Origins of Violence: Climate Change in the Sahara 7,000 Years Ago

[mkrnhr]

One cannot generalize a bout Africa for it is really a big continent with a lot of climates, cultures and so on. My own experience there (I am African) allows me to observe certain patterns that correlate with societal ponerization and what is describe in the excellent article above.
Before going further permitt me to point out some anecdotes about people cited above. I didn't know that Masai practiced circumcision, but I read a long time ago that they considered themselves as coming from ancient Egypt and that some of their traditional traditional decorations could effectively come from there. If they lived in Egypt at the time of AkhetAton for example it is not impossible that they got circumcision from there. he other remark is about Tuaregs. Tuaregs is a fascinating nation because they have until a very recent time kept some aspect of a matriarchal organisation of society. A funny legend says that once women provoked men into a duel a won, and that since then men wear a veil and women no. The other fascinating aspect is that this nation is very tolerent. Some tribes are Jewish, Christians Muslims, others... but I don't know if theses aspects continue until now, some friends from the Sahara told me that theses societies experience great changes because of their integration in the modern society (with its dogma an so on). This religious tolerance however as not to mask a hierarchic society with nobles ans slaves, the nobles being the decedents of queen Tin-Hinan and the slaves being the descendants of her servant. Not that other populations have preserved the worship of the earth feminine divinity until the 19th century alongside with the official celestial god. Things are not simple. When you go to the desert and you meet remote and isolated people living far from civilisation, you are literally shocked as how they are nice and gentle. I imagine conquistadors may have the same suprise on remote islands.

However, there are some individuals who are not like others. When I was a child, I noticed two kinds of "bad guys". The first kind was of children who seemed to show no emotions. They were intellectually deficient and they were capable of being very aggressive and violent with no mercy. Usually they came from those populated homes with a terrible punishing father and a totally enslaved mother. These children had no affection from their father (as expected) nor from their mother (too afraid to show affection and submitted to her role of reproducer). The other kind of "bad children" were smart. They were smart and manipulative. And they recognised one another. They were usually issued from more favored homes. Anyway. When crises came, the second kind was in command and the first turned into executioners, in police and army an so on.

War and colonisation ponerize tribal societies. IMHO, it works better by emergence. Let me explain my view :

Noting that a pathocraty function by expansion (an aspect of the STS nature), imagine a number of tribes living in harmony, they have what they need, intermarriage and all the golden age things.
All of a sudden, a catastrophe occurs, and climate shift induces crises so that food and water supply is not sufficient. What will happen? Many possibilities.
In one tribe nothing happens, they look for water ressources and establish around to live as before.
In an other tribe, some psycopathic-type elements will convince the others that the only way to survive is to attack other tribes. A warrior class appears, religious class, kingship and this this tribe will probably move and destroy the first tribe and establish at its place. It establishes domination worship. This domination is military, political, and religious, and the need for obeying warriors is facilitated by the installation of traumatizing practises (and subjugation of women, by nature life givers, at the opposition of the destructive dogma of this tribe). In a word, civilisation.
A third tribe is also domination-oriented but weaker then the second tribe. It is destroyed and subjugated.
A fourth tribe is also domination-oriented but it encounters any other tribe to destroy, it chooses to throw out its tyrants, or It chooses to be subject to its tyrants, awaiting centuries or millenia to be subjugated by a powerful tribe who will destroy it or subjugate it.
A fifth tribe has no psychotic elements or chooses to ignore them. It survives as long as it is isolated from the world. Until globalisation when it is destroyed or subjugated.
All these possibilities (there are surely others) may be met in Africa.
History shows that dominating doctrines came from tribes living crisis, who move into subjugate others with violence. This is exactly the history of monotheistic religions.

 

[Erna]

[quote author=sankara]

"The oyster that is never hurt can not give pearls"
Chinese proverb[/quote]

This is true, in my own life and in the life's of my friends. I am closest to the ones who haven't had it so good up to now.

[quote author=sankara]If you wanted to know more about the masks, I could introduce you to some africans friends of mine who are initiated to their mysterys in Burkina Faso.[/quote]

This would be great, at the moment I'm talking to SA based guys from Congo, Burkina, Benin, Ghana & Gabon, but their profit margins doesn't make it feasible for me, so I need to go to the source  ;)

You can mail me if you want, just click on the email thingy under my name.

Thanks for your post, but I think I'm with Laura on this one, although I think most of these questions..well...will stay questions.

 

[webglider]

The fact that there is a Western hand in these conflicts is irrelevant for the discussion at hand. Violence is violence and we are discussing it’s effect on a human being’s psychological state.

The "Western hand" is relevant to the discussion at hand.

Did such horrific crimes against women exist before the horrors of slavery and colonialism? If circumsicisionn did exist, and the horrific treatment against women did not, than there must be more to the equation than circumcision alone.

A human being's psychological state is created in large part by the environment in which he is raised. If the population has a history of trauma and violence perpetrated on them by outsiders then that history is transmitted from one generation to another even if the events of the trauma happened long ago.

It's insidious, really. First an entire culture is brutalized, and then when it adapts coping mechanisms to survive in the context of that brutalization, it is condemned for being violent, shiftless, brutal, or whatever negative value others, outsiders, decided to assign to it.

I really suggest, Erna, that you read "King Leopld's Ghost" by Adam Hochschild as Bholanath suggests. It describes the holocaust of ten million people. I doubt if King Leopold was circumcised, (I could be wrong), but if I am correct, what in the world led him, his minions and other Europeans to commit such atrocities against Africans?

The gist of my post seems to be lost on you. Any kind of atrocities carried out towards any human being (male & female) could have been used to bring up my point. I just chose to use the Eastern Congo due to the large percentage of the people in that region carrying out violent crimes against one another and since it appears as though the majority of the people in that region have something in common it’s worthy to investigate if that something they have in common might have influenced their current behaviour. Would you go to Antarctica or the Sahara dessert to study ice?

Any culture that engages in civil war perpetrates violent crimes against the members of their own population. To single out the Civil War in the Congo as the epitome of brutality, (and it is), is to ignore similar violence against women committed by many other cultures, (many of which do not practice circumcision), during times of civil war.


I'm not discounting the scientific study to which you refer, but science - like the Bible - can be manipulated to prove whatever someone wants it to prove. I think it unfair that in addition to the assault on the culture by outsiders who enslaved the people, pillaged the land, created and perpetrated sterotypes, the people have to have their cultural practices dissected, judged, and labled by the very outsiders who caused them so much suffering to begin with.

 

[Bholanath]

I mentioned cocaine....I meant methamphetamine. Old articles' reference, can't find today
.
Erna, why did you post those photos of young male puberty initiation ceremonies? -photos taken by voyeuristic, cliche-spouting, rascist and culturally ignorant National Geo photograhers. Why? A root cause of VIOLENCE?

Yes Bholanath, that was what I was getting at, the circumcisions, and of course the other things the article mentioned.
We are discussing what causes someone to be able to empty his cartridge into a helpless woman's vagina. We are discussing what can be responsible for the majority of a regions men to become pathological.

Oh, OK.

One thing that one caption said was that Nelson Mandela underwent the same initiation. Psychopathic?

He (DeMeo) began to utilize the psychological insights of Wilhelm Reich to provide an understanding of the
mechanism by which patrist (armored, violent) behaviors become established and continued long after
the initial trauma has passed.

Related to one of my irrelevant points.

Violence is violence and we are discussing it’s effect on a human being’s psychological state.

And these photos depict violence, I take it. Why did you post these photos?

I disagree with you though that circumcisions at such an advanced age leaves no scars.

I’m don’t have much knowledge of that regions people, but I think for the discussion at hand, it’s irrelevant. We’re discussing the effect of early trauma on a “human being”.

I was referring to what happens in their brains and to their beings, to produce the end product, the adult male

So....male puberty initiation = trauma, leading to psychopathy?

So the children received an initiation to become truly adult in that context. The document says that the children are send in the forest. In Africa, the sacred forest were indeed very important. The forest , profane or sacred is, (for the forest's people of course) the place where they have to find their living. The world is violent in these conditions and one has to be strong to live long and be efficient to save his own life and of his fellow villagers.

You are wandering off topic.

So....you posted the photos of male puberty initiation,... sankara relates his understanding of what is depicted,... and it's OFF TOPIC.

The gist of my post seems to be lost on you.

Not at all. "Male puberty initiation = trauma, leading to psychopathy"

According to my knowledge, a child is born without “the baggage” of his/her people’s and his/her region’s history, so no, this one doesn’t fly. Does amnesia ring a bell? Looking for complicated explanations when simpler ones exist?

No one was talking about "baggage". It was about what is going to immediately start to register on the newborn - the traumatized conditions all around in the human environment.
Amnesia in what sense? From past-life experience? Cellular memory embedded in DNA?
Are you looking for a simple explanation for violence in the Congo, by any chance? Perhaps: "Male puberty initiation = trauma, leading to psychopathy"?

Your remark is irrelevant in this context.

Your remark is irrelevant in this context.

Your remark is irrelevant in this context, etc. etc.

I'm not discounting the scientific study to which you refer, but science - like the Bible - can be manipulated to prove whatever someone wants it to prove. I think it unfair that in addition to the assault on the culture by outsiders who enslaved the people, pillaged the land, created and perpetrated stereotypes, the people have to have their cultural practices dissected, judged, and labled by the very outsiders who caused them so much suffering to begin with.

I think that was my main "irrelevant" and "amusing" point in the first post.
Yes, I do "speak for myself" only.

Don't got no PhD, but got some "overstanding" after 60 years on planet Earth, equally in "traditional" and "modern" societies. Patronization and condescending and dismissive attitudes don't cut it in my world. Also they do "not help with making progress in this thread".

respect

___________________
It's a good day to die.

 

[anart]

Just a quick note, here, Bholanath,

Don't got no PhD, but got some "overstanding" after 60 years on planet Earth, equally in "traditional" and "modern" societies. Patronization and condescending and dismissive attitudes don't cut it in my world. Also they do "not help with making progress in this thread".

Do you realize that you are being patronizing and dismissive in your post?

Also - to clarify, Erna did not post photos on this forum. She posted links. Yes, they are disturbing, but it is my understanding that she did so for documentation only.

I must admit that there seems to be some anger behind the posts in this thread, yours included, Bholanath - and while this in an emotional subject, I don't think taking that out on each other is very productive.

 

[Beau]

Patronization and condescending and dismissive attitudes don't cut it in my world.

That's a fairly hypocritical statement to make, considering what you wrote just before this sentence:

Don't got no PhD, but got some "overstanding" after 60 years on planet Earth, equally in "traditional" and "modern" societies.

I think that was my main "irrelevant" and "amusing" point in the first post.

Yes, I do "speak for myself" only.

Also they do "not help with making progress in this thread"

So, logically, YOU are not helping.

 

[webglider]

I share much of Bholanath's frustration with the way the present situation in the Congo is being linked to traditional puberty rites while the role of the colonial past is minimized.

For several years, I was fortunate to be included in a group of people who were taught Lakota Sioux traditions
and cosmology by a medicine man, (L) who had been given the task of working with white people by his elders to atone for his actions in the Vietnamese War.

Although I was always an outsider, I absorbed enough of the teachings to understand that there is a totally diffferent way of living on this earth; that there is a wisdom in the natural world that reveals itself if approached with respect and understanding.

Since there is no respect and little understanding of Nature in the society I live in, such teachings were a revelation to me.

Conquest and colonization has destroyed much of nature and the indiginous cultures that lived in harmony with it. Because we have lost that connection, and destroyed those that that could have shared their knowledge with us, the societies that replaced the indiginous ones have begun to unravel.

Sherman Alexie , a writer from the Spokane/Coeur d'Alene Native American Community, writes scathingly of the effect the accumulated years of colonization have on a Native American child raised by a White family to fit in with American culture in his novel "Indian Killer".

Amitav Ghosh, an East Indian writer who grew up in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and northern India, writes about the effects of colonization on native cultures in India and Burma as well as other settings.. One of the most haunting descriptions of the corrosive effect of colonization is found in his book, "The Glass Palace". Here is a scene involving Queen Supaylat, the last Queen of Burma, spoken to visitors who visit her in exile.

"The Queen greeted them with her proud, thin-lipped smile. 'Yes, look around you, look at how we live. Yes, we who ruled the richest land in Asia are now reduced to this. This is what they have done to us, this is what they will do to all of Burma. They took our kingdom, promising roads and railways and ports, but mark my words, this is how it will end. In a few decades the wealth will be gone- all the gems, the timber and the oil- and then they too will leave. In our golden Burma, where no one ever wwent hungry and no one was too poor to write and read, all that will remain is destitution and ignorance, famine and despair. We were the first to be imprisioned in the name of their progress; milllions more will follow. This is what awaits us all; this is how we will all end-as prisoners in shantytowns born of the plague. A hundred years hence you will read the indictment of Europe's greed in the difference between the kingdom of Siam and our own enslaved realm.'"

It will take a lot to convince me, despite scientific studies, that circumsicision is the cause of the descent into barbarism we find not only in the Congo, but all over the world, and in the United States with the likes of Sarah Palin whom, I am sure, was never circumcised.

 

[anart]

It will take a lot to convince me, despite scientific studies, that circumsicision is the cause of the descent into barbarism we find not only in the Congo, but all over the world, and in the United States with the likes of Sarah Palin whom, I am sure, was never circumcised.

It is interesting, because it appears that this thread is eliciting quite a large amount of 'black and white thinking'  --  (no pun intended) - as if there is ever ONE reason, or mode of implementation, for anything.  As if many, many techniques cannot be used to further ponerogenic processes.  Pathology uses all tools at its disposal to further its goals  - do not underestimate this!

To ignore circumcision is rather short sighted - and, I might have missed something, but I don't think anyone was limiting it to circumcision  either  - just trying to track obvious manifestations of having a bond of fundamental trust broken at such a young and psychologically important age. 

Symptoms of the disease - that is all - the disease is pathological control.  osit.

 

[Hildegarda]

This people have never built pyramids, they have never express any imperialistic behaviors...
They lived in the wilderness, expressing art and communicating with the natural elements and what I would call 'jinns'

I am not sure whether it is appropriate to lump together all native cultures (not saying that the quote above does that, but it seems to have cropped up throughout the thread). Native cultures are very different, some are more communal, others hierarchical, and sometimes they coexist in close proximity.

Sankara and Bholanath had pointed out that Western ponerization is a significant source of misfortunes of people in Africa. There is however another piece of the puzzle, not often mentioned: that of exploitation of one group of native people by another. Africa has been a center of slave trade and mining of resources long before Europeans came there. Arab slave trade was a well-developed enterprise in eastern parts of Africa as early as in 7th century AD, and in doing that, they took advantage of and partnered with already existing native slave trading networks -- turning them into slave-exporters. The estimates run up to ten million people displaced throughtout centuries. Same thing is true about trans-Atlantic slave trade: as more and more people get DNA testing for genealogical reasons (as in African Heritage Project), some of them find that their heritage comes from the parts on Africa far inland, and that means that they were sold into slavery by their own group or a neighboring rival group and brought to the coast first, before being sold across the ocean.

I thought that mkrnhr explained very well how the native cultures could have diverged, depending on which people made a particular group, and on their choices. Harsh conditions are an important factor, but they are not enough. From establishing some initiation rituals, there is still quite a way to go towards showing aggression to, or subjugating, another group.

 

[Hildegarda]

So I don't see that the pain element is inaccurate in strenghning the will and endurance of a forest dweller. [..]
So we are obviously dealing with initiations for the hard life of being human among the wilderness (physical and spiritual), for children to become responsible fellows and parents for their beloved. [..]
I have experienced many accidents, malaria, diarrhea and I found myself stronger and and healthier (thaugh older) after these.Both psychologicaly and physicaly.

I have been musing over something that is may be only marginally related, but, it still may be:

There is the book by Jean Ledloff, it's called "Continuum Concept". It recounts her experiences of living with yakuana Indians in Amazon. She found their child upbringing very peaceful, high in bonding during early childhood and high in freedom when the child gets older. This, she says, helps those kids grow up happy and emotionally balanced, and the society to remain harmonious and non-violent.

This book is very much romanticized by today's followers of "attachment parenting", and it certainly has a lot of good lessons. Yet, people seem to gloss some of Ledloff's observation.

One is that the yakuanas had a markedly different attitude towards anyone who wasn't part of their tribe, be it other Indians, her and her European companions, or the domesticated animals. Basically, as perfectly accepting and kind they were to one another, they looked down on other people and were very harsh, even cruel, with their animals.

Another one was that the communal interests took precedence over individual welfare. She recounts how the chief of the tribe wouldn't let her take on of the tribe members to the hospital for an acute appendicitis, because he didn't want to lose her medical expertise and services that benefited the whole tribe.

She also recounts an incident when a boy was shot with an arrow during a practice play, and his mother didn't as much as bat an eyelid while Ledloff was dressing the wound. Ledloff admired the mother's composure and said that it is beneficial for the child, taught him confidence and resilience naturally etc. And that's true, but I wonder whether there's something else here as well. How should I put it ... in a harsh environment, infant and early childhood mortality is higher, and so may be naturally less resources, including emotional and protective, were expended on them ... something along these lines. :/

I am beginning to understand something here. The first thing that happens when resources are limited is that people divide themselves into in-group ("us") and out-group ("them"). As "honoring ALL beings equally" is no longer physically possible, they compete for resources in various ways. Soon there is one standard -- standard of culture, of relationship, morals, attitudes etc -- for the in-group, and may be a different one for the out-group. Sometimes to be a full-fledged member of the in-group, one has to go through rituals of initiation (growing children). Strangers are always an out-group. And then, depending on what kind of people make their group, what their choices are and how ponerized the resulting system is, we can have different relationships within the in-group and b\w in-group and out-groups.

There were studies that, based on mathematical modeling, suggested the evolutionary connection between parochial (within the group) altruism and the conflict with the out-groups:

Altruism—benefiting fellow group members at a cost to oneself—and parochialism—hostility toward individuals not of one's own ethnic, racial, or other group—are common human behaviors. The intersection of the two—which we term "parochial altruism"—is puzzling from an evolutionary perspective because altruistic or parochial behavior reduces one's payoffs by comparison to what one would gain by eschewing these behaviors. But parochial altruism could have evolved if parochialism promoted intergroup hostilities and the combination of altruism and parochialism contributed to success in these conflicts. Our game-theoretic analysis and agent-based simulations show that under conditions likely to have been experienced by late Pleistocene and early Holocene humans, neither parochialism nor altruism would have been viable singly, but by promoting group conflict, they could have evolved jointly.

\\\http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/318/5850/636

There were experiments with children that seemed to confirm some of that understanding:

\\\http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v454/n7208/abs/nature07155.html

Human social interaction is strongly shaped by other-regarding preferences, that is, a concern for the welfare of others. These preferences are important for a unique aspect of human sociality—large scale cooperation with genetic strangers—but little is known about their developmental roots. Here we show that young children's other-regarding preferences assume a particular form, inequality aversion that develops strongly between the ages of 3 and 8. At age 3–4, the overwhelming majority of children behave selfishly, whereas most children at age 7–8 prefer resource allocations that remove advantageous or disadvantageous inequality. Moreover, inequality aversion is strongly shaped by parochialism, a preference for favouring the members of one's own social group. These results indicate that human egalitarianism and parochialism have deep developmental roots, and the simultaneous emergence of altruistic sharing and parochialism during childhood is intriguing in view of recent evolutionary theories which predict that the same evolutionary process jointly drives both human altruism and parochialism.

in the latter study, the scientists offered children candy and asked them to choose to take it for themselves or share with a friend, there were different variation of this experiment.

They found is that there was a consistent number, about 5% of kids, who were fully altruistic, i.e., shared with both a member of the in-group and the member of the out-group regardless of the benefit to themselves. Some kids were moderately altruistic: they shared with the partner up to the point when they had to deprive themselves to do it. But a lot of children -- and their percentage was increasing with age -- went for what's "fair", i.e., split the candy equally with the partner; they wouldn't take more candy than their partner did, but also wouldn't let the partner have more than they do, even if it doesn't hurt them. And, at any age, boys were much more likely to favor the members of their own group than the girls were. It makes sense that parochialism is more pronounced in boys, since it's males who are most active in conflicts between groups. And, some kids were making only selfish choices -- their numbers decreased with age.

You can see how these kids can make different societies, given natural bottlenecks in the way any population grows. This study will obviously be not without cultural biases (results could have been different in populations of other countries), but in general there's something to it, I think.

I guess I admire the societies that have managed to remain more matrist in today's conditions, even though none is perfect -- aside from a draw of luck, there is a lot of choice in it.

fwiw

 

[Laura]

The first thing that happens when resources are limited is that people divide themselves into in-group ("us") and out-group ("them"). As "honoring ALL beings equally" is no longer physically possible, they compete for resources in various ways. Soon there is one standard -- standard of culture, of relationship, morals, attitudes etc -- for the in-group, and may be a different one for the out-group. Sometimes to be a full-fledged member of the in-group, one has to go through rituals of initiation (growing children). Strangers are always an out-group. And then, depending on what kind of people make their group, what their choices are and how ponerized the resulting system is, we can have different relationships within the in-group and b\w in-group and out-groups.

We see an example of this happening in real life, in real time, right now. What's more, it has the added impetus of modern communication systems to help it grow.

I think that the "powers that be" are fully aware of coming climate change and its repercussions which include loss of food productivity so that the population of the planet can no longer be fed. This is intertwined with issues of oil availability though I am inclined not to buy into the ideas of Peak Oil as they are promoted. Nevertheless, whether or not there is or is not enough oil, it is a certainty that there is NOT going to be enough food. One has only to read the Pentagon Report on Climate Change and its consequences, and keep in mind that they obviously know a lot more than they let on, to be convinced of this.

So, what is happening? It seems that psychopaths and their networks have taken over a number of established groups to utilize them for their own purposes; groups such as political and religious organizations. This has occurred according to the patterns described in Lobaczewski's "Ponerology" and anyone who has read this has the tools to analyze these processes. "Lack" and "scarcity" can be associated with evil totalitarian regimes in history but few people have looked at it in terms of pathology. I think we need to. The article cited mentions how environment can induce changes in human beings and this is epigenetics in action. It is likely that the physiological changes, along with the social changes of need produce effective psychopaths as well as other pathologies and that could be the origins of some of the modern day strains of psychopathology.

Then, of course, we can consider the differences between humans with individuated soul potential (this is a cass forum, after all, so we can think more out of the box than in other contexts) and Organic Portals. In any given population, there can be 50 % OPs, 50% "Normies". And, of course, within the OP population, there are going to be defects - mutations - producing "essential psychopaths". These mutations could be triggered by stress conditions in the environment. I even wonder if part of the reason there seems to be so much pathology nowadays is due to the very poor diet of most of the world's population. And in the US, a place where people had plenty of food for many generations, I wonder if the reason for the recent increase is not the fact that the greed principle took over food production and the poor quality of "prepared foods" isn't a contributor to epigenetic mutations? Whatever the reason, some psychopaths have the ability to rise to the top, to dominate any group where they find themselves, to take over, to take charge, and their abilities might "shine" in dire conditions where ruthlessness dictates who will or will not survive.

Well, there are many areas to think about. But the point I want to make is that it seems that it has always and ever been a struggle between two kinds of human beings: those with soul potential and those without, i.e. Organic Portals. And today, the same struggle is building steam because the planet IS running out of resources. And we see the pathologicals taking over the groups they see as necessary to promote their agenda: survival of their "kind".

Right now, it looks like human beings as opposed to human-looking beings - and I'm using these terms in a very specific way - are doomed to extinction. The historical and archaeological evidence suggests that the population of pathologicals succeeds each time there is stress on the environment and we have gone from a world that was once ruled by a feminine, creative principle, to one that is dominated by a patristic, destructive, even entropic principle. Each time they take control in an overt way, large populations of "normies" die - and this is deliberate, I think. WW II was a striking example, but not the only one. Pathologicals - Hitler, in cahoots with the Zionists - determined to destroy a large grouping of human beings who were peaceful, cooperative, caring and creative - many of them were Jews. Out of this horror, they created a pathological state - Israel - populated almost entirely by "selected Jews," and they were selected for pathology. In other words, Hitler assisted at the birth of the "Master Race," only it wasn't German Nazis.

A similar process is shaping up in the U.S. at present, only it isn't going to be a selection process between "Aryans and Jews," No, it is going to be between Dominionists and everyone else.

Dominionism is a ponerized sub-set of Christianity. And that's not to say that Christianity itself, from its inception as a religion, did not carry the seeds of pathology; it certainly did. The philosophy behind Dominionism can be easily identified as pathological just by reading it and my guess is that the formulation followed the usual pattern: the ideology was created by a schizoidal psychopath, i.e. R. J. Rushdoony.

And make no mistake about it: their agenda is to take control, and to begin to eliminate "normies", many of whom generally constitute the intelligentsia of any population. Once any potential "normie" leadership is destroyed, those who do not convert to their ideology and agree to be slaves are also done away with. In Poland, the land Hitler intended to steal and cleanse and turn into part of Germany, the intelligentsia was targeted first to guarantee the success of this fast despoliation. "It sounds cruel, " Hitler reportedly told Hans Frank, "but such is the law of life."

It is the law of the psychopath, not of life.

 

[Pierre]

Well, there are many areas to think about. But the point I want to make is that it seems that it has always and ever been a struggle between two kinds of human beings: those with soul potential and those without, i.e. Organic Portals. And today, the same struggle is building steam because the planet IS running out of resources. And we see the pathologicals taking over the groups they see as necessary to promote their agenda: survival of their "kind".

It sounds like what Aaron Russo reported after his interactions with David Rockefeller.

"It told me they wanted to reduce population by half" (13'40 of this video)

 

[Al Today]

Well, my day is shot... I have been reading reply #25 over & over & over. Feels like I just got a boot kick in my chest. A baseball bat whack across my back. Throw me down on the ground and kick me in the face. That’s how that reply #25 affected me. Anyone else “see” these things? Not surprising to me many do not. They have their own thing to DO. Many “see” these things but cannot fathom a reason, a purpose for these things. Any reason that can be logically deduced probably fall within the category of conspiracy theory. I can’t get the term “normie” outta my head, so I will use it.

… psychopaths and their networks have taken over a number of established groups …

I was wishfully hoping this would not happen in my lifetime, but there it is, writing on the wall, someone else possibly “sees” what I have been denying.

… patterns …

There are so many PTB decisions/events carried through that defy “normie” logic as to reason that a “normie” MUST ask WHY? How about a couple quick examples:
Why would the gubement have these boxcars that can move mass quantities of people (in the US)?
_http://pimpinturtle.com/2008/02/01/fema-ordered-102000-boxcars-with-shackles.aspx
Why would the gubement have detention camps (in the US)?
_http://209.157.64.201/focus/f-bloggers/1607403/posts
And the kick in the face, just today on SotT:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/167543-Army-Orders-Pain-Ray-Trucks-New-Report-Shows-Potential-for-Death-
And lookee here at how the laws have been lain down for the coming “storm”. They have been PATIENTLY twisting authority to ensure there will be NO legal means of recourse.
_http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7763

How many dots must be connected to possibly “see”? There is an old story from my monotheism days that when BeeJeeBus comes back, there will be those on this BBM still will still not believe. I guess that may be true because with all these goings on, many people today cannot conceive that the PTB just don’t give a damn except for themselves.

… In other words, Hitler assisted at the birth of the "Master Race," only it wasn't German Nazis.
A similar process is shaping up in the U.S. at present, only it isn't going to be a selection process between "Aryans and Jews," No, it is going to be between Dominionists and everyone else.
Dominionism is a ponerized sub-set of Christianity. …

Those who frequent this forum and the SotT news have lately learned a new word, “Dominionism”. The Dominionists have stealthfully crept into mainstream Christianity and are just now emboldened to come out of their closet to whip up mob frenzy. Seems like they Greenbaumed a mass population and are just flipping the triggers on. Are they indeed gathering their troops for action? Granted, modern groundwork for this control program was laid down awhile back with the King James Version. They knew what they were doing, eh? Seemingly the Dominists have fine-tuned their art of mind control. How freakin’ many of them want to kill in the name of BeeGeeBus? More that we think?

Well, that’s enough rant about this 3D physicality in which we now (try to) enjoy. Please, if I am too far off target, let me know. I can’t say how many times I have read here that there is no time. I currently do not ascribe to that absolute definition. I think time does exist, everywhere. It’s just we are limited in our understanding because of our 3D linear, semi-lucid dream state. I have also felt that there exists a “different” human condition such as described with the theories surrounding those pesky organic portals. There is probably much more to them that now understood, but takes “time” and experience to learn, yes? Timelines. We are in one(1) of infinite possibilities. Indeed, perhaps we all did choose to be here, or we may be trapped within a 4D b@stardization, I just dunno. But anyway, when contemplating the meaning of infinity, what we have here, now, is a chain of events of which we have opportunities to choose what we think and DO. I “hope” I retain my ability to think and not become a zombie. HAARP can kiss my arse. But anyway, as we learn more we increase the ability to choose. My problem is not having enough knowledge to know what the choices are. Definitely not to shower the goons with “love and light”. But is it to physically protect myself and others? As long as possible, I will remain on this forum to learn, hopefully become knowledgeable enough that when the “time” does come, I will choose the choice of freedom, whatever that means…

 

[Erna]

[quote author=mkrnhr]
One cannot generalize about Africa for it is really a big continent with a lot of climates, cultures and so on.[/quote]

This can't be emphasized enough.

[quote author=mkrnhr]When you go to the desert and you meet remote and isolated people living far from civilisation, you are literally shocked as how they are nice and gentle. [/quote]

And this fact gives substance to Laura’s conclusion:

[quote author=Laura]It is pretty clear to me that what happened was an "exporting" of European psychopaths to Africa[/quote]

[quote author=mkrnhr]They were intellectually deficient and they were capable of being very aggressive and violent with no mercy. Usually they came from those populated homes with a terrible punishing father and a totally enslaved mother. These children had no affection from their father (as expected) nor from their mother (too afraid to show affection and submitted to her role of reproducer). The other kind of "bad children" were smart. They were smart and manipulative. And they recognised one another. They were usually issued from more favored homes. Anyway. When crises came, the second kind was in command and the first turned into executioners, in police and army an so on. [/quote]

I also remember these kids at school, but it wasn’t until much later that I made a distinction between them. The command the 2nd kind had on the rest of the kids was almost something to admire (at the time), until one know’s better (today).

Anart pretty much concluded everything. My observations in the thread thus far are merely “symptoms” of a festering soar, ie. pathological control.

[quote author=Hildegarda]I guess I admire the societies that have managed to remain more matrist in today's conditions, even though none is perfect -- aside from a draw of luck, there is a lot of choice in it. [/quote]

And/or natural “inner makeup” of the individual/s, as Laura suggests – Ops vs Normies.

It’s hard to imagine that such societies still exist…here’s one.

[quote author=Laura]The article cited mentions how environment can induce changes in human beings and this is epigenetics in action. [/quote]

I read Biology of Belief by Bruce H. Lipton, Pd.D. some time ago, which also gives some insight and substance to how cellular changes occur as a result of it’s environment.

 

[mkrnhr]

Al Today, it took me some time to figure out what "BeeGeeBus" was :P
Your chest boot kick reminds me of my first reading about Organic Portals on Cassiopaea, it's a normal reaction.

There is however a detail I cannot fully understand. It is the proportion of "normies" and "OPs". It is said that since genetic mixing has been continuously occurring for such a long time, the proportion of the two species is of 50% each. This is understandable if there were no specific interaction between them.

On this planet, in this density, OPs, lead by psychopaths, always win. They survive better to wars, cyclic catastrophes and also in societal confrontation. This leads me to suppose that, as time passes by, natural selection advantages statistically OPs. "Normies" are not totally exterminated because of the souls wanting to experience 3D reality, and because 4D STS predators are still needing food. But the disadvantage of normies makes them fragile compared to OPs, less likely to survive, and consequently fewer.
I am missing something in this reasoning?