The Delphi Technique: How it works

Have you ever been to a public meeting, like a school board meeting, or a city council meeting, or a trustee public hearing on a zoning change, only to find out that the decisions had been made before the meeting ever began? And on your way home from those meetings where you had stood up and voiced your opinion, but the group preceded anyway in spite of your protests and asked yourself why you even bothered. It’s because of The Delphi Technique or some variation of it which is designed to build group consensus for a desired idea while creating the illusion of community participation. The Delphi Technique is something that everyone needs to understand. Since intellectuals began to implement these types of manipulative studies, which require specialized training to use and understand, techniques like the Delphi have subverted our election process in a subtle way nationally by subverting common sense logic in favor of a socialist oriented group conscious founded on illusion, because the end results are most of the time pre-determined.

So enjoy the information below and use it in your communities to begin to take back your local government. Only when we can diffuse the effects of The Delphi Technique can we return the actions of government to the people it is supposed to serve.

Source article for below information:

The following information is written by Lynn Stuter.  Her home web site is linked at the end of this portion.   The photographs come from the PDF page also listed at the end of this article. 

Using the Delphi Technique to Achieve Consensus
How it is leading us away from representative government to an illusion of citizen participation

The Delphi Technique and consensus building are both founded in the same principle – the Hegelian dialectic of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, with synthesis becoming the new thesis. The goal is a continual evolution to “oneness of mind” (consensus means solidarity of belief) -the collective mind, the wholistic society, the wholistic earth, etc. In thesis and antithesis, opinions or views are presented on a subject to establish views and opposing views. In synthesis, opposites are brought together to form the new thesis. All participants in the process are then to accept ownership of the new thesis and support it, changing their views to align with the new thesis. Through a continual process of evolution, “oneness of mind” will supposedly occur.

In group settings, the Delphi Technique is an unethical method of achieving consensus on controversial topics. It requires well-trained professionals, known as “facilitators” or “change agents,” who deliberately escalate tension among group members, pitting one faction against another to make a preordained viewpoint appear “sensible,” while making opposing views appear ridiculous.

In her book Educating for the New World Order, author and educator Beverly Eakman makes numerous references to the need of those in power to preserve the illusion that there is “community participation in decision-making processes, while in fact lay citizens are being squeezed out.”

The setting or type of group is immaterial for the success of the technique. The point is that, when people are in groups that tend to share a particular knowledge base, they display certain identifiable characteristics, known as group dynamics, which allows the facilitator to apply the basic strategy.

The facilitators or change agents encourage each person in a group to express concerns about the programs, projects, or policies in question. They listen attentively, elicit input from group members, form “task forces,” urge participants to make lists, and in going through these motions, learn about each member of a group. They are trained to identify the “leaders,” the “loud mouths,” the “weak or non-committal members,” and those who are apt to change sides frequently during an argument.

Suddenly, the amiable facilitators become professional agitators and “devil’s advocates.” Using the “divide and conquer” principle, they manipulate one opinion against another, making those who are out of step appear “ridiculous, unknowledgeable, inarticulate, or dogmatic.” They attempt to anger certain participants, thereby accelerating tensions. The facilitators are well trained in psychological manipulation. They are able to predict the reactions of each member in a group. Individuals in opposition to the desired policy or program will be shut out.

The Delphi Technique works. It is very effective with parents, teachers, school children, and community groups. The “targets” rarely, if ever, realize that they are being manipulated. If they do suspect what is happening, they do not know how to end the process. The facilitator seeks to polarize the group in order to become an accepted member of the group and of the process. The desired idea is then placed on the table and individual opinions are sought during discussion. Soon, associates from the divided group begin to adopt the idea as if it were their own, and they pressure the entire group to accept their proposition.

How the Delphi Technique Works

Consistent use of this technique to control public participation in our political system is causing alarm among people who cherish the form of government established by our Founding Fathers. Efforts in education and other areas have brought the emerging picture into focus.

In the not-too-distant past, the city of Spokane, in Washington state, hired a consultant to the tune of $47,000 to facilitate the direction of city government. This development brought a hue and cry from the local population. The ensuing course of action holds an eerie similarity to what is happening in education reform. A newspaper editorial described how groups of disenfranchised citizens were brought together to “discuss” what they felt needed to be changed at the local government level. A compilation of the outcomes of those “discussions” influenced the writing of the city/county charter.

That sounds innocuous. But what actually happened in Spokane is happening in communities and school districts all across the country. Let’s review the process that occurs in these meetings.

First, a facilitator is hired. While his job is supposedly neutral and non-judgmental, the opposite is actually true. The facilitator is there to direct the meeting to a preset conclusion.

The facilitator begins by working the crowd to establish a good-guy-bad-guy scenario. Anyone disagreeing with the facilitator must be made to appear as the bad guy, with the facilitator appearing as the good guy. To accomplish this, the facilitator seeks out those who disagree and makes them look foolish, inept, or aggressive, which sends a clear message to the rest of the audience that, if they don’t want the same treatment, they must keep quiet. When the opposition has been identified and alienated, the facilitator becomes the good guy – a friend – and the agenda and direction of the meeting are established without the audience ever realizing what has happened.

Next, the attendees are broken up into smaller groups of seven or eight people. Each group has its own facilitator. The group facilitators steer participants to discuss preset issues, employing the same tactics as the lead facilitator.

Participants are encouraged to put their ideas and disagreements on paper, with the results to be compiled later. Who does the compiling? If you ask participants, you typically hear: “Those running the meeting compiled the results.” Oh-h! The next question is: “How do you know that what you wrote on your sheet of paper was incorporated into the final outcome?” The typical answer is: “Well, I’ve wondered about that, because what I wrote doesn’t seem to be reflected. I guess my views were in the minority.”

That is the crux of the situation. If 50 people write down their ideas individually, to be compiled later into a final outcome, no one knows what anyone else has written. That the final outcome of such a meeting reflects anyone’s input at all is highly questionable, and the same holds true when the facilitator records the group’s comments on paper. But participants in these types of meetings usually don’t question the process.

Why hold such meetings at all if the outcomes are already established? The answer is because it is imperative for the acceptance of the School-to-Work agenda, or the environmental agenda, or whatever the agenda, that ordinary people assume ownership of the preset outcomes. If people believe an idea is theirs, they’ll support it. If they believe an idea is being forced on them, they’ll resist.

The Delphi Technique is being used very effectively to change our government from a representative form in which elected individuals represent the people, to a “participatory democracy” in which citizens selected at large are facilitated into ownership of preset outcomes. These citizens believe that their input is important to the result, whereas the reality is that the outcome was already established by people not apparent to the participants.

How to Diffuse the Delphi Technique
Three steps can diffuse the Delphi Technique as facilitators attempt to steer a meeting in a specific direction.
1. Always be charming, courteous, and pleasant. Smile. Moderate your voice so as not to come across as belligerent or aggressive.

2. Stay focused. If possible, jot down your thoughts or questions. When facilitators are asked questions they don’t want to answer, they often digress from the issue that was raised and try instead to put the questioner on the defensive. Do not fall for this tactic. Courteously bring the facilitator back to your original question. If he rephrases it so that it becomes an accusatory statement (a popular tactic), simply say, “That is not what I asked. What I asked was . . .” and repeat your question.

3. Be persistent. If putting you on the defensive doesn’t work, facilitators often resort to long monologues that drag on for several minutes. During that time, the group usually forgets the question that was asked, which is the intent. Let the facilitator finish. Then with polite persistence state: “But you didn’t answer my question. My question was . . .” and repeat your question.

Never become angry under any circumstances. Anger directed at the facilitator will immediately make the facilitator the victim. This defeats the purpose. The goal of facilitators is to make the majority of the group members like them, and to alienate anyone who might pose a threat to the realization of their agenda. People with firm, fixed beliefs, who are not afraid to stand up for what they believe in, are obvious threats. If a participant becomes a victim, the facilitator loses face and favor with the crowd. This is why crowds are broken up into groups of seven or eight, and why objections are written on paper rather than voiced aloud where they can be open to public discussion and debate. It’s called crowd control.

At a meeting, have two or three people who know the Delphi Technique dispersed through the crowd so that, when the facilitator digresses from a question, they can stand up and politely say: “But you didn’t answer that lady/gentleman’s question.” Even if the facilitator suspects certain group members are working together, he will not want to alienate the crowd by making accusations. Occasionally, it takes only one incident of this type for the crowd to figure out what’s going on.

Establish a plan of action before a meeting. Everyone on your team should know his part. Later, analyze what went right, what went wrong and why, and what needs to happen the next time. Never strategize during a meeting.

A popular tactic of facilitators, if a session is meeting with resistance, is to call a recess. During the recess, the facilitator and his spotters (people who observe the crowd during the course of a meeting) watch the crowd to see who congregates where, especially those who have offered resistance. If the resistors congregate in one place, a spotter will gravitate to that group and join in the conversation, reporting what was said to the facilitator. When the meeting resumes, the facilitator will steer clear of the resistors. Do not congregate. Instead gravitate to where the facilitators or spotters are. Stay away from your team members.

This strategy also works in a face-to-face, one-on-one meeting with anyone trained to use the Delphi Technique.

Lynn Stuter is an education researcher in Washington state. Her web site address is

For a much more detailed paper on the Delphi Technique, one wrote by academics very much enchanted by the process, check out their paper here: That PDF file represents much of what my experience with the Delphi Technique consists of, primarily in business applications. However, to my experience as well, such consensus building almost always fails to some degree making the Delphi Technique good for public manipulation but not in true process improvement as Six Sigma would evolve into. The reason is explained in this article written by me.

Rich Hoffman!/overmanwarrior

American Imperialism: The Great Myth of Powerhungry Fools

I was reading about the radicalized Weather Underground this morning when an important question came to me. If America was functioning as the Constitution intended, how is America an imperialist evil cast upon the face of the Earth?

The rhetoric that has uttered forth from those pathetic creatures that radicalized public education as a “pressure cooker” of socialized ideology is purely planted subversion initiated by the KGB during the 50’s which struck American culture in the 60’s. The result is that in 2010 many of the foundations of American Culture are scrutinized to ridiculous levels, to the point where the supposed strength of our society, the baby boomers have divorced more, put themselves in debt, cheated, lied, dropped religion from their lives, and have become an ignorant voting block. They can’t take firm positions against drugs because they corrupted themselves as young people in college, so they do not properly instruct their children. That is the result of the hippie movement. It has been far more destructive than if we had become involved in a nuclear war with the Soviet Union. And the KGB knew that it was possible to destroy their enemy without firing a single shot. Such a concept is the premier strategy in the classic book studied by virtually every leader in the world, The Art of War.

For those of you that will insist that the above is paranoid fiction, I can’t help you if you cannot see the obvious. For you chose to be ignorant and short-sighted, our American Culture has been ripped to shreds over issues that are relatively shallow, such as Civil Right, Racism, and Feminism. The situation is so bad that one cannot even discuss those topics in a negative way without drawing a tremendous amount of criticism. That’s because all those topics are rooted in socialism’s social justice. Those are the projects of Marx and they have found their way into our culture through many back doors.

Nobody is going to argue that America shouldn’t try and be as fair to everyone as possible. And America has, as far as a nation can. The problem is when the above topics are used to create bloc voting, and to manipulate the election process. It’s not by accident that blacks tend to vote democrat. It’s not by accident that feminist vote democrat. It’s not by accident that Latino’s tend to vote democrat, because democrats tend to support open borders.

Folks, there is an open warfare on our society, and many people have been sleeping or just chose not to see it, because acknowledging the problem would require action that people just aren’t willing to get involved with.

We’ve let it go so long that radicals have control of what is considered normal and anyone that challenges their hold on American ideas is ridiculed so that peer pressure may kick in and conform the challenger to a consensus, and will be nudged back into obscurity.

These radicals came to power under our own complacency and trust. And they used the mantra that America was an imperialist nation. If the American people understood their own Constitution they would have known that such a statement was a complete lie. It is these same radicals that seek to expand government. Constitutionalist, as America was designed was to have a small government that would not be capable of imperialism. The growth of government into a “pig” state, as those radicals proclaimed throughout the 60’s, was advocated by groups like the Weather Underground, and the Black Panthers, and many other groups that used extreme radicalism to force weak kneed politicians to buckle to their wishes with more legislation, which equated to larger government to maintain the promises.

The new radicalism advocated by modern groups has given up the car bombings, and mass riots in favor of a more subtle method. In 2008, I watched the teachers at Lakota High School have a mass demonstration at the Board of Education and threaten to strike. There concern was wages. Two years later, when the average wage for those teachers was $62,000, the 160 million dollar budget was not enough, and the school board is trying to pass a levy to pay for the extortion that the teachers lobbied for, because the cost for those teachers are just too high now. When the levy failed for the second time, the school board made the announcement that they’d cut busing to the school, which is under 3% of the total school budget. They do that to inconvenience parents and extort their vote on the next election. The behavior is still just as radical as the tactics of the Weather Underground. The root cause of the behavior stems from socialism. But the method is not one of violence, but of economic extortion. The thinking is that if the people of the community won’t pay the extra taxes, and then wait till they have to pay for the fuel to take their kid to school, which is considerably more expensive. Lakota isn’t alone. That tactic is used all over the nation and the radicals that run many of the unions are just following the formula established from the Weather Underground.

America is not an Imperialist nation the way England was during its reign of an Empire. But radicals wanting power needed to shape public opinion in such a way to make a complacent people believe they were actually doing something wrong, so they’d support the expansion of a welfare state, and civil rights issues that subtly expanded the growth of government. The goal was an expansion of government to promote social justice and fulfill the dreams of Carl Marx. It really is that silly.

Quite the opposite, America is the only place on Earth that offers hope for all people of all races and religions. It is pathetic that the general population doesn’t go out of their way to educate themselves on what is true and what is false, instead of surrendering their logic to the ghosts of malodorous old hippie’s.

Rich Hoffman!/overmanwarrior

Opinions of the Blind

Progressives can’t argue facts because all their positions are based on emotion. So when commentators and writers point out the facts of progressive ideas, those people are attacked in an attempt to lower their credibility.

Jon Stewart is a comedian, yet he currently has the type of credibility in the media that professional politicians usually have, to the effect that President Obama endorse the Stewart Rally in October. This is because these personalities serve the progressive agenda, and they are encouraged to attack anyone that threatens that agenda.

Listen to this dude. He’s as clueless as a frat boy looking for a six-pack. It is impossible for a guy like this to understand why Glenn Beck is so upset on the phone call. Beck is an emotional guy that believes in what he says, and sometimes he can’t hold those emotions back, especially when the people on the other end of the phone are as blind as the woman he’s talking to. Yet this dude thinks he has a right to criticize Beck. Having a belief in something real is a foreign idea to the guy, so he can’t understand why an issue would case so much passion.

Listen to these kids. Why is it that young kids either still in school, or just out of school are so liberal? Because they are taught to be. Later in life, most of them grow up and become more conservative. But in the meantime they do an enormous amount of damage to our country with their ignorance.

The primary problem here is that many people functioning in our society are effectively blind.  They can’t see the obvious.  Yet they are given the ability to help shape public opinion, which increases the failures of our government.  It was Clare Boothe Luce that said “Politics is the refuge of second-class minds.”  True as that is, it’s the first-rate minds that end up defending themselves from the foolish second-rate minds.  And the masses accept it because in their hearts they are lazy, and enjoy with secret jealousy watching the first-rate minds get their chips knocked off their shoulders.  It’s far easier to be stupid and to maintain a second-rate mind. 

Rich Hoffman!/overmanwarrior