Having been blue pilled and the social rise of narcissism

[Flash]

2 psychologists specialists of narcissism are describing an incredibly comprehensive pattern, historical, social and nation wise, of having been taken over by an oligarchy, the whys and how it happened, based on our own used and abused psychology.

they also predicted the turn around of our remaining tools of revolt, social media, by their owners, the oligarch. We will be left with nothing to revolt, nor anything comfortable to live by, so the remaining result is to become a complete narcissistic global society. Lack of identity with lack of values paired with impossibility to revolt leads to narcissism.

Vadkin is a self declared narcissist, but he is extremely bright (despite the fact that he does his studies to be seen as grandiose), and I think his analysis is very good. He knows history by heart and follow states and societies developmental threads.

this above is a very brief and very incomplete description of the content, which is very complex. But very interesting. Please, do not take my description as a unique point of discussion.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=-8Sri0Fq0DQ

[Kristin]

Lack of identity and lack of values. That's interesting. Perhaps I would note that it is the identity that one does not identify with. For example, many creatives are left to surmise a living doing something that they never intended and their gifts are not looked at socially as being viable. Where do they go when there is no room for them in the ever-crowded context of limited spaces for artists? Or the brilliant accountant who wanted only to be a nuclear physicist? You get my point. Brilliance perhaps leads to narcissism when creative outlets are not available. The best example would be Adolf Hitler, an artist who just wanted to be accepted and ended up... well we all know. Dangerous territory. LOL, not to diminish the context of this conversation by bringing up A.H. Do forgive that in the meme sort of way, but prime example never the less.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

I will mark the video to watch later. Thank you.

[Flash]

Please, to all members, listen to the video before commenting. The topic is very very complex, and this complexity is well explained or demonstrated in the video.

And I do not agree Kristin that brillance leads to narcissism if there is no exit for expressing it. The source of identity and values is very different when seen from a historical view paired with our inner functioning.

Please, listen to the video, they do talk of nazi taking hold on Germany, with a quite different point of view.

Posted by Kristin (here)
Lack of identity and lack of values. That's interesting. Perhaps I would note that it is the identity that one does not identify with. For example, many creatives are left to surmise a living doing something that they never intended and their gifts are not looked at socially as being viable. Where do they go when there is no room for them in the ever-crowded context of limited spaces for artists? Or the brilliant accountant who wanted only to be a nuclear physicist? You get my point. Brilliance perhaps leads to narcissism when creative outlets are not available. The best example would be Adolf Hitler, an artist who just wanted to be accepted and ended up... well we all know. Dangerous territory. LOL, not to diminish the context of this conversation by bringing up A.H. Do forgive that in the meme sort of way, but prime example never the less.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

I will mark the video to watch later. Thank you.

I am brilliant and I am not a narcissist (this is a narcissistic comment I know, I am joking)

[Kristin]

I agree with you too Flash! That's why I stated clearly that I had not seen the video yet. I feel that creatives for the most part find creative ways to express themselves. I'm one of them. My idea was to look at the subjugated creative, and to see where that thought may lead. Thanks for your comments.

[Didgevillage]

Despite my aversion to modern psychology, I managed to watch the video up to about one hour mark, and I gave up, as the content became incomprehensible due to questioners without microphone and answers without context.

What the guy with an accent said upfront was interesting. Nonetheless, "conspiracy" is what has made the world tick, and the ultimate conspiracy of the conspirators is to claim there is no such thing as conspiracy.

Wasn't 911 a conspiracy? What about the American Revolution? And the French and Russian Revolutions?
To be fair, wasn't the attack on Pearl Harbor a conspiracy? And so on.

Germans loved Hitler because he gave them values to live by. Hitler who probably had one (or even two) Jewish parent had a number of talented Jewish generals in his army, even a Jewish air force field marshal, and was out to defeat the Bolsheviks and had no quarrel with Britain whatsoever. Nazism has nothing to do with narcissism

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Within the first two minutes of the video, the lead genius states that "no conspiracy theory merits any in depth investigation," while his own personal view of the world is an "observed fact" and so is apparently automatically proven.

First of all, "conspiracy" is a term with legal meaning and conspiracies most certainly do exist. People are charged and convicted for conspiracies all the time. It is two or more people acting in concert to do something illegal. There is nothing esoteric about this. A conspiracy theory is some theory that a conspiracy has been committed. Theories, by definition, have to be proven or disproven with evidence, which requires investigation.

The statement that "no conspiracy theory merits any in depth investigation" is completely absurd on its face.

What these two clowns are talking about is the popular use of the term "conspiracy theory" that the CIA popularized beginning around the 1960s, and the history of that is already documented well enough. They are using CIA terminology and "arguments" (or just assertions based on their pretended authority) that are clearly nonsensical.

I skipped ahead to around 25 minutes to hear him go on to say that he also doesn't believe that a radical left exists, because the radical left keeps becoming mainstream in recent history after pushing its agendas for a certain amount of time. The income tax and social welfare were inconceivable in the United States in the early 19th century, he says, and yet now we have them, so therefore leftism is inevitable and it's impossible to be a radical leftist, apparently. What he doesn't mention is that the income tax was introduced with the Federal Reserve in 1913 in the United States, and both have continued to be controversial and far from guaranteed institutions since that time. The amendment creating the IRS was in fact never ratified constitutionally. But these are all "conspiracy theories" I suppose, which he already said aren't worth investigating.

I don't have the better part of two hours for this and maybe someone else might read this and save themselves the trouble as well. Didge, you have more patience for it than I do.

[Didgevillage]

haha, it wasn't really my patience. I was sort of multitasking (doing the morning stretch), so the hour was not totally wasted.
I vaguely recall Eustace Mullins mentioning that "income tax" was a wartime measure introduced by the Rockefellers or some banksters, and that they never rescinded when the war ended.

[Universoul]

Posted by Flash (here)
2 psychologists specialists of narcissism are describing an incredibly comprehensive pattern, historical, social and nation wise, of having been taken over by an oligarchy, the whys and how it happened, based on our own used and abused psychology.

they also predicted the turn around of our remaining tools of revolt, social media, by their owners, the oligarch. We will be left with nothing to revolt, nor anything comfortable to live by, so the remaining result is to become a complete narcissistic global society. Lack of identity with lack of values paired with impossibility to revolt leads to narcissism.

Vadkin is a self declared narcissist, but he is extremely bright (despite the fact that he does his studies to be seen as grandiose), and I think his analysis is very good. He knows history by heart and follow states and societies developmental threads.

this above is a very brief and very incomplete description of the content, which is very complex. But very interesting. Please, do not take my description as a unique point of discussion.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=-8Sri0Fq0DQ

I'm working my way through this and find it interesting. I also watched the other videos you posted by this speaker in other threads. He has some good ideas about how narcissism is caused and warnings about where culture is going. Thanks for sharing Flash.