To go from Malone buying into Mass Formation theory to he's controlled opposition seems paranoid. My understanding is Desmet said the leaders of mass formations may be true believers or simply using it as an end to a means. Both of these would still be subject to accountability.
Suing the Breggin's seems thin skinned. The attacks on Malone do seem unhinged.
To go from Malone buying into Mass Formation theory to he's controlled opposition seems paranoid. My understanding is Desmet said the leaders of mass formations may be true believers or simply using it as an end to a means. Both of these would still be subject to accountability.
Suing the Breggin's seems thin skinned. The attacks on Malone do seem unhinged.
I believe the lawsuit is because Malone added the term "psychosis" into Mass Formation, Desmet told him not to say that because it sounded as though they were calling people psychotic. So now Dr Jane Ruby and the Stew Peters network are also being sued for talking about Malone using that term, it seems he's pissed that he was embarrassed. I guess now anyone can sue if they feel slighted by someone else. I find what what Malone is doing is petty and downright cruel and I hoe he loses and is laughed out of court.
Could both Peters and Desmet be controlled opposition? Who knows? Stew Peters seems the most likely because he intersperses crap with truth in an overly dramatic way. Desmet does not seem so clear cut. He seems to be sincerely trying to understand things. Anyone could be controlled opposition. That is why we cannot hitch our wagons onto one person or group - continue to watch all players. Only time will tell.
Breggin seems overly haunted by an either-or fallacy: either Desmet's mass formation thesis prevails in the court of public opinion -- and the criminals are exonerated -- or Desmet's thesis fails in the same forum, as Breggin declares it must -- in order to effectively hold the criminals accountable.
The bifurcation seems too stilted and intellectual for its own good.
Is there something unreasonable, unsound, and wholly implausible with the proposition that both the suspects are criminals and prosecutable and the public psyche took on a delusion approaching psychotic proportions in response, however pathological and disturbed, in response to the mass terror that the established power perpetrated on the public? In other words, can't both sides of the event be true, and not mutually exclusive?
Yes, it's both/and, not either/or. It took the massive, sophisticated propaganda campaign doused on a population totally ready to grasp on to it. "Emotionally potent oversimplification" I've heard it called. The ground has to be fertile enough for the seed to sprout. Took both factors. The culpability, however, lies with the propagandists who knew better, but saw profit and control at the end of the process.
"... the public psyche took on a delusion approaching psychotic proportions in response..." This psychotic response was completely manufactured and designed. Yes or no?
It's not all academic. This matters.
I see this as insidious because Desmet appears to say there were manipulators but he actually doesn't mean that, because according to him even the manipulators were captured by the mechanistic ideology that led to the (spontaneous) mass formation.
Breggin illuminates the activity of the predators. Desmet obscures it. Malone doesn't like what Breggin is doing.
Outstanding investigative reporting: highly revealing, thoughtful and explanatory work in the Unlimited Hangout piece you provide.
I still maintain, enough evidence is seemingly at hand for, basically the plausible culpability, and an indictment leading to conviction of, at a minimum, certain, particularly causative criminal cabalists -- if judicially feasible, given the present statutory mess we allowed our Congresspeople to create and our presidents to approve over many decades of a self-perceived, if only poorly strategized and highly vulnerable, globalist-inspired stylizing of our government's codified structures, ie, the asymmetrical, Constitution-eroding enactment of critically key legislation fortifying a select number of essentially linked security agencies -- and the concurrent mass mesmerization-hypnosis, certainly a large-scale delusion, based on a generalized and collective mass fear, once again approaching -- not necessarily achieving -- psychotic, and so, halucinatory-like proportions.
This sociopolitical dyad of the offending/offended and psychologically paralyzed into nonaction can, and -- in the view of relatively more sensible, oppression-resisting, rational, and psychologically healthy people, lying aside, in the same can of sardines as, their mentally afflicted cohorts -- have, in fact, coexisted concomitantly, the clinically posited (Desmetian) interactive, recycling, interdependent and morbid co-pathologies of the two, notwithstanding.
malone issue isn't that breggin disagrees with him or desmet. the issue is that breggin has been defaming malone with unfounded personal attacks. that's what the lawsuit is about.
Then ask yourself why Malone is supporting and promoting Desmet, who does not believe in global predators in the same way that Breggin does.
For Desmet, there are and are not manipulators. Read what he says. Does Malone employ the same strategy-- there are "predators" but no grand conspiracy?
Agreed -- thus supporting my view that BOTH 1) the (complex of offenses committed by the) establishment perps are prima facie indictments of their deeply immoral and illegal criminality, AND that the offenses, both in and of themselves and, based on their effects arousing fear, terror, and loathing, led 2) the weak-minded among us to assume a Stockholm Syndrome-like delusion/hypnosis/psychosis posture vis-a-vis their criminal offenders and perceived masters/captors.
At the same time, 3) the more strongly individualized and willed among us see the oppressors in no such permanently dominant and pernicious roles, but rather, in their concerted effort or conspiracy, to attempt to intimidate and weaken their prey, while developing specific strategies and tactics to resist, oppose, out-maneuver, and eventually overcome and defeat the committers of murderous aggression in the acts of culling, depopulating, and killing off
We, the strong ones in this, what appears more and more as The Greatest Struggle, know that the simple genius and indescribable elegance by which our immune systems work to defend and protect -- even to immunize -- us against offensive harm is, part and parcel, our endless inspiration and perennial guide to survival. So, keep it natural, and, as our dedicated Marines so often advise, stay frosty.
Hit the nail on the head. Desmet says there was no conspiracy to induce a mass formation. This is why he introduces the Sierpinski triangle, to convince us there was no conspiracy, only the appearance of conspiracy.
Desmet did not illuminate what you just said; he obscured it. Now we circle back and ask: why is Malone supporting that theory? It's a question, not an accusation. Why is he suing the Breggins?
Many argue that it's all a matter of interpreting Desmet. No, it is not. We break apart the concepts and we see their references (OK, we can get fancy and call it their "ontological status") and we must conclude that according to Desmet, nothing was planned in the sense that many of us believe it was.
actually, desmet does conclude that the criminals are liable for their crimes. his thesis is these kind of conspiracies are self organizing and don't require a criminal mastermind that controls it from the top down but that doesn't mean that people aren't responsible for their part in perpetuating it. desmet is trying to explain where the "maddening of crowds" comes from.
Do you really believe that Covid-19 was "self-organizing" and that some people simply took advantage of it?
Then no one anywhere is trying to impose a world government on us and actively working for that (planning and conspiring) in order to monitor, manage, and control everyone on the planet and destroy individual self-determination?
So was Covid-19 simply a "maddening of crowds"? Or was it orchestrated by a world-wide, coordinated and vicious suppression of safe and effective drugs and a world-wide, coordinated emphasis on lockdowns and a world-wide creation of a medical police state? None of that was "necessary" and many of what Desmet calls "the smartest pigs in the room" (referring to Orwell,) the virologists, protested against the insanity. Yet Desmet says we believed the "smartest pigs" not because of active deception, but because we, the people, were and are captured by a mechanistic ideology.
Was that really true?
Our leaders "took advantage" of nothing. They actively steered the ship to induce fear in the population so that they could try out their police state and hopefully get everyone to vaccine passports. Not one single thing that happened was mechanistically "necessary," as Desmet seems to want us to believe.
do yourself a favor and find an interview with desmet. i'm just giving you a broad brushstroke that doesn't do his theory justice and your desription above isn't even close to his theory.
I've watched several interviews of Desmet and have read and re-read his book. Suggest you look more closely at what he says, the identities he sets forwards, and the contradictions in what he says as well as how closely his identities match reality.
Breggins say he didnt' just buy into it, but that the talk of it 'diagnoses' the public, which then permits the global predators to claim the masses are 'sick' and to use draconian measures to lock all the psychotics up. Breggins even share examples of this happening to some folk, entirely unjustifiably but none the less, hauled off by compliant no brain cops in some countries.
Except mass formation, according to the theory, occurs through state-sponsored propaganda on a vulnerable population. Doesn't make sense to lock up the true believers. Whether the "diagnosis" existed or not, those going against the state narrative get locked up in these authoritarian movements.
Then there was a conspiracy of state-sponsored propaganda on the population that induced a mass formation. We were not "vulnerable" prior to that. Think back. For the most part we simply lived normal lives and had cares and concerns and anxieties and loves and relationships and children and family and friends, and we enjoyed being together in parks, at concerts, in restaurants and bars, etc. We did not go around with mechanistic thinking in our heads, like robots just ready to be swept up in the slightest whiff of government propaganda. The only thing spontaneous about the mass formation during Covid was the resistance.
The glow-balls are the half-wits, they talk a load of balls about vaccines being our saviour and 'have another pill' to cure the effects of the previous pill.
Bunch of loonies I call them, they are the useless eaters. They can take their glowing balls and shove them....
I'm sorry, I got carried away there, I hope you don't mind. I can always delete.
Yeah, I'm just saying the end point is always the same in these authoritarian movements whether someone posits Mass Formation theory or not - the dissidents get locked up and the movement eventually eats its own.
To go from Malone buying into Mass Formation theory to he's controlled opposition seems paranoid. My understanding is Desmet said the leaders of mass formations may be true believers or simply using it as an end to a means. Both of these would still be subject to accountability.
Suing the Breggin's seems thin skinned. The attacks on Malone do seem unhinged.
I believe the lawsuit is because Malone added the term "psychosis" into Mass Formation, Desmet told him not to say that because it sounded as though they were calling people psychotic. So now Dr Jane Ruby and the Stew Peters network are also being sued for talking about Malone using that term, it seems he's pissed that he was embarrassed. I guess now anyone can sue if they feel slighted by someone else. I find what what Malone is doing is petty and downright cruel and I hoe he loses and is laughed out of court.
It's actually pretty silly to argue about the addition of the term "psychosis" (if there is, indeed, anyone really arguing about this).
Anyway, Stew Peters also comes across as controlled opposition (what a shocking idea, huh?)
Is Desmet for real?
Could both Peters and Desmet be controlled opposition? Who knows? Stew Peters seems the most likely because he intersperses crap with truth in an overly dramatic way. Desmet does not seem so clear cut. He seems to be sincerely trying to understand things. Anyone could be controlled opposition. That is why we cannot hitch our wagons onto one person or group - continue to watch all players. Only time will tell.
Yes, even Stew Peters' photo is overly serious and dramatic (as if deliberately so). It's a give-away (and pretty silly).
Desmet reminds me of someone, a doctor. (I will look up his name.) Sometimes they play more than one role...
Sometimes the character "dies," and then they start in as someone else. Bill Hicks "died" and then became "Alex Jones" (to use a hackneyed example).
Breggin seems overly haunted by an either-or fallacy: either Desmet's mass formation thesis prevails in the court of public opinion -- and the criminals are exonerated -- or Desmet's thesis fails in the same forum, as Breggin declares it must -- in order to effectively hold the criminals accountable.
The bifurcation seems too stilted and intellectual for its own good.
Is there something unreasonable, unsound, and wholly implausible with the proposition that both the suspects are criminals and prosecutable and the public psyche took on a delusion approaching psychotic proportions in response, however pathological and disturbed, in response to the mass terror that the established power perpetrated on the public? In other words, can't both sides of the event be true, and not mutually exclusive?
Yes, it's both/and, not either/or. It took the massive, sophisticated propaganda campaign doused on a population totally ready to grasp on to it. "Emotionally potent oversimplification" I've heard it called. The ground has to be fertile enough for the seed to sprout. Took both factors. The culpability, however, lies with the propagandists who knew better, but saw profit and control at the end of the process.
Let me sum up the debate.
Breggin: "Covid-19 and the Global Predators: We are the Prey."
Malone and Desmet: no, we aren't. There are no global predators.
If you think I'm off-the-mark then read carefully what Desmet says. It might help to read what Breggin says about this, too, as he illuminates what's really going on. And, this: https://unlimitedhangout.com/2022/11/investigative-reports/covid-19-mass-formation-or-mass-atrocity/?ref=Unlimited+Hangout-newsletter
"... the public psyche took on a delusion approaching psychotic proportions in response..." This psychotic response was completely manufactured and designed. Yes or no?
It's not all academic. This matters.
I see this as insidious because Desmet appears to say there were manipulators but he actually doesn't mean that, because according to him even the manipulators were captured by the mechanistic ideology that led to the (spontaneous) mass formation.
Breggin illuminates the activity of the predators. Desmet obscures it. Malone doesn't like what Breggin is doing.
Have you looked at Desmet's substack. He answers the Breggis' directly in some detail.
Outstanding investigative reporting: highly revealing, thoughtful and explanatory work in the Unlimited Hangout piece you provide.
I still maintain, enough evidence is seemingly at hand for, basically the plausible culpability, and an indictment leading to conviction of, at a minimum, certain, particularly causative criminal cabalists -- if judicially feasible, given the present statutory mess we allowed our Congresspeople to create and our presidents to approve over many decades of a self-perceived, if only poorly strategized and highly vulnerable, globalist-inspired stylizing of our government's codified structures, ie, the asymmetrical, Constitution-eroding enactment of critically key legislation fortifying a select number of essentially linked security agencies -- and the concurrent mass mesmerization-hypnosis, certainly a large-scale delusion, based on a generalized and collective mass fear, once again approaching -- not necessarily achieving -- psychotic, and so, halucinatory-like proportions.
This sociopolitical dyad of the offending/offended and psychologically paralyzed into nonaction can, and -- in the view of relatively more sensible, oppression-resisting, rational, and psychologically healthy people, lying aside, in the same can of sardines as, their mentally afflicted cohorts -- have, in fact, coexisted concomitantly, the clinically posited (Desmetian) interactive, recycling, interdependent and morbid co-pathologies of the two, notwithstanding.
Much thanks.
malone issue isn't that breggin disagrees with him or desmet. the issue is that breggin has been defaming malone with unfounded personal attacks. that's what the lawsuit is about.
The Desmet issue is a large part of that.
Malone has insinuated in a lot of his writing that there are global predators. You are incorrect.
Then ask yourself why Malone is supporting and promoting Desmet, who does not believe in global predators in the same way that Breggin does.
For Desmet, there are and are not manipulators. Read what he says. Does Malone employ the same strategy-- there are "predators" but no grand conspiracy?
One example of many. https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/global-news-a-global-passport-for
Exactly!
Seems to me mass delusion or "mass formation" is the PLAN of the perpetrators! Think they don't know how to engineer it?
Three Roles Identified
Agreed -- thus supporting my view that BOTH 1) the (complex of offenses committed by the) establishment perps are prima facie indictments of their deeply immoral and illegal criminality, AND that the offenses, both in and of themselves and, based on their effects arousing fear, terror, and loathing, led 2) the weak-minded among us to assume a Stockholm Syndrome-like delusion/hypnosis/psychosis posture vis-a-vis their criminal offenders and perceived masters/captors.
At the same time, 3) the more strongly individualized and willed among us see the oppressors in no such permanently dominant and pernicious roles, but rather, in their concerted effort or conspiracy, to attempt to intimidate and weaken their prey, while developing specific strategies and tactics to resist, oppose, out-maneuver, and eventually overcome and defeat the committers of murderous aggression in the acts of culling, depopulating, and killing off
We, the strong ones in this, what appears more and more as The Greatest Struggle, know that the simple genius and indescribable elegance by which our immune systems work to defend and protect -- even to immunize -- us against offensive harm is, part and parcel, our endless inspiration and perennial guide to survival. So, keep it natural, and, as our dedicated Marines so often advise, stay frosty.
Hit the nail on the head. Desmet says there was no conspiracy to induce a mass formation. This is why he introduces the Sierpinski triangle, to convince us there was no conspiracy, only the appearance of conspiracy.
Desmet did not illuminate what you just said; he obscured it. Now we circle back and ask: why is Malone supporting that theory? It's a question, not an accusation. Why is he suing the Breggins?
Many argue that it's all a matter of interpreting Desmet. No, it is not. We break apart the concepts and we see their references (OK, we can get fancy and call it their "ontological status") and we must conclude that according to Desmet, nothing was planned in the sense that many of us believe it was.
actually, desmet does conclude that the criminals are liable for their crimes. his thesis is these kind of conspiracies are self organizing and don't require a criminal mastermind that controls it from the top down but that doesn't mean that people aren't responsible for their part in perpetuating it. desmet is trying to explain where the "maddening of crowds" comes from.
The truth of the matter is that it was all planned a long time ago. A final act in the Greatest Show on Earth.
https://alphaandomegacloud.wordpress.com/covid-19-summary/
Do you really believe that Covid-19 was "self-organizing" and that some people simply took advantage of it?
Then no one anywhere is trying to impose a world government on us and actively working for that (planning and conspiring) in order to monitor, manage, and control everyone on the planet and destroy individual self-determination?
So was Covid-19 simply a "maddening of crowds"? Or was it orchestrated by a world-wide, coordinated and vicious suppression of safe and effective drugs and a world-wide, coordinated emphasis on lockdowns and a world-wide creation of a medical police state? None of that was "necessary" and many of what Desmet calls "the smartest pigs in the room" (referring to Orwell,) the virologists, protested against the insanity. Yet Desmet says we believed the "smartest pigs" not because of active deception, but because we, the people, were and are captured by a mechanistic ideology.
Was that really true?
Our leaders "took advantage" of nothing. They actively steered the ship to induce fear in the population so that they could try out their police state and hopefully get everyone to vaccine passports. Not one single thing that happened was mechanistically "necessary," as Desmet seems to want us to believe.
do yourself a favor and find an interview with desmet. i'm just giving you a broad brushstroke that doesn't do his theory justice and your desription above isn't even close to his theory.
I've watched several interviews of Desmet and have read and re-read his book. Suggest you look more closely at what he says, the identities he sets forwards, and the contradictions in what he says as well as how closely his identities match reality.
You write like an attorneyтАжa very good one, I might add.
I actually cried when, after reading the Apology and the Crito, I completed the Phaedo, way back.
What could the hemlock comprise as to be such a powerful agent of inspiration to lovers of reason and justice? I wondered.
Breggins say he didnt' just buy into it, but that the talk of it 'diagnoses' the public, which then permits the global predators to claim the masses are 'sick' and to use draconian measures to lock all the psychotics up. Breggins even share examples of this happening to some folk, entirely unjustifiably but none the less, hauled off by compliant no brain cops in some countries.
Except mass formation, according to the theory, occurs through state-sponsored propaganda on a vulnerable population. Doesn't make sense to lock up the true believers. Whether the "diagnosis" existed or not, those going against the state narrative get locked up in these authoritarian movements.
Then there was a conspiracy of state-sponsored propaganda on the population that induced a mass formation. We were not "vulnerable" prior to that. Think back. For the most part we simply lived normal lives and had cares and concerns and anxieties and loves and relationships and children and family and friends, and we enjoyed being together in parks, at concerts, in restaurants and bars, etc. We did not go around with mechanistic thinking in our heads, like robots just ready to be swept up in the slightest whiff of government propaganda. The only thing spontaneous about the mass formation during Covid was the resistance.
It was planned. Desmet says it was not.
Indeed, yet anyone expendable gets locked up, and all the useless eaters are (to the globals). Certainly the half-wits.
The glow-balls are the half-wits, they talk a load of balls about vaccines being our saviour and 'have another pill' to cure the effects of the previous pill.
Bunch of loonies I call them, they are the useless eaters. They can take their glowing balls and shove them....
I'm sorry, I got carried away there, I hope you don't mind. I can always delete.
I agree. The globalists are the useless eaters. How about rebranding them as such?
Yeah, I'm just saying the end point is always the same in these authoritarian movements whether someone posits Mass Formation theory or not - the dissidents get locked up and the movement eventually eats its own.
agree Doug