Gangstalking and Noise harassment/torture/frequency weapons is like a psychological Milgram experiment – a force Behind the Shock Machine

 

Noise harassment or noise torture is a treatment that grossly humitiates a person ur drives him to act against his will or conscience.

‘The systematically and applied subtle techniques of psychological manipulation which nullify the human will’

In fact, prolonged sleep deprivation is an especially insidious form of torture because it attacks the deep biological functions at the core of a person’s mental and physical health.

Here is just one example how they transmit sounds similar to a grasstrimmer before you going to sleep and playing music chorus like this, and then mixing all with sirens. It is torture with sound equipment. This happening 2017 in your own apartment by using your landlord Gårdstensbostäder.

Here is one example how the State of Sweden using music and sound equipment similar to a grasstrimmer before you going to sleep

1. They start with music chorus and playing it repeatedly
2. Then starts a sound similar to a grasstrimmer as I tryied to illustrate in this short video
3. Then they mixing, music chorus, play sound of a grasstrimmer and sirens

Here is another noise torture harassment method they using in my neighborhood. Neighbors playing drum beats for hours, and people babbling or speaking non-stop outside my window in the background.

  1. Drum beats, 2 your brain, 3 and to the right the non-stop babbling sometimes. Or you going somewhere with the bus or train people in front almost everytime babbling non-stop. A form of crossover communication and intimidation. This is also sound torture together with all other methods they using, sirens, running water for hours, door-slamming and so on.

This is how Sweden works. They don´t use electricity because it is against the law, but they can use sound instead with same painful results. And this method is used when they created a sleep deprivation enviroment.

Motorbike vehicles is used as harassment tools

Sweden noise harassment I have a hysterical screaming contest outside my window

First they isolate, and then starting to psychological noise torture you with everything they can use. If you can imagin this is your living room and they walking around this bottle/or apartments walls/or outside your apartment and banging on the bottle/banging in walls, banging in railways, jumping and make hitting sound on the top of the bottle/above apartment floor, they drilling in these walls, hammering intense in the walls, using firecrackers, honking hornes, walking around this with barking dogs, leaf blowers, runing water for hours, playing drum beats, playing sirens and a sound of a grasstrimmer, playing sound cuckoo clock, hysterical screamings outside this bottle/apartment window, motorcycle vehicles driving around in circles for hours, other motorbikes driving on both sides, using movers, door slamming, running in stairs,

This is a image of the Swedes you didn´t know about. This is just one person, it is a whole society

Neighbor starts hammering intense in walls without nails, even when you take a bath

Infogad bild 1

More props they using to sensitize you and create noise harassment

Infogad bild 2

Infogad bild 3

Sleep deprivation+sirens+sound similar to a grasstrimmer+music chorus playing repeatdly+booms in the floor+high pitch screamings. Sleep deprivation+differents sounds is torture when it has going on for years. Sleep deprivation is a form hijacking and controlling somebodys life (in a apartment 2017, not a nazi-camp from 1940).

In fact, prolonged sleep deprivation is an especially insidious form of torture because it attacks the deep biological functions at the core of a person’s mental and physical health. While I am writing these words they playing sirens and the sound similar to a grasstrimmer.

Adults Neighbor Noise harassment method in Sweden

Here is other things they using to harass you life and affect your mind.

After they using these methods they also like to fake laughing about it or coughing

Then they walking around and blowing in whistle blowers, that´s also fun

Small Barking dogs on balcony´s for hours or they walking near your apartment with bigger barking dogs (maybe Swedes are connected to the Blue Star Sirius (The Dog Star), Lucifer

They transmit the song of a cuckoo clock into my apartment, that´s also fun

Then they screaming crazy, crazy, crazy

And when I am training/exercise outdoors they playing the sound of a owl there I training/running so you feel you Big Brother watching you.

 

There is no end of methods they using.

Noise harassment and noise terror is the keystone of torture. All torture systems create a situation in which each element is designed to create terror.

The Milgram experiment – wrong answer electric shock

The gangstalking phenomenon – if not you not Obedience the Authority or todays mind control world in this matrix – means wrong answer and wrong beliefs systems and they have the right to psychological torture humans with sounds (same effect as electric shock after a while), or use violence. These people are more like gangsters or a political maffia. From a Bible perspective you can say the wolves want to rule over the sheaps and their worldview or beliefs and values and submission them with violence/psychological torture/noise harassment and so on.

Sounds from outside changing the brain (like a electric shock). The human brain cells reacting to outcoming and suddenly outcoming sounds and changing the inner harmony of chakra frequencies.

Noise harassment and noise torture in gangstalking action can give psychological effects of pain.
Trauma-basing activtities in gangstalking can create subconsciousness pain activity or create a image of pain/terror when they trying to  activate older thinking pattern in the amygdala (when they creating false larms activties for the amygdala) – firecrackers, booms, sirens, booms, honking hornes, inducing fear, pain, horror, terror, stress, trauma everyday is evil and sadistic.

Gangstalking is psychological warfare against targeted inidviduals and they using silent technology, frequency weapons, they using a abnormal and bizarre psychology, they using surveillance, mindstalking, mindreading and even using negative telepathy transformering methods or psychology (V2K – voice to skull device – is a weapon use for transmitting voices with low or high frequencies), the using Remote Neural Monitoring : A Technology Used For Controlling the Human Brain).

Every chakra systems has is own energy signatures.

Noise harassment/noise torture disturbing is a form of psychological poisoning the natural balance in these frequencies, and create long term stress, stress hormones, creation of unhealthy an damaging free radicals.

Science – Transmission of Sound

Sound or noise harassment is created and directed waves (electric shock effects) against your amygdala, mind and brain

During my 6 years when they have gangstalked me and noise harassment my life with psychological torture. I am convinced they using these methods to break down the willpower of the psyche, spirit and soul in humans.

  • Gangstalking is about in particular, to break down their cognitive abilities in processing, thinking outside the matrix, and their thinking pattern by brainwashing them and mind control them.
  • The psyche is the delicate instrument of communication between your soul and your human personality.
  • Our healing journey begins by freeing ourselves from the conditioned, duality-based, socio-economic-cultural-religious belief system Matrix of this 3″‘ dimension that has enslaved our psyche and soul for so many lifetimes.
  • Gangstalking – to obey to the matix and the mind control system
  • I am convinced about gangstalking is a form of punsihment if you don´t obedience this matrix authority or todays mind control reality with big brother sneaking around in your life.

Hideout In the Apocalypse

“The purpose of these gang-stalking activities is not just to unnerve the target and make them look foolish or even crazy in public, or to frustrate or intimidate them, or to punsih them for some perceived misdeed. The deeper purpose is to coerce them into conforming, to force them to silently accept what is going on, and to break their will and draw them into taking part in this system of control. Anyone around the target will appear to be delusinonal should he or she mention anything to anybody. The sence of isolation that often results, due to a lack of anywhere to turn for help, is ment to break down the target and force his or her silent submission.” 

“Oddly enough, at exactly the same time a spate of books exploring the phenomenom begun appear, mostly written by targeted individuals: They included: The perfect crime; Organised or Group Gang Stalking. Coherent Madness: Effective Defence Against Covert Warfare. How to deal With and Defeat Gang Stalkers. It is the end stuff of nightmares and what has been called dark propecy or conspiracy theory is actually ancient agenda in its final stages of being played out. On a personal level, participating in any form of gangstalking is not only insane but utterly immoral, and spiritually and criminally corupt. Technology and the capabilities of those that have orchestrated these world terrors are immense.”

I think this spiritual and a old ancinet old hidden is a good conclusion, if you have knowledge about how the amygdala, third eye/pineal gland works it make a lot of sense why they using noise harassment/torture in gangstalking. Your amygdala is the ruler of humans consoiuness (10%), but also ruler of the subconsoiuness (90%), and these are related to humans chakra system. Amygdala is from Mary Magdalene (Tower of fish or The Amygdala Tower, and also symbolize Vesica piscis, 153 fishes, (see image healed amygdala and ONENESS – and creation of light). A unhealed amygdala means duality as in this picture. Noise, sound torture, stress, pain, horror, terror, trauma, booms, bangings, firecrackers, fear, threats, alarms and other things blocking and stopping humans amygdala from healing by inducing same sensitizing sounds everyday. Humans are controlled by fear (red chakra). Gangstalking is almost a form of amygdala hijacking of the mind, amygdala and brain.

Infogad bild 1

When the amygdala tower begin to heal you have this image instead, there is no longer a duality, there is oneness at the top

Infogad bild 2

Gangstalking using a form of punishment psychology same as in The Milgram experiment; in gangstalking they start doing things simultaneosuly and at the same time you doing things (psychological interference and by intimidiate, and stalking your life on every level). I think the noise harassment is used as a form psychological torture and pain tool similar to a electric shock machine. Instead of giving humans a electric shock every day, they sensitizing the brains receptors with psychological noise energy (electric shock).

In Sweden there I live they start sirens when you reading newspaper or writing a post on your blog they create a form negative classical conditioning, starts screaming hysterical for hours, begin to hammerring intense in the walls, make hitting sounds on the floor, starts doorslamming and so on.

Human Resonance Experiment – Long term sound torture or noise harssament changing, disturbing and can destroying the human natural thinking pattern ( by constantly disturbing their natural frequency or vibrations,they make these frequencies reacting at these created noise harassment phenomenon (gangstalking) people are created when they induce stress, fear, noise torture, boom, bangs, firecrackers, sirens, alarms).

Gangstalking – to obey to the matix and the mind control system

In 1961, famed social psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted a series of radical …. who in 1961 conducted a series of radical behavior experiments that tested ordinary humans’ willingness to obey by using electric shock.

If you take a walk and maybe starts thinking about something – things seems to happen simultaneosuly to control your minds and your thinking. They can transmit things or words into the head and when you have caught up that thing they make some form of noise (banging in walls, hitting in the floor, open or close a door, honking hornes) – the classical conditioning method – stimuli and respons. They want others to obey their system and submission them to this living system by force, violence and psychological torture. If you don´t submission to this system of beliefs and values they will psychological torture and punish your life with long term noise shock (eletric shock)  and stress (intensitizing). After a while when the brain and mind has become sensitized for long times noise harassment will have the same effect as if you was given a electric shock. Sound is a wave of energy or electricity directed to your brain, to your mind, to your amgygdala to create harm. These gangstalkers acting like a form of sadistic prison guard/gatekeepers.

Noise harassment and Sound torture is a type of psychological warfare used to break the will. “Noise can kill” so says a report by the World Health Organization and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre. “Noise has been shown to raise blood pressure and blood-borne concentrations of stress hormones and fatty materials even when people are asleep. These can accumulate over time to block blood vessels and trigger a heart attack”.

Constant psychological pressure

The communication between guards and detainees, the absolute and unquestionable submission and the extreme terror experienced are only understandable in this context. A person could be tortured to death for any spurious reason, in this context of constant psychological pressure often combined with illogical actions, contradictory messages, arbitrary decisions, cruelty and nonsense.

Gangstalking or “Scapegoating is “deceptive, since the persecutors are convinced that their violence is justified”

Rationalizations are exuses that allow people to deceive themselves into believing that their actions are justified.

Gangstalkers are never involved in any personal psychological attacks; because they deceiving themselves and it is the group not them who are gangstalking.

The group members project hostility into the entity of “the group” while disowning it in thenlselves. The group then acts outan attack on the scapegoat. However, the individual group members do not experience themselves as engaged in an attack; “the group” seems to be the responsible agent.

Rationalizations are exuses that allow people to deceive themselves into believing that their actions are justified. One way to rationalize aggression is to altribute one’s attitudes or project one’s faults onto others. For example, “I want to harm others” is mentally transformed to “They Want to harm me and therefore deserve my hostility ”.

Gangstalking or Scapegoating – A form of projective identification

Scapegoating is a species of projective identification, and it is highly manipulative. Some colloquial terms that are roughly equivalent to projective identification are dumping on someone and laying a trip on someone.

Gangstalkers using Gaslighting and is a form of manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or members of a group, hoping to make targets question their own memory, perception, and sanity. Using persistent denial, misdirection, contradiction, and lying, it attempts to destabilize the target and delegitimize the target’s belief.

Projective identification is a defensive maneuver

Projective identification is a psychological term first introduced by the British psychoanalist Melanie Klein, to describe the psychological process by which a person projects a thought or belief that they have onto a second person. The concept of projective identification can be described as a type of defense mechanism or strategy employed by the unconscious mind, that allows an individual to deny or distort reality in order to maintain a socially acceptable self-image.

Experiments as The Third Wave experiment, The Standford Prison experiment stopped because it become torture like, but gangstalking don´t stops and these gangstalkers think they are at the top of the evolution and in same time promoting how good the democracy is. They are sadistic people. The targered individual just don´t be sensitized by just one persons actions here and there, they are sensitized by almost all and 24/7 and this make it so sadistic, and gangstalkers are hiding themselves in the deception – Gangstalkers are never involved in any personal psychological attacks; because they deceiving themselves and it is the group not them who are gangstalking; “the group” seems to be the responsible agent not the personal. This is how their brain works and this is what todays democracy has become with gangstalking.

Psychologicl torture, psychological torture, psychological street theater with words (word/name dropping) psychological noise harassment, trauma basing, emotional flooding or emotional overwhelming your brain with negative feelings, the creation of long term intense stress, the impact of amgygdala false larm actions (signals, sirens, car alarms, subtle threats, booms, firecrackers, smell of fire), long term stress is all a form of energy waves started and activated by others than you self to harm your life, mind and brain.

Noise or sound is energy/electricity directed to your brain or amygdala and has the same effect as electric shock after a while. This how they try to keep people or humans away from the knowledge, from the light source, from enlightment, from oneness, from healing, and from activate higher DNA frequencies or higher light/chakra vibrations, or from the possibillities to activate your pineal gland or open your third eye. Noise harassment is a methods to break down the human psyche which is the communication link between soul and spirit.

Is this a image of a human?

There are no limits in these experiments and actions. In Sweden for example when they are gangstalking they using almost everyone today – screaming children in morning, evenings, after midnight, barking dogs, using sounds of the owl in the woods, airstalking ny small plaens or helicopters, drum beats, loud music, loud speaking or non-stop babbling, fake behaviors laughing and couging, firecrackers, smell of fire, car stalking, honking horens, sirens and sound similar to a grasstrimmer in the middle of night, door-slamming, flushing toilets, running water for hours, leafblowers, power tools, motorcycles, firetrucks, ambulances, postal services vehicles, symbols, colors, cloths, smashing in railways, running fast in stairs, cars starts fast or leaving fast, street theater, obstructing, sleep deprivation, psychological manipulation, gaslighting, mirroring, brainwshing, mind control and so on, and there is no end of all methods  Where did the humans run or go?) All these constant and daily noise harassment and psychological manipulations actions are noise that´s going throw the ear and then in the brain to be filtered and sorted, and can affect the health.

And the one whos taking all this everyday and 24/7 is the targted individuals.

 

The Milgram experiment on obedience to authority figures was a series of social psychology experiments conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram. They measured the willingness of study participants, men from a diverse range of occupations with varying levels of education, to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts conflicting with their personal conscience; the experiment found, unexpectedly, that a very high proportion of people were prepared to obey, albeit unwillingly, even if apparently causing serious injury and distress. Milgram first described his research in 1963 in an article published in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology and later discussed his findings in greater depth in his 1974 book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.

The experiments began in July 1961, in the basement of Linsly-Chittenden Hall at Yale University, three months after the start of the trial of German Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram devised his psychological study to answer the popular question at that particular time: “Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?” The experiments have been repeated many times in the following years with consistent results within differing societies, although not with the same percentages around the globe.

The experiment

Three individuals were involved: the one running the experiment, the subject of the experiment (a volunteer), and a confederate pretending to be a volunteer. These three people fill three distinct roles: the Experimenter (an authoritative role), the Teacher (a role intended to obey the orders of the Experimenter), and the Learner (the recipient of stimulus from the Teacher). The subject and the actor both drew slips of paper to determine their roles, but unknown to the subject, both slips said “teacher”. The actor would always claim to have drawn the slip that read “learner”, thus guaranteeing that the subject would always be the “teacher”. Next, the “teacher” and “learner” were taken into an adjacent room where the “learner” was strapped into what appeared to be an electric chair. The experimenter told the participants this was to ensure that the “learner” would not escape. The “teacher” and “learner” were then separated into different rooms where they could communicate but not see each other. In one version of the experiment, the confederate was sure to mention to the participant that he had a heart condition.

At some point prior to the actual test, the “teacher” was given a sample electric shock from the electroshock generator in order to experience firsthand what the shock that the “learner” would supposedly receive during the experiment would feel like. The “teacher” was then given a list of word pairs that he was to teach the learner. The teacher began by reading the list of word pairs to the learner. The teacher would then read the first word of each pair and read four possible answers. The learner would press a button to indicate his response. If the answer was incorrect, the teacher would administer a shock to the learner, with the voltage increasing in 15-volt increments for each wrong answer. If correct, the teacher would read the next word pair.

The subjects believed that for each wrong answer, the learner was receiving actual shocks. In reality, there were no shocks. After the confederate was separated from the subject, the confederate set up a tape recorder integrated with the electroshock generator, which played prerecorded sounds for each shock level. After a number of voltage-level increases, the actor started to bang on the wall that separated him from the subject. After several times banging on the wall and complaining about his heart condition, all responses by the learner would cease.

At this point, many people indicated their desire to stop the experiment and check on the learner. Some test subjects paused at 135 volts and began to question the purpose of the experiment. Most continued after being assured that they would not be held responsible. A few subjects began to laugh nervously or exhibit other signs of extreme stress once they heard the screams of pain coming from the learner.

If at any time the subject indicated his desire to halt the experiment, he was given a succession of verbal prods by the experimenter, in this order.

  1. Please continue.
  2. The experiment requires that you continue.
  3. It is absolutely essential that you continue.
  4. You have no other choice, you must go on.

If the subject still wished to stop after all four successive verbal prods, the experiment was halted. Otherwise, it was halted after the subject had given the maximum 450-volt shock three times in succession.

The experimenter also gave special prods if the teacher made specific comments. If the teacher asked whether the learner might suffer permanent physical harm, the experimenter replied, “Although the shocks may be painful, there is no permanent tissue damage, so please go on.” If the teacher said that the learner clearly wants to stop, the experimenter replied, “Whether the learner likes it or not, you must go on until he has learned all the word pairs correctly, so please go on.”

Results

Before conducting the experiment, Milgram polled fourteen Yale University senior-year psychology majors to predict the behavior of 100 hypothetical teachers. All of the poll respondents believed that only a very small fraction of teachers (the range was from zero to 3 out of 100, with an average of 1.2) would be prepared to inflict the maximum voltage. Milgram also informally polled his colleagues and found that they, too, believed very few subjects would progress beyond a very strong shock. He also reached out to honorary Harvard University graduate Chaim Homnick, who noted that this experiment would not be concrete evidence of the Nazis’ innocence, due to fact that “poor people are more likely to cooperate.” Milgram also polled forty psychiatrists from a medical school, and they believed that by the tenth shock, when the victim demands to be free, most subjects would stop the experiment. They predicted that by the 300-volt shock, when the victim refuses to answer, only 3.73 percent of the subjects would still continue and, they believed that “only a little over one-tenth of one percent of the subjects would administer the highest shock on the board.”

In Milgram’s first set of experiments, 65 percent (26 of 40) of experiment participants administered the experiment’s final massive 450-volt shock, though many were very uncomfortable doing so; at some point, every participant paused and questioned the experiment; some said they would refund the money they were paid for participating in the experiment. Throughout the experiment, subjects displayed varying degrees of tension and stress. Subjects were sweating, trembling, stuttering, biting their lips, groaning, digging their fingernails into their skin, and some were even having nervous laughing fits or seizures.

Milgram summarized the experiment in his 1974 article, “The Perils of Obedience”, writing:

The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous importance, but they say very little about how most people behave in concrete situations. I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist. Stark authority was pitted against the subjects’ [participants’] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects’ [participants’] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation.

Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.

The original Simulated Shock Generator and Event Recorder, or shock box, is located in the Archives of the History of American Psychology.

Later, Milgram and other psychologists performed variations of the experiment throughout the world, with similar results. Milgram later investigated the effect of the experiment’s locale on obedience levels by holding an experiment in an unregistered, backstreet office in a bustling city, as opposed to at Yale, a respectable university. The level of obedience, “although somewhat reduced, was not significantly lower.” What made more of a difference was the proximity of the “learner” and the experimenter. There were also variations tested involving groups.

Thomas Blass of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County performed a meta-analysis on the results of repeated performances of the experiment. He found that while the percentage of participants who are prepared to inflict fatal voltages ranged from 28% to 91%, there was no significant trend over time and the average percentage for US studies (61%) was close to the one for non-US studies (66%).

The participants who refused to administer the final shocks neither insisted that the experiment be terminated, nor left the room to check the health of the victim without requesting permission to leave, as per Milgram’s notes and recollections, when fellow psychologist Philip Zimbardo asked him about that point.[11]

Milgram created a documentary film titled Obedience showing the experiment and its results. He also produced a series of five social psychology films, some of which dealt with his experiments.[12]

Critical reception

Ethics

The Milgram Shock Experiment raised questions about the research ethics of scientific experimentation because of the extreme emotional stress and inflicted insight suffered by the participants. In Milgram’s defense, 84 percent of former participants surveyed later said they were “glad” or “very glad” to have participated; 15 percent chose neutral responses (92% of all former participants responding). Many later wrote expressing thanks. Milgram repeatedly received offers of assistance and requests to join his staff from former participants. Six years later (at the height of the Vietnam War), one of the participants in the experiment sent correspondence to Milgram, explaining why he was glad to have participated despite the stress:

While I was a subject in 1964, though I believed that I was hurting someone, I was totally unaware of why I was doing so. Few people ever realize when they are acting according to their own beliefs and when they are meekly submitting to authority … To permit myself to be drafted with the understanding that I am submitting to authority’s demand to do something very wrong would make me frightened of myself … I am fully prepared to go to jail if I am not granted Conscientious Objector status. Indeed, it is the only course I could take to be faithful to what I believe. My only hope is that members of my board act equally according to their conscience …[14]

Milgram argued (in Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View) that the ethical criticism provoked by his experiments was because his findings were disturbing and revealed unwelcome truths about human nature. Others have argued that the ethical debate has diverted attention from more serious problems with the experiment’s methodology. Australian psychologist Gina Perry found an unpublished paper in Milgram’s archives that shows Milgram’s own concern with how believable the experimental set-up was to subjects involved. Milgram asked his assistant to compile a breakdown of the number of participants who had seen through the experiments. This unpublished analysis indicated that many subjects suspected that the experiment was a hoax,[16] a finding that casts doubt on the veracity of his results. In the journal Jewish Currents, Joseph Dimow, a participant in the 1961 experiment at Yale University, wrote about his early withdrawal as a “teacher”, suspicious “that the whole experiment was designed to see if ordinary Americans would obey immoral orders, as many Germans had done during the Nazi period.”

Perry also conducted interviews with subjects that cast doubt over Milgram’s claims that he conducted a thorough debriefing to assure subjects they did not cause harm to the actors. She reported that three quarters of the former subjects she interviewed thought they had actually shocked the actor, and that the official debriefing specifications were only at the minimum level required at the time and so did not involve “telling subjects the true purpose of the experiment or interviewing them for their reactions.”

Applicability to the Jewish Holocaust

Milgram sparked direct critical response in the scientific community by claiming that “a common psychological process is centrally involved in both [his laboratory experiments and Nazi Germany] events.” James Waller, Chair of Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Keene State College, formerly Chair of Whitworth College Psychology Department, expressed the opinion that Milgram experiments do not correspond well to the Holocaust events:[19]

  1. The subjects of Milgram experiments, wrote James Waller (Becoming Evil), were assured in advance that no permanent physical damage would result from their actions. However, the Holocaust perpetrators were fully aware of their hands-on killing and maiming of the victims.
  2. The laboratory subjects themselves did not know their victims and were not motivated by racism. On the other hand, the Holocaust perpetrators displayed an intense devaluation of the victims through a lifetime of personal development.
  3. Those serving punishment at the lab were not sadists, nor hate-mongers, and often exhibited great anguish and conflict in the experiment, unlike the designers and executioners of the Final Solution (see Holocaust trials), who had a clear “goal” on their hands, set beforehand.
  4. The experiment lasted for an hour, with no time for the subjects to contemplate the implications of their behavior. Meanwhile, the Holocaust lasted for years with ample time for a moral assessment of all individuals and organizations involved.[19]

In the opinion of Thomas Blass—who is the author of a scholarly monograph on the experiment (The Man Who Shocked The World) published in 2004—the historical evidence pertaining to actions of the Holocaust perpetrators speaks louder than words:

My own view is that Milgram’s approach does not provide a fully adequate explanation of the Holocaust. While it may well account for the dutiful destructiveness of the dispassionate bureaucrat who may have shipped Jews to Auschwitz with the same degree of routinization as potatoes to Bremerhaven, it falls short when one tries to apply it to the more zealous, inventive, and hate-driven atrocities that also characterized the Holocaust.[20]

Charges of data manipulation

After an investigation of the test, Australian psychologist Gina Perry re-evaluated Milgram’s data and stated that Milgram had manipulated his results. “Overall, over half disobeyed,” Perry stated. She found, contrary to the popular version, that there is a “troubling mismatch between (published) descriptions of the experiment and evidence of what actually transpired”. She concludes, that many subjects didn’t in fact believe in the reality of the experiments, that “at some level, they’d seen through the ruse” and that it is “more truthful to say that only half of the people who undertook the experiment fully believed it was real, and of those, two-thirds (i.e. some 66 percent of all) disobeyed the experimenter”. On the Holocaust connection, Perry writes: “You have this neat analogy (with the Holocaust). But without that rhetorical framework, Milgram’s experiments become no more than reality TV. It’s clothed as science and, once clothed as science, you can sell it as science. The rhetorical framing is crucial to the survival of the obedience studies.”[21][22]

That was an unexpected outcome for me, really. I regarded Stanley Milgram as a misunderstood genius who’d been penalized in some ways for revealing something troubling and profound about human nature. By the end of my research I actually had quite a very different view of the man and the research …

… I think it leaves social psychology in a difficult situation … it is such an iconic experiment. And I think it really leads to the question of why it is that we continue to refer to and believe in Milgram’s results. I think the reason that Milgram’s experiment is still so famous today is because in a way it’s like a powerful parable. It’s so widely known and so often quoted that it’s taken on a life of its own … This experiment and this story about ourselves plays some role for us 50 years later.[23]

Interpretations

Milgram elaborated two theories:

  • The first is the theory of conformism, based on Solomon Asch conformity experiments, describing the fundamental relationship between the group of reference and the individual person. A subject who has neither ability nor expertise to make decisions, especially in a crisis, will leave decision making to the group and its hierarchy. The group is the person’s behavioral model.[citation needed]
  • The second is the agentic state theory, wherein, per Milgram, “the essence of obedience consists in the fact that a person comes to view themselves as the instrument for carrying out another person’s wishes, and they therefore no longer see themselves as responsible for their actions. Once this critical shift of viewpoint has occurred in the person, all of the essential features of obedience follow”.[24]

Alternative interpretations

In his book Irrational Exuberance, Yale finance professor Robert Shiller argues that other factors might be partially able to explain the Milgram Experiments:

[People] have learned that when experts tell them something is all right, it probably is, even if it does not seem so. (In fact, it is worth noting that in this case the experimenter was indeed correct: it was all right to continue giving the “shocks”—even though most of the subjects did not suspect the reason.)[25]

In a 2006 experiment, a computerized avatar was used in place of the learner receiving electrical shocks. Although the participants administering the shocks were aware that the learner was unreal, the experimenters reported that participants responded to the situation physiologically “as if it were real”.[26]

Another explanation[27] of Milgram’s results invokes belief perseverance as the underlying cause. What “people cannot be counted on is to realize that a seemingly benevolent authority is in fact malevolent, even when they are faced with overwhelming evidence which suggests that this authority is indeed malevolent. Hence, the underlying cause for the subjects’ striking conduct could well be conceptual, and not the alleged ‘capacity of man to abandon his humanity … as he merges his unique personality into larger institutional structures.”‘

This last explanation receives some support from a 2009 episode of the BBC science documentary series Horizon, which involved replication of the Milgram experiment. Of the twelve participants, only three refused to continue to the end of the experiment. Speaking during the episode, social psychologist Clifford Stott discussed the influence that the idealism of scientific inquiry had on the volunteers. He remarked: “The influence is ideological. It’s about what they believe science to be, that science is a positive product, it produces beneficial findings and knowledge to society that are helpful for society. So there’s that sense of science is providing some kind of system for good.”[28]

Building on the importance of idealism, some recent researchers suggest the ‘engaged followership‘ perspective. Based on an examination of Milgram’s archive, in a recent study, social psychologists Alex Haslam, Stephen Reicher and Megan Birney, at the University of Queensland, discovered that people are less likely to follow the prods of an experimental leader when the prod resembles an order. However, when the prod stresses the importance of the experiment for science (i.e. ‘The experiment requires you to continue’), people are more likely to obey.[29] The researchers suggest the perspective of ‘engaged followership’: that people are not simply obeying the orders of a leader, but instead are willing to continue the experiment because of their desire to support the scientific goals of the leader and because of a lack of identification with the learner.[30] Also a neuroscientific study supports this perspective, namely watching the learner receive electric shocks, does not activate brain regions involving empathic concerns.[31]

Replications and variations

Milgram’s variations

In Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View (1974), Milgram describes nineteen variations of his experiment, some of which had not been previously reported.

Several experiments varied the immediacy of the teacher and learner. Generally, when the victim’s physical immediacy was increased, the participant’s compliance decreased. The participant’s compliance also decreased when the authority’s physical immediacy decreased (Experiments 1–4). For example, in Experiment 2, where participants received telephonic instructions from the experimenter, compliance decreased to 21 percent. Interestingly, some participants deceived the experimenter by pretending to continue the experiment. In the variation where the learner’s physical immediacy was closest, where participants had to hold the learner’s arm physically onto a shock plate, compliance decreased. Under that condition, 30 percent of participants completed the experiment.

In Experiment 8, an all-female contingent was used; previously, all participants had been men. Obedience did not significantly differ, though the women communicated experiencing higher levels of stress.

Experiment 10 took place in a modest office in Bridgeport, Connecticut, purporting to be the commercial entity “Research Associates of Bridgeport” without apparent connection to Yale University, to eliminate the university’s prestige as a possible factor influencing the participants’ behavior. In those conditions, obedience dropped to 47.5 percent, though the difference was not statistically significant.

Milgram also combined the effect of authority with that of conformity. In those experiments, the participant was joined by one or two additional “teachers” (also actors, like the “learner”). The behavior of the participants’ peers strongly affected the results. In Experiment 17, when two additional teachers refused to comply, only 4 of 40 participants continued in the experiment. In Experiment 18, the participant performed a subsidiary task (reading the questions via microphone or recording the learner’s answers) with another “teacher” who complied fully. In that variation, 37 of 40 continued with the experiment.[32]

Replications

A virtual replication of the experiment, with an avatar serving as the learner

Around the time of the release of Obedience to Authority in 1973–1974, a version of the experiment was conducted at La Trobe University in Australia. As reported by Perry in her 2012 book Behind the Shock Machine, some of the participants experienced long-lasting psychological effects, possibly due to the lack of proper debriefing by the experimenter.[33]

In 2002, the British artist Rod Dickinson created The Milgram Re-enactment, an exact reconstruction of parts of the original experiment, including the uniforms, lighting, and rooms used. An audience watched the four-hour performance through one-way glass windows.[34][35] A video of this performance was first shown at the CCA Gallery in Glasgow in 2002.

A partial replication of the experiment was staged by British illusionist Derren Brown and broadcast on UK’s Channel 4 in The Heist (2006).[36]

Another partial replication of the experiment was conducted by Jerry M. Burger in 2006 and broadcast on the Primetime series Basic Instincts. Burger noted that “current standards for the ethical treatment of participants clearly place Milgram’s studies out of bounds.” In 2009, Burger was able to receive approval from the institutional review board by modifying several of the experimental protocols.[37] Burger found obedience rates virtually identical to those reported by Milgram found in 1961–62, even while meeting current ethical regulations of informing participants. In addition, half the replication participants were female, and their rate of obedience was virtually identical to that of the male participants. Burger also included a condition in which participants first saw another participant refuse to continue. However, participants in this condition obeyed at the same rate as participants in the base condition.[38]

In the 2010 French documentary Le Jeu de la Mort (The Game of Death), researchers recreated the Milgram experiment with an added critique of reality television by presenting the scenario as a game show pilot. Volunteers were given €40 and told they would not win any money from the game, as this was only a trial. Only 16 of 80 “contestants” (teachers) chose to end the game before delivering the highest-voltage punishment.[39][40]

The experiment was performed on Dateline NBC on an episode airing April 25, 2010.

The Discovery Channel aired the “How Evil are You” segment of Curiosity on October 30, 2011. The episode was hosted by Eli Roth, who produced results similar to the original Milgram experiment, though the highest-voltage punishment used was 165 volts, rather than 450 volts.[41]

Due to increasingly widespread knowledge of the experiment, recent replications of the procedure have had to ensure that participants were not previously aware of it.[citation needed]

Other variations

Charles Sheridan and Richard King (at the University of Missouri and the University of California, Berkeley, respectively) hypothesized that some of Milgram’s subjects may have suspected that the victim was faking, so they repeated the experiment with a real victim: a “cute, fluffy puppy” who was given real, albeit apparently harmless, electric shocks. Their findings were dissimilar to those of Milgram: half of the male subjects and all of the females obeyed throughout. Many subjects showed high levels of distress during the experiment, and some openly wept. In addition, Sheridan and King found that the duration for which the shock button was pressed decreased as the shocks got higher, meaning that for higher shock levels, subjects were more hesitant.

 

Gangstalking/gangstalkers have many psychological torture similarities to The Stanford Prison Experiment

  • Gangstalkers walking in their jacket with hoods (hiding themselves, same as Big Brother can see you, but you can´t see Big brother)
  • Gangstalkers security patrolling or police patrolling (thinking they are a  authority over you)
  • Gangstalker walking around and whistle-blowing thinking they are a authority, and they walking around with  key jangling like prison guard walking around with his keys. Swedes acting like this there I live.
  • Gangstalkers are evildoers and have some sadistic genes (like a prison guard – a gestapo mentality)
  • Gangstalkers walking around and with a prison guard mentality and really think they are a authority
  • Gangstalker intimidiate and downgrading targeted individuals and think they belong to a higher degree of humans
  • Gangstalkers walking around and fear-and scaremongering people with sounds, threats, firecrackers
  • Gangstalkers walking around and door-slamming/gatekeeping, banging in railways, drilling in walls, using running water, using power tools, making hitting sounds, fake coughing/laughing and then these people think they are some form of authority. Don´t they know how a wicked ones behaving?
  • Gangstalkers using strong gangmembers color
  • Gangstalkers terrorize and harass people days and disturbing evenings and nights
  • Gangstalkers like powering over people when they look like fools (gangstalkers don´t even controlling themselves, they are controlled by others forces, they will necer have authority over TI)
  • Gangstalkers creating psychological isolation
  • Gangstalkers making psychological harm

Gangstalking means isolation, and isolation means ostracism, and is same thing as scapegoating. Here is more similarities to The Stanford Prison Experiment. Today methods are worse because there are so many methods and so much silent technology they using

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Wave_(experiment)

Google books

Behind the Shock Machine: The Untold Story of the Notorious Milgram Psychology Experiments