I get sooooo, tired of arguing with the Useful Idiots, the Space Fillers, the Zombies, the Walking Abortions that they call Millennials that are so generous they are willing to share your Hard Earned surplus with themselves. At the same time they keep you from being promoted, or prevent you from getting a job, or fire you for using your First Amendment Right, they are bull of their feelings of Moral Superiority and Self Righteousness which makes them feel Entitled to share everything they want that you possess with themselves. The NAZIs came from the Liberal Progressives, not the Conservative Right. They are like the people that shop at Whole Foods Ignorance is not a Virtue, but the real Privilege is that of the Useless Generation that having contribute nothing to Society or the World feels Entitled to the Best of Everything that they haven’t earned the right to. They are nothing but easily manipulated Pawns that can’t think for themselves and are dangerous to everyone INCLUDING themselves. If they wanted to save the World they would go Kill themselves but they are not that Altruistic having no Moral Virtue and being completely self-Interested and Consciously Evil. They were raised under the Unconditional Love of the False Moral Authority of the Toxic Mother who was only interested in Usurping the Authority of the Father in the form of the God of Reason. These Useful Idiots were indoctrinated into having a Mordred Complex. They have been completely indoctrinated into the External Authority of Liberal Progressives and they have NO ability to think Critically or Analytically or even to recognize the Authority of Reason…
When I was living in Everette with Betsy Appleton after my terrible break up with my psychologist girl friend, I got to spend some time with the horses that Betsy was in charge of. One horse in particular caught our eye, his name was Denny. Denny had a great personality and a relatively short torso, but he was skittish and nervous. Most people don’t know this but horses can be very specieist, very prejudiced, and mean spirited. In Denny’s coral there were two other horses, taller than Denny and a donkey.
Denny would play with the Donkey as though he were a donkey, he would play donkey games. Donkeys will stand shoulder to shoulder and then act as though they are going to bite the knees of the other donkey, when this happens the correct response is to drop onto your knees so they are out of range. When the other donkey stops trying to bite your knees you leap up and try to bite his knees. He drops down and the game continues. (stop looking at me like that, I didn’t invent the game…)
Well, the other horses thought themselves too good to fraternize with a donkey and they punished Denny by constantly biting him on the ass, these bites were more than gently playing, they frequently drew blood and Denny had scars all over his ass for befriending a donkey and treating him as an equal and a friend.
Denny was unbroken and we were worried that if another trainer tried to break him they wouldn’t understand his hyper-vigilance and mistrust of others. We were familiar with the training methods of other trainers and we were afraid that they would become frustrated and abusive with Denny, not realizing what a truly large heart he had and what great character. He couldn’t be broken like other horses.
I used my knowledge of the occult, which is really just psychology when you get down to it, and devised a breaking technique that was untried, and, well, invented by myself.
My plan was to over stimulate Denny’s orientation response, until he relaxed it and stopped being paranoid.
The orienting response (OR), also called orienting reflex, is an organism’s immediate response to a change in its environment, when that change is not sudden enough to elicit the startle reflex. The phenomenon was first described by Russian physiologist Ivan Sechenov in his 1863 book Reflexes of the Brain, and the term (‘ориентировочный рефлекс’ in Russian) was coined by Ivan Pavlov, who also referred to it as the Shto takoe? (Что такое? or What is it?) reflex. The orienting response is a reaction to novel or significant stimuli. In the 1950s the orienting response was studied systematically by the Russian scientist Evgeny Sokolov, who documented the phenomenon called “habituation“, referring to a gradual “familiarity effect” and reduction of the orienting response with repeated stimulus presentations.
We would walk around him first in one direction and then in the other, he would try to follow us with his eyes, and that would make him dizzy, and then eventually he would get tired of following us with his eyes, realizing that we weren’t doing anything to harm him and he would sigh and relax. Then we would reverse directions and circumambulate him yet again, this time slapping him all over with some vigor so that he could hear the sound of your strokes. He would tense up and become suspicious of us yet again and then relax his orienting response again. By this time he was in a Euphoric Catharsis.
Long story short we broke him to saddle in 1 month, and we sold him for a decent price to an owner that loved and appreciated him. I actually got to ride him on one of our regular routes, he was a little smaller than average but he was strong, and he was responsive, and he was affectionate and attentive. A great horse, he participated, he tried to get along with everybody and fit in. He was concernful of everybody.
Just one of those many experiences that I am glad to have had, that set me apart and make me different. Part of the reason I don’t see things the way other people do.
Dr. Stylianos Atechlys known as Daskalos (Teacher) once said that obsession is demonic possession. Something I have always thought was interesting is how quickly people introduce you to their issues. I believe that things end as they begin so I am always very interested in the first meeting I have with a person. How they approach relationship. The initial approach. If relationship is an approaching where two people begin to understand each other, than how we approach relationship is how we approach approaching. In the initial approach does the person approach authenticly and honestly or do they approach strategically? Do they approach me as a superior talking to a subordinate? Forcing a frame and trying to get me to participate? or do they approach me looking pathetic and trying to elicit sympathy? Do they approach me telling me how awesome they are and expecting me to agree? In the case of Charles Manson the first thing you see is the swastika carved into the middle of his forehead.
People flaunt their issues and attract attention to their issues. How many times do you start a conversation and the person ends it by saying, “god bless.” or “All I need to know is do you believe in Jesus?” The fact of the matter is that I do believe in Jesus but not the Jesus you believe in. I believe that Jesus in the quintessence, the fifth element, he was the incarnation of reason which is why they called him the Logoish, and I believe that god is the faculty of reason in man. So should I say no or yes?
The fact of the matter is that people are either rational and in relationship with truth and reality (which is much, much, rarer than you think) or they cling to morbid emotions and delusions and psychosis. Some people are traumatized in certain areas, and rational in others. When you stimulate a certain issue they enter a refractory state, but each individual has to be responsible for their own mental and emotional health and willing and desiring of being a whole person.
In relationship people will ask you in some form or another “are you a good person?” and this is stupid because psychopaths conceal their emotional morbidity and misrepresent themselves. They are manipulative. Psychopaths have to do the wrong things, they have to do things psychopathicly in order to work their will and attain their good. So stop asking people if they are good people, figure it out for yourself, stop exposing yourself to being manipulated, learn to recognize the behavior and challenge people to be mentally and emotionally healthy.
One of these people always lies and one of them always tells the truth. If I ask, “are you a good person?” the psychopath is going to be the first to respond very convincingly in the positive and they will probably even have reasons why they are a good person.
People understand themselves and agree with themselves. Contemplate that for a second. The world view of the individual makes them correct in their behavior. In order for them to be correct in doing certain things they have to perceive the world in a certain way. This is their gestalt. This is their philosophy, their soul. The problem is that people don’t enter relationship to understand the other person in the relationship which is a necessity. You have to understand how the other person in the relationship thinks. You have to understand the human organism. You have to understand yourself, only in understanding yourself correctly can you understand other people correctly in relationship to yourself. You have to understand the logical fallacies and the cognitive biases. You have to know your issues, what stimulates your issues, what puts you in refractory states, when you are in a refractory state should you act and what actions should you take, and how do you get out of a refractory state and back into a positive mental and emotional state. Do you act when you are in relationship with your morbid emotions? When do you act? Do you get good results, do you get the result that you desired? Why not? Why are you trying to get the result that you are trying to get? Why do you desire that result? Are your relationships based on shared diseases? or on allying yourself with the better angels of others?
The Psychopath has to attack. They can’t not attack. They can’t keep themselves from attacking and they are looking for people to attack and reasons to attack. They don’t have self discipline or self control. They can’t stop looking for the thing that they hate so they can kill it. Recent research suggests that feeling thwarted is the source of anger. Based on my Shared State Theory of Communication, we communicate whatever state we are in. So if we are in a state of feeling thwarted, we communicate thwartedness, and we want to thwart. But antagonizing the problem is not necessarily moving towards the solution. To use my terms something happened to the person that they never want to happen again, a state they want to avoid, but the psychopath is in relationship with desiring to kill the thing that they perceive as the cause of the state they want to avoid. But in doing so they are constantly restimulating the refractory state reminding them of the state they want to avoid. Which means they are keeping themselves in a permanent refractory state permanently, which Paul Eckman says is the same as being insane. They are obsessed with the thing they are trying to get away from. The only way the can rest is if that thing ceases to exist in reality. So we have the form of the conquest.