Shadow play: Jacques Vallée’s Control System Hypothesis and D. W. Pasulka on the social engineering of the UFO mythology

Among thoughts provoked by my recently reading James Madden’s Unidentified Flying Hyperobject: UFOs, Philosophy, and the End of the World (2023), aside from those concerning the hyperobject, were others regarding Madden’s about Jacques Vallée’s Control System Hypothesis and D. W. Pasulka’s contentions about the intentional steering of the UFO mythology. I have already probed some ideological implications of two variations of Vallée’s Control System Hypothesis; here, I address Madden’s presentation of Pasulka’s “troubling thesis” (105) from her American Cosmic (2019).

For Madden, Pasulka’s position is that “we are in the midst of a religious transformation, and this process is something that is being done to us…[using] the newly honed tools of media technology.” This “manipulation looks like it has been transacted, at least in part, by quite mundane powers.” This “religious transformation” is characterized by “a particular system of belief centering on ‘nuts-and-bolts’ UFO technology manned by extraterrestrial, rational animals.” For Madden, Pasulka is inspired to investigate this “religious transformation” first by Jung’s observation that with the modern “flying saucer” era “We have…a golden opportunity of seeing how a legend [for Pasulka, a religion] is born” (103).

Despite Madden’s seeing Pasulka and Jeffrey Kripal as “the avant garde for academic ufology in the humanities and social sciences” (9), the religious dimensions of the UFO and its pilots have a long, rich history of academic, scholarly investigation (interested readers are directed—for a start—to the essays collected in The Gods Have Landed: New Religions from Other Worlds (1995)). Be that as it may, what strikes Madden is Pasulka’s conjecture that the UFO mythology is being intentionally engineered. Madden quotes American Cosmic:

The creation of a belief system is now much easier to accomplish than it was two thousand years ago, when people didn’t possess smartphones and were not exposed to the ubiquitous screens of a culture that now teaches us how to see, what to see, and how to interpret what we see…I [Pasulka] was beginning to research the ways in which the virtual and digital media were being used for political purposes under the auspices of information operations. how the military employed media, social media, and all types of electronic media for purposes of national security. All these media have played major roles in the creation of a global belief in UFOs and extraterrestrials. It is in the world of media that the myth is created, sustained, and proliferates. (104)

Surely, the myth is, in a sense, “created…in the world of media:” there would be no “flying saucers” had not a journalist coined the term. The “visionary rumour” has been spread through print, electronic, and now digital media (newspapers, magazines, books, radio, television, cinema, and the internet). Indeed, the dissemination, formation, and reception of the myth in the media is a study of its own. At the same time, that the authorities (at least in the United States) have not been absolutely forthcoming and have actively engaged in spinning the topic is old news. Already in his first book, The Flying Saucers are Real (1950), Donald Keyhoe first expressed the view that the air force knew (or had, at least, concluded) that flying saucers were interplanetary spacecraft but was covering up this knowledge and dissuading public belief in it until a later date when through various public relations efforts the “ontological shock” of the revelation that “we are not alone” could be sufficiently cushioned and controlled. Keyhoe’s books planted the seeds for the ideas of “the flying saucer conspiracy” (the title of his 1955 book) and the push for “Disclosure” (the authorities’ admitting publicly what they know about our interstellar visitors), something Keyhoe actively worked toward in his lifetime.

Today, the locus classicus of such dissimulation is the Army Air Force’s first claiming a flying saucer had crashed near Roswell, New Mexico, only to quickly retract the story and explain what had been found on Mac Brazel’s ranch were the remnants of a weather balloon. No less pertinent if perhaps less famous is Allen Hynek’s being urged to explain the sightings in Exeter, New Hampshire as swamp gas. More gravely, stories of intentional deception by military and intelligence agents are well-known (Jerome Clark’s The UFO Book (1998) includes a two-dozen page entry “The Dark Side” with a thirty-seven entry bibliography). Among them, most notoriously, are the cases of Paul Bennewitz, who was driven to insanity and suicide by an Air Force disinformation campaign (as well-researched and documented by Greg Bishop in his Project Beta: The Story of Paul Bennewitz, National Security, and the Creation of a Modern UFO Myth (2005)) and that of William L. Moore, who was actively recruited both to provide intelligence on his fellow ufologists and to disseminate disinformation, an important actor in the whole MJ-12 affair. Jacques Vallée’s 1991 Revelations: Alien Contact and Human Deception delves into these and other, international stories, while the late Robbie Graham’s Silver Screen Saucers: Sorting Fact from Fantasy in Hollywood’s UFO Movies (2015) is arguably the deepest dive into government actors’ actively playing a role “in the creation of a global belief in UFOs and extraterrestrials” (Graham, curiously, absent from the pages of American Cosmic).

What needs be remarked is that already in his 1975 volume The Invisible College: What a Group of Scientists Has Discovered about UFO Influences on the Human Race Vallée was reflecting on the manipulation of the myth by both human and nonhuman agents, writing about both the UMMO affair (an elaborate hoax committed by unknown parties for unknown reasons) and developing his Control System Hypothesis (that some UFO sightings and encounter events are intentionally staged by the intelligence behind the “real” phenomenon to act as stimuli to modify social behaviour). These two manipulations are humorously represented in the X-Files episode “José Chung’s ‘From Outer Space'” (1996) where two air force pilots, disguised as Greys abducting a young couple, are interrupted and abducted themselves by a real alien from (perhaps) inner earth. Indeed, that the American (and other) governments have had a hand in manufacturing UFO events and manipulating the mythology is, itself, an important part of the X-Files‘ UFO mythology. (One might be moved to ask if Chris Carter’s series is, then, a moment of postmodern reflexivity, where the medium of manipulation makes an open secret of its manipulations). The matter is, indeed, complex…

Setting aside the possible deceptiveness of the Phenomenon itself, even the human steering of the mythology is far from simple. (I have ventured some reflections on the matter, here). First, there are a number of parties involved, national (e.g. the United States) and private (e.g., those responsible for the UMMO hoax). Even within a single nation state, there are a number of agencies, not all of which are necessarily acting in unison or even necessarily aware of each others efforts (e.g., the navy, the air force, the various intelligence agencies). Are all these pushing the same agenda? More generally, it seems not unlikely that various nation states will exploit the mythology each for their own ends. Indeed, one reason the United States Air Force was so concerned about flying saucers was it feared the Soviet Union could use a flurry of “uncoordinated targets” as cover for an air assault. Exactly how various international actors might in fact be exploiting the mythology is a question.

As the cases of Paul Bennewitz and others attest, at least in the United States, various actors have in fact worked to maintain and guide the mythology, but to what end or ends? In the case of Bennewitz, it was to cover up highly-secret transmissions Bennewitz had detected but couldn’t understand. Further, we do know that the idea of extraterrestrial spaceships buzzing the skies has served as a cover story to hide test flights of experimental aeroforms. Other uses are imaginable, but uncertain. Even if the myth is part of a larger, long term plan, perhaps the interested powers-that-be, even without an immediate use, seek to maintain the myth of interstellar visitors as a potential weapon in the psychological, propagandistic arsenal for some eventual, unforeseen use.

However, as the X-Files episode mentioned above shows, the mythology is, in a sense, out of control. The manipulation of the myth, as well, at least among a portion of the population, is even already out of the bag. One might ask, moreover, if it is imaginable that any one government can have an agent in a steering role in every movie and television studio. Anyone who has worked in the motion picture or television industry will attest just how aleatoric the process of movie production is, how hard it is to control and determine the final product, so many having a vested interest. Of course, an iron-fisted control is likely not even needed; all that’s necessary is to nudge the mythology as necessary, as long as the reigning idea is that of extraterrestrial visitation. As long as the idea is sufficiently profitable, it will be creatively exploited. (Arguably, a less paranoid and more interesting question is just why this idea holds so much fascination…).

At the same time, however ubiquitous the “visionary rumour,” exactly how powerful is it? What exactly is the value of steering “our collective unconscious toward [this] particular system of belief” by a “co-opted popular media” (105)? However true that such co-option is in fact at work, the production of the mythology is out of any one party’s hands, not to mention its reception by audiences who are hardly mindlessly passive receivers, rendering the predictable and, hence, controllable effects of the myth uncertain to a questionable degree.

What Pasulka fails to question are the conditions of possibility for the persuasiveness of the myth’s central idea in the first place, social conditions which imply a deeper function of the idea of technologically-advanced extraterrestrial civilizations. First, the “plurality of worlds” is an old idea; the belief in the possibility of “intelligent life” on other planets goes back to antiquity. Thus, ideas about aliens and their spaceships were already in the air when the United States Army Air Force cast around for possible explanations for the sightings of flying discs in the wake of Kenneth Arnold’s report of “flying saucers.” That this science-fiction theme already thrived quite vitally in the media of the day suggests there would have been little need for it to be cultured to whatever end, however much there is in fact evidence of such meddling. And, as I have argued here consistently, the myth of anthropomorphic extraterrestrials and their technologies is an all-too understandable projection of the self-understanding of the so-called “advanced societies,” especially within the context of their having “progressed” to the point of being able to annihilate themselves. On the one hand, these alien societies are images of a possible future the other side of the critical threats facing the modernized world; on the other, as SETI researchers themselves have proposed, extraterrestrial civilizations “more advanced” than our own might very well have solved the very problems that threaten ours, a belief shared by advocates of Disclosure eager to exploit those free energy technologies they believe world governments have retrieved, reverse engineered, and exploited to their own ends. This more profound view of the UFO mythology perceives it not so much as a new religion (though it has surely inspired New Religious Movements) but as a quite understandably spontaneous outgrowth of the ideology underwriting technoscientific society, a fantasy that imagines that, because such societies are natural (a universal feature of the evolution of life, from its appearance to its developing “intelligence”), technological “progress,” at least potentially, can solve the problems it itself gives rise to, an imaginary answer to a real problem. In this regard, it seems those aspiring social engineers that so concern Madden and Pasulka could very well have saved themselves the trouble.

Another not an Other

A friend recently shared this meme of “What-the-Dalai-Lama-told-John-Mack” (which I haven’t fact-checked), which, along with the recent publication of Diana Pasulka’s Encounters: Experiences with Nonhuman Intelligences prompts this post.

As readers here will know, one engine of thought here at the Skunkworks is the thesis that the very idea of technologically-advanced, extraterrestrial civilizations is ideological, that is, treating a profoundly contingent cultural formation (namely, that of the earth’s so-called “advanced” societies) as if it were somehow natural or universal. The Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (ETH) for the origin of UFOs/AUP merely projects “First World” humanity as a paradigm of “intelligence” and “technology” onto the cosmos.

However, recent reflections on “the Phenomenon,” taking their cue, arguably, from Jacques Vallée’s Passport to Magonia combined, sometimes, with more recent, original research, depart from the conjecture that UFOs/UAP hail from an extrasolar civilization. Following Vallée, it is proposed that the mind-boggling variety of entities encountered in relation to flying saucers, UFOs, and UAP are part of a broader, human tradition of interaction with nonhuman intelligences. As Pasulka writes in the introduction to her new book (in her characteristically breezy style): “Traditional religions, including Christianity, Islam and Judaism, as well as Buddhism, and Hinduism, in addition to Indigenous communities, include some recognition, in parts of their histories and traditions, either acknowledging or pondering the existence of extraterrestrials or nonhuman intelligence, or do not discount it” (8).

In this notion of “nonhuman intelligence” there seems something unreflected, and that is the very (reported) fact of human/nonhuman interaction, an interaction that is more like human-to-human interaction than that between different species. If these entities are not of the family Homo (and even within that family mutual recognition is restricted), then the grounds of the mutual recognition between human and nonhuman beings is mysterious (if not downright mystical). I have argued this point with regards to intelligent extraterrestrials: there is no obvious reason why They should recogize Us as their technologically-advanced, intelligent Other. The same reasoning is arguably applicable to the nonhuman intelligences posited by Vallée, Pasulka, et al.

Within the context of the Abrahamic religions, the interaction between humankind, angels, and demons is not suprising, however, given that they all spring from the same Creator, Man being made in His image. Just how an analogous thinking is operative in the traditions Pasulka lists above, she—the religious studies scholar—would know better than I, but my hunch is this analogue is present in one inflection or other in them all. It follows, then, that myths, traditions, stories, or reports of “face-to-face” interaction with nonhuman intelligences, at least within the context of a Darwinian understanding of life, intelligence, and consciousness, betray an anthropomorphism if not an anthropocentrism. In our average-everyday reality, human-to-human interaction differs from interspecies interaction, and interaction between human and nonhuman “intelligent” beings would be an instance of the latter, not the former.

This reflection reveals a deeper, unquestionable anthropocentrism. The very idea of “nonhuman intelligence,” as it is deployed in talk about “the Phenomenon,” excludes out of hand the “intelligence” of all other forms of life on earth (which is ironic given the way that non-Abrahamic traditions—“Buddhism, and Hinduism, in addition to Indigenous communities”—think of nonhuman beings in ways markedly more empathetic). As I have argued, there’s no such thing as intelligence. That is, the concept of “intelligence” denotes not some quality or characteristic in-itself, but is a piece in some language game (e.g., that of various fields of psychology, artifical intelligence research, etc.) possessed of significance only relative to its particular use. Just as the concept of technology is unreflectively inflated and projected onto the cosmos by the thinking that goes on in the ETH and the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, too often in ufological talk, even in this latest inflection, “intelligence” appears blindly applied only to human, all-too-human (so-called) Others.

Calendar year in review

These past twelve months have been in retrospect surprisingly remarkable at these Skunkworks. Though it felt like production had slowed, thirty-four posts were published, which is more than one a fortnight(!). More interestingly, I managed to eschew the UFO/UAP stories that made the biggest splash, namely those involving the U.S. government’s renewed overt interest in the matter. The only more mainstream topic I did address was that of Avi Loeb, a topic I finally put to sleep.

The year really began in the spring, with the conference proceedings held to inaugurate the Archives of the Impossible at Rice University. I viewed and commented on all the plenary talks—by Jeffrey Kripal and Jacques Vallée, Whitley Strieber, and Diana Pasulka (Heath).

These plenary talks, and other discussions held around the inaugural conference, raised a persistent and increasingly acute topic of reflection here, the relation between the being and nature of the phenomenon and its meaning. Three posts essay this question: ‘“The theme has vista”: the question of UFO reality and the Myth of Things seen in the Sky’, ‘Getting to a root of the matter: a “radical” “theory” of the UFO Phenomenon if not the UFO-in-itself‘, and “A Note on Cultural Seismology…”.

March was also the month that began the publicity for Jeffrey Kripal’s new book, The Superhumanities: Historical Precedents, Moral Objections, and New Realities. Kripal gave a remote lecture on the topic, to which I reacted at length. I was also prompted, in part by having to object to some criticisms of Jacques Vallée’s The Invisible College levelled by Robert Sheaffer, to relate some of those earlier ideas of Vallée’s to Kripal’s project.

Vallée’s earlier work, Passport to Magonia, also gave me the opportunity to extend, broaden, and deepen my forays into the social significance of the UFO myth, in this instance, its colonialist unconscious. Not unrelated were the posts devoted to nonhuman life, the abstract concept of technology at work in ufology, and the textuality of the phenomenon itself.

Spring and Summer saw me in conversation with Luis Cayetano, a conversation that expanded to include the faculty of The Invisible Night School.

Indeed, The Invisible Night School was one of several new research initiatives that caught our attention this past year, including Mike Cifone’s hard-headed Entaus blog (resolutely bent on wringing some coherence out of ufology), Limina: The Journal of UAP Studies, news of the journal’s inaugural symposium this coming February, and the first university-level UAP studies program, at the Julius Maximilian University in Würzburg, Germany.

This coming year, we’d surely like to write more posts! These may include a weekly or fortnightly notice of more mainstream UFO/AUP stories (tentatively titled “What’s Up” or “In the Air”). I hope, too, to return to more fundamental research: continuing to review and study those volumes on Jung’s Ufological bookshelf along with those recently added to the evergrowing research library here at the Skunkworks, more attention to the poetic handling of the myth and more new contributions of my own, and an ever more refined handling of the notion of technology. Likely, the proceedings of Limina‘s inaugural symposium will provide grist for the mill, and the phenomenon itself, in its protean development and our attendant reactions, will doubtless provide some prompts to furrow the brows and click the keys…