"Crisis of the Republic" and Pathocrats - An Exercise in Discernment

In spite of the fact that the writings of schizoidal authors contain the above described deficiency, or even an openly formulated schizoidal declaration which constitutes sufficient warning to specialists, the average reader accepts them not as a view of reality warped by this anomaly, but rather as an idea to which he should assume an attitude based on his convictions and his reason. That is the first mistake.
An uncle of mine teaches university level philosophy and has been quite popular among the student body for his interpretations of “bearded schizoidal fanatics”, as well as many non-bearded ones. My own youth was beset by much turbulent confusion, and being thrown about “pillar to post” in making “the first mistake” until I realized that my uncle himself was schizoidal.

Even so, his fanatical stance against science and anything scientific allowed me to appreciate the limitations of the scientific view, which I had placed upon a pedestal at the time. Thus, at the risk of making the first mistake, I often feel the need to explore and examine what can be construed as schizoidal in a critically corrective manner, at least to understand what is behind the expression, in this case a highly pontificated critique of the direction behind this site and those affiliated with it.

It is obvious Durand considers all advocates of this direction as well-meaning fanatics on the wrong track, doomed to extreme and apparently painful failure. I am sure he is not the first or the last in this view among the many who have come across this material.

He seems to call out a warning almost in dire prophetic fashion for C advocates to mend their ways, or suffer the consequences of their folly. The “C-way” has struck a tone of discordance in this person, and he has judged, scoffed and mocked.

I have taken the trouble to look at the author’s web site, or at least some of the main writings therein:

http://beingquest.com/Rel_Trad.htm

I was surprised to see that the tone of writing is rather clearer than that in his comments on this forum. If he would have expressed himself at least according to that level of coherence perhaps constructive dialogue would have followed. Instead, he judged, scoffed and mocked.

Durand, are you surprised that you were judged, scoffed and mocked in return? Where is the mercy and compassion of which you speak in your religious writings? You seem to me to be playing the role of Jesus overturning the tables of the moneychangers, yet THOSE were not well-meaning as you have professed these souls are.

Don’t you realize that the Tower of Babel of the “One Truth” has long been rent asunder (for better or for worse)? The path, which you describe, is but one room of that former tower, however you may view it, just as the path described on this site is but another room.

The difference is that your path is eclectic, and has always existed in some form or tradition. Your room may seem to be lofty, and may in fact be lofty, but it is tiny and as long as versions of it have existed IT HAS DONE NOTHING. The fact of the matter is that it has contributed just as much to the woes of the world as any other “well-meaning” path.

This room is larger and more accessible to a wide variety of individuals. Your writings suggest egalitarianism leads to fascism. I will not disagree that it has led to fascism, because of the collectively immature level of the “many”. However, given the nature of the times, the “many” or at least a portion thereof, must be addressed in some fashion.

If the proponents of this site and those affiliated with it were simply propagators of a doctrine, I would not take the time to read the material, let alone respond to it. What I see happening here is that people are being motivated to think and network, who may have otherwise been left in isolation. Opinions regarding whose truth is or is not valid aside, this dynamic is far better than fatalistic complacency.

I for one do not place you in the position of pauper. You have actually done this yourself. And judging from the number of contributions on your site, your voice is truly alone in the wilderness. If the “many” are fools as you say (and the views of C-supporters are not of any majority by far), then why have you taken the energy and time to express your dissent, and why have you lost the degree of clarity evident where you do express your views?

In any case, as I mentioned in the beginning of my own rant (which I admit is only a superficial exposition), I am simply applying my own reason to what I have read from you, just as I can only apply my own reason in reading the other contributions in this forum. I can only conclude that your motives (here, not on your own site) were not to communicate, but to admonish for the sake of admonishment.

The gulf between your view and those held by many of the contributors here is now insurmountable. You have been labelled pathological, and you seem to have labelled the C direction pathological, and all its truly well meaning attempts as fruitless and futile. I would have thought that one such as yourself, who allegedly believes in mercy, truth, integrity and compassion, would have figured out a way to approach this gulf more in accordance to your professed beliefs.

To quote Proverbs .22:
...scoffers delight in scoffing, and fools hate knowledge.
This unfortunately has been your legacy on this site.
It is a shame.
 
Ban Durand or not--I skip over what is meaningless to me--banning anyone from an open forum is problematic I think and somewhat deconstructs the process--another option would be to deleat the entries of known agitators without opening them or responding and deny D. and company the audience they crave.

I want to comment on the opening topic of this thread--that knoweledge of the truth about 911 is not necessary for people to "Wake Up"--on the possibility that some (new) readers may think the topic is overrepresented.

Although I had been a seeker of knowledge, spiritual and otherwise all my life, I had no religion, and few sacred cows left that were not yet put to pasture; still I was an average American citizen who understood governments were often self-serving and somewhat shady dealing, but I did not think or believe that there were elements within the American government who would go so far as to murder their own people and others en masse in our own country.

Watching the twin towers come down the morning of 9-11 was the most paradigm expanding single event of my adult life. As I was watching I actually thought "that looks like one of those buildings that are demolished on purpose," but the emotional mass hysteria that followed caught me up and I believed the official version until a year or so later when picked up some pamphlets at an anti war protest and began reading opposing opinions on the internet. But, the viscereal recognition (as opposed to an intellectual awareness) remain buried but nagging at me until I woke up to the truth with the 9/11 discussions here and on the Cass site and others.

Once I accepted the truth of 911 in my heart, recognizing the rest of the illusions (that I am aware of so far) of life in 3D, and Pathocracy was possible.

With the shock of the knowledge of our governments' involvement --my waking up vastly accelerated. I think it is vital to keep repeating the message as often and in as many ways available, as the SotT team has done so well, in order to reach as many sleeping hearts and minds as possible.

henry said all this so much more eloquently:
"Were Americans to admit to themselves what happened on 9/11, they would have a life-changing lesson in psychopathy, and that just might bring some of them closer to salvation."

bon chance mon ami
shellycheval
 
EsoQuest said:
The gulf between your view and those held by many of the contributors here is now insurmountable. You have been labelled pathological, and you seem to have labelled the C direction pathological, and all its truly well meaning attempts as fruitless and futile. I would have thought that one such as yourself, who allegedly believes in mercy, truth, integrity and compassion, would have figured out a way to approach this gulf more in accordance to your professed beliefs.
His cup is full. I think this is perhaps one of the greatest shocks to the system - to realise that "mercy, truth, integrity and compassion" are merely inverted by being used as tools of the psychopath, charactopath and reality escapee. It is no mean thing to really grasp that most of what we consider to be borne of conscience is a mostly a reaction against reality and a rich diversity of buffering at work. Beliefs serve this end so well. We can recognise our own fearful adaptions to our existence which take on definite pathologies if our will fails in the end and/or if we are just too damaged, as so many are.

J.
 
Well, none of these responses surprises me, as you can imagine, given your thorough certainties...especially of Laura, the Queen of the Hive. A few bright spots among your company, but as ever mostly the gritty taste of kicked-up dust blown wayward. Tut, tut...tis not persistance of your obsessed-with schizoidalisms (the pot really does call the kettle black, ya know), but my own exploration of your space and the points between what you have said, do say, or may say, speculating all the while and more often mouthing some words from across the room to them that can read lips, not sinking ships in desperate wail of assault under the banner of Psychopathy...but thanks for the compliment, I guess. Or was it an insult...hmm, can't tell. Laura doesn't make any real references but quotes highlighted for especially veneous effect. It's not like Reference isn't directly made, dear. And accuse me attributing falsely to others some deviousness? Ironic how I was actually thinking of attributing hope within the tresspass, if it can be characterized as such (which your attribution names to be sheer assault). Just can't get right with some people, eh?

But, you're right. You have more or less been long time suggesting that my company is not worth your treasured while. Or is that, wiles? Anyway, I'm not sure I accept that characterization, despite my open charade upon your vast self-appointed spheres of influence. You're welcome to them, I assure you. I suppose it's just my Experimental frame of reference, quite apart from something other obsessed upon there.

Is it a psychiatric matter to oppose, albeit apparently trifling dangers, what another might insist is important? If you really, really do (do you mean IT?), I'd say that's fanatical, even cultish, the way a cruel and barbaric tribal beat drums out the Green Languages' etherial metaphores. Who brutalizes whom? And it's Insistancy as evidence of Psychopathy that rings your bell? Good grief. Your 9-11 pounding must be the heighth of sickness then, eh? Oh, there's a difference all right; and it's when everyone but yourself fits the descriptive evidence of Psychopathy. Glomb onto a Tomb of Script; it means nothing to a student except as a mirror of their own inherited, innate, and thoroughoing perversity. How easily it becomes the weapon which Psychopaths use on their Enemy...need a little psychiatric help there, Durand? Another means of demonization that more easily invites the Alteration of Experience, not as objective phenomena but wholly, subjectively determined.

This is that whole Objective Paradigm syndrome 'scientists' pretend to their humiliation, which is why it's nice to have a group around to support the crafty venture. Few things as cultish as a band of scientist working on a secret few others can understand let along undertake. I mean, it's one thing to try live it out without corrupting others, but to gang around a Roost at Night in comfort of your clique...well, that's a horse of a different color, eh? Kinda brings chills to my spine. Must be nice.

Take these same people and place them alone in the world and they fall or nearly fall to pieces, then while pretending the caretaking, like a mother's preferential love, weep over those nearest and scorn those not known. Victimhood. It's an aweful complaint, indeed.

I've urged compensation and amelioration and grace (excepting the other offenders) in my counsel, oft; and been derided as Not facing the horror of the situation, and pie in the sky fancy, and poetic word-saladry (which phrase 'word-salad' is as condescending as anything I ever said thereafter). Your abstractions are clever, by half. I know what you mean, who you mean it for, and what your seething heart recommends toward me. I may be flippant, but alas, not ignorant. *insert mumbo here about the Psychopaths' tactics and orientations to manipulate.

I've scorned ideas, false notions, distortions, and the general folly; but I never hid my hope, nor faith, nor what can be made of love among hostiles. One less spider's web won't hurt ya none though. Gods know you've hatched enough to support your work.

But now seeing how much you covet your 'science' of Evil and other skrying practices and necromancies, I won't bother to raze the wiccan or warlock with more tripe of judgement. Good advise, perhaps better well taken, then recollecting the words of Horace:

Virtus, repulsae descia sordidae,
intaminatis fulget honoribus,
nec sumit aut ponit securis
arbitrio popularis aurae.

Virtus, recludens immeritis mori
caelum, negata temptat iter via,
coetusque vulgaris et udam
spernit humum fugiente penna.

Est et fideli tuta silentio
merces. Vetabo qui Cereris sacrum
vulgarit arcanae sub isdem
sit trabibus fragilemque mecum
solvat phaselon; saepe Diespiter
neglectus incesto addidit integrum,
raro antecedentem scelestum
deseruit pede Poena claudo.

Must be nice to have something soo tempting on your Enemy, eh? Quite the cure for that once shameful ignorance from whence you have so arduously delivered yourself (or is that, selves?...hard to tell with all the little anvils clanking).

Perhaps I AM amused because it strikes me as an irony, which has kinda been my putshe (nevermind the spelling, if you care). So you'll find yourself in vast, if not wholly good, company having trounced this pauper's soul, hemmed in perhaps by lovers, or accusers as the case may be, to enjoy or deploy as you list. One can only hope for the best, eh? Or is hope one more of those intangible, pschizoidalisms only the pychopath employs upon the unwary?...ah, what tangled web ye weave.

So let me count the ways before I wave off.

Generosity in the guise of Experiment
Experiment in the guise of Science
Science in the guise of Knowledge
Knowledge in the guise of Experience
Experience in the guise of Experiment

Not much different from Wishful Thinking, eh? Ah, but you have the SCIENCE...that's right. I'm learning all the time.

Where does that leave Generosity? I guess when the Experiment is finished, the guise of Generosity can be discarded as really only a ploy to invent Experiment. Nice. That would make the whole affair something of a farse, would it not? No wait...the motto is Crush the Enemy. OK, scratch that...you're on track. Then it's: Insinuate Generosity FOR the purposes of Experiment. Bootstrap, right? Clever bees. And all the while you keep your little Hive all cozy for the drones and workers, right? Take the preferred seats. See if I care. Nobody really invited me to THIS Party, anyway.

Yet, generosity is nothing if not extended in kindness to them you cannot prefer, but defer upon with evident, unwitheld benefaction. One kind word would have sufficed, though I poured mine down from overflowing cups, even while sometimes opposing SOTT usual extremities. This is but the last in a thorough series...don't think I don't know it. And if Person means anything, word for word, as pound for pound, I'd bring in harvests by far in weight of this penureous exchange and despite you so much relish. Just between Us, that is. I'm sure your generosity extends to your friends. Whose doesn't? Even thiefs have honor among themselves.

That's a FACT not even your bean counting puffers could deny...well, maybe not; the laughing stock of irony being the loudest din in the Aer. Projection, you say. Ya, well...duh? If you didn't project yourself upon what you C, you'd be a Vampire...which, btw, your company has sometimes fairly resembled (metaphysical non-entities [Predators])...among others. Persistency. That's a good one. So your answer to the question:

Which would you rather be, Wise and Humorless or a Jolly Fool?

You would say the Wise and Humorless, because they are Persistent for the Truth, right?...don't quibblel. So, the Sage is a Psychopath. Nice. I don't give a shite if I AM a Sage or not; but I know Humorlessness, and I suspect you are not so wise as you insist upon...but U can do the math.

I thought Scholars had brighter wit and sounder wisdom than to take themselves serious enough to believe their own banter. What Experiment? Whose the docrinaire? Holy Christ, I think I've been blinded by the light. Thanks.

But, what the hell. We came this far, might as well compound the fault and call Science the Antichrist, Scholarship the False Prophet, and Nations the Beast by which all are made to take the Mark...of mere man...call him homo laboris....whose stock-in-trade is the objectification of experience. This just keeps gettin better.

I'd stick around and kinda see how this all spins out, but I know you're anxious to hear no more and I really, really do not want to bother; verily. I won't pretend victimhood or plead your grace upon my wounded brow...none of that shite, as in fact I fairly pity your faithlessness here. Yeah, it's an accusation. So what?

Every Enemy is a Psychopath or wanna be (in quasi-moral terms, the fine arsenal employed by, you guessed it: fascists and other fanatics [can you say, psychic rehabilitation? [no, that would be more like mesmerism] hmmm])...just look in the Mirror and say out loud: Be Right or Be Damned. Nice polarity...and whom does this resemble? I think I mentioned Inheritance of different orders and planes for orders, some intersecting. So can't get me on Felony Arsen (that would be True Flaming, as Death; gatecrashing is what one does at drunken parties. Maybe guilty on the latter).

I don't know. Ya'll look kinda look the same to me...and I do mean U All. Mirror, mirror on the Wall... memememe. chuckle* gods that must just annoy the hell out of some, or it wouldn't be so god damned funny...err, ironic. Thanks for the Dance. Avete, salut.
 
Durand said:
I'd stick around and kinda see how this all spins out, but I know you're anxious to hear no more and I really, really do not want to bother; verily. I won't pretend victimhood or plead your grace upon my wounded brow...none of that shite, as in fact I fairly pity your faithlessness here. Yeah, it's an accusation. So what?
You seem to have written quite a bit not to be bothered. Your syntax and word usage is following a mix of ye olde English and the colloquial here - I think it's best if you choose one or the other as people will think you're just interested in style which will further lead people to think that your writing has absolutely no substance whatsoever.

Anyhow, all the best with your Latin studies. I always wish I'd studied Latin at school. I like this one most of all: "Noli simul flare sobereque" Do you know it? it means "Don't whistle and drink at the same time." Classic stuff eh?


J.
 
Durand said:
I don't know. Ya'll look kinda look the same to me...and I do mean U All. Mirror, mirror on the Wall... memememe. chuckle* gods that must just annoy the hell out of some, or it wouldn't be so god damned funny...err, ironic. Thanks for the Dance. Avete, salut.
It seems to me that you have described yourself to a tee. Memememe, look at me, listen to me, read my long wordy posts, talk to me, fight with me, I am right you are wrong, and finally, a sneaky poor me.

Durand said:
I'd stick around and kinda see how this all spins out, but I know you're anxious to hear no more and I really, really do not want to bother; verily. I won't pretend victimhood or plead your grace upon my wounded brow...none of that shite, as in fact I fairly pity your faithlessness here. Yeah, it's an accusation. So what?
You have pulled what I call a Mr. Twister. That‘s twisting people’s intent and words around to suit your needs at the time.

By the way, I don’t think you’ve been dancing with anyone but yourself. Dancing with another requires partnership and mutual respect.
 
I, for one will not make the same mistake more than twice (i.e., long replies to a psychophagic philosopher). I have one in my family, and you'ld think they hatched from the same creche. No, there are shades of philofascism here, inquisitional elitism and I would say more than a bit of intellectual penis envy.

That's all for me.
 
At this point in time, we've had LOTS of experience with such types. They are all the same, as you say. We've learned to spot 'em quite rapidly, though we do always make little tests to make sure. I used to call it "gall," but that was before Lobaczewski who more clinically described it better as "relatively controlled pathological egotism and the exceptional tenacity derived from their persistent nature."

It's like having someone come to a gathering at your home: the person doesn't like you, doesn't like anything you do or say or think, doesn't like the people gathered, doesn't like the way your house is decorated, and thinks they have the right - or even duty - to come anyway and tell you and everyone else there how they all need to change and do everything THEIR way.

No matter how many times you say: this is my house, these are my friends, we have the right to decorate our house as we prefer, to gather together to discuss things the way we wish, to think the thoughts we choose, and so on, they insist on shouting you down, though they go about it in the most convoluted and bizarre language I've ever encountered. They may, of course, as you noted, be able to speak or write with some semblance of normality and even eloquence. But the instant you resist their takeover, the instant you "scratch" them by daring to question their views, it seems that something in the psychological structure collapses, as Lobaczewski points out, and the language becomes more and more schizoid.

From my point of view, having such people as Durand to come and provide for us samples of this process to study is invaluable. Many researchers in the psychological sciences are studying just this phenomenon. They believe that the way a person uses the language must correspond to something, that it describes key psychological states, perhaps even referring to events in the brain.

When a person begins to use language in a bizarre way, employing odd syntax and definitions, not used by the majority of normal persons, it is generally indicative of a withdrawal from reality.

The schizoidal psychopath is generally able to function quite well until that "scratch" comes. Under pressure, they manifest many symptoms of true schizophrenia including thought disorders, (illogical thinking, unclear communication as noted above), hallucinations, inappropriate emotional reactions, and so on. It is believed that schizophrenia is related to a dopamine imbalance in the brain. Michael Talbot writes in The Holographic Universe:

...schizophrenics often report oceanic feelings of oneness with the universe, but in a internal linkmagic, delusional way. They describe feeling a internal linkloss of boundaries between themselves and others, a belief that leads them to think their thoughts are no longer private. They believe they are able to read the thoughts of others. And instead of viewing people, objects, and concepts as individual things, they often view them as members of larger and larger subclasses, a tendency that seems to be a way of expressing the holographic quality of the internal linkreality in which they find themselves.
I wonder sometimes if schizophrenics are really able to "see" or "tap into" 4th Density realities? Reading about John Nash and some of the writings of other schizophrenics suggests that this may be the case. The only problem is, the reality they tap into is the 4 D STS reality. I've never read a case that tapped into the STO reality. For that reason, it is useful to sometimes read such things because it gives us an insight into the thinking of 4 D STS, even if at a minimal and disorganized level because it is so mixed with 3 D conceptualizations.

The problem always is to be able to study the phenomenon without being infected by it. As Lobaczewski writes:

In spite of the fact that the writings of schizoidal authors contain the above described deficiency, [pathological egotism, persistent need to impose their view on others, etc.] or even an openly formulated schizoidal declaration which constitutes sufficient warning to specialists, the average reader accepts them not as a view of reality warped by this anomaly, but rather as an idea to which he should assume an attitude based on his convictions and his reason. That is the first mistake.
And if you make that mistake, you can easily get infected. Lobaczewski points out that the Schizoidal psychopath is able to exert an "intense influence upon individuals who are insufficiently critical, frequently frustrated" by social or cultural problems. Such people, because they are already unhappy or dissatisfied with life, are easily taken in by "Doctrinaire" declarations. Because some of the words of the Schizoid type ring true, because some of the facts the Schizoid type utilizes are evidently correct, the average unhappy person looking for answers may then consider the rest of the words that are difficult to decipher as just simply evidence of genius, something that he cannot yet understand. Because the words are often used in strange juxtapositions, often emotionally excitative, the reader may then projects onto them the understanding he has formulated himself, and thinks "Oh, yes! We're hermanos!"

As Lobaczewski says, there are two types of people who buy into the schizoidal rants: those who accept the contents as I have just described, "critically corrective," and those who are themselves suffering from some pathological deviation, either genetic or a result of lack of familial or societal nurture.

In short, in our day and time, there are LOTS of people who are susceptible to this kind of stuff because very few people are able to think critically, and even more have been hurt by the psychopathic societies in which we live.

From what we have learned, there is nothing that can be done to "fix" any psychopath, whether Schizoidal or Essential. They are pathogens on the body of society against which we need to immunize ourselves, and then learn how to contain them with proper psychological hygiene. As Lobaczewski also points out, taking a moralistic view is of no help whatsoever. One needs to look at the problem scientifically.

Our problem right now is that the epidemic is raging. We are not yet in a position to cure "Typhoid Mary."
 
I agree that schizoids do tap into 4D reality as you call it. I have met many, and at least some of them have hounded me longer than I would have liked. In my experience, psychotics at first seem to share a common desire with any normal person. That is, they seem to recognize the world is not right and that something needs to be done about it.

I have had transpersonal experiences in nature, through meditation, while composing on the keyboard and through chemical induction. In the latter cases, I was prepared by at least a decade of chemical free experiences and understanding, extensive research in metaphysics and biochemistry, and also most likely a certain genetic predisposition so that I could face the chaos of those states, which proved invaluable.

Unfortunately, I would say 99 out of 100 others that were in my vicinity on and off literally went insane, and not because only of the chemical, but also because I refused to cater to the distorted psychic patterns they craved to impose upon the experience. Refusing to admit to a psychotic's god-hood under such conditions seems to cramp their style. I even had people try to negotiate about taking turns being the "chosen one"!

Most just shut down the experience and their reality windows, understanding that the box was as far as they could go. They realized it is one thing to theorize about telepathy, for example, and another thing to experience it in real-time. Furthermore, there are "influences" (of the STS) variety waiting on the other side of any induced expansion of consciousness. Usually, it takes one or two experiences before these influences get wind of the foolish human entering their domain, and then they flock like hungry locusts. Some of my psychotic aquaintances ended up actually praying to these influences in their daily lives.

Many psychopaths revel in the experience as if it affirms some inner "knowledge" of being "special", whether some incarnation of an "ET superbeing", Jesus Christ, Napolean or whatever. It was fascinating to watch when two such individuals would end up having revelations of supremacy in the same room, and then turn on each other as if in one of the "Highlander" movies ("there can be only ONE"). It was not pleasant when they turned on me (sometimes this was planned out before a "session").

Extreme experiences notwithstanding, however, these petty messiahs are everywhere and a common thread of their so called "revelations" is violence and intimidation either psychological or physical if they feel they can get away with it. I believe there are "leadership" psychopaths, but also "follower psychopaths", and that these are symbiotic in their common parasitic need.

I also believe they are being fed and prodded by influences beyond 3D perception, mainly because I have been witness to both that influence on others, and felt those influences try to turn on me, often working with and/or through the psychotic vehicles. A great reason for my own esoteric researches was simply the necessity to build greater immunity to these influences and turn the tables from defense to offense, because once in it there is no way to wipe the slate clean and go back to blissful ignorance (and I would'nt want to anyway).

As for the "scratch" test, just writing as you do is a scratch for most psychotics. That is one level. Other psychotics or latent psychotics of both leader and follower varieties can, however, fly under the initial radar by performing their own "corrections" upon the information. However, maintaining a facade (even if they convince themselves that they believe it) is highly stressful for even the most covert psychotics when their needs are not consistently met. Eventually, they will crack. Understanding this dynamic is very important for damage control among other things.

It seems to me, a normal person sends out an energy signature the psychotic can recognize. I have seen this recognition many times where psychotics label others as placed on either side of the "with us or against us" line. This has nothing to do with disagreements or differences in opinion and ideology. It goes far deeper. In my view, healthy people need to learn to turn the tables on the psychotics, and part of immunity (again according to my own observations) is the conscious building of an energy signature that does not compute for the psychotic.

I cannot really find all the concepts to properly convey this, as I am still exploring it, but it has to do with maintaining unshakeable integrity, and a kind of energetic symmetric of centered but healthy conviction. The psychotic field seeks to influence through holes in personal integrity, which is why they love to use divide and conquer tactics, the promotion of guilt, doubt and fear. I understand Carlos Castaneda addresses the issue of dealing with petty tyrants among other things, but I also believe that for a normal person to be vulnerable to psychotic attack that person must have endured an already advanced undermining of the personal energy field through varied degrees of trauma and psychological stress imposed by more minor dealings with psychosis in family and society. (This basically includes everyone).

It is similar to what the elite is doing to human bodies through vaccinations, food toxins, chemtrails and other methods. Notice that they do not move unless they have at first weakened and undermined their intended victims, like a spider needing to sting its prey into paralysis before it begins consuming it.

I do agree also that curing "Typhoid Mary" is secondary to building personal immunity, not only to withstand psychotic attack when it occurs, but to deflect such attacks from occuring in the first place. Deflection is most likely related to the generation and maintenance of a healthy integrity field that is unpalatable to the degree that psychotics can refuse to percieve it (psychotics and STS are infamous for their tendencies toward denial), and/or influences the very temporal flows to divert unwanted probabilities of confrontation.

Regarding the latter dynamic, it is alsonteresting that elitists expend much energy and effort to convince us something bad will happen before it does, either overtly through threats or covertly through movies, the new media and other cultural venues.

I am optimistic, however, because it has only been recently that the problem is being seriously addressed, and once you really focus on it, solutions do start to precipitate out of the fog.
 
EsoQuest said:
I agree that schizoids do tap into 4D reality as you call it. I have met many, and at least some of them have hounded me longer than I would have liked. In my experience, psychotics at first seem to share a common desire with any normal person. That is, they seem to recognize the world is not right and that something needs to be done about it.
Perhaps that THEIR world is not right i.e. not enough domination, not enough manipulation with the requisite results or rather not enough essential energy to consume and maintain that inner world. Although they may appear to recognize that the world is unfair and imbalanced and may even take jobs that are ostensibly about alleviating suffering I think it's all a sham and a sop for playing the psychopath game - without exception. The desire is a fake one used to entrap and feed.

This idea of tapping into 4D STS is also interesting. Just as great artists and thinkers can tap into 4D STO and "above," so to the reverse. I can think of many obvious examples including H.P. Lovecraft's writings and H.R. Giger's so called "Art" which literally sucks the energy from you. Both of these guys in my view not only act as channels but as entry points into this density, like efficient vacuums at the intellectual and emotional levels. Once you see this type of obvious drain taking place, I think it does become easier to spot other forms replicated from these entropic nodes, as it were. Your body reaction tells you.

The subject of Pathocracy and Poonerology seems to be one of the very greatest "secrets" that is finally being given an airing. I still find it astonishing and absolutely chilling.

J.
 
esoquest said:
As for the "scratch" test, just writing as you do is a scratch for most psychotics. That is one level. Other psychotics or latent psychotics of both leader and follower varieties can, however, fly under the initial radar by performing their own "corrections" upon the information. However, maintaining a facade (even if they convince themselves that they believe it) is highly stressful for even the most covert psychotics when their needs are not consistently met. Eventually, they will crack. Understanding this dynamic is very important for damage control among other things.
This is oh, so true. Among the earliest experiences we had with our discussion groups was just this problem. I think it happened a dozen times or more in the past five years. And in nearly every case, once the individual was exposed, pretty much following the same dynamic as Durand (even to falling into a greater or lesser degree of verbal confusion), we would send them on their way with our blessings that they should make their own lives, their own websites, and promote their own ideas as they saw fit and leave us to ours. And, in nearly every case, no sooner had we had this bifurcation of ways, they went on the attack. It was the damndest thing I ever saw. We didn't attack them, we simple expressed the desire to be allowed to think our own thoughts, live according to our own lights, and congregate with others who were likeminded. That was IT! No big secret cult, no frauds, nothing but a wish to not have to include such as Durand in our discussions where endless time and energy was wasted just trying to deal with everyone of their twists and turns.

The thing that bugged us the most about this was our observation of such individuals after they had left our group. I never in my life witnessed such outright lies, distortions, twisted facts, declared with such absolute certainty that it literally disoriented us.

That was why we began to study the phenomenon.

Next you write:

It seems to me, a normal person sends out an energy signature the psychotic can recognize. I have seen this recognition many times where psychotics label others as placed on either side of the "with us or against us" line. This has nothing to do with disagreements or differences in opinion and ideology. It goes far deeper. In my view, healthy people need to learn to turn the tables on the psychotics, and part of immunity (again according to my own observations) is the conscious building of an energy signature that does not compute for the psychotic.

I cannot really find all the concepts to properly convey this, as I am still exploring it, but it has to do with maintaining unshakeable integrity, and a kind of energetic symmetric of centered but healthy conviction. The psychotic field seeks to influence through holes in personal integrity, which is why they love to use divide and conquer tactics, the promotion of guilt, doubt and fear. I understand Carlos Castaneda addresses the issue of dealing with petty tyrants among other things, but I also believe that for a normal person to be vulnerable to psychotic attack that person must have endured an already advanced undermining of the personal energy field through varied degrees of trauma and psychological stress imposed by more minor dealings with psychosis in family and society. (This basically includes everyone).

It is similar to what the elite is doing to human bodies through vaccinations, food toxins, chemtrails and other methods. Notice that they do not move unless they have at first weakened and undermined their intended victims, like a spider needing to sting its prey into paralysis before it begins consuming it.
This idea is something that has exercised me to no end. As recently as a week ago the issue came up again due to an experience I had that made it clear to me that I am NOT as immune as I would like to think I am. What is funny is that it seems Lobaczewski "sensed" something was wrong and wrote an email to me saying "I am uneasy, is something wrong?" I wrote him back last night a long description of the incident.

The short version is that I decided to deliberately expose myself to psychopathy, up close and personal. It was like a personal "test." Even though it seemed like, on the surface, that I was unaffected, within a day or so of this exposure, I noticed that my mind kept going back to the schizoidal psychopathic declarations.

Now, keep in mind that, in this case I am talking about, it is not someone who falls into schizoidal jabberwocky under pressure that can be easily discarded. No indeed, this individual is smooth, calm, uses lots of language that promotes himself as a great teacher, teacher of love and light, and so on. What is different is his plain, simple, and ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN declarations that are LIES. And I mean that I KNOW they are lies. I also know that HE knows they are lies. In other words, I know he is lying CONSCIOUSLY, and he does it with such sincerity, with such compelling certainty that it is staggering! And the lies are all about ME. One of the most bizarre of these lies is that I plagiarized my own autobiography!!!! I mean, that just FLOORS me!

So, to observe him operate, to observe him work on an innocent party, an individual who might even be thought reasonably critical, was quite amazing. Not a single one of the people under the spell of this psychopath has ever thought that it might be useful to ask my family or friends (many of whom read said volume before it was published for fact checking purposes) whether or not my autobiography is plagiarized or not. Or to ask me personally about anything. He makes a big issue about demanding that I answer a whole list of questions in public that cannot be answered in public because the answers include extremely personal information about private people that I have no intention of making public for their safety as well as my own.

But I KNOW all that. I know how spellbinders work, and how they always travel with a "Greek Chorus" even if they often create the image on the internet that there are more people following them than really are by playing different parts on message boards and "talking to themselves" half the time. It still works on gullible people. It's almost comical to observe because the writing styles give them away so easily.

As I said, after this hour or so of self-torture, I thought - well, that was easy! Three years ago I would have taken to my bed for days after reading such lies told about myself! Now I can read it and even chuckle at some of the more outlandish claims that people suck up like manna.

But something strange happened: I began to question myself. Not about the facts... but about reality itself. What got to me was, strangely enough, the "pity factor." Here was a small group of people just literally SCREAMING that I had hurt them!!! I had, in some way, destroyed their lives. They were wounded, damaged, looked to me for help and I just brazenly took advantage of them and cast them aside. That was one variation. Another variation was that I was destroying the minds of other human beings (possibly untold numbers) talking about Organic Portals, or psychopaths, propagating the C's material, etc.

So it wasn't the lies that were told about me personally (or my husband, or our group) that affected me. Since I knew with certainty that those were lies, I have documents and dozens of witnesses, and so on, that isn't even the issue. The issue was the question as to whether or not what I am doing hurts people or not.

So, I forgot the main rule: Do NOT consider anything produced out of schizoidal rants as an idea which I ought to consider in the context of my own convictions and reason.

In other words, at some level, as I repeatedly recalled to mind the words emerging from the apparently anguished rage of these individuals, I began to interpret them in a manner corresponding to my own nature.

And it was PITY that opened the door. I began to HURT for those people who claimed that I had hurt them.

It was all downhill from there.

I began to think: "well, if these people think I am so awful, maybe I am?!" And then I began to start looking
at myself and everything I had ever said and done in a very negative light. I began to wonder if someone like me - obviously so different from these other people - has a right to exist since my existence causes pain to others. How dare I come along and take their happy lives away from them by expecting them to do the very hard (admittedly so) work that is required to find something of truth? After all, if they are so happy believing lies, what right do I have to upset that apple cart and cause them pain?

Then things began to really deteriorate. After taking the thoughts that far, I began to question my own view of everything. I began to ask myself do you really KNOW what is the difference between good and evil? After all, if these people believe YOU are evil, maybe they are right and you are wrong. What right do you have to exist?

Now remember, I am falling into this state all the while knowing the FACTS that are incontrovertible that I can see they are lying about. What's more, I can see that they are lying CONSCIOUSLY.

But still, their declared pain has evoked pity in me and that pity was the spider's web. Something mysterious began to act on my mind in a strange way and the result was that I found myself feeling exactly as though
I had no right to do anything, to want anything, no right to ask for anything, no right to live even. Everything I had ever done had done nothing but hurt other people. All these people were hurt, they were all
screaming out loud how I had hurt them, and obviously such a person as myself ought to just do the right thing and go out behind the barn and shoot myself and save the world further misery.

It took me about four days to come out of it. It was like falling into a black hole of despair and self doubt and self-accusation. It was slow and insidious, like poison.

So, it seems that I'm pretty good with dealing with the intellectual side of it, but when the pity ploy comes along, I'm still the world's biggest sucker. The instant I think that someone has been hurt by me or by something I have done, even inadvertently, I am almost drowning in suffering.

It lasted about four days. The time previous to that, about 8 months ago, involved someone close to me who was subverted by this filth. In THAT case, it was a lot worse. I ended up with a herniated cervical disc that took two months to heal.

What to do? How to make oneself not only intellectually immune, but also emotionally immune?
 
"What to do? How to make oneself not only intellectually immune, but also emotionally immune?"


Boy - answer that one and we have won the whole enchilada!! It's absolutely amazing that your reaction to deliberately exposing yourself to the psychopath is EXACTLY the reaction I have endured again and again when I've, for some idiotic reason, decided that I could read an email, or answer a phone call from my psychopath! (I apologize for constantly referring to this person, since in comparison, it seems that the psychopaths you deal with are much much more dangerous) At first, I deconstruct everything and lay it out in nice, clean order in my mind, all the while feeling safe because I see all the manuevering and lies - then - BLAMMO - I'm hit with doubt. It seems to sneak in the back of my mind, or even raise slowly from some unseen subsurface, and then, there I am, emotionally flat on my back again - every single time! It's really uncanny.
Since there is obviously such a strong similarity on how it 'works' on us, it has to be mechanical - which means there IS a way to stop the effect. How to find it, though?
 
Just the logical recognition that a person has a psychological pathology has not been enough to allow me to shield myself from their effects. Even though I think I can recognize these types of people by their behavior patterns, I still allow myself to get caught up in their dramas and even allow myself to question my motives, beliefs and actions. Logically I know that I shouldn't let their behavior have an effect on me, but thoughts about their behavior come into my head sporadically and cause rationalizations and self-doubt.

The Lobaczewski material has been immensely helpful. My undergraduate major was in psychology but the knowledge I gained from it was woefully incomplete. Reading Lobaczewski's work made me acutely aware of how little I do know about the mind, motives, and patterns of behavior of psychopaths.
 
Yes, it is the $60,000 question. I wrote an answer, and deleted it. In fact, I have an answer, but the complexity of the issue demands a bit of thought as to how to organize it into a coherent wording. It certainly is not something one can be flippant about. So, I will get back to you on it.
 
Quoting Laura (since I have not figured out how to do it the other way) 8)
"What to do? How to make oneself not only intellectually immune, but also emotionally immune?" -end quote

Before I get started with my opinion of an answer I want to make clear that this is only opinion and I certainly do not have the answers for certain to this and that at best my answer is just more questions.

What to do? Learn to identify the predator? This is likely pretty confusing as it can involve alot of casting judgement or jumping to conclusions, at least that is my opinion. If identifying is/were at all possible that 'might' help in gaining some intellectual immunity. Emotional immunity seems like a severely difficult part to answer. On one hand the answer seems to be easy but on the other the answer may be or seem psychotic in itself as in not having any emotion towards others or people at all.
Being that I am at best a padawan I am still at the gate to understanding alot of these data and subjects. Do we all throw out emotional hooks http://glossary.cassiopaea.com/glossary.php?id=58&lsel=E constantly? It seems to be something most of us use in interacting with one another almost at a constant level whether conscious of the act or not. Would being able to identify when we allow the hooks and when not to help or should we not allow them ever at all? If I recall something someone was showing me as I was (on a concious level, not a active level) learning about these hooks, by allowing them we give away some of our freewill.
Obviously (opinion) a healthy person is going to have some hooks, giving or taking, especially in the sense of caring about others (often more than themselves, osit) which this said healthy person does. If one does not have concern or caring on the intellectual and emotional level then aren't they considered to be psychopathic? Isn't it them trying to drain you by hooks (turning what you know against you, making you fall into self doubt or pity) a psychopathic ploy?
I guess I have to yield and admit that not only do I not have the answer, but also that there is certainly no easy one. It is difficult in alot of ways to understand other peoples perspectives as well. To know where someone is coming from though they appear to be acting as a petty tyrrant or psychotic.
How can one truly judge say a parent who lashes out inside a shopping mall and puts a hand to good use on a disobedient childs rear, as an example? Is she/he being psychotic, cruel and mean as she reddens her childs rear with clenched teeth? Perhaps he she is a bad mother or father, perhaps the child has driven a usually concerned, caring and loving parent to the edge of madness, the child having been born without emotion.
I am guessing the average caring healthy person (though likely not to intervene) would side either way, with the child right off, or perhaps being a parent themselves they might take sides with the parent like "I saw what (child) he/she did, give him/her another one." I wonder if this is my own blockage in some form or another, there are so many depths within I have not fathomed. Certainly these things are difficult to judge. This brings up my own questions I have.
Do we have the right to judge? In some ways I would think certainly. Chocolate ice-cream is better than vanilla (opinion). Isn't that a judgement in a way? Wow that car, color, woman, house.. is better than comparative car, color, woman, house.. our judgements give us some of our values, likes and dislikes, so we certainly do cast judgement. We also often miscast judgement, or jump to conclusions without knowing all of the details. Knowing the difference at least for me it is a very tricky situation be it at the level of acting out in a subjective way or an objective way.. I cannot seem to decipher. My gut tells me one thing but then on deeper reflection (which is the last thing I move to, first I have to act out and act on my preconceived notion(s)) I find that my quick to judgement(s) on certain issues are completely blind stupidity.
I wanted to say I should go look for one of them for dummies books like 'psychology for dummies' so that I might find the answer for myself. Then I think of all the posioning I have taken in by not searching out the answers for myself (spiritual, psychological, religious) and just letting someone else tell me what is best and figure that maybe 'psychology for dummies' may not be what I might need to answer some of my own questions. I feel I need to move on from some simple almost-mental understanding of things like subjective/objective concepts and start the practice of putting them to work but I am not completely clear on the concepts themselves.
So much more I would like to say or ask but I will just likely end up deleting more paragraphs.. certainly there is plenty of work for me to get at.
 
Back
Top Bottom