Political Ponerology - New Edition (Now Available!)

Just wanted to drop a little note here about the result of flapping our butterfly wings.
In the past two weeks (with the Iran situation), I’ve heard multiple people across the podcast world call our leaders (or the forces behind them) psychopaths, usually in the same sentence as calling them “the Epstein class”.
This has been more than just a passing mention too - they have each dug into it in their own way.

Off the top of my head, they where:
Scott Ritter/Judge Napolitano (plus the Judges other guests).
Pepe Escobar on The Duran and other podcasts.
Neil Oliver/Gareth Icke.
Bret Weinstein/Danny Jones (this one’s worth a listen if you like Bret’s thoughtfulness).

I’m sure there were others too.
Anyway, let’s hope this momentum continues. And do what we can to help.
 
Just wanted to drop a little note here about the result of flapping our butterfly wings.
In the past two weeks (with the Iran situation), I’ve heard multiple people across the podcast world call our leaders (or the forces behind them) psychopaths, usually in the same sentence as calling them “the Epstein class”.
This has been more than just a passing mention too - they have each dug into it in their own way.

Off the top of my head, they where:
Scott Ritter/Judge Napolitano (plus the Judges other guests).
Pepe Escobar on The Duran and other podcasts.
Neil Oliver/Gareth Icke.
Bret Weinstein/Danny Jones (this one’s worth a listen if you like Bret’s thoughtfulness).

I’m sure there were others too.
Anyway, let’s hope this momentum continues. And do what we can to help.

Haven’t followed much of Candace Owens recently but in the one show I watched recently she was making it pretty clear quite a number of times that she thinks the most fitting description of Erika Kirk is a Psychopath (mentioned here).

So yeah, the probably biggest podcast in the world (at least in the west) is putting Psychopathy into focus as well.
 
Just wanted to drop a little note here about the result of flapping our butterfly wings.
In the past two weeks (with the Iran situation), I’ve heard multiple people across the podcast world call our leaders (or the forces behind them) psychopaths, usually in the same sentence as calling them “the Epstein class”.
This has been more than just a passing mention too - they have each dug into it in their own way.

Off the top of my head, they where:
Scott Ritter/Judge Napolitano (plus the Judges other guests).
Pepe Escobar on The Duran and other podcasts.
Neil Oliver/Gareth Icke.
Bret Weinstein/Danny Jones (this one’s worth a listen if you like Bret’s thoughtfulness).

I’m sure there were others too.
Anyway, let’s hope this momentum continues. And do what we can to help.

Yes. Years ago the C’s said something about the information they transmit as one day becoming common knowledge among the general population.

It blew my mind to consider that as being a possibility and as such, I’ve always remembered it and watched our reality to see whether it would happen or not.

It’s safe to say that over the years, many concepts the C’s got across have become clear to many people not connected to the forum. And in my opinion, the rate of this has slowly increased.

I think it’s highly probably that the rate of increase will continue exponentially.
 
To add to other observations, MartyrMade's Darryl Cooper wrote an essay last year after the 12-Day War titled The Psychopathology of Zionism. It is as the name would suggest a look at the psychopathology of Zionism.

He details the paranoia of many otherwise seemingly intelligent Jews when it comes to their belief that the world is out to get them and how they traumatize their children with this paranoia. How this sensitivity to and identification with perceived external threats conforms to the rabbinic idea that the world hates Jews for the irrational belief that God loves Jews and not gentiles.

That the chosen people identification that is clung to so tightly these days is a way of resolving the contradictions between what these people normally profess and how they react to Palestinians and Israel as a nation.

He mentions an old Haaretz article titled "Only Psychiatrists Can Explain Israel's Behavior" that asks questions relating to how Israel can be so paradoxically pathological while also relying on other nations' benevolence to exist. He immediately follows up his mention of the article by saying that Israeli paranoia backed by U.S. military power leads to something akin to collective psychopathy.

He's got that right!

Anyways, it's 26 minutes long, well worth the listen, and another example of the idea of political psychopathology making its way into wider acceptance.

 
How this sensitivity to and identification with perceived external threats conforms to the rabbinic idea that the world hates Jews for the irrational belief that God loves Jews and not gentiles.
Douglas Reed pointed this out in his book Controversy of Zion and how the zionists (and those groups before them) made sure that the Jews knew the world was against them by continually causing turmoil that made the world go against them.
 
I meant to share a while back that 'ponerology' is mentioned in a prose-poem published in the the latest book by John Waters, quote as follows:

"...I am an authority on the destruction of my country’, published in The Abolition of Reality, Waters writes: ‘I am an authority on the destruction of my country. I wish I weren’t. I wish I were an expert in building boats, or growing butternut squash. I wish I were not an amateur specialist in psychopathy and ponerology, or an eyewitness authority on authoritarianism. I wish I were a better accordionist or crosswordist instead..."

You can read that in the substack 'press release' for the book which is called 'The Abolition of Reality: A First Draft of the End of History,' link here:


I am very fond of Mr Waters, whose substack I am a paid subscriber to, from which he releases an excellent weekly newsletter called 'Diary of a Dissenter'. It is excellent value, especially if you're interested in events in Ireland viewed from a lense closely aligned with the one used here. Mr Waters is a household name in Ireland, and appeared regularly on RTE and other national broadcasters before he went 'rogue', and is now, of course, persona non grata in polite Irish society. I can't help but deeply admire those who have a seat at the table and give it up for the sake of truth.

Anyway, that wasn't the exact reason for this post. This post is to flag a guy who John Waters appeared on a podcast with, a guy by the name (or non de plume) of EM Burlingame ("EMB"). In that podcast EMB makes the reasonable claim that the world we live in and the people running it are insane, not as a glib pejorative, but as a clinical diagnosis. He calls it pathocracy, but does not credit the source of that term and the ideas underneath it. The podcast is here:


EMB has a substack article in which he explains the structure of a pathocracy, as he sees it:


Not entirely consistent with the source material, but some similarity. I guess the ideas are becoming viral, which is arguably good, but that process will be accompanied by distortion and or dilution of the ideas (whether deliberate or accidental).

FWIW i found his simple proposal that the sane must stop engaging with the insane as if they are sane fairly useful, and it might be generally useful for those who are unlikely to acquire deep psychological knowledge.
 
Just a "minor" heads-up in case you haven't noticed, they've modified/almost completely removed the Wikipedia entry for Political Ponerology under accusations of anti-Semitism mainly (they've accused themselves of what they really are), when the truth is that the book isn't about that and the text of the summary entry accurately reflected the book's content. I'm linking to the debate that led to this measure:
For some background, the article is currently about the concept of "political ponerology" as proposed by Andrzej Łobaczewski in his book Political Ponerology (Polish: Ponerologia polityczna. Nauka o naturze zła w adaptacji do zagadnień politycznych). The book was published by Red Pill Press or Pilule Rouge, a publishing house owned by Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk, the leaders of a new religious group named the Fellowship of the Cosmic Mind (see here for a list of everyone on the board of directors of the Fellowship, here for proof that most of the directors of the Fellowship are involved in Quantum Future Group, here for proof that Red Pill Press/Pilule Rouge is owned by QFG; in addition, Red Pill Press's homepage shows that most of their books were written by directors of the Fellowship or otherwise related to the Fellowship, as well as having an affiliates list which only list sites affiliated with the Fellowship).

The book itself outlines an alleged phenomenon known as "pathocracy". The ideas presented in this book, however, are a deeply antisemetic, racist, and eugenicist conspiracy theory (this article explains the conspiracy theory in far better detail than I could). The publisher itself is also known for parroting conspiracy theories about Bush and the Mossad committing 9/11 and regularly platforming Aleksandr Dugin, among other things.

The article doesn't mention any of this. In fact, the article promoted the so-called study of "political ponerology" as if it were a legitimate field of study rather than part of a conspiracy theory for over 14 years. The article was initially written by an editor with an undisclosed connection to the Fellowship (see WP:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_187#User:Poneros) and, before this morning, had only four sources, Two of them were the book itself, one of them was a news outlet named Signs of the Times or Sott.net, which is also owned by the Fellowship, and one of them was pages 37-40 of Kazimierz Dąbrowski's The Dynamics of Concepts, in which Dąbrowski supposedly supported Łobaczewski's assertion that he and other researchers worked together on the book in a secret research group. I managed to track down a copy of the book yesterday and found that the relevant pages did not mention anything to do with Łobaczewski, ponerology, pathocracy, or any sort of secret research group. The closest thing to that within those pages was Dąbrowski talking about negative integration and its connection to psychopathy before talking about positive disintegration. If anyone wants to verify this, we're willing to send a copy of the pages to them.

At this point, I think it'd be best to blow it up and start over, changing the article's subject to be about the book and the spread of its ideas, if we are to have an article about this at all. In its current form, there is nothing worth saving in this article. ~Red of Arctic Circle System (talk) 20:55, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

 
Back
Top Bottom