them because they are the menace threatening to appropriate someone else’s fruits of labor, be damned. However, I think they are not a threat at all. Most of the people prefer to do something, anything, because being idle is very boring. From emotional perspective boredom is very close to disgust and if you think boredom is something bearable (then you never experienced real boredom), we probably agree disgust is not bearable.
      Looking from positive side, doing something can result in accomplishment that brings joy, maybe happiness too. Incentive, emphasized in previous quotation, is not absolutely necessary.
      What I am afraid of in our circumstances are ambitious people, particularly young ambitious people. Today such a people are incentivized in so many ways to subordinate everything to their success, they are cogs and grease of systemic perpetuation of misery.

      “On the other hand, burned-out Chinese workers—who recently launched the “lying flat” movement to popularize opting out of Xi Jinping’s “continual struggle” toward tech dominance…”

      Authors, young and ambitious probably towards workaholic, ascribe this phenomena to burn-out and fatigue. I think it is also about recognition that all of the chasing is meaningless, working is just a part of life not life itself. Many of so called shirkers in the west probably got the same revelation, but there are also many who simply lost hope altogether.
      Lying flat might also be contemplated from taoistic perspective, it’s the opposite of our indoctrination that we always have to be active, react to things, with permanent question: what we will do about it…What about doing Nothing for a change? Think about it, it’s very subversive idea.

      The Master doesn’t try to be powerful;
      thus he is truly powerful.
      The ordinary man keeps reaching for power;
      thus he never has enough.

      The Master does nothing,
      yet he leaves nothing undone.
      The ordinary man is always doing things,
      yet many more are left to be done.

      The kind man does something,
      yet something remains undone.
      The just man does something,
      and leaves many things to be done.
      The moral man does something,
      and when no one responds
      he rolls up his sleeves and uses force.

      (Tao Te Ching 38)

  4. Did the BBC’s credibility die of COVID or with COVID?

    https://imgur.com/a/06VkeVG

    Thanks to Joe for sending this forward, it gave me a chuckle. Also, thanks to the fine people who made this sign.

  5. I doubt the self-appointed “god-like” controllers got their stuff from Hitchcock but it’s easy to think so. It’s one thing to see the manifestations of holly wood’s psychological manipulations played out in our so-called “realities” but it’s quite another to attribute these manipulations to a guy like Hitchcock… who was brilliant no doubt but not the impetus of what we’re currently experiencing. I’m sure they called him “useful.”

    It’s more likely that Hitchcock and the controllers both use occult knowledge; the former made great movies, the latter turned reality into a movie (aka a lie).

    CS Lewis wrote about the Numinous (aka MacGuffin) in The Problem of Pain. So did ancient Kabbalist Jews in the Torah (aka the Old Testament). “Daemonic dread” is hardly anything that originated in holly wood.

    I was thinking about American Graffiti and how the elusive girl in her “Thunderbird” represents the “American Dream” fiction. Sometimes close and yet so far away. That she rode a Thunderbird is significant. The native American legend of thunder and lighting ie the Numinous.

    Even more than that briefcase in Pulp Fiction, they disclose exactly what they think of the masses in the “ketchup” joke. Wasn’t that “not funny” joke kind of odd in the middle of PF? Didn’t it stick out like a sore thumb? It took me twenty years but I realized why it was in there; MOCKERY. They are mocking our ignorance of occult knowledge. Of course, that’s my opinion but really it seems like a diamond bullet.

    Lastly, yes Christine Lagarde is “prominent” in their club. So why do people largely ignore her January 15, 2014 “luncheon” at the National Press Club in DC? You know, when the prominent member (aka messenger) announced to the press the timeline for their global takeover? Let me remind you…

    Now, I’m going to test your numerology skills [aka gematria] by asking you to think about the magic seven, okay? Most of you will know that seven is quite a number in all sorts of
    themes, religions. And I’m sure that you can compress numbers as well. So if we think
    about 2014, all right, I’m just giving you 2014, you drop the zero, 14, two times 7. Okay, that’s just by way of example, and we’re going to carry on. (Laughter)
    So 2014 will be a milestone and hopefully a magic year in many respects…

    2014 = 7
    2014 + 7 = 2021
    and so on back and forth bla bla bla*

    imf dot org/external/np/tr/2014/tr011514.pdf

    Again it’s my theory but wow look at how it all came to be exactly what she said using “coded language” (a quote in the question/answer section).

    So, no, it wasn’t enough to catch a few holly wood characters in their disclosures. That is a sideshow for people who do not understand the weapons used against them.

  6. Alabama is using COVID money to build more prisons.
    Is that good use of COVID money?
    Who would have thought that shaming the poor and protecting the oligarchs is a bipartisan thing….

Submit a Comment


SUPPORT

Become a Corbett Report member

RECENT POSTS


RECENT COMMENTS


ARCHIVES