News Ticker

Oxytocin + Propaganda: Promotes Acceptance of Refugees, Stimulates Appetite For Financial Risk

PHOTO: via Ruptly

‘Given the right circumstances, oxytocin may help promote the acceptance and integration of migrants into Western cultures.’

Among last week’s onslaught of news related to Charlottesville and the removal of monuments were lesser-noticed but interesting articles about a study involving oxytocin and its ability to “reduce the effects of xenophobia by facilitating pro-social behavior toward refugees.”

In other words, a new study published by the National Academy of Scientists (PNAS) suggests that increased oxytocin levels can potentially turn border-loving nationalists into generous migrant-hugging globalists.

Oxytocin (not to be confused with OxyContin/oxycodone) has been dubbed the “love and trust hormone.” This hormone is produced by the brain and plays a role in stimulating social bonding, mating, sexual reproduction and maternal instincts. Since its identification in 1952, scientists have been studying oxytocin’s usefulness as a tool to manipulate social behavior.

The latest study, a collaborative effort between US and German universities, involved 183 white students, who were given 50 euros that they could either donate to needy refugees or to needy locals for food or entertainment. Predictably, the majority of students said they would donate the funds to locals.

Then a non-placebo group was given an inhaled dose of oxytocin and asked the same questions. Generosity to outsiders did not increase among those students who were identified as having negative views toward refugees at the outset. The researchers then subjected this same drugged group to peer pressure to donate their funds, and they did — 74% more.

PLC = Placebo Group; NORM = Peer Pressure; OXT = Administered Oxytocin; Xi-index = Xenophobic Tendencies. CHART SOURCE: ‘Oxytocin-enforced norm compliance reduces xenophobic outgroup rejection’/PNAS

Not noted but significant: The chart above shows the placebo (not-drugged) group that exhibited anti-refugee sentiment at the outset became even LESS generous when subjected to peer pressure.

The study concluded that the “combined enhancement of oxytocin and peer influence” was able to diminish “selfish motives.”

Researcher Rene Hurlemann, a professor at University of Bonn department of psychiatry, stated: “Given the right circumstances, oxytocin may help promote the acceptance and integration of migrants into Western cultures.”

Fig. 1.
CHART SOURCE: ‘Oxytocin promotes human ethnocentrism’/PNAS

A similar study published by PNAS — one that at least acknowledges the positive aspects of ethnocentrism — concluded that self-administered oxytocin “creates intergroup bias because oxytocin motivates in-group favoritism and, to a lesser extent, out-group derogation. These findings call into question the view of oxytocin as an indiscriminate ‘love drug’ or ‘cuddle chemical’ and suggest that oxytocin has a role in the emergence of intergroup conflict and violence.” However, it appears this study did not employ peer pressure to influence drugged subjects’ decision making.

A third and final notable study on oxytocin applies to “neuroeconomics.”

A hormone called oxytocin also may increase trust in financial exchanges. In the trust game, an investor decides how much money to give to an investment banker. Investors who took a sniff of oxytocin, which is involved in lactation and birth, invested more money than did other investors. However, oxytocin did not affect investor decisions when a random mechanism, rather than a person, determined their return.

Imaging research suggests that oxytocin reduces people’s fear of betrayal. After learning that their trust had been violated in repeated games, investors decreased their investments, and their brains showed increased activity in regions involved in fear (amygdala and midbrain) and arousal (insula and postcentral gyrus). However, those who sniffed the oxytocin spray did not change their investments and did not show brain activity changes.

This confirms the findings of the first study, which showed that administration of oxytocin — especially when coupled with human persuasion — generated greater levels of “altruistic generosity” and high levels of risk tolerance in financial decisions. In other words, people under the influence of oxytocin are easier targets to loot.

So all in all, oxytocin sounds like a promising opiate for the masses to suppress nationalism and promote globalist agendas, provided that all of the institutions from which we derive information are on board with the program. (No, I’m not wearing a tinfoil hat.)

For decades, the government and pharma industry has been researching new and better psychotropic drugs to evoke euphoria and passivity among the sheeple; from over-prescribing anti-depressants to legalizing marijuana and polluting our water with fluoride and other chemicals. Recently, the FDA approved large-scale research studies using the recreational street drug ecstasy  (MDMA) as a treatment for depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

We don’t even know what’s being spraying in the air, which makes the administration of oxytocin as an inhalant particularly disturbing. By the way, in case you haven’t heard the word — and apparently Mitch McConnell hasn’t — chemtrails are no longer just some conspiracy theory.

Be Sociable, Share!
    • Torchy Blane

      Aint that the truth …

      • Adrian Chetwynd

        Yep, too true Torchy, so maybe, “we few”, ought to
        emigrate to somewhere like “Madagascar” and leave the “useless
        eaters” to face up to the consequences of their stupid gullibility of worshipping
        the “jew”?

  • Rome falls

    • Torchy Blane


  • Brabantian

    Regarding migrants & love, one of the curious alt-right discussions, is on how women in general favour the migrants much more than men, which shows itself in voting patterns, & the pre-dominance of women holding up ‘Welcome, Refugees!’ signs in street scenes, as in photo above

    It’s said this is biologically-driven, because women sub-consciously favour a surfeit of aggressive, dominant males, whom they sub-consciously or secretly prefer as more sexually exciting, than more docile ‘cucked’ Western males whom feminists claim to want but whom women find dull … perhaps an inheritance of thousands of years of seeking out stronger, dominant males … hence, in apparent paradox, males seem more upset by news accounts of rapes by migrants etc than females are, unless the women or close friends are very personally victims … women visibly respond to aggressive young men, so there are numerous sexual scandals of European women with boys & young men in refugee centres, women who like criminals in prison etc, ‘liking the bad boys’, ‘ladies love outlaws’

    It’s said that ‘democracy’ fails, because cucked males plus women, are always a majority … Women are more intrinsically pro-oligarchy, get along to go along, men are more often the rebels, as is their heritage … plus in Western modernity, women come to see government, the State, as their alpha male … asset-stripping the weakened male populace to support women & children, via alimony etc … It’s said this is why you see nationalist – sovereigntist sentiments peaking at about 40% of the populace, as women both fall in line behind the ‘winning’ globalists, the ‘winning’ alimony-extractors, women also instinctively crave aggressive young male foreign arrivals who are ‘winning’ under oligarch sponsorship … It’s said that USA Trump 2016 was a unique one-off, because you had palpable high-alpha-image male candidate (very rare), against super-unpleasant corrupt female with male cuck entourage (worse than usual) … women were drawn to the alpha as well as men there

    It’s said that part of the lure of conversion to Islam in the West, is that both men & women are secretly craving a more traditional gender role, which traditional Islam visibly offers … they can’t admit this to themselves directly but the for-them new ‘religion’ provides the ego-cover … with the additional benefit that, given how Western oligarchies are sponsoring Muslim advances in Europe, the SJW feminist complaints are only allowed against the traditional white males, Islamist patriarchal practices cannot be criticised because ‘that is another culture you must respect’ & to do otherwise is ‘racist’, ‘Islamophobic’

    • Brabantian

      An Oxford – Cambridge anthropologist, Joseph Daniel Unwin (1895-1936), wrote a famous book in 1934, ‘Sex & Culture’ … J D Unwin found examples of early civilisations, which also had phases of sexual freedom, ‘feminism & women’s rights’ etc … e.g., “in late Babylonia, they had alimony, child support, no-fault divorce, marital rape laws, & economic equal rights for women”, ancient Rome similarly in its late phases … Unwin found that in every case, the civilisation quickly & irreversibly collapsed, with men & women both becoming miserable & having far fewer children, even in the eras before modern ‘birth control’ … Unwin thought the Western world in his own 1930s, was beginning the stages of that collapse

      Unwin thought history showed that, the end of patriarchal marriage – via women’s rights, feminism etc – created a death-of-civilisation spiral where both women & men are miserable … It is said that many women are really only interested in about 20% of males, the more ‘exciting’, powerful, aggressive, even dangerous males … The old patriarchal monogamy system, Unwin thought, was what enabled civilisation to grow, as the stable relationships paired people up & liberated energy for more constructive purposes … women accepted not having Mr Top Dog, & men stopped fighting because nearly every one had a mate

      But with the end of life-long monogamy, not only, said Unwin, do men like to ‘fool around’ as they always have wished … but also women, for their part, feel more ‘free’ to indulge their instinct to have, even if briefly, an ‘alpha’ male, & so are also eager to jettison marriages on slight pretexts, especially given that Papa Welfare State will step in & supply child support & alimony, extracted from the male … who has quickly come to fear in the West, that any ‘marriage’ he enters will be short-lived, except for alimony & child support payment extraction, which is long-term

      Hence the paradoxical effect that, in the ‘free love’ era, sexual activity turns a corner towards the negative, & is now said to be rapidly declining throughout the developed world … Now in the smartphone era, even sex amongst teenagers is said to be rapidly declining versus previous decades … With lifelong marriage an increasingly rare reality, real-life sex may also be declining, despite the world being porn-saturated

      • Douteux55

        Fascinating. My son has frequently shared that millenial females have no interest in longterm relationships and do not consider fidelity a serious requirement. His friends enter into unions out of a sense of destiny but not necessarily passion or love and do not expect it to last. It’s true there are a lot more single men in their late 20’s and 30’s than ever and it isn’t just the economy. The girls in my classes are predominantly contemptuous of the boys and that is a new development in the last 5-8 years for me. It’s all they teach in these “physical education” classes. People should be warned, these courses are really brain-washing, reinforcing all the identity politics of the satanics.

  • Talk about bias and result skewing:

    The study concluded that the “combined enhancement of oxytocin and peer influence” was able to diminish “selfish motives.”

    The “scientists” are the sole arbiters of the meaning of the word “selfish” and, moreover, the experts on acceptable morality. Particularly when it is only applied to white males (who are inherently evil).

    If you read the study, the test group was given 50 to donate to suffering locals vs. foreign groups. Naturally, the majority selected to help their fellow citizens first, even with the administration of oxytocin. However, after being administered oxytocin a second time, and this time being subjected to heavy artificial peer pressure, they were somewhat more likely to give to the foreigners instead.

    Draw from that what you will, but to label one as “selfish” when they determine who to donate their money to is incredibly dishonest at best. These “researchers” should lose all funding for performing this blatantly biased experiment.

  • Adrian Chetwynd

    Nothing new to see here… The jewish protocols clearly stated
    (a long time ago), that the jews had intended to bankrupt all white Nations via
    their plan for forced immigration (of dark skinned benefit scroungers) into all
    Aryan countries.

Secured By miniOrange