Showing posts with label Captain Hook. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Captain Hook. Show all posts

Sunday 11 February 2024

I Shall Support You -- But I DON”T Think You Can WIN.


"If You Want to Run again, (obviously),
We Shall Support You; 
But We DON'T Think that
You can Win --"



ITN Exclusive: Margaret Thatcher's Dramatic First Interview After Being ...

In June 1991, Former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher sat down with ITN's veteran political correspondent Michael Brunson for an exclusive interview about her final days in Downing Street. It was the first time Thatcher had given her version of events since her resignation as Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party in November 1990. 
In a 25-minute interview, an emotional Mrs Thatcher reflected in detail on the days leading up to her resignation. The former Prime Minister wept as she remembered accepting the loss of her cabinet's support and having the House of Commons after deciding to step down – an event Mrs Thatcher described as "traumatic". 

#MargaretThatcher #Thatcher #UKPolitics 

To search the ITN Archive collection on Getty Images, follow the link below:






hello
[Music]
[Applause]
I hope you have some
thank you very much thank you very much
thank you
Mr Satchel this is the first time you've
spoken to British television since your
resignation so I wonder because we
haven't heard as it were your version of
events and your side of the story you
you've said in the past that you thought
that what happened that what led to your
departure was really because people took
fright at the opinion polls isn't it
really the case that what had happened
was that your cabinet had in a sense
begun to Desert you because they were
worried about the way you were handling
things like Europe and like the poltex
and wasn't that the real reason why
things turned out the way they did
no I don't think it was
and I would say so if I thought it was
there had been some controversy about
the community charge
but everyone agreed it was based upon
the right principles the right
principles but we just got it up too
high and that would have been corrected
by putting in more tax for bigger
proportion of taxpayers money no I think
it genuinely was what I said that
certainly there's some on the back
benches who are getting very alarmed at
the opinion polls but I think we'd
perhaps had fewer people who this time
had had experience of what happened
before and they they demonstrated that
in that they didn't give one a clear run
on the first ballot that was one thing I
thought it would come all right but when
I returned
I thought I simply must speak the
members of my cabinet one or two other
senior ministers and I'm not going to
say who said what but they weren't a
hundred percent
um and they were very concerned
although they said most of them not all
that they would certainly support me
there was just a feeling that I thought
well if we get through we'll probably
gets through
but the things will go on being divided
with this kind of
um little bit of uncertainty
I had just better decide because it
should have come clear on the first
ballot can you just I think that
decision was right may I say so I think
that decision was right although the
letters I had
um
we had over 160
000.
in the end
were marvelous they didn't understand
and they contested
what happened because they said we voted
for you in a general election
and we haven't been asked
nevertheless that was not the position
one was faced with
I was faced with a position where I only
got 204 votes and it really should have
been more they said I should have been
at home during that period I was
in Paris
signing the treaty we had worked for
eign
and certainly those were there will
quite forget now what we saw on that
occasion was almost you come bursting
out of that Embassy door to the waiting
microphones and you very quickly said
that you were going to stand for the
second ballot but I wonder if you could
tell us actually how it was because
moments before that you were waiting
upstairs weren't you for a phone call
we were and I couldn't go after the
evening's engagement until we'd had it
and I was told the results immediately I
said but this means a second ballot so
we had not in fact got enough but then
it seemed to not seem to me at that
stage it would be difficult uh to get uh
three or four more people to vote with
us on the second ballot and um although
it was not very easy to go to a second
ballot it didn't seem to be very
difficult
uh something happened while I was away
that night there were various meetings
all over the place I think in London I
couldn't obviously be here and when I
got back the next morning it still
seemed to me that I would have a good
chance but during the day uh I got on
with
starting to get the confidence motion
ready and then thought I simply must see
the cabinets and some other people and
it was just very strange have you seen a
situation slip away from you I'm a
politician I know I can feel it I can
sense it and when um some people whom I
expected to be absolutely a staunch
had very different views said look I
will support you but I don't think that
um that it is a foregone conclusion then
all right no General can fight without a
really good army behind and I Linda guy
indicated it was the view that I took
I'm still sure it was the right one
under those circumstances
when did you really first sense that the
support had drained away to the extent
that you had to reach that decision was
it in in the morning when you came back
no it was in the evening after I had
come back because you had a big meeting
of colleagues over lunch didn't you at
number 10. yes so that was perfectly all
right Perfect all right and staunch what
some suggestions at that that all might
not be well I don't think people told
you then about the division of numbers
in the cabinet but I think there was
more than a hint there wasn't there that
things might not be quite going your way
to say the very least well I came back
and I I saw quite a lot
and I learned a good deal from that and
then the advice that I had was that
things were moving and changing in the
house and no I I was not going to cling
I either carried on with full Authority
I knew I had the authority of the people
but I wasn't going to carry on without
the authority of my party I did not have
enough I had
um I had a majority
I had a majority on the first ballot I
had a majority but I did not have a
sufficient majority and it would not
have
have been enough to go on the divisions
would have gone on that would have
absorbed them that is not good at that
stage of a parliament for anyone I still
believe that the decision was right and
so after that I'm confessed I went there
it's about half past eight and I simply
said look I have got to get back to
number 10 to finish making up that
speech you realize I have got emotional
Center tomorrow and I'm going in and I'm
going to have a battle
but of course uh just earlier today so I
got back and I think it was about ten
past one when um I had just finished the
speech and I said that I would make up
my mind finally the following morning
I'd sleep on it and Dennis and I
discussed it and
um you know the result
I'm still convinced it was the right
decision what went wrong was that we did
not get a big enough majority on the
first ballot and there's nothing I could
do to cure that that was the thing I
couldn't get over they said to me as I
went through but you haven't been to ask
us to vote for you other people have and
I thought Goodness Me
do I after 11 and a half years have to
go and ask personally for a vote
I remember previous leadership elections
but there you are they thought that I
did and I thought that um that was not
necessarily the right way to do it
because in the afternoon confidence or
they hadn't so it fell away very rapidly
uh early evening and because of the
first ballot not being sufficient I took
the decision in the end when you had to
come to that decision after you'd seen
the members of the cabinet individually
and one or two one understands that said
Point Blank that they would resign if
you carried on that only underlines what
you've been saying with such force that
you couldn't go on but I don't think
anyone said to him and no one said to me
no one said to me they would resign if I
carried on
no one that's interesting because it is
reported that at least one one said to
me
they would resign
if I can I didn't see them all
I didn't see them all I think I saw
about 11 or 12 and one or two other
people
but no one said to me
not one
but the crucial thing is that you then
went back to number 10 you had a
conversation with certain Etc Dennis DT
as he's always known he has always been
an absolutely staunch defender of you of
course as any husband would be but he's
been very valuable to you well he's he's
he's he's absolutely marvelous
and I think he was a bit cut up too that
we didn't get more but if he did we
didn't get enough then um he he
thought it was better to resign so he
was supportive in your decision there he
didn't try to talk you out of it no
he realized the political situation too
you must have full authority of your own
party to do to do the decisive things
which I have always done
too many people were fearful of the
opinion polls and um
so that was the way it went and then the
following morning of course you had I
suppose what must have been brought up
early
um and things hadn't changed so I
decided to take the course of action
which I did
then I went into the house well could I
just first of all ask you to recall what
must have been a very difficult meeting
of the cabinet yes of course it was
of course it was you don't take a
decision like that
without it being difficult
without heartbreak
heartbreak there may have beamed it was
the right decision
but you had to get through it
bernardingham in his Memoirs has said
that it was a traumatic experience those
are his words yes it was and it would
have been very strange if it hadn't been
but we got through it in fact you broke
down we got to the house you broke down
during that cabinet didn't you yes but I
carried on
and then the house
by that time I was back fighting fit
as you saw
just before that though the image that
people will perhaps remember you said
the cabinet was extremely difficult then
you had to come out into Downing Street
and you had to face the cameras in
effect you had to face the world
[Music]
you had to come and make what was
perhaps the statement of your life
and then I see that you know we notice
now that it's affecting you now and it
must have been yeah you must take to my
voice now it's not affecting my voice
you're thinking back to traumatic things
um but I managed to get through them
I managed to get through the television
I managed to get to the cabinet again
because there was something else to do
I had to um uh get on to people and I
must say this but Douglas heard and John
Major said if you wish to go on we will
propose you and second you again
and and that was marvelous that was
marvelous and then one had to get to a
cabinet and one or two people wanted to
leave because they too of course wanted
to to make provision for their own uh
for their own candidature quite right
quite right but by that time I had other
things to do and so I got on with them
the almost Final Act if you like of the
drama and it was a drama of your
resignation that speech you gave to the
house
now you've said how difficult it was
going through all the run-up talking to
the cabinet and all of that the
emotional strain that had obviously and
we've seen put you through what about
the business of going to the house and
making that resignation speech
ing it always isn't a full house always
whether it's at question time or an
ordinary down extraordinary day because
the house was packed
and early on in the speech I got a
little frog in my throat which you
sometimes do and I knew I had to talk
through it until I got some here here so
that I could have a glass of water and
then all of a sudden you start to get
interruptions and so you go from a
prepared script and it's spontaneous you
answer the questions that come
and
that just takes you out of yourself
completely you're so concerned with the
debate and the the quick thinking on
your feet of the right reply and then we
got on to the more interesting parts of
the speech let me say if ever you're
speaking the economy is the most
difficult thing to speak about it tends
to be in a sort of jargon
and however much you try to get rid of
the jargon you can't uh you always can
speak about the state of Industry
because that's human and living but the
actual public expenditure monetary
policy public sector Bond requirement is
it is difficult and you have to you get
that fairly fairly near the beginning so
you get to it and then you get on to
things which live like industry and
commerce uh and also some of your your
foreign policy and social services and
so on
uh and it did just take off I knew it
was taking off I knew when we got into
debate it would be all right but it just
did
do you remember the moment yeah do you
remember the moment when Dennis Skinner
intervened yes yes he is a marvelous
parliamentarian and no one has been
better at interjections than Dennis
Skinner
uh and he made a joke that you're going
to be governor of the Central Bank in
Europe and he said lots of money lots of
money you know he would say that and
your reply
what a good idea
it just did a thought I'm enjoying it
was fun beginning to enjoy I'm getting
to enjoy it yes were you yes because we
got on to him uh yes it's it it's it's
something which takes you out of
yourself the way to get out of yourself
is to have such strong things to do
immediately
that requires all your concentration all
your thought all your effort it's it's
and then you've forgotten what what is
bothering you because you've got
something to do immediately and for most
of my my political life that has been so
whatever the things that that really
that really were deeply deeply
concerning to me personally one had to
get on with something else and and
that's how you just get through
let me ask you if I may though about
thatcherism
it's uh
a word that's much banded about and
sometimes you've said well
really what it means because there was
the principles of it were invented long
before Mrs Thatcher yes they were but to
other people
to some other people thatcherism means
something negative it means I think that
they see it as a time of of personal
greed of time when people were just out
for themselves and that's the sort of
image that they have of ceterism
but absolute nonsense
don't most people want to work hard to
do better by their own families to have
a better house better holidays better
furniture
isn't that a worthwhile thing wouldn't
life be very much better if more people
took responsibility for their families
and for building their own future and
building their own security
and when they do that and have a little
bit over to help people less fortunate
than themselves isn't that a good thing
and aren't we trying to get the third
world out of the poverty it's in by
building up its Industries and having
some investment to go and help them with
John Wesley answered the question you've
just put
do not impute to money The Faults of
human nature
it's not the money it's not the wealth
you create it's what you do with it and
most people do want a better standard of
living
many many people use their money to to
do more for the Arts to see more to
enjoy more of the great artistic Works
whether it be music whether it be art
look at the Fantastic voluntary effort
in this country
it's enormous
no those look great isn't it absurd
trade unions mostly argue for higher
wages they argue for bigger
differentials but they then coming and
saying greed so some people are greedy
but people who want a better standard of
living a better way of life without
children or not they are highly moral
they're highly valued citizens and
they're usually those people who look
after their houses and their families
look after their neighborhoods join in
doing things their neighborhood
community spirit
this is the real satirism
isn't that always the danger that people
might be seeing you still as trying to
second-guess the prime minister
well I hope they won't
I hope they won't I did all my own first
guessing
for 15 years of what was right to do and
it wasn't guessing
so going back to the right principles of
passionate belief and uh you asked me
recently what things I remember I recall
one thing very well in 1980 One Finance
Minister of another part of the world
where'd you really rather believed in
what I was doing but hadn't seen it put
into practice before and saying to me
it look you're having difficulty we're
watching you very carefully we're
watching Britain very carefully that's
good they always please me when they're
watching Britain
because if you can roll back the
frontiers of socialism and in Britain
roll forward the frontiers of freedom
other people will follow you
what's an extraordinary thing to say
I knew I must keep going my goodness me
I took a pounding but we did
we did change Trade union law we did say
to a company look if you're if you're
going broke this is because you haven't
got it right and we're not going to pull
taxpayers money and to save you when in
fact if there's any taxpayers money
ought to be going to Bringing to bursts
and new Industries and for the first
time they had to take the consequences
of their own action what else is
democracy and responsibility all about
we did and we got people enthusiastic
about Enterprise do you know we've had
more young people starting up on their
own than ever before it is a new spirit
that's the essence to get the economy
right you have to understand human
nature there is a new spirit and we did
get it right and I'm not going to say it
go
just a final point on the whole business
of the way your Premiership ended I
think you've said that that no prime
minister really ought to have to leave
in those circumstances of course the
counter argument is it's almost like
that old phrase about be you never so
high the law is above you it's almost a
sense isn't it in which you say be you
never so high as prime minister but you
may be out of Downing Street by tonight
and prime ministers ought to know that
oh if you're out for what I call
constitutional reasons
of course
we were out for the reasons of the rules
made by the conservative party for
leaders in opposition
and that's very different
that's very different
uh the rules are still there
are there not rules which apply to the
labor party or to any other party
this was the first time it had happened
and uh it happened it happened I took
the right decision I am now free
to live another life a very practical
use both to the people of this country
and internationally I have a passion for
Britain
for the spirit of the people
for their character
it's done wonders for the world in the
past
it can still do wonders for the world of
the future
and what is your foundation going to do
it is going to embody all of those
things which I've explained and believed
in how to roll forward the frontiers of
Freedom how to bring it about
educating people about what it is all
about giving practical help to the
people in Eastern Europe who are trying
to do it they will want to know how to
learn we can give them scholarships they
can come over here we can get people to
go over there to advise them we can hold
conferences where they all get together
and learn from one another and
perpetuate the ideals I've also been
very active in uh the environment and
there's a good deal of work to do there
on a scientific basis that is partly
education was partly practical it's
enlarging the frontage of Freedom it's
bringing more and more of the world to
democracy on the basis of what we in
Britain have done it's taking our
leadership to others they're coming I
have telephone calls how can we do it
one can't give anything likes the amount
of money which governments can give the
one knows people who
you give them a helping hand you put
them in the way of Grants or
scholarships you teach them how to do it
most of the changes in the world
are brought about by a few people who
believe things and don't give up the
saccharovs the soldier knit sins knew
what was needed the Next Generation
we have to teach how and the young
people have never been made servile or
Passive by the communist system
the older people have when I spoke to
the young people in Moscow and then
they're such a right to a man and woman
isn't it marvelous but they already
raring to go and we must help them with
the how of it the spirit of Enterprise
the spirit
the character that is Britain
was such a marvelous people
we've done so much for Europe
we've done so much we've taken to the
far-flung corners of the world
a legal system our common law one of the
best in the world sound uncorrupt
Administration
of the spirit of enterprise
America practice at the other side the
best you learn from us this we must have
a foundation to make certain we have a
center so which it can continue that is
what I will do the best of Britain to
the best of the world
Margaret Thatcher thank you very much
indeed for talking to us
my pleasure thank you

Wednesday 29 March 2023

Ostraphobia




Hook :
Good evening, 
Ladies and Gentlemen, 
Your Captain again.

Please do not allow 
this minor turbulence 
to disturb you.

For now, please sit back, relax. 
Enjoy the remainder 
of The Flight.
Thank You.

Peter Pan's Wife :
Look what Jack drew.

Peter Pan :
That's very nice, dear.
What's that?

Peter Pan's Wife :
Fire.

Peter Pan :
Fire. Really?
Is that Our Plane?

Peter Pan's Wife :
Yep.

Peter Pan :
Who are these people?

Peter Pan's Wife :
That's Jack, that's Me, 
that's Mom...
...and that's you.

Peter Pan :
Where's my parachute?
I won't make it to 
my next birthday….

Peter Pan's Wife :
You won't die without A Phone 
and a fax machine

Peter Pan :
I got The Phone, 
and The Briefcase.

Peter Pan's Wife :
Talk to him.

Peter Pan :
…why didn't I have 
a parachute, Jackie?

Jack :
Take a wild guess.

Peter Pan :
Jackie. Jack.
Will you stop? You can 
break a window.

Jack :
They're double-layered. 
You can't break them.

Peter Pan :
Give me that.

Jack :
You're afraid you'll 
get sucked out. 

Peter Pan :
I'm not afraid of being sucked out.
Yes, you are. You're afraid 
you'll be sucked out.

Peter Pan :
Just stop.
Jack, next season, I'm coming 
to six games. I promise.

Jack :
Yeah, be sure to buy 
enough videotape.

Peter Pan :
Hey. Jack.
My Word is My Bond.

Jack :
Yeah, junk bond!

Peter Pan :
What's the matter with you? 
When are you gonna stop 
acting like A Child?

Jack :
I am a Child.

Peter Pan :
Grow up.

Tuesday 6 September 2022

Weeding




Captain James Hook :
Thank you. 
Thank you. 
Thank you.
Well, my stupid, sorry, parasitic sacks of entrails.... 

Revenge is Mine.

Long live The Hook!

I baited that Hook 
and now I'm proud to announce...
We have his children.

Finally I'm going to 
kill Peter Pan,
that cocky boy who 
cut off my hand 
and fed it to 
The Crocodile!

And who killed that 
cunning Crocodile? 

HOOK!

Who stuffed him?

HOOK!

Who made him into 
a quiet clock? 

HOOK!

Who went to 
The Other World 
and stole 
Pan's children?

HOOK!

And who didn't believe 
I could DO it?
Who doubted me?

Who amongst Us 
Does not Belong?
Someone here does 
not belong --

Stranger amongst 
The Loyal,
I'll weed you out.


[Command ship]
(Skagra snaps his fingers and the sphere settles on a pillar.)

ROMANA
Why don't you tell me
Why won't you just say what 
you're trying to do? 

(Skagra looks out of a big window.)

SKAGRA
Tell me what you see. 

ROMANA
Stars. 

SKAGRA
What are they doing

ROMANA
Doing? 

SKAGRA
Yes. 

ROMANA
Well, they're just there
They're --

SKAGRA
Exactly. Spinning uselessly through The Void. 
And around them, billions of people 
spinning uselessly through their lives. 

ROMANA
Says who?

SKAGRA
I Say. 

ROMANA
And Who are You


SKAGRA
What I am now is Not Important
But what I, what We all shall become... 

ROMANA
What do you --

SKAGRA
Shush. Look. 
(He opens his hands.)

ROMANA
What? 

SKAGRA
What do you see? 

ROMANA
Nothing. 

SKAGRA: 
Billions of atoms spinning at random, 
expending energy, running down
achieving nothing
Entropy, like the stars. 

But what is the one thing that 
stands against Entropy
against random decay? Life. 

(indicating himself)
See how the atoms are arranged here
They have MeaningPurpose
And what more Meaning and Purpose 
than in here. (his head

You do not understand Me. 
Your Mind is too limited.
 
My Krargs. They shall be The Servants 
of The New Generation. 

ROMANA
New Generation? New people?

SKAGRA: 
Not new people. 
A new Person.

[Krarg generator room]
(They enter a vapour-filled room.)

ROMANA: 
What? 

SKAGRA
Shush. 

(Skagra activates A Machine, and a new Krarg is created. Giant shaggy alien red yeti with post-it notes instead of fur, pretty much.

KRARG: 
What is Your Command, O Master?



Sunday 31 July 2022

Men of Fire

 

Polly (put The Kettle on) :
Have done it Doctor, did you really find something…?
 
The Cosmic Hobo :
…oh, Polly, I only wish I had.
 
….why not make some coffee 
to keep them all happy, 
while I think of something.
 
Polly (put The Kettle on) :
(tenderly touches him on the shoulder)
Alright.

….it’s The SUGAR
That’s Why it only affects some people —
not everyone takes it.

 
Male Organism 
Not Suited to Induce Other Males 
 
It is frequently reported that homosexual relations are prevalent in that type of boys’ school called a “public school” in England, and a “private school” in the United States. 
 
I have had occasion to observe one or two such relationships. 
 
In the cases which have come to my attention an older, stronger boy has compelled a young and much weaker boy to give him erotic pleasure, as well as to perform many other services of an appetitive nature for the benefit of the older youth. 
 
In such cases as these, the emotional response of inducement on the part of the older boy wins for him a greater total amount of pleasantness, both appetitive and erotic, than that which can be obtained from mere teasing and torturing of younger boys. 
 
Moreover, the younger boy’s combined submission and inducement attain for him a certain amount of Freedom from being made the object of dominance response. 
 
The older boy in these affairs usually protects and favours, in various ways, the boy who submits to him. Frequently he not only refrains from hazing or tormenting the younger boy, but also prevents other boys from doing so.
 
In this type of behaviour, therefore, we may see a certain amount of inducement expressed by a male subject free from control of dominance.
 
The Limitation to such relationships seems to be a physiological one.
 
Since neither the body nor the emotional development of the younger boy is suited to act as an effective stimulus to the passion of the stronger youth, the dominance of the younger boy yielding to dominance of the older boy becomes a matter of compliance by the weaker one rather than submission.
 
The older boy as environmental stimulus, in short, evokes motor stimuli stronger than the motor self of his companion, but, for the most part, antagonistic to it.
 
Thus, the stronger youth becomes an adequate stimulus to compliance but not to submission. The younger boy yields, not because he enjoys the relationship as such, but because it seems to be to his appetitive advantage.
 
“That’s a LOT of Baseball Cards….."
 
The compliance of the weaker boy, in turn, makes itself felt by the would-be inducer, and the inducement fails to produce sufficient pleasantness to be long continued.
 
From this sort of relationship, however, both boys frequently emerge with an unusually complete appetitive development, and with a transfer of inducement into adaptation to, and control by appetite.
 
In other words, the older boy has learned that he can use inducement to obtain services and pleasures which would otherwise be beyond his reach.
 
The younger boy, also, has been taught that by a compound response made up of inducement and submission expressed toward a stronger companion, he can obtain protection, gifts, and perhaps advancement in school activities of various sorts.
 
In the cases I have studied, at least, both boys entering into such a relationship, tend thereafter to use the primary emotional response of inducement not for its own sake nor for the completion of a true love response, but rather as first aid in furthering the ends of active and passive appetite or both.
 
This use of inducement, as we shall have occasion later to observe, constitutes one of the most unfortunate of personality developments. 
 
Normal Adult Male Transfers 
Inducement From Sadism to Business
 
The element of inducement in males who have not had experiences of homosexual type, nevertheless, tends to follow a somewhat similar course of development. The behaviour called “cruelty” toward other males continues to be expressed in some degree throughout adult life. Business men, as well as men engaged in professional and academic life, appear to obtain a certain emotional pleasure by means of imposing hardships and minor torments upon other males who come under their authority. And this same type of pleasure is still more obviously manifested when failure of another man is reported, even though this individual is in no sense a rival. Criticisms or attacks made upon another male appear to be enjoyed without restraint by most men, and it would appear that the dominant or appetitive satisfaction in disposing of a rival fails to account satisfactorily for the entire response. There exists, in addition, a certain emotional gratification (captivation emotion) in the thought that the person attacked is thereby subjected to the subject himself as well as to all other persons who witness the attack. With the normal and fairly successful business man, however, these occasional enjoyments of perverted inducement response must be strictly limited to those occasions when the subject’s own appetitive interests can not be injured by indulging in enjoyment of the other person’s enforced subjection. Daring late adolescence there is indication that dominance, compliance and their appetitive combinations develop very rapidly with male subjects, until appetite may be said to exercise undisputed control over the average male’s emotional responses. With this maturing appetite comes the suppression and limitation of inducement expressed in forcefully bullying and injuring other males. The youth begins to discover that he cannot afford to alienate other males who may later serve his interests in one way or another, no matter how insignificant these persons may seem at the time when he has an opportunity to subject them injuriously in some way. For instance, one boy may successfully dominate another lad of the same group during athletic competition or competitive seeking of the same class office or scholastic prize. The natural tendency of the male following such successes seems to consist of an expression of open triumph over the rival, with perhaps a certain patronizing condescension expressive of the defeated one’s subjection to the superior strength of the more successful boy. The triumphant boy does not regard this defeated rival as an enemy or antagonist. In fact, the whole pleasure of the inducement response would be turned to indifference were the other boy regarded as a real antagonist. To enjoy this type of victory to the full, the defeated male must still be thought of as a friend, though a friend of inferior strength and position. It soon transpires, however, that the defeated boy has reacted to the openly expressed superiority of the successful youth by becoming a real enemy. Perhaps, at a subsequent election of class officers or in the course of academic relationships, if the two boys are taking the same courses, an occasion arises where the formerly successful youth needs the support of the boy whom he has been treating as an inferior. He finds this support is not forthcoming. The formerly defeated youth now responds with dominance to the previously controlling dominance in the other boy’s behaviour and the formerly triumphant youth suffers accordingly. I studied several instances of this type, and found that in these instances only a few such experiences were necessary to lead to a splitting off of inducement from open dominance, and the initiation of a new pattern of behaviour in which inducement was used to further the ends of appetite instead of thwarting them. In other words, instead of giving free rein to the pleasantness of injurious subjection of other boys the subject quickly learned to use inducement to acquire and regain their appetitive assistance and service. Inducement in Business This system of emotional organization, wherein inducement is used as first assistant to active appetite, forms what may be called the extensor muscle of modern business. Selling goods is a clear cut example of this type of composite emotional response. The salesman not only stimulates the appetitive mechanisms of his prospective customers by impressing upon the buyer the financial advantage which these particular goods hold for him, but he also uses a considerable amount of “personal appeal” to the buyer. That is to say, the salesman endeavours to impress the buyer with his own qualities as a good fellow and reliable person. And if the prospective customer allows himself to become sympathetic the salesman may even make an open statement of his own personal needs and desires in winning the patronage of the merchant to whom he is talking. All this consists of rather clear-cut, active inducement behaviour, on the part of the salesman. In itself such behaviour has no connection whatever with the intrinsic merit or usefulness of the goods to be sold. Yet, no business man to-day doubts the importance of such inducement technique in effecting sales. Even printed advertisements which do not, of course, enable the seller to appear personally before the buyer, contain as large an element of inducement as it is possible to convey with the help of words, pictures and suggestions of both form and colour. Pretty girls are depicted extending the article to be sold invitingly toward the reader of the advertisement. The concern manufacturing the product advertised is symbolized as the family’s best friend, or as the generous saviour of humanity in distress.
 
Another form of what might be called substituted inducement, commonly found in advertisements, is the attempted identification of the advertiser with some member of the prospective customer’s family, who is represented as inducing the reader of the advertisement to buy the product advertised.
 
For instance, a picture of a baby may be shown with the heading:
“Bring happiness to your child, buy this cuddly, dimpled baby doll!”
 
Or a picture of two attractive children sharing a bottle of soft drink,
may be displayed with the legend: “Let your children enjoy these taste-tempting drinks”.
 
In nearly all selling methods of modern business some element of inducement can be found directly or indirectly expressed, over and above the appetitive appeal contained in descriptions of the intrinsic values and delights of the goods themselves.
 
This use of inducement response as a servant of appetite emotion tends to be learned by the average male about the time of sexual maturity. Thereafter, he limits more and more the use of inducement in enjoyment of the captivation of other males, and extends its use further and further for the purpose of procuring appetitive benefits from other people of both sexes.
 
Confusions Between Inducement and Dominance
 
The behaviour just considered, which might aptly be styled the evolution of male inducement, serves only to illustrate the tendency which all males exhibit, at times, to confuse and intermingle dominance and inducement responses.
 
The integrative element which is identical in dominance and inducement is the superiority of the motor self over the strength of the motor stimulus.
 
The integrative difference between the two responses consists in the fact that an adequate stimulus to dominance emotion is antagonistic to the motor self while adequate motor stimulus to inducement must remain in alliance with the motor self.
 
If there appears to be the slightest doubt as to whether the person who constitutes the environmental stimulus is willing to accept the rôle of inferiority to the subject, then the average male organism immediately tends to react to the individual in question as to an antagonistic stimulus.
 
The “boot-licking,” or utterly servile attitude which male underlings of great men so frequently find it necessary to adopt, in order to retain their positions, furnishes dependable evidence of the tendency just referred to.
 
If the assistant or employee inadvertently manifested, at any time, behaviour which impressed his chief with a possible superiority of strength on the part of the supposedly inferior male, the employer would feel immediate necessity for reducing his employee’s strength to a level obviously lower than his own.
 
This emotional purpose, again, is a common one both to dominance and to inducement responses; but since dominance is the prevailing male emotion, the employer almost invariably seeks to educe his subordinate’s strength by action antagonistic to the other man’s interests.
 
He may reprimand him before others, decrease his pay, or discharge him. 
 
I have observed many instances of each of these methods used by males in Authority to reduce the strength of a subordinate. 
 
Nor are such methods limited to business or other appetitive relationships where there may be, in most cases, some actual opposition of interests between chief and subordinate. 
 
In The Home, a Wife or Son may be “put in their place” by this method. 
 
Deliberately cutting and insulting remarks may be addressed to The Wife. 
 
A Son who shows any tendency to dispute the superiority of a “successful” father is likely to receive more definitely injurious treatment. 
 
Physical abuse, cutting off a son’s allowance or privileges, or even (in one actual case) causing the son’s arrest and sentence in juvenile court, may be used as methods of reducing the “uppishness” of The Boy. 
 
All these courses of action are dominant and not inductive methods of reducing the strength of the person regarded as inferior to the subject, since all these methods of treatment disregard utterly the interests and well being of the person thus treated. 
 
Were inducement the prevailing response, the actions of The Father, or person in Authority must have been kept in complete alliance with the welfare and happiness of the persons subjected. Had this been done, and true inducement actually exercised, the inferior persons must have been induced voluntarily to reduce their own strength to a required degree, in order to accept completely the control of the inducer. 
 
Most males, who appear to possess very meagre development of inducement emotion in pure form, would regard such a task as utterly impossible. An average male is prone to remark “the only way to show the boy his place is to beat him within an inch of his life”. 
 
Often the sentiment expressed is more violent than the action which follows, but the two are usually similar in nature. Whenever another person’s strength is to be reduced to a level inferior to a man’s own, the person is treated as An Opponent and dominance takes the place of inducement in nine cases out of ten.
 
 
Hans
Very well. (hangs up)
 They're coming
Now we'll see how these Russians 
deal with a crack SS division. 
 
Erich
(putting his cap on
Er.... Hans.... 
 
Hans
Have courage, My Friend! 
 
Erich
Yeah. Er.... Hans,
I've just noticed something. 
 
Hans
(looking through binoculars)
These Communists 
are all cowards! 
 
Erich: 
Have you looked at
our caps recently? 
 
Hans:
(lowers binoculars)
Our caps
 
Erich: 
The badges on our caps.
Have you looked at them? 
 
Hans:
What?... No... A bit. 
 
Erich:
...They've got skulls on them. 
 
Hans:
Hm? 
 
Erich:
Have you noticed our caps have actually got
little pictures of skulls on them? 
 
Hans:
Er... I don't, erm... 
 
Erich:
Hans... are we the baddies?
 
Later, Erich still can't get over the fact that
the skulls seem to imply that
he and Hans are on the wrong side
of Good and Evil:
 
Hans:
Well — maybe they're the skulls of our enemies! 
 
Erich:
Maybe. But is that how it comes across?
I mean, it doesn't say next to the skull, y'know,
"Yeah, we killed him, but Trust Us,
this guy was horrid"! 
 
Hans:
Well, no, but— 
 
Erich:
I mean, what do skulls
make you think of?
Death. Cannibals. Beheading.
Erm... Pirates... 
 
Hans:
(brightening)
Pirates are fun!
 
Erich:
I didn't say we weren't fun,
but, fun or not, Pirates
are still the baddies.
I just can't think of anything
good about a skull!
 
Hans:
What about….
pure Aryan skull shape? 
 
Erich:
Even that is more usually depicted
with the skin still on!
Whereas The Allies—
 
Hans:
Oh, you haven't been listening 
to Allied propaganda?
Of course, they're gonna say 
we're the bad guys!
 
Erich:
But they didn't get to
design our uniforms!
And their symbols are all,
y'know, quite nice!
Stars, stripes, lions, sickles... 
 
Hans:
What's so good about a sickle? 
 
Erich:
Well, nothing, obviously,
and if there's one thing we've learned
in the last thousand miles of retreat,
it's that Russian agriculture
is in dire need
of mechanisation! 
 
Hans:
Tell me about it! 
 
Erich:
But you've gotta say,
it's better than a skull!
I mean, I really can't think of anything worse
as a symbol, than a skull! 

Hans(thinks
A rat's.... anus? 

Erich
Yeah. And if we were fighting an army 
marching under the banner of a rat's anus, 
I'd probably be a lot less worried, Hans! 

(Hans puts a cigarette in his mouth and sets down an ashtray — shaped like a skull. As he absorbs this, he and Erich see one of their comrades drinking out of a mug with a skull on the side, and another knitting a scarf with a skull pattern

Hans: 
...Okay. So... 
(he and Erich suddenly bolt from the table and run for it)