A new term must from henceforth be deployed: Mass Induced Psychosis.
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 don't think this kind of post is helpful, really. Zoning in on particular people when we have far bigger problems to address.
Also, v briefly, I don't believe the mass formation theory indemnifies the actual perpetrators; I think it just goes some way in explaining how they get away with it as part of their plan. Some are susceptible to it, some aren't.
None of is perfect. We all have history and things that we might chance if we had the chance to go back again. We are living through an incredibly difficult period. Many of us who are ‘awake’ to any extent are struggling to know who we can believe and some of those whom we thought were acting from a place of sincerity and truth are being revealed as either having been misled themselves or are insincere.
I have grave doubts as whether this ‘outing’ of people is helpful. Personally, I take everything with a large pinch of salt. I am drawn to some more than others but I take no-one’s word as gospel. I have to believe something/someone though otherwise how on earth are we going to get through this nightmare?
CJ Hopkins has said as much in his recent exchange with MAA:
“The same people that conformed to the old structure of power (simulated democracy) are conforming to the new structure (pathologized totalitarianism). Their conformity looks different, not because the people have changed, but because the structure of power has changed.”
“It’s a red herring because it focuses your attention on the result rather than on the cause. You don’t defeat totalitarianism by ‘curing’ people of mass psychosis. You end the mass psychosis by dismantling the totalitarianism that caused it.”
“To those who are upset that I called Desmet’s theory a red herring ... my point is simple. It’s a red herring because the causality of the phenomenon is reversed. Mass psychosis doesn’t cause totalitarianism. Totalitarianism causes mass psychosis. Always. It is an essential part of the structure of totalitarianism. The people who conform to the dominant system of power will conform to ANY dominant system of power. Change the structure of the system of power, and their conformity to it will look different.”
Agreed. Mass Induced Psychosis is a more appropriate label since most, if not all, of the catastrophes we have witnessed worldwide, especially since 9/11, have been completely orchestrated events.
I finally understand your problem with Desmet. You finally got through to me on this.
However, the matter of agency can be, “both Desmet and Elite Theory are right.” It’s not either/or.
Elite Theory I think explains a lot of how the world has worked, continues to work, and always will work.
But Desmet’s theory explains how the masses are susceptible to believing in what the Elites tell them.
So if you believe that there are Elites that want to destroy the present standards of living and liberal society, to “build back better”, e.g. form a world government and totalitarianism without the ability to escape…STILL you can believe easily enough in Desmet’s theory about how people will drink the Koolaid, and how 30% of them will never change their minds and will adhere to what they were first told, and how there will be some who don’t believe it and will never believe it and who can break free…
I don’t see it as a binary thing. Both theories are correct.
Anybody that studies Jonestown, Waco, Germany in 1938, etc HAS to contemplate what happened to the people who followed and did horrible things to others. In my own contemplations there was a strong drive to look for a single bullet as the root cause: "It was Jim Jones!" "It was Adoph Hitler!" "It was Pol Pot!" Find that source causality and eliminate it and you eliminate the problem, right?
It's just not that simple. There ARE predators among us, no doubt. But the deeper question in the sorts of cases I just mentioned is WHY do they gain traction? What sort of power do they have over their followers that would take what appear to be regular folks and turn them into monsters (please do not read me to say we should have any pity for the likes Jospeh Goebbels and his ilk--they were monsters who were attracted to somebody that would let them be the full psychopaths they in fact were). How did a church goer and family man become the ghoul that (relucantly or not) was responsible for dropping zyklon gas into the showers at Auschwitz-Birkenau?
Desmet is wrestling with that problem. He is actually building on the earlier work by author, Gustav Le Bon, who's amazing work The_Crowd:_A_Study_of_the_Popular_Mind was mind blowing for me. Look him up--I think the work, published in 1895, is available online for free (if it hasn't been purged!)
Desmet is asking a fair question: How did this happen? How did 2/3 of the western world completely fall for the storyline spun by the likes of a little bespectacled wart and his scarf-wearing hand maiden? What super power did they wield that captured the minds of otherwise brilliant people and made them shut down their businesses, inject their babies, scream at non-compliant friends and family?
The stark answer is something like "because we wanted them to."
Le Bon's basic thesis is just the opposite of what we first think: People get the leaders they, as a crowd, want. We, as a crowd, select for the answers we in our heart desire. The effective leader simply discerns what strings to pluck that will resonate with what we want. In that view, if Hitler had been eliminated in 1932 by a freak bus accident, the German people would have simply "found" another purveyor like him to take his place.
I've read the Breggin's book and found it helpful.
I've read Desmet's recent defense of his view point and found it very compelling and much more nuanced look into my own heart and thinking.
I'm willing to accept both at this point as different viewpoints contemplating the problem that humanity is. The name calling isn't helpful. I would imagine that even the Breggin's have failures in their practice that they aren't proud of. I found their accusation of Desmet's "failure" (if indeed, it is true) as a cheap shot.
Folks, we are the problem. Desmet and Le Bon are asking each of us to look deeply in our soul's mirror and imagine that darkness lives there.
“The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either -- but right through every human heart -- and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. And even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained”
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago 1918–1956
Thank you. This is amazing information. We need it. We need all the facts we can get. By the way, I tremendously appreciate the term you use for what has been done to people: Mass Induced Psychosis. INDUCED - it puts the responsibility on the inducers. It does not soften what has been done with the minimizer word: formation. It is accurate. And wow!! What incredible arrogance on the part of Mattias Desmet, to believe he knows a mass murderer (hundreds of murders) will murder no more, because Desmet has such utter faith in his therapeutic approach.
Perfect timing, I just saw this interview with Peter Breggin, the first 15 minutes of the video, going over the Malone/Desmet issues.
This just in from Robert Malone: "The “personality” launching the attack is an MD with Pharmaceutical industry experience . . . ."
Well, I don't know any MD without pharmaceutical industry experience. And I doubt that any MD, pre-Covid, had been as big a thorn in the side of the pharmaceutical industry as Peter Breggin. So that sounds to me a little misleading, to put it mildly. It's a bit like saying that Ralph Nader has automotive industry experience.
I myself do not have the time to get much into this debate. Suffice it to say that I never saw a need for this mass formation theory.
However, even before this column's bombshell, I would side with Breggin -- or a hairstylist or a bar tender -- over a psychoanalyst like Desmet. Breggin says psychoanalysis is a cult. I would go even further: it is an intellectually violent assault on the patient. It establishes the doctor as God, and God proclaims truth about the patient's inner psyche.
I realize that in calling a nonphysical action to be a violent assault I may sound like an SJW saying that giving an opinion is violence. But there is a crucial difference: the physician patient relationship. The patient, particularly in psychiatry, is vulnerable, and places himself in a subordinate position to the physician. It is not an equal playing field.
And psychoanalysts do not give their opinions: they give truths, often extrapolating far beyond the facts.
Not surprisingly, the psychoanalysts I have met have a marked tendency towards arrogance.
More upsetting, their patients do not improve. I have tried to work with people who have had years of psychoanalysis. Maybe at this late stage of my career I could help them, but back then I could not. Their previous treatments had done too much damage.
Mass-induced psychosis is a much better description because it, as you say, points to rather than hides the evil intent. I also like (as a descriptive term, not as a phenomenon!) trauma-based mind control. This term points to the evil intent and names the mechanism.
Let the truth prevail, but let's also give people the benefit of the doubt. I agree with previous comments that Desmet's work doesn't suggest removal of accountability for our actions due to mass formation. It simply explains our vulnerability to propaganda. Something that others have also touched on in their books.
Having said that, let the authorities tackle the issue of his accountability for concealing the crimes of a serial killer. It seems to me that there's a lot of guilt to be spread around. I'm thinking pharmaceutical companies whose drugs destroy the minds of people and induce psychosis in many known mass murderers. Not to mention an entire culture that is omnicidal and worships power and money. Then there's patriarchy itself, a relatively recent social phenomenon, which creates a system of dominance and hierarchy that distorts and deforms human relationships. One only needs to look at gonzo porn to see how young men are being taught to view the world. All of these factors come into play when we see social breakdown. The world becomes divided into the the exploiters and the exploited.
It wasn't meant to be this way. Human beings, brought up in a loving, nurturing home placed in a wise and caring community in a healthy thriving environment free from fear and scarcity simply do not manifest mass psychosis. Somehow we lost our way as a species. I fear we may never find our way back.
Mark Twain did famously post that "Like the moon, every man has a dark side almost no one sees"...
I know nothing about this controversy of mistrust concerning Dr. Robert Malone, who seemed very likeable, intelligent and believable - but at this point nothing would surprise or shock me.
The Breggins are exceedingly unhelpful in our fight against medical tyranny. I read Desmet's piece that Robert Malone published and thought Desmet handled it in a mature and reasonable fashion. The Breggins sound like nut jobs, something every movement has an element of. My biggest objection to the Breggins' critique is that Desmet is "blaming the victims." What the Breggins fail to understand is that in a mass formation, there is a symbiosis between the controllers and the controlled. The covid believers, to cite one example of mass formation, support their "superiors," don't question them, and so have an equally important role to play in mass formation. Being a victim is very fashionable these days. I think we need to consider the strong probability that the so-called victims are also agents. And then there is this: Desmet discussed this issue thoroughly in his book, which apparently the Breggins (who also seem to be in the thralls of another kind of mass formation) failed to read.
The Breggins appear to have outright lied in their review of Desmet's book and in the above article. Make of that what you will, but there's a legal concept of "false in one, false in all". Why are you publishing this bullshit? You're likely to lose readers if you keep this up.
Breggin: "We have previously described Desmet as protecting the people behind the mass murder of millions of individuals during COVID-19 by declaring that the masses originated the problem and that there was no malicious or organized planning behind it."
Desmet's book: "Is there any steering and manipulation at all then? The answer is a resounding yes, there most certainly is all kinds of manipulation. And with the means available to today’s mass media, the possibilities are simply phenomenal...
... institutions were created that make plans about what future society should look like and how the ideal future society should respond to crisis situations. The Lockstep scenario of the Rockefeller Foundation, Event 201 of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (in collaboration with John Hopkins and the Rockefeller foundation), and The Great Reset by Klaus Schwab are examples of such endeavors. For many people, these events and publications are the ultimate proof that the social developments we’re experiencing are planned and the product of a conspiracy, since long before the outbreak these “plans” described how society would go into lockdown as the result of a pandemic, that a biopassport would be introduced, and that people would be tracked and traced with subcutaneous sensors...
There are countless other examples that seem to point in the direction of a plan being implemented, such as: the fact that the definition of “pandemic” was changed shortly before the corona crisis; the definition of “herd immunity” to imply that only vaccines can achieve it; the counting method for corona deaths was adjusted by the WHO so it was higher than the number of flu deaths; that the registration methodology of vaccine side effects led to serious underestimation (by, for example, labelling those that become apparent during the first fortnight after vaccination as not vaccine-related); that all key political positions when the crisis started were held by politicians who were pro-technocracy (all people referred to as the World Economic Forum’s Young Global Leaders)."
In order of importance:
1. The perpetrators / predators are real and they must be thwarted and pursued to the fullest.
2. Mass Formation Psychosis is also real and understanding it is key to point 1.
3. "No professional should ever give himself the right to avoid reporting a confession of mass murder by one of his patients."
The Mass Formation, although not called as such, is well documented by scholars past - Arendt, Merloo et al. Desmet expanded on it in timely and helpful ways.
Desmet should be allowed to have his say and the process permitted to run its course.