by Francis Lee for the Saker Blog
The naval Battle of Copenhagen (1801) occurred during the War of the Second Coalition when a British naval fleet commanded by Admiral Sir Hyde Parker defeated a Danish fleet anchored just off Copenhagen. Vice Admiral Horatio Nelson led the main British attack. During the battle, he was famously reputed to have disobeyed his senior officer, Sir Hyde Parker’s, order to withdraw by holding the telescope to his blind eye to look at the signals from Parker. The signals had given Nelson permission to withdraw from the engagement at his discretion. Nelson then turned to his flag captain, Thomas Foley, and said ‘You know, Foley, I have only one eye. I have a right to be blind sometimes.’ He raised the telescope to his blind eye and said, ‘I really do not see the signal.’ It just goes to show that sometimes it is good policy to disobey orders. Copenhagen is often considered to be Nelson’s hardest-fought victory.
In our own time, much, if not all, of the mainstream media (MSM) seem to suffer what can only be described as ‘Copenhagen Syndrome’; this involves, putting a metaphorical telescope to their cultivated blind eye and in so doing averting any possible contact or exposure to counter-vailing views that might disturb their own precious narrative. This requires a quite deliberate mental and moral effort at carefully nurtured ignorance and blindness on their part. Yet they still have the nerve to call themselves – liberals (sic!)
This form of internal self-censorship is not necessarily even recognised by those who practise it; they will often believe their own views, beliefs, and general world-picture, these being regarded as ‘common sense’ ‘our values’ ‘everybody knows’, or ‘the truth’ and so forth – all of which, are deemed unchallengeable.
This has been a recurrent historical leitmotif, particularly virulent in religious conflict, and, in our own time, political/ideological conflicts often filtered through a religious prism; the Sunni-Shia conflict in the middle-east, and, nearer to home, and still, in this day and age, the catholic-protestant conflict in the north of Ireland. Book burning, and the catholic church’s Index Librorum Prohibitorum have been egregious examples of this mindset. But the change from religious persecution of the heretic by which the religious order maintained its ideological hegemony, to more modern methods of thought control and abject conformity have reached levels of sophistication not previously the case. As Alexis de Tocqueville noted: ‘’Formerly tyranny used the clumsy weapons of chains and hangmen; (but) nowadays even despotism, though it seemed to have nothing more to learn, has been perfected by civilisation … ancient tyrannies which attempted to reach the soul, clumsily struck at the body, but the soul often escaping from such blows, rose gloriously above it.’’ But now modern democratic tyrannies leave the body alone and go straight for the soul.’’ (1)
Suffice it to say that this totalitarian approach has little connection with real liberalism; it is in fact the very opposite. Here for example is John Stuart Mill on the subject.
“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion… Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them…he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form…
‘’Our merely social intolerance kills no-one, roots out no opinions, but induces men to disguise them, or to abstain from any active effort for their diffusion. With us, heretical opinions do not perceptibly gain, or even lose, ground in each decade or generation; they never blaze out far and wide but continue to smoulder in the narrow circles of thinking and studious persons among whom they originate, without ever lighting up the general affairs of mankind with either a true or a deceptive light. And thus is kept a state of things very satisfactory to some minds, because without the unpleasant process of fining or imprisoning anybody, it maintains all prevailing opinions outwardly undisturbed … A convenient plan for having peace in the intellectual world, and keeping all things going on therein, very much as they do already … But the price paid for this sort of intellectual pacification is the sacrifice of the entire moral courage of the human mind.’’ (2)
Tracing the heroic period of dissenting, classical liberalism associated with John Stuart Mill, and later public 20th century dissident intellectuals including various writers and philosophers such as George Orwell, John Steinbeck, F Scott Fitzgerald, Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, Jack London, and playwrights such as Arthur Miller, Eugene O’Neill, Harold Pinter, and Samuel Beckett, to the professed wisdom of the soi-disant modern liberal class, shows just how far those enlightenment values, as espoused by the above, have been eclipsed by a degenerated form of neo-totalitarianism, an age of endarkenment.
Per the postulates of contemporary ‘liberalism’ the subaltern classes are required not merely to act in a manner deemed appropriate by their ‘betters’, but also to believe what is held to be their unembellished wisdom. Like the ideologically homogeneous liberal class, the lower orders – Orwell’s proles – must fit in and adapt themselves to the prevalent order. The middle class, however, (Orwell’s outer-party) take to this virtual reality as a duck to water. In this context the late Gore Vidal’s description of the upper and middle strata and ruling elite of American society elicited the following penetrating insight: ‘’There is no actual conspiracy, it’s just that they all think the same.’’ Which is to say they do not think at all.
This attempt to supress any dissenting worldview, was always going to be a tall order. However, it took an economic and political crisis – globalization in its many dysfunctional manifestations – for the true face of the illiberal, liberal class to become apparent. It was like seeing the grotesque portrait of Oscar Wilde’s fictional character, portrayed as Dorian Gray, hidden in the attic, and comparing it with Gray’s visage in real life: an unchanging outward appearance a picture of an everlasting youth and beauty; but a representational portrait of a personality warped with corruption and vice.
There is, and as a matter of fact there always has been, an area of ‘dangerous thought’ in every society, this much should be common knowledge. Whilst we may agree about what is considered dangerous to think may differ from country to country, and from epoch to epoch, overall the subjects marked with ‘out-of-bounds’ notices are those societies, or the controllers of those societies who believe that some issues and beliefs to be so vital and hence so sacred that they will not tolerate their profanation by discussion. Moreover, thought, even in the absence of official censorship, is disturbing, and, under certain conditions, dangerous and subversive. For thought, as compared with routine and reflexes, is a catalytic agent that is capable of unsettling routines, disorganizing habits, breaking up customs, undermining faiths, and generating scepticism.
Even in contemporary ‘open societies’ of course, it has always been the case – pace Soros – that there have been areas where any genuine discussion cannot even be mooted let alone allowed. This is because political discussion possesses a character fundamentally different to academic discussion. It seeks to be not only to be in the right but also endeavours to demolish the basis of its opponents social and intellectual existence. Political conflict, since it is from the very beginning a rationalised form of the struggle for social predominance attacks the social status of the opponent, his public prestige, and his self-confidence. As the Marxist writer/theorist Ralph Miliband (not to be confused with his offspring epigones) once remarked of the UK newspapers’ political coverage he described, ‘‘a spectrum which ranged from soundly conservative, to utterly reactionary.’’ (3)
Contrary views to the present suffocating orthodoxy are now regarded as dangerous and extremist; but now traditional notions of equality, Rule of Law, Parliamentary/National Sovereignty, Universal Suffrage, which hitherto have been taken for granted are coming under attack from the self-righteous inquisitors of the liberal class. The issues of elections in the EU, are a case in point. When such elections returned the ‘wrong’ verdict they were obliged to re-run the election to get the ‘right’ result. The UK Brexit issue, and the more disputed election of Donald Trump, and now Joseph Biden, were fraught with malpractice. High farce parading itself as serious constitutional procedure. Such events seem to have occasioned an ideological and emotional crisis in the liberal class, a calamity bringing on an ideological apoplectic seizure. Thought and discussion must, therefore, be closed down. Only one narrative, endlessly repeated, is acceptable, that of the ruling elites. Other narratives either do not exist or are dismissed as mere propaganda. This is precisely where the Copenhagen Syndrome comes into play. The liberal class, particularly in the media, are operationalizing Nelson’s blind eye stratagem by clamping down and pathologizing dissent; whether it will work or not will be a thorough test of the west’s putative democratic values and beliefs.
None of this is news of course; it has been just a more extreme version of what was the earlier status quo. Turning a blind eye is pretty much what those invested with power and stewardship carry out routinely. But so will oppositionist currents which are beginning to emerge will always attempt to make themselves heard. For every action there will be a reaction. We live in a declining civilisation; the evidence is manifest.
‘’Where is the intelligentsia that is carrying on the big discourse of the western world and whose work as intellectuals is influential among parties and publics and relevant to the great decisions of our time? Where are the mass media open to such men? Who among those who are in charge of the two-party state and its ferocious military machines are alert to what goes on in the world of knowledge, reason and sensibility? Why is the free intellect so divorced from decisions of power? Why does there now prevail among men of power such a higher and irresponsible ignorance? (4)
Why indeed? And all very true. But the opening salvo from the PTB, is just that, an opening salvo. The great game is just beginning. I remember in 1971, in a radical communications collective in Turin, Italy reinforced that perspective. Thousands of Fiat workers participated with varying degrees in the extra-parliamentary left [especially Lotta Continua – ‘Continuous Struggle’] as they battled the company and the state.
La Lotta Continua!
NOTES
(1) Alexis De Tocqueville – Democracy in America 1835
(2) John Stuart Mill – On Liberty, Of Thought and Discussion 1859 – pp.163/164
(3) The State in Capitalist Society – Ralph Miliband – 1969
(4) The Sociological Imagination – C Wright Mills p.203 – 1959
“Where is the intelligentsia that is carrying on the big discourse of the western world and whose work as
intellectuals is influential among parties and publics and relevant to the great decisions of our time?”
They are working on headlines like these: “Column: Stimulus checks are coming, but first we must address Mr. Potato Head and Dr. Seuss” (https://www.chicagotribune.com/)
/sarc
The Copenhagen Syndrome was always practiced by the Western media, ignoring what you don’t like and using a selective approach to what you are going to write and say. Today the Copenhagen Syndrome has been placed in a very advanced stage, the Western media being shamefully used for anti-Russian and anti-Chinese propaganda. Just look at the propaganda nonsense written about the Scripal and Navalny false flag operations, not to mention the propaganda used during the November election steal in the US. The Western elites are getting nervous, and the media reflects it. Things are not going as the elites planned.
Francis writes of a collective totalitarian tendency which by its nature seeks to dominate society. This has interested me for many years. However I found a breakthrough in my attempt to understand this all too common phenomena in, of all places, my therapists waiting room. Whilst waiting for my shrink I found in the Journal of the American Psychological Association (1980) an absolutely fascinating article entitled “The Totalitarian Ego.” The author had made a ground breaking comparison between the human ego mind’s desire to impose its “totalitarian” world view upon the inner psyche and the patterns of totalitarianism observable in Eastern European political dictatorships. The essence of the article being that the patterns of domination, control and repression found in totalitarian political dictatorships is replicated in the intra psychic relationship between the conscious ego and the soul (or the unconscious.) His psychological thesis was that all of our ego’s have a totalitarian drive in relations to our own deeper being. This internal (psychological) totalitarianism replicates itself en mass in the form of various structures of political and social totalitarianism. In short we all do it. Our own internal denial of this constitute our own personal “totalitarianism.” But let us all deny this together. The struggle to transcend our own internal totalitarianism is really the essence of individual personal and spiritual growth.
The revealing thing I found in this article was that the American psychologist was only capable of seeing the political totalitarianism in the Soviet block. He was blind to the totalitarian structure of American society. I saw this particular blindness on the part of the American psychologist as a telling proof of his thesis.
So when you have a concentration of egoism in a culture the unavoidable result is a concentration of totalitarianism. This is in my view a defining characteristic of the Western bourgeois class. Hence the relevance of Francis’s essay.
So the only workable solution is to re-situate the ego-mind in service to a consciousness greater than itself. That can only come from the soul understanding and requires an effectively functioning spiritual culture. That awakening of course however will be desperately resisted by the combined fear of the collective totalitarian ego. Which is where we are today. Accordingly the social resistance to this darkening totalitarianism can only come from what psychologists call the collective unconscious. Which is precisely where it is coming from. Salvation is flying beneath the radar of the conscious ego mind. So our commentators can be forgiven for believing it does not exist. It is not easily discernible to the rational ego.
I see this perspective as profoundly Marxist in that Marx defined communism as the collective transcendence of egoism. His exact terminology was “communism is the transcendence of human self estrangement.” Self estrangement being a German philosophical term for egoism. The ego estranges itself from the real Self and sets itself up as an alternative to authentic life, or as Hegel and Marx termed it “Reason.” Here we find a German philosophical term for collective spiritual awakening and the governance of society by what Plato would call the enlightened aristocracy. Marx was Christian in that he saw that “aristocracy” as having to be established on a democratic basis. Hence his advocacy of socialism.
Accordingly political liberation can only be a subset of spiritual liberation. Any other approach can only result in a variation on the theme of ego driven totalitarianism. This hidden drive of the human ego to enforce its own unrecognized “totalitarianism” is the real reason for the corruption that invariably tends to set in following revolutions.
Currently China is posing the best example of success in this respect. This is because it is a culture that has a well established and remarkable inbuilt resistance to the dominance of egoism.
Excellent insights. I see this manifest on the mundane and personal level everyday in the corporate ladder climbing mentality, which of course is bred into our young as soon as they’re able to walk and talk these days. American pro sports, with their emphasis on hyper-individualism, trash talking, and the now ubiquitous “mine’s bigger than yours” salary comparisons, are another excellent example of this same phenomenon. Public attitudes toward all this – once disgusted, then merely tolerant, and now celebratory – have shifted dramatically over my lifetime, indicating that the process is long term and showing no signs whatsoever of waning anytime soon. One can only hope such a callous, shallow, and proudly narcissistic society can’t be too much longer for this world.
The author of the quoted paper can perhaps be forgiven for his slanted worldview based on the time period in which he wrote. Given that things were so much different then, his insights were still amazingly relevant and prescient of things to come.
Very insightful conmentary. Thank you very much! 👍👏
After my first semester of study of pedagogy, I studied young Marx’: ‘Philosopie und Nationalökonomie’. The shock was the term and concept ‘Selbstentfremdung’ (Self-estragement).
It was a shock of brightness. Since my early days I distrusted the lying and bullying adults – suddenly a social (ASC Taurus) Philosopher (Aquarius-Sun) gave me back my thrust in man.
Man under the crust of self-alienation. Three years later I wrote my philosophical essay: ‘Entfremdung und Freizeit’ (Selfestragement and Leisur).
long story short, sacked as teacher after 1 year, 10 years communist ‘activist’, longshoreman, etc.
in the end of these 10 years realized how self-estranged our club was, not as stupid as many others even the elite, but anyway … and any such estrangement focused in the materialistic one – sideness in opposition to meaning and Symbol.
So the last field, which I had not plowed in was: The symbol and a half year later God embraced my dear childish heart and in the days of my Pisces-heart I met my wife, the zodiac and his Guru, and my coming Heimat.
All my trials had become reduced when my heart had led me, to (become) my cog in the cogwheel of creation, to live, love and serve.
Everybody has his/her short story.Here I gave mine as an example, of what is necessary:
to find and become your one and only singular cog. Finding it is start of becoming a tree, aka staying at cog’s anonymous place, ‘without any wish for change’.
That can only be provided and arranged by God’s ‘serving’ archetypes or gods, meaning the
contents of the collective archetype and the architectural place each one cog is situated in
the wheel of wheel called Horoscope.
Yes, this oldest science of man, reading the similes of the living the heaven in nature’s inner
physio/psyche is it, hoovering the conscious I out of the waters of unconsciousness – a delight
for the archetypes, I have reason to believe.
The dimension of the soul, growing between body and spirit, is given by the time the cog-‘tree’ is growing .
So my ultimate item: without these individualized ‘trees’ the Forrest of truth and understanding will never exist, without communism in the childlike heart communism will never exist.
And the symbols are the language of the collective unconscious, the zodiacs yet are the symbol
of the symbols. And it’ is excellent for immune-system, to study them.
Marx a Christian? That’s a good one. Salvation coming from Hell, not from Heaven.
Anon; Yes you are right. This is a good one. Marx was a passionate and dedicated Christian. Try reading the book “Marx Against the Marxists” by Jose Miranda. Progressive Christian humanism was his motivation. In the tradition of German Romantic philosophy. What you call salvation coming from hell is simply a dimension of salvation coming from the Christian Shadow. But Carl Jung teaches us that 80% of the Shadow is gold. In Marxism gold is being offered from what the Christians mistakenly call “hell” But what do they know. They don’t know how to negotiate their own shadows. Do you?
”Woe [to them] that call evil good, and good evil; who make darkness light, and light darkness; who make bitter sweet, and sweet bitter. 21 Woe [to them] that are wise in their own conceit, and knowing in their own sight. 22 Woe to the strong [ones] of you that drink wine, and the mighty [ones] that mingle strong drink: 23 who justify the ungodly for rewards, and take away the righteousness of the righteous. 24 Therefore as stubble shall be burnt by a coal of fire, and shall be consumed by a violent flame, their root shall be as chaff, and their flower shall go up as dust: for they rejected the law of the Lord of hosts, and insulted the word of the Holy One of Israel” (Isaiah 5:20-24).
Marxism is the ‘Opium of the intellectuals’. There is ‘No God’ and Marx is his Prophet.
Well Anon you can keep up with the seemingly religious denunciation of Marxism. But I wonder if you have grappled with the Marxian understand of self estrangement in the guise of religion. If Marxism is so wicked please share with me your insights as to why the Chinese have been so wonderfully successful through its principled application.
There is an ancient proverb: “There is no worse blind man than the one who doesn’t want to see. There is no worse deaf man than the one who doesn’t want to hear. And there is no worse madman than the one who doesn’t want to understand.”
There is voluntary blindness in not seeing that the ‘enlightenment values’ espoused by the ‘heroes of dissent’ such as John Stuart Mill, George Orwell, John Steinbeck, F Scott Fitzgerald, Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, Jack London, Eugene O’Neill, Harold Pinter, and Samuel Beckett are the generators of the present ‘age of endarkenment’. The Milibands belong to the same cohort (Ralph Miliband was a member of ”Hashomer Hatzair/Young Guard, the Socialist-Zionist, ‘secular’ Jewish youth movement founded in 1913 in Galicia, Austria-Hungary. Members of Hashomer Hatzair were the first proponents of integration of Marxism with psychoanalysis).
Really? I mean this has officially happened, instead of the “wrong” result merely being subverted by buying off the winner, as in Greece?
Biswapriya Purkayastha
https://www.jstor.org/stable/24713344?seq=1
“This analysis tackles the question of whether the democratic deficit in the European Union is associated with repeated referendums”
it really happens in the “democratic” eu..
Ugh.
And they lecture the world about democracy.
Worse even, in several E.U. member states the referendum has recently been outlawed. The Netherlands and France are two that come to mind…
Should always read, reread Snow Leopard, carefully! (Yes, I deliberately deleted / obfuscated the subject of that sentence.)
“His psychological thesis was that all of our ego’s have a totalitarian drive in relations to our own deeper being.” This is Freud’s deep message in all his many books. Although I don’t recall him ever stating it directly : “You are a totalitarian / authoritarian / abuser / user of weaker others; and deceiver of yourself”.
“He was blind to the totalitarian structure of American society.” Fish cannot see the water in which they swim and breathe. And Freud lived in totalitarian / authoritarian / abuser / user social structures nested 5 deep.
I could have picked on Francis Lee, but Snow Leopard is closer to where I want to lead you.
Then, there is Anonymous : “There is no worse blind man than the one who doesn’t want to see.”. Some say, “In the country of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.”. Well, maybe… More likely, they lock him down in a cold damp dungeon, or chain him to a stake in the market square and barbecue his toes. Or maybe, he is smart, and plucks out the offending eye.
I am a highly intelligent, highly skilled, concept-adept, intellectual. My teachers, and my books, trained me to be an intellectual ass-hole.
Let us look at the Socratic Method. The official story is, “Ask questions until the unquestioned cloaks are stripped away, and Veritas is revealed, in all her naked (and Roman) glory.”.
We are also taught that the woke guardians of public morality of that day, not being the later famously organized Romans, had neglected to lay-in soap and water; and therefore demanded he suicide by drinking hemlock, to save them the mess and guilt for cutting his throat.
We are not taught to ask questions, about what we are taught, about _Socratic_Method_ and about his death… and most importantly… about how the noble stories of Socrates came to us. Hints : Apparently, Socrates, being a salon artist, did not write and copyright his words. And, it seems neither did his student / groupie / plagarist, Platon, who later made a good living presenting his own gigs. In fact, all we really have are much later writings, by neo-Roman neo-Christian Neo-Platonists.
So… It may well be that Socrates was keen to see Veritas’ naked butt. However, the discourses, those which I recall, are designed to intellectually harass the victim, until he gives up and says whatever Socrates / Platon / friends / Romans / Christians wanted him / Socrates / victim to say.
I have also read / heard (some time ago) that an Anishnabeg elder said, you cannot argue / dialogue with a man … let us say partner … until you know and can believe exactly what he himself says and thinks and believes.
Perhaps Nelson’s hagiographers do not understand that refusing to see is not the same as seeing. And careless seeing is closer to refusing than to seeing.
”Woe [to them] that are wise in their own conceit, and knowing in their own sight”.
Believing that Platon’s Dialogues are ”much later writings, by neo-Roman neo-Christian Neo-Platonists”, doesn’t show that you are ”a highly intelligent, highly skilled, concept-adept, intellectual”. But you believe Fomenko, Heinsohn…
Great article Mr. Lee.
Well, the really big philosophic question and riddle is touched from time to time, but remain unnoticed.
Remember “Universal Soldier” by Donovan, “he really is to blame, without him all this killing cant go on”, or Georg Carlin “no one seems to notice, no one seems to care”.
The sheeple! Who is the sheeple? Ourselves! Who did the One in Matrix fight? Himself!
A study from Leeds support the above and our own observations. 95% of us are sheeple!
We are followers, even many of us who believe “we are special”. Only 3-5% of us have backbone enough and can manage the real world. https://www.naturalnews.com/034676_sheeple_study_psychology.html.
Milgram experiment, over 2/3 of us obey authority to the death of someone unknown. So we have the explanation on why the majority jump on any lie or fake from the few. Group thinking.
Let me conclude it, I personally get around it by following the advise in Ecclesiastes: Life can only be meaningful on the individual level if man follows God.
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.217946
Democracy in America
https://archive.org/details/onliberty00inmill/page/6/mode/2up
On Liberty, Of Thought and Discussion
https://archive.org/details/stateincapitalis00ralp
The State in Capitalist Society
(need account to borrow, no money needed)
https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22Mills+C.+Wright.%22&and%5B%5D=subject%3A%22Sociology%22
(this was all i found by C Wright Mills)
“Who ever pays the Piper calls the tune.”
The media have never been independent, those who work for Murdoch know what he wants without him stating it, you just get a call from the boss that your services are no longer required if you displease him.
State run media -even though it’s the taxpayer who pays- becomes the arm of government, it’s the top down nature of power.
And that is the crux of all political and social problems, we are taught from birth to obey this top down structure, it is high time that we alter this training to instead trust only people who are logical and make perfect sense instead of dipping our lids to the position only.
As can be seen many an unworthy individual can acquire position through loyalty, subterfuge and financial means, this can no longer be tolerated.
The power of recall from voted for officials should always be an option for the public to remove rougue representatives.
The public have financial weapons against heads and owners of industry if they are doing wrong, all you have to do is boycott their products.
If people stop using Facebook then Facebook will soon disappear, and something will take its place.
What is holding the world back?
It’s YOU!
Face To Face | Carl Gustav Jung (1959)
Professor Jung is interviewed at his home in Switzerland by John Freeman.
“The only real danger that exist is man himself. He is the great danger and we are pitifully unaware of it. We know nothing of man, far too little. His psyche should be studied because we are the origin of all coming evil.”
“I don’t need to believe, I know”
“The psyche is not confined in space and time”
“If you think along the lines of nature then you think properly”
Q: As the world becomes more technically efficient, it seems increasingly necessary for people to behave communally and collectively. Do you think it’s possible that the highest development of man may be to submerge his own individuality in a kind of collective consciousness?
A: “In the end there will be a reaction…Man cannot stand a meaningless life”
Carl Jung
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AMu-G51yTY
It is more sinister than that—they are creating an alternative reality. First there is the Copenhagen then the Stockholm syndrome then the hive mind. Reference ” Battle for Humanity”. below, please.
. It is a new game for us older folks and it is being waged by the techno-fascists in the Universities with the cover of the “woke” crowd. We have no God given rights so chuck the Constitution and Bill of Rights because they were written by white men. Yes, that stupid.
https://www.option3.co.uk. ( Battle Against Humanity). it shows how and then delves into why. Somehow more of us need to have access to the higher realms of the council of the Elohim so that veil needs to thin considerably. Hey, !!! a little help, please?
ah, if you attained the “higher realms” you wouldnt worry
you would know that all this is exactly what needs to be happening
men call anything unpleasant the Devil’s work
although it is regular God’s work that they just dislike
so no worries, everything is on track
this is a breaking point, but for each person individually
they choose to be what they want to be – slave or freeman
and those enlightened should lead by example,
not “fight for humanity” or “fight against evil elites”
or “save everybody” – all abstract unattainable goals,
but show others how to live the right path – like Jesus did
The wikipedia entry for “Stockholm Syndrome” is _very_ instructive … whether you believe wikipedia is the goto source for information, or for disinformation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome
The second paragraph in this section shamelessly credits two different experts with defining the term : “Nils Bejerot, a Swedish criminologist and psychiatrist coined the term […]”; “It was originally defined by psychiatrist Frank Ochberg […]”. Ochberg is an american, so likely an american editor did not believe a European.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome#Stockholm_bank_robbery
I recall controversy at the time and since, as the body of the wikipedia entry makes clear and murky. This recent article summarizes nicely : “dubious pathology with no diagnostic criteria”; “riddled with misogyny and founded on a lie”; “Stockholm authorities — under direct guidance from Bejerot — responded to the robbery in a way that put the hostages at greater risk from the police than from their captors […]; as well, she observed that not only was Bejerot’s diagnosis of Enmark made without ever having spoken to her, it was in direct response to her public criticism of his actions during the siege.” The same Bejerot who coined the term.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome#Jess_Hill_(2020)
Captives and slaves, workers and assistants, mammals and reptiles, despite the raging of kings and priests, despite the glittering lies of legend and literature, have always sought to accomodate the new Alpha.
In many parts of the world, cops with political and media deadlines, not to mention budget constraints, frequently assail prematurely and disasterously; then slander the victims.
As Jess Hill points out, “Stockholm Syndrome” is more useful as clickbait than as description.
Armstrong put up an interesting blog post:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/tyranny/morality-v-obedience-guide-for-the-sheep/
Next to this are the words of Psalm 37:4 and Psalm 1:2
Take delight in the Lord,
and he will give you the desires of your heart.
‘and why people don’t is something that God always looks to get to the bottom of?’
And that is the single most important question which hardly or never comes up in religious circles
When man doesn’t take God’s Laws seriously that is something that God always looks to get to the bottom of.
You have neither heard nor understood;
from of old your ears have not been open.
Well do I know how treacherous you are;
you were called a rebel from birth.
For my own name’s sake I delay my wrath;
for the sake of my praise I hold it back from you,
so as not to destroy you completely.
See, I have refined you, though not as silver;
I have tested you in the furnace of affliction.
For my own sake, for my own sake, I do this.
How can I let myself be defamed?
I will not yield my glory to another. Isaiah 48:11
Just imagine how many of us would have survived a Job kind of encounter and what God would have learned about each and every one of us.
It is why by the way we find Satan called the accuser of the brethren. As far as it is concerned we deserve nothing from God it knowing our true nature.
Good article addressing trends that are now a topic of deep discussion among people who see the collapse of the current world order of the so-called liberals as inevitable for a number of reasons. It is important to have ideas circulating about the nature of what will replace it to try to avoid falling into even more severely totalitarian systems.
Nice Francis Lee. More expansive than 5 volumes of pompous droll, and far more tasty.