302 Comments
author

There are those who keep trying to define my position regarding the Mass Formation theory and then attack it. This is called creating a "Strawman" argument, and is a well known debate ploy which is considered a logical fallacy. Such arguments appear to often be advanced by individuals who claim to be supporters of Dr. Breggin. I have no insight into the purpose or motivation of this concern trollery.

But if you wish to actually understand my position, rather than the Strawman that is being created, read this.

And then ask yourself, "Why is so much effort being invested in linking Malone and Desmet, and then seeking to demean both?" and "Who is responsible for this?"

https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/caged-animals-are-safe-but-it-is

Expand full comment

Let’s start with Barack Obama, who as Americans, we should know pretty well by now. Both his parents and grandparents were avowed communists. I repeat, avowed communists. Frank Marshal Davis, Obama’s “mentor”, was an avowed communist. For people like me who have been studying communism since the age of around 13 years and he was attached to three major combat units in the Vietnam war as a psychological operations officer, Psyops, and have the shrapnel to prove it, one can learn a lot about the indoctrination that North Vietnamese soldiers guards prior to coming across the DMZ and down the Ho Chi Minh trail. one can get an understanding of communist tactics and strategy at a very personal level. couple that with my intellectual interest in political theory etc., although I was a biology major and I am a retired neurologist, it becomes very easy to recognize a Communist when Barack Obama came on the stage. Using identity politics by calling everyone who disagreed with him a “racist“ and other similar insults, Obama use the color of the skin as the Greeks use the Trojan horse to get into Troy. Using typical communist “infiltration techniques“ the bureaucracy in Washington grew  as directed by Obama and his comrades with like-minded communist. Doublespeak and blatant lies or spoken with the smooth voice of Barack Obama. One has to be somewhat of a sociopath to get away with this. The only reason Barack Obama was reluctant to see Biden steal the election of 2020 rather than one of his other comrades, Was whether Biden would go through with Obama’s plans. But lo and behold Biden developed progressive dementia, knows he is has grave threat of imprisonment because of his son Hunter Biden, and therefore can be easily manipulated. and now we see, before our very eyes, a socialist communist regime in Washington DC. Mass illegal immigration is creating chaos throughout our cities. Murders are at an all time high. The Covid crisis essentially put Americans in cages. I told one of my daughters two weeks into the lockdowns that “the Chinese communist are loving this, they are seeing how easy it is to get us under control by using a little virus to cause grave fear.“ The other communists across the world to include Schwab must’ve been delightfully shocked to see how easy it was to actually close down the world economy! I they did not need to know what mass formation psychosis was or any of the other terms used my political analyst. The willingly submissive world could be called the “black swan“ that’s surprised even our most critical and dangerous enemies of freedom. Who could’ve predicted how submissive the world would become to a little old coronavirus? We are at war for our freedom. Pearl Harbor and the invasion of Poland have already occurred; but will we as a people recognize it and fight back with everything? it is now or never.

Expand full comment

Very astute observations and insight!

Expand full comment

Excellent post. The importance of naming the disease is to promote general knowledge that the disease exists and to help people recognize it when they see it.

Expand full comment
Sep 5, 2022Liked by Robert W Malone MD, MS

"Jill and I listen carefully to our readers and those that we meet during our travels, and always learn from the valuable feedback that is freely given."

You keep doing you, Robert, and try to ignore the ankle-biters.

Expand full comment

So I read Breggin's July 27 blog in which he accuses Desmet of being a "Trojan Horse" to the medical freedom movement somehow purposefully throwing people off holding anyone accountable for the pandemic crimes against humanity. It seems to me Breggin totally misrepresented the positions of Desmet. I think the two men's positions are not mutually exclusive. The people who planned and carried out the pandemic took advantage of the phenomenon of Mass Formation psychology using propaganda. What is so surprising/confusing to me is why Breggin would attack Desmet and then you in his Aug. 23rd blog: https://breggin.com/article-detail/post_detail/The-Desmet-Malone-Ideology-of-Mass-Psychosis-Blames-the-Citizens-and-Not-the-Global-Predators Who is influencing Breggin? Your "caged animal" substack article on the why and how of the pandemic was brilliantly nuanced in explaining all of the multifaceted elements influencing the way things played out.

Expand full comment

Having read or re-read the Breggins statement from your link, it seems pretty clear to me that they make a strong case for expressing dissatisfaction for Desmet's main argument; I haven't as yet finished reading Desmet's book but have felt the same misgivings about a lack of acknowledgment that much evidence exists to show a well designed globalist and elitist agenda has been at work; an agenda in pursuit of power and control at any cost regardless of the existence of any mass formation or hypnosis; a case can also be made that the "pandemic" narrative of enforcement and denial of freedoms served to destroy, for many, any sense of personal identity and responsibility in efforts to resist the mass propaganda being imposed.

Expand full comment

Did you read this post by Desmet? Why are we splitting hairs when there are much bigger issues to resolve? Together. Rage and fragmentation will do nobody any good.

Expand full comment

We ARE discussing the "bigger issues" and there has been societal "rage and fragmentation" from the beginning , long before any of us started posting here or anywhere else.

Expand full comment
Sep 5, 2022Liked by Robert W Malone MD, MS

Lumping us together is a compliment.

We must hang together or we will surely hang separately.

Expand full comment

So I read your explanatory analysis, and with all due respect, you yourself very clearly establish that link between you and Desmet, even calling him a colleague; you very clearly outline how the major players built covid policies on lies while supporting the "groupthink" theory inherent in Desmet's mass formation thesis which places much blame on the group while all but ignoring the clearly designed tactics used by the likes of Birx and Fauci; but your final summation is the most illuminating and I fully quote it here: "Looping back to the big picture, there is the idea that what has been happening globally is just the beginning of something very dark, very intentional, and very planned. Is there any way that either you or I can know for certain if this is the case? Unfortunately, no." And then quite hypocritically but consistent with your contradictory stance, you claim that you have just stated a "hypothesis" which is" most definitely consistent with the observable facts"; as you say, the facts exist and do point to what we all have experienced as being very dark and intentional on a global scale and the answer to your own question is not "no" but an emphatic YES! Yes because of the enormity of the evidence pouring in from so

many quarters and now, even from the admissions of many of the key players who are "jumping ship" as the facts are coming to light.

Expand full comment

At this stage of the game how is it still possible to speak of "conspiracy theories" when we KNOW that conspiracies do exist and not even secret anymore, if they ever were; and when proven to be real are not mere theories or "ideas" or "hypotheses"; the fact is we do "know for certain" and one suspects that Malone , as one who was there, also knew .

Expand full comment

Some - including many on here - did not fall for "the clearly designed tactics used by the likes of Birx and Fauci", while clearly many others did. I see Desmet's work as an attempt to help explain the latter. If, as it seems, you have no time for that work, how do you explain the latter (and the distinction)?

Expand full comment

Actually I have spent a great deal of time reading and watching Desmet interviews with an objective and open mind; Desmet's book may very well offer an explanation for some of those who fell for the pandemic propaganda and did not offer resistance because they were too fully immersed in a mass formation state but that's not necessarily the case for everyone; in the final analysis ( and even in the first analysis!) it remains up to the individual who will not easily compromise either his independent thought or his identity even while under enormous societal pressures; Covid revealed that such rare individuals still exist and can be forces against the very same propaganda that the majority succumb to.

Expand full comment

I don't disagree anything you say there. Perhaps our difference (if any) is that I tend to see Desmet's contribution as part of an effort to help the deluded escape their delusion, rather than as an effort to blame the problem on them and thus absolve the real bad guys?

Expand full comment

Yes I accept that Desmet does contribute in that sense and society as a whole needs to take responsibility and clearly define what values it holds most dear, especially in times of crisis; but "the real bad guys" do exist and their power and control must be fought against and if another tyranny replaces the present one, then it must also be resisted.

Expand full comment

I am offering to have a conversation of all parties on my podcast, if there is desire. With love and respect and intellectual integrity. I find this new schism heartbreaking and more dangerous than most other things. it's not like we don't have a big monster to fight together, in whatever way makes sense to each of us. One thing we cannot afford is in-fighting. We can't afford it, simple as that. We can't afford it. I wrote the story about about an earlier in-fighting in the freedom community, I stand by it. We can't afford it. Everybody should talk.

https://tessa.substack.com/p/unity

Expand full comment

I'm with you. It's heartbreaking. The ball seems to be in the Breggins' court, as it seems Dr. Desmet is open to discussion.

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Sep 5, 2022
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Early on, Fauci's friend and colleague Dr. Ian Lipkin, got covid and called a friend in China. He was told HCQ or plasma from someone who had it were working. Lipkin went on HCQ early, within a few days of getting sick and going downhill, and very soon after starting HCQ, began turning around. You bet Fauci knew this.

Expand full comment

Excellent points and is there any doubt that evil or Satanic forces are at work in the world and manifest in such as Fauci and his fellow psychopaths? such explanations as mass formation and psychosis may be nothing more than the effects remaining after evil has taken root and manifested itself throughout society; the masses most affected are those who compromised their beliefs and sacrificed their identities and became accomplices to the very demonic forces they claimed to be fighting; willingly or unwillingly when one sells one's soul to the devil , there will be a reckoning coming due as the devil will certainly demand payment for his work.

Expand full comment

There is evil in this world and it is called pride, greed, power, hate, envy......and undiagnosed and unchecked expands in perpetuity.

Expand full comment

Fauci dismissed Hydroxychloroquine because there wasn't enough profit in it. In order to enable the use of new profitable drugs it had to be shown there wasn't anything else.

Expand full comment

Fauci discredited/banned HCQ and later Ivermectin because you can't get an EUA for a vaccine if there's a readily available, effective treatment / cure. This was coordinated worldwide.

Expand full comment

A sincere discussion in good faith between these parties to aid fuller understanding is not ‘in fighting.’

Taking a shot and then refusing to engage may be, however.

Expand full comment

I agree that a sincere discussion in good faith is not in-fighting, it is the only format available to human beings to resolve conflict. It has to happen between all parties though, otherwise it's a courthouse and not a sincere discussion! And in courthouses, everybody is interested in winning. While what we need to an even-headed approach with truth is mind, and as void of personal branding as possible.

Expand full comment

We are paying for the ills of how we have all been raised - to seek victory at any cost, as opposed to wisdom and peace. And I hope this conflict is resolved because nothing good is going to happen from pointing fingers at each other. We are looking at a literal battle of our lifetime. Not the time for egos!!!!!

Expand full comment

From what I see here, the ‘finger pointing’ - as in taking a shot and then refusing to engage in good faith - is coming from one side only, no?

Expand full comment

it seems like Mattias is more eager to talk than Ginger, and I hope it gets resolved. I have hope for that, it is far more productive than "winning," because, if the tyrants have their way, the winner and the loser will end up in the same digital prison, or camp, for that matter.

Now, I am agnostic of the participants' vaccination status because I believe it's less relevant than their actions right now. I personally don't judge anyone on their past choices, what matters is where people are now.

Expand full comment

How does their vax status figure into this? (Or did I miss something?)

Expand full comment

Yes, you're seeing the situation correctly.

Expand full comment

Did you read Desmet's book?

Expand full comment

No? Yes.

Expand full comment

Absolutely, Tessa!

Expand full comment

I think we’re in agreement on that, T.

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Sep 16, 2022
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Excellent comment, Jim

Expand full comment
Sep 4, 2022·edited Sep 4, 2022

Given Kirsch’s extraordinary stack piece today, might it not be more productive for both these parties to explain how each of their perspectives best addresses the revelations he describes?

Expand full comment

Absolutely!

Expand full comment

Here’s where I agree with you, T, but in a slightly different way: what I think our side could do much better is organize our rockstars into a group around different issues if attack - rather than have everyone pursue their own thread (albeit brilliantly). What we lack is a team-manager/coordinator, so perhaps you can fulfill that role 🙂

Expand full comment

Yes. And on as many podcasts as possible. But the best method will be to have moderator and all guests in the room in person.

Expand full comment

Absolutely. Having everyone in the same room would be ideal. Before the pandemic, I used to host in-person, offline debates between people in great disagreement with each other. There is a reason why in-person and offline works the best. It's most relaxing for everyone and makes it less of a courthouse and more of a sincere conversation. But things have changed after 2020, the whole physical thing is screwed up, and we are used to watching everything online, so we can work with what we have...

Expand full comment

Cordiality seems to be better when in person.

Expand full comment

Without a doubt!!

Expand full comment

Agreed. Thank you for offering a place to fix the schism.

Expand full comment

Beautifully expressed, Tessa Lena!!! Thank you for your healthy and inspired observation, and for having the courage and desire to DO SOMETHING to help us all WAKE UP. I have been seeing more and more in-fighting lately; all motivated by narrow obsessive view points!

Expand full comment

It was the perfect storm for propaganda to flourish and it's been happening for a very long time: the dumbing down of thinking, the complete LACK of critical thinking in curriculum in public schools, the WOKE hysteria, the economic destruction with printing money...go back to Nixon when he removed the gold standard... and of course Ron Reagan, that devil with dementia, not unlike the current clown in the big house of white. And Obama bailing out the banks and Wall Street to open the country up to endless paper money printing...

Expand full comment
Sep 4, 2022·edited Sep 4, 2022

I see a lot of overlap between the principals discussed here by Desmet, and the arguments made by young people when they claim that 97% of climate scientists are in agreement, and the science is "settled."

When I point out, all climate science is funded by the government, and the scientists bend their judgments to give the paymasters what they want, the young people scoff and laugh (not unlike the German diplomats when Trump said in his UN speech the Germans were becoming dependent on the Russians for their energy). Their response is, "You're crazy! You're saying there's a big conspiracy to distort the science, and all the climate scientists are part of the conspiracy and have agreed to go along. That's insane!" I try to explain, it's not an explicit conspiracy like you think. It's an unspoken one, but where the incentives are clear, and those who don't get onboard fall by the wayside.

These young people are idealistic. They aren't aware of how much science is influenced by which data is given weight, and which, though valid, is ignored. And how a person with a spouse, children, and a mortgage can steer his judgment to provide for his family. And do it with a clean conscience, believing he/she is doing right, and doing it for the greater good.

They just can't see it.

Expand full comment

The media are presenting preposterous lies as unquestionable fact. This is how people become brainwashed. They can't conceive that the absurd nonsense they have accepted as truth couldn't be false because of how it was presented.

The 97% consensus is pure fiction. Every aspect of climate has a wide range of conclusions in the peer reviewed literature. The only consensus is that our emissions should be causing some additional warming all other variables remaining constant. Empirically base studies give far lower warming rates than model based pseudoscience.

Expand full comment

I read an interesting scientific paper, which pointed out that the majority of the greenhouse effect of CO2 has already occurred and adding additional CO2 will make little additional impact. Imagine the windows of your car are all rolled up on a sunny day and someone adds an extra inch of glass thickness to the windows. Is the interior of the car going to get hotter? True or not true. I believe it would be an experiment, which if not already conducted, could answer the question.

Expand full comment

Physicists who have done the line by line calculations of CO2's radiative flux all show that it doesn't have a strong enough forcing to produce the strong positive feedback's assumed in hypothetical climate models. It has been measured that CO2 declines in it's ability to produce further warming as it increases in volume. That and tons of other data are ignored by the climate establishment. Measurements from NASA show that most of modern warming was from a reduction in clouds which allowed more of the suns energy to reach the surface. The IPCC position that most of modern warming is from human emissions has been invalidated by empirical measurement.

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Sep 5, 2022
Comment removed
Expand full comment

"Back-radiation says a colder atmosphere can warm a warmer surface."

That's a misstatement of what actually happens. Emitted IR photons directed back towards the surface of the Earth slows down the rate which heat can escape. (back radiation) More heat is retained by the system as a result. It is not a violation of thermodynamics as you are suggesting.

Physicists show that an emitted photon from a CO2 molecule is far more likely to thermalize through collision than produce downwelling back radiation. The effect is tiny.

The theory that gravity establishes the surface temperature still needs some work the last time I checked but has strong merit. It's detractors misrepresent it as replacing the Greenhouse theory. That isn't true, GHG's respond to the gravitational set temperature in the classically understood manner.

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Sep 5, 2022
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Yes, totally agree Jim!

The propaganda techniques which were used for the climate crisis lie were scaled up for the COVID crisis power grab by Big Pharma.

Preposterous pseudoscience is being presented as an unquestionable fact. They repeat the lies thousands of times so people who aren't scientifically literate have no hope of understanding how brainwashed they are. That is the scary part. I recently read that 68% of UK conservatives believe the absurd nonsense being promoted incessantly.

Expand full comment

Very insightfully stated!

Expand full comment

A very astute comment. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Agreed. At the very least, Evil is an emergent property. See the great Michael Crichton’s “Prey” .... and also Crichton for other aspects of this episode.

Expand full comment

Didn’t he die mysteriously? I remember reading one of his books about nanotechnology which was terrifying. It was about nanotech outsmarting man….

Expand full comment

“Prey” - scared me too.

Expand full comment
Sep 5, 2022·edited Sep 5, 2022

Terminal Man left a huge impact on me; still does even after reading 40 years ago

Expand full comment

“State of Fear”. If you haven’t read it, please do. He saw the future clearly.

Expand full comment

Thanks, Judy. Loved it.

Blue ringed octopus.

He has an essay - read by Carlton Heston, if memory serves - where he describes how the Enviros have recreated the Bible - State of Grace - The Fall (Fossil Fuels) - Evil (James Watt, Thomas Edison, etc. and redemption is carbon credit indulgences and the sacraments of recycling…..

He doesn’t say this but I reckon that The Savior is geologist Gene Shoemaker - of impact crater fame - whose prophetic voice will save Gaia when an Earth-Threatening asteroid comes a calling….

Expand full comment

Would love to see a sentence or two on what Crichton said. Thx.

Expand full comment

Start by looking up “Emergent Property”.

The book is about computerized nano-particles that self-assemble into predatory swarms.

Enjoy the read!

Expand full comment

Thank you AlanDavis. Emergent properties that self assemble … sounds like a foreshadowing of current themes.😵‍💫🙄

Expand full comment

Crichton’s mind is amazing.

Expand full comment

Your cheap shot at President Ronald Reagan (not "Ron Reagan"; that's his leftist son) detracts from your otherwise thoughtful comments. I was proud to vote for this good, visionary, and consequential man the first time in 1980. I watched him take on the daunting task of "making America great again" and instilling pride and hope in Americans like me following the disastrous Carter years. And then I voted for him a second term, during which he set the stage for the collapse of the Soviet Union 7 years later...all the while under attack by vicious political opponents and a hostile media. For years Americans had lived under the shadow of that evil regime's threats to force communism on us and enslave our grandchildren. President Reagan, or as you mindlessly call him "that devil with dementia" and absurdly compare him to the illegitimate current occupant of the White House, was steadfast and courageous in his commitment to keeping America free and strong with his doctrine of peace through strength. I have to conclude you've simply been misinformed about Ronald Reagan and his presidency and the difference they made in preserving our freedom for the next generation. Now it’s our turn, the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Reagan’s generation.

Expand full comment

Perry-Folino is hypersensitive when criticized. I agree completely with your assessment of President Ronald Reagan. P-Folino called him demented. I’m a retired neurologist. Reagan did later show decline but Biden is declining while in office before the world’s eyes and is being easily manipulated and led here and there.

Expand full comment

Very accurate response!

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

FDR is the primary author of the socialist state we live under today. You obviously don’t understand economics.

Expand full comment

You’re an idiot, Perry-Folina.

Expand full comment

Name calling is a low form insult expected from an immature person.

Expand full comment

Wow

Expand full comment

Here is what you need to know about Ronald Reagan..it's elucidated quite well for anyone defending him. https://terpconnect.umd.edu/~jklumpp/comm461/lectures/reagan.html

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

You’re still an idiot, Perry-Folino

Expand full comment

This is the first that I've read Mattias' own words, although I've read much about him from Margaret & CJ, among others. I'd have to say he convinces me of his critics' point--although I know that's controversial. There's an artificial dichotomy being presented between a handful of evil people and an evil in the hearts of all of us that we need to change. But another direction is looking at a system that rewards selfish, greedy, destructive, violent megalomaniac behavior. If you got rid of the handful of people who are currently the best at that, they'd be replaced. But thinking that we just need to "be the good we want in the world" is naive. This is absolutely an intentional plot and just because people like YNH make their motives clear hasn't made it less effective. In fact, I'd say that Mattias is doing the same thing as Yuval, in spreading out the blame to all of us so that we're distracted by our own guilt from holding the perpetrators responsible. Yuval does this with overpopulation and 'ownership,' Mattias does this with willingness to go along and blind complicity.

We need to see the actors as the symptom but diagnose the disease correctly. We were born to be healthy in mind, body and spirit. The confusion and delusions we're under have been inflicted on us through systems of money, education and media, to name three. Your Lord of the Rings quote from the Sunday Strip has it right.

Expand full comment

"This is the first that I've read Mattias' own words". And if, after finally reading his own words you continue to mis-interpret his meaning (he is not presenting an "artificial dichotomy") you may unwittingly be illustrating his point. In the end, no matter how conditioned, manipulated and propagandized people are, we are all still ultimately responsible for our own thinking, the choices we make and the actions we take. This is not "spreading out blame" or "setting people up to be distracted by their own guilt". On the contrary It is for the purpose of encouraging people to see their part in how this has happened, and in this way feel empowered to remove the yoke of control by fully comprehending how it got there in the first place. The goal is to elevate our awareness beyond the simplistic victim-perpetrator perspective.

Expand full comment

Teresa: You make a very valid point; but being "responsible for our own thinking" is not a simple matter, especially when one has been indoctrinated for many years to do the opposite; we have been "dumbed down" by educational systems and educators that are no more than propagandists for current trends and government dictates in service of their own selfish interests and preservation;; to be a responsible thinker means we have to be critical thinkers and capable of objectively examining our own positions and open to change if and when necessary; I have known many from academia, religion and philosophy who, by any standard, have failed to uphold their own belief systems and take personal responsibility for their own decisions; in spite of their "intelligence" and "awareness" they chose to be accomplices and cowardly victims of their own choices; as Thoreau once wrote: "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation."

Expand full comment

I appreciate your point Tony. As someone who experienced significant adversity in childhood, and became a teacher specifically to become an agent of change, I could not agree more with your comments. Our system of public education is not only broken but has become an ever more horrifying tool in the hands of this totalitarian agenda. It's clearly child abuse at this point, and the system is not fix-able. Yet I would make the additional observation that it may well have been my own experience of familial child abuse that brought me to immediately question what was happening with COVID from the beginning, on an intuitive level. I've done an enormous amount of work psychologically to understand my experience; yet others I know who have not developed insight into their experience of abuse, have bought into the entire COVID narrative and become enraged when challenged. Victim identity can become a kind of comfort zone, and as one who has lived there, it is extremely dis-empowering and left me stuck, prone to perpetually re-enact the dynamic. Awareness is something that that must be cultivated. It's not the same as intelligence or cognition.

Expand full comment

Couldn't agree more.

I too experienced severe and chronic adversity throughout my childhood and have long ago stopped trusting the medical mafia... if I ever truly did.

Are you familiar with JT Gatto's work?

https://www.pdfdrive.com/weapons-of-mass-instruction-a-schoolteachers-journey-through-the-dark-world-of-compulsory-schooling-e162898324.html

Expand full comment

Yes! He's brilliant and I appreciate the link. I also share your distrust of the medical mafia.

Expand full comment

The Medical Mafia (2002)

~ Ghislaine Lanctôt

https://archive.org/details/TheMedicalMafia

Direct link to PDF file:

https://ia800304.us.archive.org/2/items/TheMedicalMafia/TheMedicalMafia.pdf

415FDD8E7C67479381383FB7773DF379.pdf

~*~

Expand full comment

Very insightful comment....much appreciated!

Expand full comment

Very insightful comment, much appreciated!

Expand full comment

Very well stated...

NOTHING will change fundamentally, until we fundamentally change the way we perceive and treat children. Until then, we will continue to see childhood adversity re-enacted upon EVERY aspect of society.

Furthermore, childhood adversity more often than not consists of imposing utterly INSANE societal standards of "normalcy" on children, to which they MUST conform, in order to survive, at a time when they are too young to understand and reject the madness being imposed on them.

The "masses" are essentially clueless and unaware of their own conditioning...

Aware Parenting website:

www.awareparenting.com

Expand full comment

So back to Mattias. He's presenting, imo, one side of the dichotomy but Margaret Anna Alice and CJ Hopkins present the other. I think all of these people, btw, respect each other as I respect all of them, it's a difference in ideas, not intent.

In Margaret's Dissident Dialogue with CJ (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/dissident-dialogues-cj-hopkins) she states, "Whereas Mattias suggests mass formation precedes totalitarianism, you believe totalitarianism produces the mass formation, right?" Both Margaret and CJ see this being driven by 'philanthropaths' as Margaret coined.

What Mattias states here is "The steering is first and foremost driven by an ideology—a way of thinking. ... all this can be done without man having to reflect on his role in his own misfortune, without questioning himself as a moral and ethical being. This ideology makes life easy in the short term. The price for convenience will be paid in arrears."

He continues, "Man has always fallen prey to the aforementioned “temptations”—the illusion of rational understanding and control, the resistance to question oneself critically as a human, the pursuit of short-term convenience. ... The puppet master is the ideology, not the elite. ... the leaders of the masses—the so-called elite—give the people what they want. When fearful,the population wants a more controlled society. ... The “plans” do not precede the developments, as a conspiracy logic suggest. They follow them."

I don't think people are reading Mattias and saying, "OMG yes! I haven't looked at my role in my misfortune and how I don't want to question myself critically and just want short-term convenience." No, this is a way of blaming others for their (and our) misfortune. And the alternative is blaming the hidden actors that Mattias says are just giving the people what they want. Which might be more credible if they weren't creating the fear in the first place.

I'm a very pragmatic person and what I look at is the usefulness of any belief. Both positions say that first you need to change other people, which kind of stops you in your tracks (unless you know a more effective way than I do, because I'm failing miserably.) What I look at in my writings is how to change the system. I think that if we presented an alternative, people would change their minds on their own.

Expand full comment

I appreciate everyone's point of view, and find it interesting to read them. As I understand what Desmet is saying, people become vulnerable to totalitarian measures when they lack insight into their own motivations and behavior. The "powers that be" are following a standard Hegelian model of creating a terrifying problem, then appearing in the very next scene with the perfect solution for anxious, fearful people - "a more controlled society". The propaganda keeps the fear moving toward their goal (clearly stated) for increased control over every facet of life. In my opinion, and what I think Desmet is saying is that the "change" needs to be driven from within each individual as a matter of personal responsibility, then build momentum from there. In a way, it's like asking people to grow up. Our culture has become not just "dumbed down" but infantilized. So perhaps in the same way that abused children get trapped in an external locus of control, the challenge in recovery is to look in the mirror and redefine who really runs the show. It's an internal process in my view, and there are no short cuts.

Expand full comment

Thank you, Teresa, for mentioning Hegel, whose unproven theory of dialectics is the actual problem. Mechanism and rationalism were not incompatible with Monotheism...it was the attempt to control nature by praying and sacrificing to multiple gods and the writing-off of each failed attempt by devising theories of what mischief was done by which of those gods. Monotheism made the universe seem understandable, if we recognized one God as Creator and accepted God as being rational, then by learning to be rational we could learn to be godly. During much of the Enlightenment this became the standard view of both philosophy and theology. No one argued that rationality causes evil. Contrarily, the standard view of the evil we today would call Totalitarianism, was that people chose to ignore what was reasonable and grab at any powers they could.

What changed with Hegel's introduction of paradigm theory, was the notion that the universe was evolving. Thesis collided with Antithesis to create a Synthesis superior to the original opposed parts, aka a New Paradigm. This view of a continuously improving universe, devoid of a decision-maker who chose its course, made morality obsolete. As John Lennon tried to explain it, "it's gonna be alright", revolution or not, so get HAF on dope and enjoy the view of history changing and paradigms shifting. Teilhard de Chardin had already put the cherry atop his theocratic version of the Hegel sundae: The Universe would evolve by paradigm shifts until it created a god.

Effectively this was the Manichean Heresy run backward through the sausage grinder. Mani began with a god half light and half matter, half evil and half good, then claimed it divided itself into a Good spirit and an Evil spirit. De Chardin began with raw matter and a lot of conflicting paradigms, and ended up with a deus ex machina.

This leaves us in a peculiar place, when trying to make sense of totalitarian thinking. I think Desmet has found something genuinely wrong but widely popular and frequently copied, but that something is not mechanism nor rationality. Rather it is the mysticism of Hegel's paradigm evolution that grabs the narcissistic elements of so very many minds and leads them to the conflicting choices of either complete nihilism ("It's gonna be alright" no matter what choices we make) or adherence to some arbitrary belief system to which we sacrifice first our rationality and then our personal existence. To achieve rationality is to see the value of companionship and the learning we gain by discourse with others. I'm a little proud of having written this response but I must thank Dr Malone for introducing all of us and then introducing the Desmet articles to us, or my writing here would not have happened. Yes it is desirable to sharpen our wits in discussions with each other. Achieving the correct answer takes work and the admission to all the previous failures leading to it. Forcing people on pain of death or persecution, to agree with the dumb idea du jour ("Earth is flat", "The Sun revolves around Earth", "Freed Negro slaves should not marry white people or Evolution will run backward", "Er ist der Juden", and "Allah drew the Ayatollah Khomeini's face on the Moon" have all been in vogue among ignorant people who followed fools) creates the false appearance of agreement, but leads us ever-farther from the truth because pleasing the Leader and his following, is necessary if we are to survive.

In summary, the totalitarian urge was well-summarized by Orwell (with perhaps some inspiration from CS Lewis) in "Nineteen Eighty-Four". It is the power to replace reason with commands, that makes ruling the people attractive.

Expand full comment

That's a brilliant post Bob. Thank you for clarifying Hegel's paradigm and for your observation that it leads to either nihilism or our adherence to non-sensical belief systems to which we may ultimately sacrifice our existence. If what reinforces people's adherence to non-sensical beliefs is the information people access, and when these trusted sources skew and censor that information at the behest of "powers that be", it would seem one means of blocking the stampede off the cliff would be to expose those outlets (NYT and WaPo especially) once and for all for the bought and paid for propaganda tools they have become. Perhaps law suits and court cases, with all that must be disclosed in the discovery process, might be what breaks this open for people.

Expand full comment

I'm proud of you too, Bob, for this comprehensive and scholarly post! I confess, though, that I got a little lost in applying it all back to the question. Let me define that again, so you can help me.

Mattias is saying (as I understand it) that our ideology of short-term convenience without self-criticism is the cause and totalitarianism is the result. CJ and Margaret are saying that evil totalitarians are the cause but people who don't resist are complicit. I'm saying that we're all complicit unless we live off of foraged berries in the wilderness AND we're all innocent victims. Change the system so that people can take responsibility for their own lives and communities, and the ideologies will follow.

So how does your analysis define the cause and solution? Thanks for seeing the value in companionship and learning through discourse. I agree!

Expand full comment

I agree with you, Tereza, that our morbid obsession with near-term comfort has blinded many of us to considering life more than 3 months in the future, let alone planning and investing for it, but that's not really what Mattias DeSmet is introducing here nor about which I am responding. If only 99.995% of Humanity chose to live off foraged berries in the wilderness, that still leaves 30,000 nuclear missiles in the control of the 0.005% of the population who would own them. So the foraging-for-berries solution is unattainable because someone would retain the capacity to use violence against we berry-foragers and return us to a servile status. That's why neither Mattias nor I set that option on the table...it's unattainable until someone can enforce the peace.

I'm merely stating the opinion that Mattias has overreached by blaming rationality, science, and mechanistic thinking for the social problem of censorship and centralization of control through fear.

It's not the Scientific Method that turned Western Medicine into a belief system with Drs Fauci and Birx as High Priests and Dr Malone as heterodox antipope. Rather, it was the conflation of Science, with the outward symbols of Science (white lab coats, academic titles, unique dialect not spoken by ordinary citizens) that confused so many of the common people into hushing up, refusing to ask logical questions, and taking the most-paranoid view of the COVID threat even to the exclusion of considering the other threats to life and limb that were also present.

In his seminal 1964 book, "How Children Fail", John Holt asserted that the grade schools of his day and yet today, put an inadequate effort into teaching every student the basics. The handful at the high end of the bell curve come away with relative mastery of the curriculum but the vast majority, argued Holt, come away ashamed of what they did not master and fearful to be asked any question to which they might not know the answer. Dr Holt correctly saw this as a threat to the democratic institutions of lawful society, because people must have the will to think for ourselves and independently reach decisions, else we become a rabble waiting for a Robespierre or a J.E.B. Stuart or a Chairman Mao or an Ayatollah Khomeini to turn us into a raving mob that goes off lynching people on the demands of a Leader. I mention Stuart and his KKK in particular because they literally funded the creation of junk science, in order to pass "public health" laws that racially segregated much of American society, but which falsified junk science when exported to South Africa caused oppression and when exported to a German prison inmate named Hitler, led to his wildly-popular book, "Mein Kampf", his release from prison, rise to public office, his 11 million state-sanctioned murders of the "racially unfit" and the biggest war in history that killed additional millions. There was nothing scientific in KKK race myths. They simply were most-paranoid interpretations of Evolutionary theory that predicted Evolution would run backward if Africans married Europeans...to which a surprising number of Americans reflexively react by denying the possibility of Evolution itself. In my country this seems to be our version of becoming berry-pickers: Many Americans embraced ignorance of biology to avoid taking sides in the decades-long feud between racists and anti-racists, resulting in a celebration of ignorance that screeches to a halt when someone becomes ill and needs medical care.

So my difference of opinion with Mattias, is that he sees some sort of general problem relating to Mechanism and Rationalism in some way, and I see a narrow and specific problem of some people trying to establish a Church of Science, whose beliefs are not open to question, then seeking to use coercive methods to punish heretics for daring to question the beliefs of the Church of Science.

Boiled down to the essentials, my view is that this Church of Science defies the Scientific Method itself. Anyone who questions a theory in real science, inspires an experiment to test the theory, and real scientists accept experimental proof or disproof of all theories. Turning the quackery into a belief system and suppressing all contrary evidence is a lot of things, but is not rational nor mechanistic nor honest.

As for solutions, we need to get back to the Scientific Method. Questions deserve honest answers, particularly when the honest answer is "We don't know." Nobody should be shamed for asking honest questions.

Expand full comment

I'm enjoying reading yours also, Teresa, and I see by the spelling of your name that we're both named after the formidable Teresa of Avila and not the wimpy little flower ;-) I think the comparison to an abused child is very apt because you're right, we've been made not just psychologically dependent but dependent for everything that keeps us alive--food, shelter, sick care. I don't know anything about child abuse, and I defer to your knowledge, but it seems like a step in recovery is self-forgiveness, is recognizing that this is something that was done to you without your consent, and deciding not to go along with it anymore.

It seems like the self-blame, maybe, keeps someone stuck in the cycle of abuse. There's a shame in having let it be done to you, even though from an objective point of view, that's nonsense.

In the same way, people who suspect the vaccine has hurt them have to deal with the self-blame that they did it to themselves, or stay in denial. By forgiving them, showing how they were coerced and fooled, and giving them something constructive to do with their anger, I think we'd give them a way to take back their locus of control, as you put so well.

Expand full comment

These are very insightful connections Tereza, and beautifully said. Shame is a powerful tool and often weaponized by abusers to keep a child quiet. I never connected things exactly as you're describing within the context of COVID but the parallels are strong and your points are excellent, especially the final one.

Also I appreciate your comments about the 2 Teresa's. They each have such interesting stories but Teresa of Avila was the rebel... ;->

Expand full comment

Yay, someone else who knows the histories of the Teresa's! Yes, T of Avila was a saucy wench with a wicked sense of humor and an independent streak. A master of psychology as abbess, she sat below everyone else to show she was there to serve them. It was said that her young confessor, St John of the Cross, was in love with her. And she managed to skirt the Inquisition. A woman for our time!

Thank you for the very kind words, Teresa.

Expand full comment

Yes, that's key: Consciousness is an inside job. No easy one time task, since insights unfold over one's lifetime. Blame/shame, preoccupation with an enemy, and polarization only serve to obscure and delay. Fearless courage for one's self, and deep compassion for all humanity are required companions if we are to have any hope of navigating the rocky road before us now.

Expand full comment

I agree 💯 👍🏼🙏🏼

Expand full comment

So many topics, Teresa. I went off to a dance class and came back to a veritable feast of interesting points! First, I'm so sorry to hear all the things you've had to deal with and the diagnosis you're dealing with now. I know yours isn't related to the vaccine but I did some research on that because my brother-in-law was just diagnosed with Stage 4 pancreatic and the same prognosis of 6 mos as you. I've been walking a fine line, trying hard to convince them to not do chemo and go to someone Joe Mercola just interviewed--the interview is on the website at Brio-Medical.com and the link is on my episode: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-cancer-covax-connexion.

And then you and Nicoletta were talking about one of my heroes, John Taylor Gatto. And coincidentally, my latest YT (which I'll transcribe for Substack later today) references him in Reinventing Education: https://youtu.be/rVty8ClMNM4. I talk about him in some earlier episodes too, From FOMO to JOMO: the Joy of Missing Out: https://youtu.be/5ZGY7uPs8K4 and Six Levels of Reality: https://youtu.be/5aVIwLwQBk4 where I cite his research on mass compulsory education as mental colonization. I think you're both really onto something! I'll jump into Mattias in another post.

Expand full comment

Thank you, on behalf of all, for that sharing and for those links...

Expand full comment

Extremely well said!

Expand full comment

What has it come to when the Breggins won't sit down and have a discussion with you on their impressions of your book's message?

Compare that response to the method of face to face discourse and argument that took place in the groundbreaking and now famous Dr. Bret Weinstein interview with you and Steve Kirsch. That approach was so impactful, respectful, and riveting to view and experience.. It was a lengthy discussion among colleagues with similar and related concerns with some differing points of view and ranges of emotional feeling about them. In doing so the perspectives being taken were elaborated upon and expressed in more nuanced ways. The discussion was carried out in a collegial, human and well-moderated format, addressed misunderstandings or possible inconsistencies, and supplemented each side's understanding. Bret Weinstein displayed his gift in participating and hosting that exemplary meeting of the minds Joe Rogan has a similar gift with ability to relate to all sorts of audiences, with humor as needed.

What we are also discovering is that when attacks and critiques among scholars, detractors or even colleagues are executed from a distance, drone style, sometimes anonymously, without any opportunity for interaction, it is not helpful to anyone's cause or to humanity's needs in general. We must bring back in person conferences, meetings, roundtables and moderated discussions on the things that matter.

https://archive.org/details/brett-weinstein-dr-robert-malone-steve-kirsch

Expand full comment

Amen to that, everything you said. After I watched that very same interview, it had been very much a watershed moment for me. Whether it was "a shot heard round the world" or a "crossing of the Rubicon", well... choose your own metaphor, for it was a life-changer from which I will never turn back.

The Truth is like a Lion. Roar, Lion, roar!

Expand full comment

I watched the Weinstein and Steve Patterson discussion and wow it was one of the best pure intellectual back and forth I have seen. Respectful and productive.

Expand full comment

Dr. Desmet's response to the Breggins is much appreciated. I was very surprised to see their criticism of him, and by virtue of proximity, I guess, Dr. Malone as well. Having read their book and listened to several interviews of/by them, I considered them members of the small group of what I call professional "heroes" in the COVID nightmare. I can't imagine why they struck out as they did at Desmet, but the fact that they've been unresponsive to him leaves me no choice but to reevaluate my high opinion of them.

Expand full comment

It’s called “professional jealousy”.

Expand full comment

Perhaps Dr. Desmet struck a nerve...

Expand full comment

My husband and I watched the Tucker Carlson Today interview with Desmet - we were stunned, still processing the truth of it all. It was actually encouraging. So much to unpack.

Expand full comment

I already responded to this at Mattias’s Stack (https://mattiasdesmet.substack.com/p/am-i-an-expert-in-mass-formation/comment/8839799) so won’t repeat what I said, except to say I am disappointed the Breggins didn’t take Mattias up on his offer to discuss this misunderstanding constructively and hope they change their minds.

Robert, I knowing jabbing children is close to your heart, so I think you will especially appreciate the piece I just published (which includes your plea to parents):

• “50 Reasons to Give Your Child the COVID Shot” (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/50-reasons-to-give-your-child-the)

To anyone seeing this, PLEASE read past the title :-)

My hope is to get this to as many parents as possible and that the title may make the propagandized actually click through to read it. I would be grateful to you and any others who would be willing to share this.

Expand full comment

Read and shared. Thank you for all your writing! 🙏🏼💜🙏🏼

Expand full comment
Sep 4, 2022·edited Sep 4, 2022

Disclosure: I still have yet to read Desmet's book, but I have not been impressed by his general dea. I already have several issues:

a) I believe we are experiencing "ordinary" mass hysteria, which is fairly common historically. Giving the phenomenon a special technical name masks this pedestrian identity and deflects examination of its historical roots.

b) This hysteria is NOT grass-roots, but has largely been manufactured by mainstream media and Big Tech. In other words, the hysteria is an intended result of a propaganda project.

c) The hysteria, denigration, and especially censorship, began in earnest back when Trump was elected. It emerged seemlessly from previous systematic denigration of Putin and Russia, which in fact morphed into Russiagate, as a project meant to hide the Wikileaks pizzagate revelations. But the Milgram-level hysteria really exploded following Trump's election.

d) The anti-Trump hysteria project was redirected in 2020 toward COVID panic, caused by systematic denigration of simple medical treatments as they were discovered. Once again, this was helped greatly by the media, as well as western elite medical institutions of the west. "Misinfformation" as a term for reporting that countered propaganda entered our vocabulary. The propaganda drumbeat was "outside the vaccine there is no salvation." In other words, I see this more as Mass Vaccination than Mass Formation.

e) The political battle is only secondarily between different social groups, but must primarily be directed against the propagandists and censors who are using time-tested techniques to render tyrrany acceptable, and even trendy.

Expand full comment

As Desmet clearly points out in his book, the scientific/mechanistic mindset of our modern world led inevitably to the Mass Formation Psychosis that we are suffering from today. You would be well advised to actually read his book before reviewing it.

We are currently experiencing a 4th Turning in human relationships and in our relationship with the world in general. Everything written today, including THE PSYCHOLOGY OF TOTALITARIANISM, is tentative. Within ten years, the West will be overturned and the "revolution" will experience a counterrevolution.

Will the remnants of society become a peaceful agrarian society or will we see inquisitions and mindless violence? I'm guessing the BRICS will take over the world. But, what do I know?

Expand full comment
Sep 4, 2022·edited Sep 4, 2022

Your criticism is well-founded and something I need to remedy. But that doesn't take away from my main point.

Invoking 4th turnings etc. as passsive explanations does mask what I feell are the central historical issues, that our suffering is primarily due to ACTIVE demagoguery and denigration, carried out by elite propagandists. This sort of thing is nothing new or unfamiliar. The only novel feature is the availability of mass technology and the scale of the controls we have in our time. And possibly our acquiescence.

Expand full comment

Hi Cassandra. So happy to chat with a person with such a lovely name! The book entitled The 4th Turning struck me as prophetic and geometrically perfect. If you've not read it, the general concept is that each generation can be seen as having an archetypal spirit. The authors gave each generation a trait (e.g. sleepy, dopey, hero, dreamer) and posited that every 80 years or so a crisis would cause a massive shift in American life. As examples, they cited the American revolution, the civil war, WW II, and then left us wondering what would happen 80 years after that last one. Well, here we are. I don't see it as a passive explanation of events so much as a prophetic description of American history and evolution.

You are correct when you say the current chaos is nothing new. The world experienced a tulip mania in the seventeenth century and adults actually bought Beanie Babies in the 1990's. In between, there was the Hula Hoop, the Twist, and something called Disco.

Yet, it is modern technology, overpopulation, and psychology that have made the witch hunts and hatred of the 21st century unique.

Desmet does an amazing job of organizing trends and societal changes as forces which created the Nazi's a little more than eighty years ago and the Bidens and Faucis of today.

Expand full comment

Whether its group think, mass hysteria or mass formation psychosis - the fallout remains the same - death and destruction followed by resurrection. We are in dark days. JRR Tolkien’s Ring trilogy is a great foil for our journey.

Expand full comment

azradale@substack.com just posted the definitive article about Joe Biden's frightening speech and what it means for America. It's worth looking for:

"Opinion: It Is The Hour Of The Time" by Moneycircus

"Biden invokes the Lightbringer to conquer the soul. Solzhenitsyn speaks to us."

The powers of darkness have America in their hands and if we cannot find it in ourselves to RESIST, we are lost.

Expand full comment

The Trump Derangement Syndrome was cultivated ruthlessly and he made some errors amidst all the good he did. But, everyone makes errors and media bloodlust is a terrible thing. Hard to understand how he survived so much betrayal too — but that’s the light and the shadow of big egos. Agree w many of your points and focus on what is essential to combat this problem. Well said about ordinary hysteria too — it’s not humanity’s first rodeo regards hysteria.

Expand full comment
Sep 4, 2022·edited Sep 4, 2022

I was first introduced to Mattias Desmet in an interview by Jeremy Nell on Jerm Warfare about a year ago. His explanation for our current predicament and admonitions resonated with me. I don't think I'd use the term "hypnotized", but the people around me we completely taken in by the narrative. Many (most?) still are.

You may not remember, Dr. Malone, but I reminded you of Professor Desmet's warning about infighting amongst the opposition groups when you implied that Alex Berenson was "controlled opposition". Desmet warned that previous totalitarian states arose, in part, because the people who saw through the propaganda were a disparate bunch given to infighting that rendered them ineffective.

Perhaps that is the nature of the beast? Those of us who are able to see though the narrative are naturally skeptical and, perhaps, a little distrusting. We are right to be suspicious of each other. Previous movements have used Agents provocateur to influence the opposition. And, after all, Vladimir Lenin said, “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” We must all suss out each other's intentions and motives. No one is above scrutiny.

I wrote the following comment on threadirish's article entitled "Controlled Opposition : Why I Really Don’t…". I stand by it. Some in the opposition believe our current nightmare has a central planning committee of elites. Others believe our current nightmare is an amorphous, ever changing give-and-take between the so-called elites and the masses. I am, like many others, on the fence. I don't think incompetence, hubris, and CYA are sufficient to explain what has transpired over the past two and half years. I recognize that Klaus is more an Austin Power's evil villain than a James Bond evil villain. While I have some degree of compassion for those taken in by the propaganda (even if many wished me ill), I acknowledge that we are each responsible for our choices.

I don't agree with Desmet that conspiracies are necessarily secret. In fact, the most effective conspiracies are conducted in the light of day. They're just rebranded. After all, four out of five doctors smoke Camels (or, at least, they used to).

I recognize that many in the opposition who've stepped forward have paid an high price for their advocacy. Perhaps our skepticism seems like ingratitude? It isn't. The very ability that helped us see through the propaganda is still at work today.

If there is a plan to push the opposition to violence in order to discredit and destroy the freedom movement, we cannot play into their hands.

================================

One might wonder if the people calling out others as being "the controlled opposition" are themselves the controlled opposition.

Human beings are innately tribal. In the present circumstances, we must fight our need to belong and to follow leaders. We must do our own research. We cannot subordinate our critical thinking to others.

For a long time, I've felt that something was wrong in the world...that something was coming. I can't say why. I guess I'm just a little spooky. We don't live in the world we thought we lived in. We likely never did as that world was a creation of those who would craft our opinions and nudge our choices.

Now they have new plans for us. It's a rude and difficult awakening. Not all people are good. Who knew? Non-psychopaths simply cannot understand psychopaths. Their brains are wired differently than ours...forever. They really don't care if they hurt people.

I'm not a joiner. I never have been. I'm naturally reserved and, perhaps, a little distrusting. Going against the narrative was not a challenge for me. For others, it is impossible. They have different needs and motivations. IMO, they're weak.

I confess that I wonder about people in positions of influence who have taken the jabs. Some were late joiners who were injured (Malone, Kirsch) and have admitted their error. Others (Nawaz) admit that they took the jabs for travel. I've been wondering about Mattias Desmet these past few days. Clearly, he traveled to the United States to have that chat with Tucker Carlson. A foreign national cannot enter the US without at least two jabs. I don't think there are exceptions. Certainly, the US government didn't make an exception for Djokovic. How does a guy who has come to public prominence for his book on mass formation justify taking the jabs? I don't get it. So, the lockdowns and masks and school closures were bad...but the experimental gene therapy injections were cool? Ummm...nope. The jabs were the pièce de résistance, the most effective weapon in their coup d'état (coup d'état du monde?).

We should all be wary. Don't subordinate your thinking or your autonomy to anyone.

Beware the cult of personality.

Scruntinize for the motivations of so-called thought leaders...always.

Expand full comment

"I don't agree with Desmet that conspiracies are necessarily secret. In fact, the most effective conspiracies are conducted in the light of day. "

Three Points:

a) "Conspiracy" has become a loaded word, used by propagandistists to tar a theory as being absurd. The word thus becomes a kind of No Admittance sign against further consideration of the denigrated idea.

b) I'd argue that all political activity is properly a conspiracy. Speculation about what operatives might be up to would fall in the class of "conspiracy theory". But it's hard to even write this sentence, the words have become so loaded.

c) From the preceding, whether the conspiracy is secret, or whether it's open, depends largely on whether the conspirators feel that broadcasting their ideas would further their cause or embarrass them. Whether a conspiracy should be publicized, "leaked", ot kept secret is a tactical issue.

Expand full comment
Sep 5, 2022·edited Sep 5, 2022

I agree with your final point, especially. However, not all coordination (for example, political activity) is conspiratorial. IMO, the term conspiracy connotes malicious intent and/or malfeasance. The conspirators are trying to accomplish something they know the people would reject if they understood the full intent.

Expand full comment

FYI, according to dictionary definitions, "conspiracy" does not involve secrecy but "conspiracy theory" does.

Expand full comment

IMO, a distinction without a difference. They are used interchangeably.

Expand full comment

Just briefly, would you say that the WEF involves a conspiracy? It cannot equivalently be said to be a conspiracy theory because their intentions have been extensively published in books and on their web site, and is anything but secret.

Expand full comment

Clearly, there is a globally coordinated effort to push us towards a technocracy. So, yes, I think that qualifies as a conspiracy.

In a saner time, people would recognize the weffies for the lunatics that they are. For example, (wholly-captured) NASA can't seem to launch their spiffy new Artemis rocket, but the weffies believe we're all going to be part of the borg in a few decades. No, we're not. Whatever Klaus and Billy upload to the cloud will not be alive or human. We all have a shelf life. None get out alive. The people of the world are being held hostage to atheist fossils who are terrified of death.

I've said this before, but...the bugs will be eating Klaus long before we eat bugs.

Expand full comment

Very well stated and good for the bugs!

Expand full comment

I think your book was scholarly, clear, awakening, cautious and fair -

and if we want to be free - we must take on responsibility Responsibility is the other side of the freedom coin !!! Freedom & Responsibility Go hand in hand

Naïveté may not be evil - but it is something we must walk thru fire to cure

Well it was for me anyway

Thank you dr Malone

Expand full comment
Sep 4, 2022Liked by Robert W Malone MD, MS

I am a Clinical Psychologist. Early on during the pandemic, there was so much that did not make sense to me. The term "psychological coercion" kept coming up in my mind. I sent several colleagues this article: https://www.theneurotypical.com/psychological_coercion.html and asked, "Doesn't this seem like what we are going through?" No one agreed. I then watched an interview with Mattias Desmet on Mass Formation with Dan Astin-Gregory. It all came together! I think psychological coercion is the precursor to Mass Formation Psychosis. I hope the Breggins come around to understand this.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the link! I think you are right. The propaganda machine is using most of the tools of psychological coercion regularly.

Shame is a primary psychological manipulation they are inflicting people with. Any information contrary to the lies they promote are branded as an anti-science right wing nutcase conspiracies.

In order to be the good tribe you must embrace corporate propaganda so you are not labelled as the bad tribe.

Expand full comment

Well, it's great that we're having a discussion about all this. For those who haven't read the book, this "attack" may seem like it's coming out of left field.

The Breggins are being very harsh about it, but the book did leave us bewildered. We definitely came away with the idea that "conspiracy theories"-and, critically, "conspiracy thinking"-were presented amateurishly and inaccurately. It wasn't an original take. We've all seen the media do this.

It was the reference to Event 201 that really triggered the alarm bells. We also thought it ludicrous that he would depend on Wikipedia for his definition of "conspiracy".

Those who "mass up" over this to defend Desmet or the Breggins are kind of missing the point.

We don't think Desmet is "controlled opposition" or a "Trojan Horse". But we did start to wonder if he'd been encouraged to be dismissive of "conspiracy theories" by someone, or if he went out of his way to do so in hopes that the book would attract less controversy.

His response here essentially confirms this motivation. And, he protests too much. He had no "ethical" obligation to accuse, or fail to accuse, anyone of anything. He didn't have to weigh in on the topic at all; it's outside of his lane. He could have expressed doubt and uncertainty, but instead offered dismissal.

We had a similar reaction, and published our review before seeing anyone else's review.

https://icthruit.substack.com/p/the-psychology-of-totalitarianism

Expand full comment

Thank you for a very balanced and insightful comment!

Expand full comment

Thank you. I so enjoyed this article as well as Mattias’ book. I wonder how Breggin and Breggin came away with their “take-away” from the book🤔.

Expand full comment

Yes. Thank you for posting this. This news needs to be presented via the main stream media immediately. This study has been previously published in various forms and it was initially difficult for the authors to fully analyze when completed, because of the huge amount of data involved. Some mathematical miscalculations were initially made, which resulted in the appearance of a less robust improvement in mortality. Furthermore, the critics pointed out that not everyone took the ivermectin as instructed. The authors have answered this criticism in this newly published version on Cureus, which I have down-loaded before it disappears. Sometimes criticism makes you stronger.

Time to spread this news! Does main stream media find this material boring???

Expand full comment
Sep 4, 2022·edited Sep 4, 2022

One of the best discussions on this list. I appreciate the thoughtfulness and depth of this group in all of its diverse facets (I refuse to stop using “diverse” and “social justice” because these terms have been taken over by manipulators). Great to open this forum up to this guest, Dr Robert. I have to research more how stinging the Breggins have been — but the commentary indicates they’re too caustic — and perhaps not necessarily. I actually embrace both points of view. Prof Desmet is in the rich tradition of philosophy and the history of ideas that evolve mankind. He is updating the early work I read 45 years ago on the psychology of mobs as a young Phil major. The technology centrism and progression of materialism, together w the degeneration from logical positivism do need updating. We have been changed after thousands of years of an apprentice learning system from elders to a species that is formed by media messaging from strangers with motives apart from kinship and clan wellness. God help us. Desmet’s update is crucial as a scholarly foundation for the thoughtful leaders to consider as they may try to deliver us from brainwashing and unconscious mass formation processes. I use deliver in the old time faith way — deliver us from evil. Desmet’s work is a deep ally of Breggins if only they could talk. Basically, I feel Breggin is the much needed wartime consigliere and is impatient with anything that obstructs totally focused identification of the deadly enemy and it’s elimination. We have to win or die. Do we win by mass change of consciousness or must there be blood? We don’t know yet. And, we must be ready. But, for sure — if we escape species annihilation, we need to reform our mass consciousness and lift all boats. Sending love to this wonderful substack, Desmet and Peter too. 💜

Expand full comment

Appreciated your evaluation. I agree that Breggins and Desmet are allies, each with their own approach to the same evil.

Both make reference to the need to reject the mechanistic materialist view of life and of mankind. Philosophy has outcome.

I do resort to the “old time faith way”. There has to be transcendent truth of who and what we are or we will be constantly redefining ourselves according to the changing philosophies and interests of thought leaders of the day.

According to the Bible, God created mankind in His own image. And when we chose to reject Him as God (because we wanted to be our own gods), He set us free to do what we wanted--but not without consequence.

As we were warned, the wages of sin is death. And instead of becoming better--we became selfish, greedy, arrogant etc. Though we still have the capability to display the beauty of the image of God--our tendency is to be a distortion of what we were created to be and deny our Creator and use others for our self-serving purposes.

In this state, we do not have the ability to be reconciled to the Creator in ourselves. But God did not leave us without recourse. He gave Himself through the death and resurrection of Jesus to pay the penalty of death for sin so that the justice of God would be satisfied. When we recognize our predicament and put our faith in the sacrifice of Jesus and stop trusting our own ability to earn our way back to God, we are forgiven and reconciled to our Creator. Then we know who we are and He teaches us what we are here for.

Jesus paid the ultimate price for us because God values us as precious to Him. We are NOT mechanistic biological bags of “data” as WEF global elite thought leader Yuval Noah Harari describes humanity! The philosophy and value system these elites hold to, is as old as the first lies told in the Garden of Eden at the dawn of time.

Desmet is right when he says that to rid ourselves of the global elites is not the answer because others will take their places. We need to grapple with and reject the philosophies and beliefs that are opposed to transcendent truth. It starts with ourselves. And if all of society believes what is not true, we must have courage to speak the truth come what may.

The Bible is an old book. But if we actually look at what is said in it, we will see that it gives an accurate picture of who we are and what is going on today.

Romans 1:21-22 “”For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.”

Will I get shut down for writing this? Or will some consider it?

I love this community and am hoping we can turn this ship around for our children’s sake.

Expand full comment
Sep 5, 2022·edited Sep 5, 2022

Absolutely loved the fullness of your testimony, Grace — Philosophy is different thing indeed than the Word- more a history of our ideas - still we know there are different takeaways from the Word — I’m on the same thread as your takeaway and I like to interject the Word too because it’s a way of witnessing — it’s not accidental that they left casinos functioning while they arrested choristers in open air parking lots. Nope — not accidental. In war, they take out communication first — and for many, command and control starts with the Creator (known is different ways to some). So I see your testimony as restoration of command and control in the High Place. Keep the faith Grace-full One. 🥰

Expand full comment

Thank you. That means a lot.☺️ It has been hard to discern what to do as a parent of teens during all of this chaos and confusion. I want to be able to give them hope--which is one reason I joined this community. It is encouraging to find fellowship in unexpected places! You are right, it certainly wasn’t accidental. What a day to be alive! 🔥

Expand full comment