Where did the high number of psychopaths during the end of the Roman Empire come from?

othree

Jedi
In one of the C's sessions it was asked how many psychopaths there were during the collapse of the Roman Empire, and the answer was either 40 or 60% or something similar. Much higher than the average 6% it is assumed now among the general population.

My question is: How did those high %-numbers during Rome's collapse come about? Is it because the psychopaths from all surrounding areas were attracted by Rome, so there was a lack of psychos in other countries, but a higher concentration in Rome? Or is it that there were more psychos incarnated during that time, orchestrated by the Lizzies? Does anyone have any ideas?
 
In one of the C's sessions it was asked how many psychopaths there were during the collapse of the Roman Empire, and the answer was either 40 or 60% or something similar. Much higher than the average 6% it is assumed now among the general population.

My question is: How did those high %-numbers during Rome's collapse come about? Is it because the psychopaths from all surrounding areas were attracted by Rome, so there was a lack of psychos in other countries, but a higher concentration in Rome? Or is it that there were more psychos incarnated during that time, orchestrated by the Lizzies? Does anyone have any ideas?

I think your suggestion is probably correct since that seems to be operative in our own days.
 
My question is: How did those high %-numbers during Rome's collapse come about? Is it because the psychopaths from all surrounding areas were attracted by Rome, so there was a lack of psychos in other countries, but a higher concentration in Rome?

Yes, as Laura said, based on other comments by the Cs, that 6% is "on the planet", but there are concentrations much higher than that in certain areas.
 
In one of the C's sessions it was asked how many psychopaths there were during the collapse of the Roman Empire, and the answer was either 40 or 60% or something similar. Much higher than the average 6% it is assumed now among the general population.

My question is: How did those high %-numbers during Rome's collapse come about? Is it because the psychopaths from all surrounding areas were attracted by Rome, so there was a lack of psychos in other countries, but a higher concentration in Rome? Or is it that there were more psychos incarnated during that time, orchestrated by the Lizzies? Does anyone have any ideas?
can't find it, was this in reference to the event itself or the time when it happened??

for example:
there were X% of psychopaths during fall of the Roman Empire
there were X% of psychopaths in the Roman Empire
there were X% of psychopaths in Rome(now that would be closer to our standards where politicians congregate:)

my understanding is that souls incarnate, therefore psychos cannot incarnate
🤔
 
my understanding is that souls incarnate, therefore psychos cannot incarnate
I think that according to the C's psychos do have a soul and can reincarnate, or at least that's how I interpret the discussion about Hitler and what happened to him after he died. Supposedly, he was in 5D and contemplating what to do next, or something to the effect. And whether to come back or not. It came up in one of the sessions.

And since the lizzies seeded psychos on our planet, I assume they could also increase or decrease their numbers .... ?
 
can't find it, was this in reference to the event itself or the time when it happened??

for example:
there were X% of psychopaths during fall of the Roman Empire
there were X% of psychopaths in the Roman Empire
there were X% of psychopaths in Rome(now that would be closer to our standards where politicians congregate:)


🤔
I found it: Session 8 August 2015

(Approaching Infinity) I just want to ask this one last one here. What was the percentage of psychopaths in Rome during Caesar's career?

(L) I think it would probably have changed.

(Approaching Infinity) Maybe at the time that he died.

(L) Well, when he died he killed off a bunch of them. So how is that gonna relate to before he killed them off?

(Approaching Infinity) Well... What was the average?

(L) You want an average overall? Okay, we can deal with that. That's fairly specific, even though the answer is not. What was the average overall percentage of psychopathy in Rome during Caesar's life?

A: 29 percent.

(Approaching Infinity) Just one more, Laura. Right before the civil war started, what was the percentage of psychopaths in Rome? [laughter]

A: 42

Q: (L) I'd say that's not terribly unusual. Rome was an attractor for every nasty critter in the whole empire.
 
Also keep in mind that Rome was a city, and the center of Roman power. So you had both a lot of aristocrats, and a lot of people living in relative poverty. So both of those would probably tend to concentrate the number of personality disordered people living there. That's not to say other factors weren't at work. For example, there's the idea of "phylogenetic selection" - that certain conditions and norms of living will tend to promote the expression of certain traits or personality structures. And there if such a phenomenon is true, then there would be a hyperdimensional aspect behind it as well.
 
Yes, as Laura said, based on other comments by the Cs, that 6% is "on the planet", but there are concentrations much higher than that in certain areas.
OK, but if this is true now, and if it was true in Roman times, then this must mean that there must have been places which were essentially sucked dry of psychos, so with a concentration of near 0%. So, if the theory that psychos are majorly responsible for all the injustice, exploitation, and mayhem on earth, then there must have been places which were nearly paradise like during the fall of Rome?

Same now: assuming that the overall concentration of psychos is currently still at 6%, and assuming that most of them are concentrated in wealthy countries like USA, Australia, UK, EU etc., then this should mean that less wealthy countries should have either a very low concentration of psychos or as good as none and should be relatively safe to live in. But looking at places like Africa, South America, Middle Eastern countries - I am not sure this argument holds up? Or does it?

Or is it maybe that the overall concentration of psychos is currently higher than 6% (and was also higher during Ceasar's times)? After all, if the Lizzies seeded them here, then I am sure they can increase or decrease their numbers at will? Or why would they want to keep it at 6%? Is there something specific about the 6% number? Why would they not keep it at 8 or 12%? Maybe that's something to clarify with the C's?
 
Hi,
One notice : the % of psychopaths currently in Israel is the same than Rome before the start of the civil war : 42%
(Ailén) Israel?

A: 42 percent.

It's off topic from the original question, but was wondering about similitudes.

Some questions that come to mind :
Could things be triggered once, at one place on earth, there are too many of them ?
What i know wonder, but this will be even more off topic, but among these 100% of psychopaths (let's keep Israel but question could be broaden to the whole world), are they being jabbed in the same proportions than "normal" people ?

Sorry if it's not the fully right thread to bring this observation and new questions, but I had to find somewhere where to put it :)
 
Same now: assuming that the overall concentration of psychos is currently still at 6%, and assuming that most of them are concentrated in wealthy countries like USA, Australia, UK, EU etc., then this should mean that less wealthy countries should have either a very low concentration of psychos or as good as none and should be relatively safe to live in
What if the psychos are well integrated in the highest spheres, decisional spheres of our society, where will we find a safe place to live out of their power reach?
 
OK, but if this is true now, and if it was true in Roman times, then this must mean that there must have been places which were essentially sucked dry of psychos, so with a concentration of near 0%. So, if the theory that psychos are majorly responsible for all the injustice, exploitation, and mayhem on earth, then there must have been places which were nearly paradise like during the fall of Rome?

Same now: assuming that the overall concentration of psychos is currently still at 6%, and assuming that most of them are concentrated in wealthy countries like USA, Australia, UK, EU etc., then this should mean that less wealthy countries should have either a very low concentration of psychos or as good as none and should be relatively safe to live in. But looking at places like Africa, South America, Middle Eastern countries - I am not sure this argument holds up? Or does it?

Or is it maybe that the overall concentration of psychos is currently higher than 6% (and was also higher during Ceasar's times)? After all, if the Lizzies seeded them here, then I am sure they can increase or decrease their numbers at will? Or why would they want to keep it at 6%? Is there something specific about the 6% number? Why would they not keep it at 8 or 12%? Maybe that's something to clarify with the C's?
At 6% out of 7 billion people, that would mean there are 420 million psychopaths worldwide. I think that that would make it possible for there to be at least a few in any country; a lot that would be in governments or whatever controlling bodies those countries have. It would only take a couple in the right place to make things miserable for the rest of the people.
 
Same now: assuming that the overall concentration of psychos is currently still at 6%, and assuming that most of them are concentrated in wealthy countries like USA, Australia, UK, EU etc., then this should mean that less wealthy countries should have either a very low concentration of psychos or as good as none and should be relatively safe to live in. But looking at places like Africa, South America, Middle Eastern countries - I am not sure this argument holds up? Or does it?
There are many pathways to evil, not just psychopathy. Even if, theoretically, a country had no psychopaths, there are still many kinds of environmental factors that produce character disturbance - bad nutrition, toxins, infant brain damage, and the cycles which perpetuate such things, like childhood abuse and poverty. Then there are the effects of "good living" - garden-variety narcissism (selfishness, self-centeredness, self-entitlement, etc.), a tendency to hysteria, conversive/dissociative thinking, etc. In a nutshell, there's plenty of psychopathology to go around.
 
At 6% out of 7 billion people, that would mean there are 420 million psychopaths worldwide. I think that that would make it possible for there to be at least a few in any country; a lot that would be in governments or whatever controlling bodies those countries have. It would only take a couple in the right place to make things miserable for the rest of the people.
Ok, but if it takes just a couple, then why are there as many as there are now, instead of just a fraction? If it takes just a few, then why aren't there just 600 psychos on the planet at any given time, so let's say, three per country? Are the 6% some kind of constant or does that number fluctuate, based on how soon the Lizzies want to bring about self-destruction and terror? How does it fit the proposed theory that psychos are agents of the Lizzies which bring about most of the mayhem on this planet .... ?
 
There are many pathways to evil, not just psychopathy. Even if, theoretically, a country had no psychopaths, there are still many kinds of environmental factors that produce character disturbance - bad nutrition, toxins, infant brain damage, and the cycles which perpetuate such things, like childhood abuse and poverty. Then there are the effects of "good living" - garden-variety narcissism (selfishness, self-centeredness, self-entitlement, etc.), a tendency to hysteria, conversive/dissociative thinking, etc. In a nutshell, there's plenty of psychopathology to go around.
Ok, but given that the working hypothesis on this forum, supported by the C's from what I understand, is that psychos are the main tool of Lizzie control on this planet, then it would follow that if there were areas with no or as good as no psychos, then those areas should display significant advantages to human life and be safer?

Is this in fact the case?

Can one make the argument that poorer countries (with assumed lower psycho populattion) will see less strict enforcement of totalitarian control? Is the fact that Africa has so far only a marginal vaccination rate a direct result of (assumed) lower psycho concentration on that continent? Or will African countries catch up at some point with the totalitarianism and even overtake Western countries, irrespective of how many psychos they harbor?

I think trying to find an answer to these questions could have potentially valuable practical implications:
Assuming that indeed the overall psycho population on the planet is kept at a constant, and assuming that they are attracted to and concentrate in areas of increased wealth (hence influence), then it is logical to assume the wealthier a country is, the more mayhem and murder it will experience. If all the previous assumptions are (mostly) correct, then it would follow that less wealthy countries should experience less mayhem and be safer. Even if there are other types of psychopathologies present (narcissism, toxicities, trauma, etc.) ...
 
Back
Top Bottom