Whelp, looks like the anti-Trump hysteria was one of the biggest gaslighting episodes in modern political history.
Shocking, the conspiracy theorists called it again!
I hope this isn't true for no reason other than the concept is terrifying.
Out of morbid curiosity, who are they harassing now thinking it's me?
Why is it that otherwise perfectly intelligent, thoughtful and rationally minded people baulk at the suggestion that sociopaths are conspiring to manipulate and deceive them? And why will they defend this ill-founded position with such vehemence?
History catalogues the machinations of liars, thieves, bullies and narcissists and their devastating effects. In modern times too, evidence of corruption and extraordinary deceptions abound.
We know, without question, that politicians lie and hide their connections and that corporations routinely display utter contempt for moral norms – that corruption surrounds us.
We know that revolving doors between the corporate and political spheres, the lobbying system, corrupt regulators, the media and judiciary mean that wrongdoing is practically never brought to any semblance of genuine justice.
We know that the press makes noise about these matters occasionally but never pursues them with true vigour.
We know that in the intelligence services and law enforcement wrongdoing on a breathtaking scale is commonplace and that, again, justice is never forthcoming.
We know that governments repeatedly ignore or trample on the rights of the people, and actively abuse and mistreat the people. None of this is controversial.
So exactly what is it that conspiracy deniers refuse to acknowledge with such fervour, righteousness and condescension? Why, against all the evidence, do they sneeringly and contemptuously defend the crumbling illusion that ‘the great and good’ are up there somewhere, have everything in hand, have only our best interests at heart, and are scrupulous, wise and sincere? That the press serves the people and truth rather than the crooks? That injustice after injustice result from mistakes and oversights, and never from that dread word: conspiracy?
What reasonable person would continue to inhabit such a fantasy world?
The point of disagreement here is only on the matter of scale. Someone who is genuinely curious about the plans of powerful sociopaths won’t limit the scope of their curiosity to, for example, one corporation, or one nation. Why would they? Such a person assumes that the same patterns on display locally are likely to be found all the way up the power food chain. But the conspiracy denier insists this is preposterous.
Why?
It is painfully obvious that the pyramidical societal and legal structures that humanity has allowed to develop are exactly the kind of dominance hierarchies that undoubtedly favour the sociopath. A humane being operating with a normal and healthy cooperative mindset has little inclination to take part in the combat necessary to climb a corporate or political ladder.
So what do conspiracy deniers imagine the 70 million or more sociopaths in the world do all day, born into a ‘game’, in which all the wealth and power are at the top of the pyramid, while the most effective attributes for ‘winning’ are ruthlessness and amorality? Have they never played Monopoly?
Sociopaths do not choose their worldview consciously, and are simply unable to comprehend why normal people would put themselves at such an incredible disadvantage by limiting themselves with conscientiousness and empathy, which are as beyond the understanding of the sociopath as a world without them are to the humane being.
All the sociopath need do to win in the game is lie publicly whilst conspiring privately. What could be simpler? In 2021, to continue to imagine that the world we inhabit is not largely driven by this dynamic amounts to reckless naiveté bordering on insanity. Where does such an inadvertently destructive impulse originate?
The infant child places an innate trust in those it finds itself with – a trust which is, for the most part, essentially justified. The infant could not survive otherwise.
In a sane and healthy society, this deep instinct would evolve as the psyche developed. As self-awareness, the cognitive and reasoning abilities and scepticism evolved in the individual, this innate trust impulse would continue to be understood as a central need of the psyche. Shared belief systems would exist to consciously evolve and develop this childish impulse in order to place this faith somewhere consciously – in values and beliefs of lasting meaning and worth to the society, the individual, or, ideally, both.
Reverence and respect for tradition, natural forces, ancestors, for reason, truth, beauty, liberty, the innate value of life, or the initiating spirit of all things, might all be considered valid resting places in which to consciously place our trust and faith – as well as those derived from more formalised belief systems.
Regardless of the path taken to evolve and develop a personal faith, it is the bringing of one’s own consciousness and cognition to this innate impulse that is relevant here. I believe this is a profound responsibility – to develop and cultivate a mature faith – which many are, understandably, unaware of.
What occurs when there is a childish need within us which has never evolved beyond its original survival function of trusting those in our environment who are, simply, the most powerful; the most present and active? When we have never truly explored our own psyches, and deeply interrogated what we truly believe and why? When our motivation for trusting anything or anyone goes unchallenged? When philosophy is left to the philosophers?
I suggest the answer is simple, and that the evidence of this phenomenon and the havoc it is wreaking is all around us: the innate impulse to trust the mother never evolves, never encounters and engages with its counterbalance of reason (or mature faith), and remains forever on its ‘default’ infant setting.
While the immature psyche no longer depends on parents for its well-being, the powerful and motivating core tenet I have described remains intact: unchallenged, unconsidered and undeveloped. And, in a world in which stability and security are distant memories, these survival instincts, rather than being well-honed, considered, relevant, discerning and up to date, remain, quite literally, those of a baby. Trust is placed in the biggest, loudest, most present and undeniable force around, because instinct decrees that survival depends on it.
And, in this great ‘world nursery’, the most omnipresent force is the network of institutions which consistently project an unearned image of power, calm, expertise, concern and stability.
In my view, this is how conspiracy deniers are able to cling to and aggressively defend the utterly illogical fantasy that somehow – above a certain undefined level of the societal hierarchy – corruption, deceit, malevolence and narcissism mysteriously evaporate. That, contrary to the maxim, the more power a person has, the more integrity they will inevitably exhibit. These poor deluded souls essentially believe that where personal experience and prior knowledge cannot fill in the gaps in their worldview – in short, where there is a barred door – mummy and daddy are behind it, working out how best to ensure that their little precious will be comfortable, happy and safe forever.
This is the core, comforting illusion at the root of the conspiracy denier’s mindset, the decrepit foundation upon which they build a towering castle of justification from which to pompously jeer at and mock those who see otherwise.
This explains why it is that the conspiracy denier will attack any suggestion that the caregiving archetype is no longer present – that sociopaths are behind the barred door, who hold us all in utter contempt or disregard us completely. The conspiracy denier will attack any such suggestion as viciously as if their survival depended on it – which, in a way, within the makeup of their unconscious and precarious psyche, it does.
Their sense of well-being, of security, of comfort, even of a future at all, is completely (and completely unconsciously) invested in this fantasy. The infant has never matured, and, because they are not conscious of this, other than as a deep attachment to their personal security, they will fiercely attack any threat to this unconscious and central aspect of their worldview.
The tediously common refrain from the conspiracy denier is, ‘there couldn’t be a conspiracy that big’.
The simple retort to such a self-professed expert on conspiracies is obvious: how big?
The biggest ‘medical’ corporations in the world can go for decades treating the settling of court cases as mere business expenses, for crimes ranging from the suppressing of adverse test events to multiple murders resulting from undeclared testing to colossal environmental crimes.
Governments perform the vilest and most unthinkable ‘experiments’ (crimes) on their own people without consequence.
Politicians habitually lie to our faces, without consequence.
And on and on. At what point, exactly, does a conspiracy become so big that ‘they’ just couldn’t get away with it, and why? I suggest it’s at the point where the cognitive ability of the conspiracy denier falters, and their unconscious survival instinct kicks in. The point at which the intellect becomes overwhelmed with the scope of events and the instinct is to settle back into the familiar comforting faith known and cultivated since the first moment one’s lips found the nipple. The faith that someone else is dealing with it – that where the world becomes unknown to us, a powerful and benevolent human authority exists in which we have only to place our faith unconditionally in order to guarantee eternal emotional security.
This dangerous delusion may be the central factor placing humanity’s physical security and future in the hands of sociopaths.
To anyone in the habit of dismissing people who are questioning, investigative and sceptical as tin foil hat wearing, paranoid, science-denying Trump supporters, the question is: what do you believe in? Where have you placed your faith and why? How is it that while no one trusts governments, you appear to trust nascent global governance organisations without question? How is this rational?
If you are placing faith in such organisations, consider that in the modern global age, these organisations, as extraordinarily well presented as they are, are simply grander manifestations of the local versions we know we can’t trust. They are not our parents and demonstrate no loyalty to humane values. There is no reason to place any faith whatsoever in any of them.
If you haven’t consciously developed a faith or questioned why you believe as you do to some depth, such a position might seem misanthropic, but in truth, it is the opposite. These organisations have not earned your trust with anything other than PR money and glossy lies. True power remains, as ever, with the people.
There is a reason why Buddhists strongly advise the placing of one’s faith in the Dharma, or the natural law of life, rather than in persons, and that similar refrains are common in other belief systems.
Power corrupts. And, in the world today, misplaced and unfounded trust could well be one of the greatest sources of power there is.
Massive criminal conspiracies exist. The evidence is overwhelming. The scope of those currently underway is unknown, but there is no reason to imagine, in the new global age, that the sociopathic quest for power or the possession of the resources required to move towards it is diminishing. Certainly not while dissent is mocked and censored into silence by gatekeepers, ‘useful idiots’, and conspiracy deniers, who are, in fact, directly colluding with the sociopathic agenda through their unrelenting attack on those who would shine a light on wrongdoing.
It is every humane being’s urgent responsibility to expose sociopathic agendas wherever they exist – never to attack those who seek to do so.
Now, more than ever, it is time to put away childish things, and childish impulses, and to stand up as adults to protect the future of the actual children who h
Weird downvotes today...someone's temp ban must be up lol.
u/Pokemathmon is the quintessential Top Mind. They've crammed every single talking point into one sentence.
They cannot let comments that show support for me stand. I think 90% of this activity are bots.
The sheer amount of canned talking points that emerge whenever I'm mentioned is stunningly blatant.
They haven't hit this comment yet from that thread, but they will:
The banning of the only mod actually interested in conspiracies was the nail in the coffin.
"Someone" will reply to this soon and downvote this comment aggressively. The reply will be something like Pokemathmon's rant:
I'd rather not bring back the mod that silenced dissenting opinions in a conspiracy sub. Seeing the best points against a garbage political facebook meme wind up [deleted] because it didn't fit Axol's political narrative is really disheartening to see, especially in a conspiracy sub that should be skeptical of all the powers at be, regardless their political persuasion.
lol Pokemathmon, you're fucking retarded, did you know that?
u/nfk42 is also clearly a bot/alt:
very much so, its inconceivable that axo could have fallen for the trump train. only other explanation is controlled opposition.
I have dozens of threads calling out Trump and literally telling Trump to fuck himself. They have never cited a single thread where I expressed support for Trump when I was a /r/conspiracy mod.
The posthumous framing of me as a rogue mod gone full "Trumpet" is one of the most bizarre and significant gaslighting efforts in the history of /r/conspiracy, and that should say a lot.
u/Pokemathmon is the quintessential Top Mind. They've crammed every single talking point into one sentence.
They cannot let comments that show support for me stand. I think 90% of this activity are bots.
The sheer amount of canned talking points that emerge whenever I'm mentioned is stunningly blatant.
They haven't hit this comment yet from that thread, but they will:
The banning of the only mod actually interested in conspiracies was the nail in the coffin.
"Someone" will reply to this soon and downvote this comment aggressively. The reply will be something like Pokemathmon's rant:
I'd rather not bring back the mod that silenced dissenting opinions in a conspiracy sub. Seeing the best points against a garbage political facebook meme wind up [deleted] because it didn't fit Axol's political narrative is really disheartening to see, especially in a conspiracy sub that should be skeptical of all the powers at be, regardless their political persuasion.
lol Pokemathmon, you're a raging faggot, did you know that?
u/nfk42 is also clearly a bot/alt:
very much so, its inconceivable that axo could have fallen for the trump train. only other explanation is controlled opposition.
I have dozens of threads calling out Trump and literally telling Trump to fuck himself. They have never cited a single thread where I expressed support for Trump when I was a /r/conspiracy mod.
The posthumous framing of me as a rogue mod gone full "Trumpet" is one of the most bizarre and significant gaslighting efforts in the history of /r/conspiracy, and that should say a lot.
So math is hard.
(thanks)
Why are the NPCs triggered by their own memes? Super Straight...Blue Anon...the only reason these memes are being censored is because they reveal the true hypocrisy of the NPC.
Interesting occult history of "St. Germain" for those conspiracists who are paying attention...
well I know what that's like. I had multiple botnets after me on /r/conspiracy. Lame.
This highly bizarre, and intriguing, article was shared by N.S., and it has my high octane speculation motor running in overdrive today. It concerns something called "digital electricity", which is a mind-twister and noodle-baker all on its own. Just what in the name of sense is "digital electricity"? The answer as provided in the following article - from two years ago - might astonish you:
Here's the article's definition of "digital electricity":
“This emerging technology combines DC power and data into packets which are transmitted and received in a manner that is somewhat analogous to how information packets are conveyed over networks. Digital electricity allows us to push power out to much longer distances without having to plan for the normal voltage drop – and without having massive copper wire size; we incorporate this technology into our designs when centralized power is a must and on projects when the facility’s design doesn’t support traditional cable lengths – such as rail stations, airports and sports venues."... What they apparently offer is a way to send very short, very high-voltage pulses for long distances over standard, low-power cabling (such as in Ethernet) to a unit which somehow accumulates and then transforms the energy into a substantial power source (Figure 1). The pulses are halted within 3 msec if there’s a break in the cable, someone touches it, or any other irregularity.
So note firstly what is being claimed: the transmission of substantial direct current electrical power over long distances along normal wires without severe attenuation via short electrical pulses. People who have read my books The SS Brotherhood of the Bell and Secrets of the Unified Field will recall that I discussed why the Germans would have placed an entire electrical power plant so near the installations for the Nazi Bell, or, conversely, why they would have placed those installations so close to an electrical power plant.
The answer came from Thomas Edison, who advocated that the electrification of America be done with direct current, and not our contemporary alternating (Tesla-tech) current. The difficulty of direct current is well known to anyone with a basic high school science background (back when high schools in America were more concerned with teaching science, rather than commenting on the race and/or presumed cultural biases of the scientist or engineer in question). Direct current falls off dramatically over distance on power lines; what one puts in isn't what one gets out, and hence Edison's plan would have led (quickly) to an environmental disaster with a power plant needed every few miles or so.
Because of this circumstance, I argued in those books that the Bell device required huge amounts of direct current electricity and the thick cabling to go with it. (As confirmation of this argument, see my discussion with Mr. Tino Von Struckman, with his accompanying pictures, in the members' area dialogue section, where there is clear pictorial evidence of heavy cabling at one time present in the installations in Silesia where the Bell was allegedly developed and tested.)
But according to the claim in the article, this need for heavy cabling has been solved by sending the direct current not in a continuous stream, but in short pulses. Well, possibly, because another detail that emerged about the Bell was Igor Witkowski's observation that the German nickname for the device was der Bienenstock, the "beehive," because of the buzzing noise it made in operation.
From this I deduced that perhaps, at the load end of the Bell itself, there was an electrical gate that was rapidly being opened and closed, which would produce the characteristic electrical buzzing sound. What the article seems to be stating is that the electrical gate has been moved to the source end of the circuit.
However, here my speculations trail off, because the article notes something else:
The stated benefit is that the energy is so low that the wiring does not need an electrician to do the installation, so it can be done by regular construction crews. It is claimed to be lower cost in materials and highly efficient. It also meets all relevant UL and IEC regulatory requirements for low-power safety. A complete system requires what are called digital electricity transmitters and complementary receivers, (Figure 2), but I could not find data sheets for either, nor a clear statement of what goes into and what comes out of each box, their size, power requirements, speed, or anything similar.
I studied their web sites and collateral carefully and did some other research, and still don’t really grasp how this set-up works or how it manages to accomplish what seems to be contradictory and almost unsupportable goals. How can you send enough energy, via short pulses, to integrate and convert into a fairly large amount of output power in this type of continuous power-drain application? Pulse-power delivery is a viable technique for some specialty situations, such as high-energy tests, but this is very different. The greatly simplified discussion, “The Idea” on the VoltServer site, actually raised more questions for me than it answered. In addition, the product page at the JMA Wireless site was of little help, as was this VoltServer “success story” posted in a publication called Connected Real Estate. The hour-long VoltServer presentation “Touch-Safe, High Voltage Digital Electricity Transmission using Packet Energy Transfer,” which you can view below, was somewhat more helpful, but still left me wondering about the technique and the claims.
Overall, I wish I better understood what they are doing and how they do it. Frankly, the skeptic (or cynic) in me was ready to assume this was some sort of “something for almost nothing” scam that seems too good to be true, but VoltServer claims about 200 installations in various commercial buildings as well as named sports stadiums, so I suppose it really does work. I still wonder, though, why I haven’t seen anything about this apparently innovative technology in the various engineering-design publications, especially as it is clearly not a very new approach given the many actual deployments. What’s your sense of this innovation? Are you familiar with it? Are you comfortable that it can it really deliver what they claim? Do you understand how it works? What am I missing—or am I missing the point? (Boldface emphasis added)
Indeed... no data, no announcements in the engineering journals, and a quick search on phys.org produced next to nothing, so yes, you can color me suspicious too. No, not just suspicious, but very highly suspicious.
But let's crawl to the end of the speculation twig once again: pulsed direct current electricity would essentially be an "electro-acoustic" wave, a longitudinal "compressional" wave with peaks and troughs of compression and rarefaction. Could that be transmitted on wires? I assume it could, though I'm at a loss to explain why someone touching such a wire would not experience a sudden sharp pain, if not paralysis and/or death. But this basic idea was behind Tesla's "wireless power" transmission idea. So I have to wonder, was my "electrical gate" that I posited for the Bell not located at the load end, but rather, at the source end, and were massive DC pulses being delivered on those massive cables?
And if this system - all my and the original author's skepticism aside - is what it says it is and is delivering the power it says it's delivering, are we looking at yet another quiet energy revolution right before our eyes? If so, then more sweeping changes are in store.
lol you're SO close. COVID's a hoax.
Never better since leaving! Hope you're well too!!!
I didn't add trinadin...trinadin was original to the team and added by Doggos along with me. I don't know what happened to that account but I can ask. I think he initially was only going to be around temporarily to help with CSS etc. He never planned on staying on as permanent mod here.
As for Evspra, he deleted his account after dealing with some harassment at GA from what I understand. I'm just catching up myself and I submitted a thread to GA this morning trying to get more info.
Regardless, Evspra will always be welcome here!
Again, if you're upvoting one of those posts chances are you're going to upvote all of them.
Exactly. It would be weird if one of these was way off (like 50 upvotes when the rest have 15). I submitted a bunch of separate threads to make a point, and I assumed the even amount of upvotes are from people who saw that and upvoted. 15 is so small too.
To be honest, I thought you were Axolotl.
This is my only account on .win and I'm no longer on reddit.
u/#hoax