I thought that the claims by the Breggins were addressed by Desmet in a recent substack? I've heard Dr. Breggin speak about his own book. It appears that the infighting has begun. It is unfortunate, as it leaves many of us with information that creates further head-spinning we must sort through.
I thought that the claims by the Breggins were addressed by Desmet in a recent substack? I've heard Dr. Breggin speak about his own book. It appears that the infighting has begun. It is unfortunate, as it leaves many of us with information that creates further head-spinning we must sort through.
At this point, I think this parallels the nature vs nurture battle. Clearly, a combination of evil intentions, coupled with massive brain-washing techniques have rendered many hypnotized. History shows us that people will carry out very evil acts when in such a state. Essentially, both Desmet and Breggin each have a piece of the puzzle.
Every day I am grateful for my suspicious nature that rendered me able to see through (eventually) the lies. I also remain grateful for all fighting for truth. United we stand.
I read Desmet's book, and before I ever read the Breggins' review, I was appalled and very disturbed Chapter 8, "Conspiracy and Ideology", so much so that I put the book aside, planning not to finish it. I did finally read the last part, which I liked, but was still very uneasy that he could have written Chapter 8, which I considered little more than an incoherent, self-contradictory spewing of the "conspiracy theorist" propaganda we get from the MSM.
I then read the Breggins' article, which I largely agreed with but thought they misrepresented Desmet's overall theory of mass formation. Then I read Desmet's apologia and did not find it satisfactory.
This information is hugely revealing and upsetting to say the least. I will add that I knew of and admired Dr Breggins from before this whole "covid" psyop and have faith in his integrity and sincerity (even while understanding that that does not necessarily mean every part of his arguments are completely valid). Mattias Desmet I have known only since I've seen him interviewed by Reiner Fuellmich and several other video channels, and through his book.
I had the same reaction, putting the book aside when he started calling "conspiracy theorists" mentally unbalanced -- well, I nearly threw it across the room. I never did finish it.
I've found psychologists and psychiatrists to be self aggrandizing, narcissists who're trying to figure out their own fked up lives. Never trusted them, never will. Read the Bible, you'll find direction and how to behave morally and ethically. The Torah is so honest it holds our forefathers accountable for their bad behaviors. What other canonized religion refuses to whitewash its own failings and seeks to correct them?
I saw a few interviews with DeSmet and found most of what he said about the mass psychosis to be according to what I saw myself. But I was not convinced about the rest and decided against buying his book. Thanks for the warning, I will certainly not buy it.
Yeah I think you are having a visceral reaction to the label Conspiracy Theorist. Keep in mind that Desmet is a professor in Europe and they may look at differently than we do here in the US and right of center. One could argue that the vaxx proponents are a form of Conspiracy Theorists who happen to have large groups and political power. But I also have not read his book.
Oh, he was using "conspiracy theorist" in basically the way it is used here. He gave a definition of "conspiracy" that was straight out of a CIA talking points manual, and his whole discussion was classic say (or imply) that people who see bad actors, planned manipulation, and actual conspiracies are "nuts". I'm not saying he necessarily did that as an "intelligence" asset; it is entirely likely he is quite brainwashed on the subject. After all, he is part of the academic world and I can tell you from first-hand experience, that is a very brainwashed world indeed.
For a more complete understanding of Desmet, perhaps you should watch his interview with Tucker Carlson. Putting down a book before finishing it is dumb.
Well, I did finish the book and I still found Chapter 8 appalling and extremely disturbing. I don't understand your logic in suggesting that a person who has actually read *most* of the book is "dumb" to decide finishing it isn't worth her valuable time. Chapter 8 is followed by Part 3, which while I liked it, is mostly a discussion of the philosophy of science and in no way undoes the damage he did in his "conspiracy theorist" diatribe. And, honestly, it is perfectly reasonable and far from "dumb" to decide not to finish a book for any number of good reasons, including that the author has shown poor reasoning, and compromised argumentation.
I bought a book by a scientist I thusfar had admired for great articles. The book was a gathering of good and bad articles and I did not finish it. By a third into it I had already discovered two mayor mistakes and did not even take it to the second hand shop. I threw it in the garbage. It has lots of great critics online. I put on mine, did we read the same book ?
Yours is the argument I could count on hearing from all my former university students who had no intellectual curiosity. You aren't being invited to "like" a book like this; we read books like Desmet's in order to consider them critically and analytically. Whether we "like" a book is immaterial. It's difficult to imagine what could be more valuable than being exposed to a new perspective on the world, especially at this time in world history. Desmet's having come onto an hypothesis of mass formation is a valuable contribution to understand the uniqueness and danger of this moment. He deserves our respect and we owe ourselves the experience of reading all of it.
The chapter on conspiracy does not belong in the book. I suspect his editor and publisher required this chapter as the price of publication. IMO--Mathias Desmet sold his integrity for a few shekels.
I had similar thoughts about it, or that he wrote it late, under time constraints, without thinking it through very carefully. However, I'm more inclined now to think that this is just something he hasn't thought through at all, and has just absorbed and internalized the pervasive propaganda. The incoherence and contradictions in that chapter are jarring in comparison to the rest of the book.
I reread Chapter 8 this afternoon and revise my original impression. I am left to wonder if the managerial elites are equally victims of mass psychosis, albeit of a different category than the manipulated public. I am reminded of Leo Strauss's argument for the noble lie. Then--I remember psychopathy and further wonder if there is an intraspecies predator(psychopaths) who manipulates the managerial role in the modern world. Curiouser and curiouser!
Yes... I believe you are completely on to something. Nazi J von Ribbentrop still pledged allegiance to Hitler after his own conviction and death sentence at Nuremberg. During his trial, he actually tried to say that Hitler had deceived him and that he didn’t know Hitler didn’t want peace. This was obviously rejected as false. Even after trying to deny blame for Nazi crimes, he was quoted as saying that if Hitler came to his prison cell he would still do whatever Hitler asked of him. Sounds like psychosis
And I would add, not liking a book can often be a perfectly acceptable response, and does not necessarily indicate that the reader has not understood it, or engaged with it, or considered its arguments. In fact, it's possible to understand a piece of writing very well, even agree with it, and not "like" it. And with many types of books, not liking it, not enjoying the experience of reading it, can be as good a reason as any not to finish it. We are not your students seeking a good grade on the latest assignment.
Huh? How do you come to the conclusion that you can characterize anything I wrote here as simply saying I didn't "like" Desmet's book. I made a pretty clear statement of what I found wrong with it. And yes, I did mention that there were parts I liked, but I didn't think a comment on this Substack was a place for an extended and detailed review of the book. I assure you, I have gone into more lengthy analyses of Desmet's book and the Breggins' critique of it in emails and discussions with friends, but I don't think a comment on someone else's writing is the appropriate place for that. And you obviously don't either, as you have simply given him your praises without penning a detailed review any more than I did, or rather, less.
Ah, now I understand why you're dumb and call people names for not doing what you think is right. You're a college professor who thinks the sun rises and sets in your butt. FYI, it doesn't. College professors are self-centered, egotistical, a$$hat$. Congrats, you're ruining the critical thinking ability of young people. 🤢🤮
On a smaller scale like reading half way through a online comment and understanding where its going and where it is not. In some cases I'd throw the book down and give it a book across the room. The dog is free to make of the book on the floor what he will.
He did and there are nuances to his explanation, that didn't leave me feeling comfortable. I can't speak to his intent, and I operate on the assumption of "good intent" until I'm proven wrong. I found much of what Desmet said to be reasonable - with some concerns - and also assumed sincerity.
I think the Breggins - who have been aware of the march towards totalitarianism a long time and have been warning humanity - are sincere as well.
That is the hope that the Great Reset instils in anti-vaxxers. That's why they are pushing this Great Reset nonsense
You are already enslaved... actually farmed is a better term ... they control you by paying you.
They already own everything because they own the Reserve Currency.
What they are doing is exterminating us ... before we hit a critical point and BAU collapses - that would put 8B very angry predators on the streets in the dark ... hungry.
Fortunately the men who run the show recognize that -- and are doing something to head that off.
Shale binge has spoiled US reserves, top investor warns Financial Times.
Preface. Conventional crude oil production may have already peaked in 2008 at 69.5 million barrels per day (mb/d) according to Europe’s International Energy Agency (IEA 2018 p45). The U.S. Energy Information Agency shows global peak crude oil production at a later date in 2018 at 82.9 mb/d (EIA 2020) because they included tight oil, oil sands, and deep-sea oil. Though it will take several years of lower oil production to be sure the peak occurred. Regardless, world production has been on a plateau since 2005.
What’s saved the world from oil decline was unconventional tight “fracked” oil, which accounted for 63% of total U.S. crude oil production in 2019 and 83% of global oil growth from 2009 to 2019. So it’s a big deal if we’ve reached the peak of fracked oil, because that is also the peak of both conventional and unconventional oil and the decline of all oil in the future.
I don't get why we didn't build more fission reactors to cool the spent fuel ponds, and just scale that up until we have other new energy systems, though.
How about you test this out -- turn off your power - use no petrol -- and don't buy any food (cuz that food involves loads of fossil fuels in its production) for a week.
Then come back and tell us about it (no internet... don't cheat)
I thought that the claims by the Breggins were addressed by Desmet in a recent substack? I've heard Dr. Breggin speak about his own book. It appears that the infighting has begun. It is unfortunate, as it leaves many of us with information that creates further head-spinning we must sort through.
At this point, I think this parallels the nature vs nurture battle. Clearly, a combination of evil intentions, coupled with massive brain-washing techniques have rendered many hypnotized. History shows us that people will carry out very evil acts when in such a state. Essentially, both Desmet and Breggin each have a piece of the puzzle.
Every day I am grateful for my suspicious nature that rendered me able to see through (eventually) the lies. I also remain grateful for all fighting for truth. United we stand.
I read Desmet's book, and before I ever read the Breggins' review, I was appalled and very disturbed Chapter 8, "Conspiracy and Ideology", so much so that I put the book aside, planning not to finish it. I did finally read the last part, which I liked, but was still very uneasy that he could have written Chapter 8, which I considered little more than an incoherent, self-contradictory spewing of the "conspiracy theorist" propaganda we get from the MSM.
I then read the Breggins' article, which I largely agreed with but thought they misrepresented Desmet's overall theory of mass formation. Then I read Desmet's apologia and did not find it satisfactory.
This information is hugely revealing and upsetting to say the least. I will add that I knew of and admired Dr Breggins from before this whole "covid" psyop and have faith in his integrity and sincerity (even while understanding that that does not necessarily mean every part of his arguments are completely valid). Mattias Desmet I have known only since I've seen him interviewed by Reiner Fuellmich and several other video channels, and through his book.
I had the same reaction, putting the book aside when he started calling "conspiracy theorists" mentally unbalanced -- well, I nearly threw it across the room. I never did finish it.
I've found psychologists and psychiatrists to be self aggrandizing, narcissists who're trying to figure out their own fked up lives. Never trusted them, never will. Read the Bible, you'll find direction and how to behave morally and ethically. The Torah is so honest it holds our forefathers accountable for their bad behaviors. What other canonized religion refuses to whitewash its own failings and seeks to correct them?
I saw a few interviews with DeSmet and found most of what he said about the mass psychosis to be according to what I saw myself. But I was not convinced about the rest and decided against buying his book. Thanks for the warning, I will certainly not buy it.
I love that one!! Since we'll be the only ones not dead of a COVID jab, you could be right.
Yeah I think you are having a visceral reaction to the label Conspiracy Theorist. Keep in mind that Desmet is a professor in Europe and they may look at differently than we do here in the US and right of center. One could argue that the vaxx proponents are a form of Conspiracy Theorists who happen to have large groups and political power. But I also have not read his book.
Oh, he was using "conspiracy theorist" in basically the way it is used here. He gave a definition of "conspiracy" that was straight out of a CIA talking points manual, and his whole discussion was classic say (or imply) that people who see bad actors, planned manipulation, and actual conspiracies are "nuts". I'm not saying he necessarily did that as an "intelligence" asset; it is entirely likely he is quite brainwashed on the subject. After all, he is part of the academic world and I can tell you from first-hand experience, that is a very brainwashed world indeed.
For a more complete understanding of Desmet, perhaps you should watch his interview with Tucker Carlson. Putting down a book before finishing it is dumb.
Well, I did finish the book and I still found Chapter 8 appalling and extremely disturbing. I don't understand your logic in suggesting that a person who has actually read *most* of the book is "dumb" to decide finishing it isn't worth her valuable time. Chapter 8 is followed by Part 3, which while I liked it, is mostly a discussion of the philosophy of science and in no way undoes the damage he did in his "conspiracy theorist" diatribe. And, honestly, it is perfectly reasonable and far from "dumb" to decide not to finish a book for any number of good reasons, including that the author has shown poor reasoning, and compromised argumentation.
I bought a book by a scientist I thusfar had admired for great articles. The book was a gathering of good and bad articles and I did not finish it. By a third into it I had already discovered two mayor mistakes and did not even take it to the second hand shop. I threw it in the garbage. It has lots of great critics online. I put on mine, did we read the same book ?
Yours is the argument I could count on hearing from all my former university students who had no intellectual curiosity. You aren't being invited to "like" a book like this; we read books like Desmet's in order to consider them critically and analytically. Whether we "like" a book is immaterial. It's difficult to imagine what could be more valuable than being exposed to a new perspective on the world, especially at this time in world history. Desmet's having come onto an hypothesis of mass formation is a valuable contribution to understand the uniqueness and danger of this moment. He deserves our respect and we owe ourselves the experience of reading all of it.
The chapter on conspiracy does not belong in the book. I suspect his editor and publisher required this chapter as the price of publication. IMO--Mathias Desmet sold his integrity for a few shekels.
I had similar thoughts about it, or that he wrote it late, under time constraints, without thinking it through very carefully. However, I'm more inclined now to think that this is just something he hasn't thought through at all, and has just absorbed and internalized the pervasive propaganda. The incoherence and contradictions in that chapter are jarring in comparison to the rest of the book.
I reread Chapter 8 this afternoon and revise my original impression. I am left to wonder if the managerial elites are equally victims of mass psychosis, albeit of a different category than the manipulated public. I am reminded of Leo Strauss's argument for the noble lie. Then--I remember psychopathy and further wonder if there is an intraspecies predator(psychopaths) who manipulates the managerial role in the modern world. Curiouser and curiouser!
Yes... I believe you are completely on to something. Nazi J von Ribbentrop still pledged allegiance to Hitler after his own conviction and death sentence at Nuremberg. During his trial, he actually tried to say that Hitler had deceived him and that he didn’t know Hitler didn’t want peace. This was obviously rejected as false. Even after trying to deny blame for Nazi crimes, he was quoted as saying that if Hitler came to his prison cell he would still do whatever Hitler asked of him. Sounds like psychosis
And I would add, not liking a book can often be a perfectly acceptable response, and does not necessarily indicate that the reader has not understood it, or engaged with it, or considered its arguments. In fact, it's possible to understand a piece of writing very well, even agree with it, and not "like" it. And with many types of books, not liking it, not enjoying the experience of reading it, can be as good a reason as any not to finish it. We are not your students seeking a good grade on the latest assignment.
Huh? How do you come to the conclusion that you can characterize anything I wrote here as simply saying I didn't "like" Desmet's book. I made a pretty clear statement of what I found wrong with it. And yes, I did mention that there were parts I liked, but I didn't think a comment on this Substack was a place for an extended and detailed review of the book. I assure you, I have gone into more lengthy analyses of Desmet's book and the Breggins' critique of it in emails and discussions with friends, but I don't think a comment on someone else's writing is the appropriate place for that. And you obviously don't either, as you have simply given him your praises without penning a detailed review any more than I did, or rather, less.
Ah, now I understand why you're dumb and call people names for not doing what you think is right. You're a college professor who thinks the sun rises and sets in your butt. FYI, it doesn't. College professors are self-centered, egotistical, a$$hat$. Congrats, you're ruining the critical thinking ability of young people. 🤢🤮
On a smaller scale like reading half way through a online comment and understanding where its going and where it is not. In some cases I'd throw the book down and give it a book across the room. The dog is free to make of the book on the floor what he will.
Calling someone names because they don't like what they're reading that they bought and paid for, is dumb.
I rarely finish a book.
You and Samuel Johnson! Good company.
He did and there are nuances to his explanation, that didn't leave me feeling comfortable. I can't speak to his intent, and I operate on the assumption of "good intent" until I'm proven wrong. I found much of what Desmet said to be reasonable - with some concerns - and also assumed sincerity.
I think the Breggins - who have been aware of the march towards totalitarianism a long time and have been warning humanity - are sincere as well.
It all tends to come out in the end.
So mass distraction BS, Kathleen. And that is why we're going to end up slaves or dead.
No one is ending up a slave.
We will win.
And it's mass induced psychosis from henceforth.
That is the hope that the Great Reset instils in anti-vaxxers. That's why they are pushing this Great Reset nonsense
You are already enslaved... actually farmed is a better term ... they control you by paying you.
They already own everything because they own the Reserve Currency.
What they are doing is exterminating us ... before we hit a critical point and BAU collapses - that would put 8B very angry predators on the streets in the dark ... hungry.
Fortunately the men who run the show recognize that -- and are doing something to head that off.
Shale binge has spoiled US reserves, top investor warns Financial Times.
Preface. Conventional crude oil production may have already peaked in 2008 at 69.5 million barrels per day (mb/d) according to Europe’s International Energy Agency (IEA 2018 p45). The U.S. Energy Information Agency shows global peak crude oil production at a later date in 2018 at 82.9 mb/d (EIA 2020) because they included tight oil, oil sands, and deep-sea oil. Though it will take several years of lower oil production to be sure the peak occurred. Regardless, world production has been on a plateau since 2005.
What’s saved the world from oil decline was unconventional tight “fracked” oil, which accounted for 63% of total U.S. crude oil production in 2019 and 83% of global oil growth from 2009 to 2019. So it’s a big deal if we’ve reached the peak of fracked oil, because that is also the peak of both conventional and unconventional oil and the decline of all oil in the future.
Some key points from this Financial Times article: https://energyskeptic.com/2021/the-end-of-fracked-shale-oil/
The full plan https://www.headsupster.com/forumthread?shortId=220
I don't get why we didn't build more fission reactors to cool the spent fuel ponds, and just scale that up until we have other new energy systems, though.
Oh?
How about you test this out -- turn off your power - use no petrol -- and don't buy any food (cuz that food involves loads of fossil fuels in its production) for a week.
Then come back and tell us about it (no internet... don't cheat)
I pray you are right.
Nah. Humans win.
perhaps, to potentially engage in a false dichotomy, truth cannot exist without lies...?