Trump: The Playing Field For An Electronic Mind-Control Experiment?

[Chester]

http://us.blastingnews.com/news/2017...001491379.html

https://virginiapatriot1776.wordpres...-rally-claims/

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/09/watc...ng-to-college/

can we say... "Hoax?"

fake... phony... fake

[Hervé]

Once upon a time, this thread had a topic... summarized in its title...

[Chester]

Apologies, Herve... I actually thought I was in the Fake News thread.

[Fellow Aspirant]

Posted by Hervé (here)
Once upon a time, this thread had a topic... summarized in its title...

Sorry for muddying the waters somewhat, Herve. (and I apologize for the missing accent )

My purpose in including the pastor's letter was to bring up the possibility of Trump using some sort of conditioning to elicit huge emotional responses from his audience - albeit those based in anger. I thought the pastor was onto something, especially when he surmised the presence of demonic activity. Rhetorical techniques such as those Trump uses have been known since antiquity,(look up the origin of the word rhetoric but today we should be wary of the possible amplification of their effects by the use of electronic means.

That's why I used the Pastor's exact words so that everyone could read (and understand?) for themselves what his message truly was, without the "interpretations" or outright lies that our media (even the MSM) is so victimized by these days.

That said, one only has to observe the over-the-top anger reactions, even around here, when anyone posts something critical of Mr. Trump. It's kind of a "triggering" phenomenon. I think that such behaviour is fed by such fake news sites as those mentioned by Sam. And, of course Breitbart News. These sites started with the election of Obama, and it's pretty clear that they are now woven tightly into the fabric of our societies, so we had all better learn to deal with them.

This whole programming thing, though, leads me to wonder which came first: the anger or the manipulation of it? Is the anger itself an enhanced version of a more usual, subtle reaction to unpleasant events? The precursor to the anger is fear - an emotion our "controllers" have a long history with using against us.

Whatever the cause, we sure seem to lose our sh*t more easily these days.

Interesting times, indeed ...

B.

[Feritciva]

Dear people of Avalon,

Are you serious? So is Trump the name to get humanity out of "global elite's" hand? While we're at it, what about despotic right-wingers like Erdogan and Putin? Are they saviors too?

So, anything said or written against them or any anger against them is mind control orchestrated by global elite? Really? Seriously?

Good luck with that then...

Disapponitment goes deeper & deeper...

Feritciva, One of the "Controlled Ones"

[Hervé]

Right... This thread is attempting to address one aspect of what's happening on this planet as in the manipulation/triggering of pent-up anger towards specific targets with predictable outcomes.

The energy is directed at Trump, Putin, Erdogan, al-Assad or whoever... not Hillary, Soros, Netanyahu or Gulen and the Wahhabism promoters... nor at what/who has been ceaselessly working at creating situations which generates constant immigration floods all over said planet with wars and economic strangleholds.

Here is something that should get one onto the thinking starting blocks:

Posted by Hervé (here)
...
When I looked into who he [CIA’s Intelligence researcher] took assignments from, it was not primarily Tenet. The pattern was much the same as for the White House researcher. Most of his assignments, about 60% were coming from David Rockefeller. Only 10% were coming from Tenet. About 15% were coming from Bush and Cheney. Most of the rest were coming from the White House researcher. That piqued my interest. Why was the White House researcher not commissioning the studies directly?
...
The article was on how Middle Eastern countries were financially incompetent to manage their own accounting and banking affairs. No evidence was given for that assertion. It recommended that loans made to and from Middle Eastern banks to US corporations/banks under a certain size should be forced to go through banking structures that the US could control. The staffer calling in that assignment to the Professor had received a call within the hour from David Rockefeller. The staffer’s hand written notes from that call showed that he had faithfully transmitted Rockefeller’s instructions to the Professor. Those instructions included recommending that the World Bank and the Bank of International Settlements in Basel be used to give “the US oversight control”.

But as both of those institutions were controlled, not by the US govt. but by David Rockefeller, it gave the control to him, not the US Govt.. That is, unless one made the mistake of thinking that David Rockefeller was the US Govt.. It was a mistake that perhaps he had made subconsciously.
...
I guessed that the point of that propaganda stunt by Rockefeller was to set the stage for his taking over many banks in the Middle East later. It also seemed designed to cut out smaller companies from being able to compete with his own enterprises. It later prevented Iraqis and Afghanis from getting the loans they needed to rebuild themselves. It forced them to wait for US reconstruction by large US corporations. It was part of a set of US policies which put a stranglehold on their economies in practice. That often forced them to work for the US occupation of their country or watch their children starve to death.
...

[Hervé]

PONERIZATION: How the American Republic was taken over by political cliques of criminally insane psychopaths

State of the Nation
Thu, 02 Mar 2017 00:00 UTC

Can the ponerological Deep State ever be fixed?

Ponerization (from ancient Greek poneros - evil), is a ponerological term coined by Dr. Andrzej M. Łobaczewski. Ponerization is the influence of pathological people on individuals and groups whereby they develop acceptance of pathological reasoning and values.[1]

It's high time for the American people to face a hard reality.

They have been under the ponerological influence of an unbroken succession of political cliques whose central organizing principle is the perpetual war economy.

Because the United States of America was stealthily transformed into the military arm of the New World Order, numerous unprovoked wars of aggression have been waged around the world for well over a hundred years. These highly destructive and deadly wars have been fought in the name of the American people, and with their tax dollars. Hence, the American people are complicit in these misadventures by virtue of their inaction and indifference.

With this critical understanding, the U.S. citizenry has a profound karmic responsibility in so much wanton death and destruction across the planet. Nevertheless, it is never too late to reverse the course of the "Psychopathocracy" that the U.S. Federal Government has become as a tool of Deep State.

Hence, the $64,000 question of 2017 is: Will President Trump put a stop to the wars? Will he terminate the perpetual war economy as he promised during the campaign season.

Trump's most important campaign promise

There were many significant promises that Candidate Trump made during the 2016 election cycle, but the single most important was his commitment to world peace and international cooperation. Making peace with Russia was the cornerstone of Trumpian foreign policy.

However, the real obstacle to the implementation of this popular and noble plan is the degree to which the body politic itself — on both sides of the political divide — have been irreversibly ponerized. Much more significantly, however, is the fact that the vast majority of the agents of Deep State have been purposefully ponerized.

When something or someone has become "Ponerized" in its strictest sense, it means that the person or group can no longer make the distinction between healthy and pathological thought processes and logic. One is no longer able to draw a line between correct thinking and deviant thinking.[1]

The most glaring example of ponerization is the complete takeover of the Left by the infamous and incorrigible psychopath George Soros. It's not just the Soros machine that is at work here. There is in actuality a vast network of criminally insane psychopaths who are affiliated with th many Soros organizations, all of which are connected directly or indirectly to Deep State.

Of course, one need look no further than the 2016 campaign season to view the complete ponerization of the Democratic Party. Candidate Hillary R. Clinton and husband Bill, Campaign Chair John Podesta, President Barack Obama and wife Michelle, VP Joe Biden, Candidate Tim Kaine, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, et al. presented themselves as a cast of evil characters in a real life "film noir" where Edgar Allan Poe meets Franz Kafka.

Truly, it just can't get any more malevolent and ugly, nefarious and repugnant than what the whole world witnessed during the 2016 presidential campaign. The whole election cycle and period leading up to Inauguration Day was by far the most uncivil and outrageous in U.S. history.

But why? Really, why have things so degraded throughout civil society USA?

Ponerization:

The seemingly inexorable ponerization of American society by the political class and mainstream media, together with the international banksters and corporate lobbyists, hit a new low in 2016. In fact, the public discourse has so deteriorated, and basic social norms have been so violated, that 2017 will inevitably see a further degeneration.

The political status quo that President Trump now faces is one that seemed unimaginable before he entered the presidential race in July of 2015. This ever-worsening predicament has been methodically manufactured by the agents of Deep State through a deliberate process of ponerization. As a matter of fact, it is the various ponerological strategies and tactics employed by various "political cliques of criminally insane psychopaths" who are responsible for this rapidly devolving state of affairs.

Here's how it works:
The Central Intelligence Agency (C.I.A.) forms the very backbone of Deep State. Only by understanding where the C.I.A. really came from, and how it was originally constituted, will the pervasiveness of post-modern ponerization be correctly comprehended. As follows:

"The Office of Strategic Services (OSS) was a wartime intelligence agency of the United States during World War II, and a predecessor of the modern Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The OSS was formed as an agency of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS)[4] to coordinate espionage activities behind enemy lines for all branches of the United States Armed Forces. Other OSS functions included the use of propaganda, subversion, and post-war planning."[3]

Given this historical reality that the OSS, and then the CIA, were all about coordinating espionage, disseminating propaganda, subversion, etc., it's easy to understand the type of individual who is drawn to such dubious work. "Dubious" because these nefarious activities are virtually always aimed at overthrowing democratically elected governments around the world which have not cooperated with the New World Order agenda.

Even more alarmingly, through the implementation of Operation Paperclip, the C.I.A. became the final home of so many Nazi operatives at the end of World War II. One of those Nazis was Reinhard Gehlen who is described on the CIA's website as follows:

"General Reinhard Gehlen, former head of Nazi intelligence operations against the Soviets, was hired by the US Army and later by the CIA to operate 600 ex-Nazi agents in the Soviet zone of occupied Germany. In 1948, CIA Director Roscoe Hillenkoetter assumed control of the so-called Gehlen Organization."[4] (Source: www.cia.gov)

What this page on the CIA website neglects to say is that Operation Paperclip (OP) brought many more high-level Nazis than the publicized scientists, engineers and technicians. Gen. Gehlen is a perfect example of those high-ranking intelligence assets who not only came to the United States unimpeded, they carved out a very special niche within the American intelligence community.

The real OP back story is well beyond the scope of this article; however; suffice it to say that recruits like Gehlen came to occupy some of the most powerful positions within the C.I.A., as well as within other black budgeted, super-secret intelligence agencies. These nameless agencies did their clandestine work without any oversight whatsoever. The "Reinhard Gehlen" story is an example of how one man thoroughly corrupted the entire C.I.A. with his Nazi philosophy, intelligence-gathering strategies and recruitment policies.

"Nazi Recruitment Policies"
This is where the ponerization of American government accelerated at an unprecedented rate. Because the Soviet threat was used to scare the heck out of everyone post World War II by those who ran the C.I.A., it could be effectively utilized it to keep everyone in line. The Nazi regime in Germany was genuinely afraid of the Communist leadership of the USSR. Some historians have even posited that Adolf Hitler attacked Russia as a result of this abiding fear and loathing of all things having to do with Marxism and Communism. It was the relentless cultivation of this same fearful attitude stateside that was responsible for creating the philosophical basis for the Cold War, especially as it was aggressively promoted by The Company (as the C.I.A. is known in intelligence circles).

What's the point?
The critical point here is that the hiring policies of the CIA (and NSA, DIA, DHS and all the other 13 US intelligence agencies) have grown out of this environment of fear and trepidation, paranoia and suspicion. Whenever this is the case, those in charge will always lean toward the recruitment and hiring of individuals who are just like them. Because the leaders of the C.I.A. were so heavily influenced by the OP-recruited Nazis, they adopted their screening process for all future agents and managers.

In this fashion, CIA agents were routinely hired who would follow any and all orders unquestioningly. By and large each successive crop of agents had to prove that they would do whatever was necessary to carry out their intelligence-gathering missions and/or black operations. The many psyops conducted by the C.I.A. particularly demanded that the agents completely suspend their conscience during the execution of many of those psychological operations.

It's well known throughout intelligence communities worldwide that the 'best' spooks are those who are willing to do whatever is necessary to accomplish their mission, no matter how vile or immoral. This is what they do. They are totally divorced from the consequences of their actions because they have been empowered by a thoroughly ponerized institution (CIA) which they are told can do no wrong. As an organ of the U.S. Federal Government, the C.I.A. is fully protected from prosecution. So are the overseas field agents, unless they violate laws of foreign nations which they do all the time. They just are never caught. Or, if they are caught, they are allowed to get away with the law-breaking because the victimized country does not want to end up like Afghanistan ... or Iraq ... or Libya ... or Syria ... or the Ukraine.

Why the C.I.A. must be dissolved
The crucial factoid here is that like usually hires like. A psychopath will almost always bend toward recruiting like-minded psychopaths. A sociopath will do the same. Nazis are much more comfortable hiring Nazis, just as Communists are in hiring Communists. Hence, the C.I.A. has now undergone many decades of recruiting folks who fit the profile of a spook who has little or no conscience and who habitually exhibits the following characteristics:

• glib and superficial charm.
• grandiose (exaggeratedly high) estimation of self.
• need for stimulation.
• pathological lying.
• cunning and manipulativeness.
• lack of remorse or guilt.
• shallow affect (superficial emotional responsiveness)
• callousness and lack of empathy.
• parasitic lifestyle
• poor behavioral controls
• sexual promiscuity
• early behavior problems
• lack of realistic long-term goals
• impulsivity
• irresponsibility
• failure to accept responsibility for own actions
• many short-term marital relationships
• juvenile delinquency
• revocation of conditional release
• criminal versatility[5]

All of these personality traits in the aggregate basically define a psychopath. Therefore, when the C.I.A. has only recruited and hired psychopaths (and sociopaths) since the mid 1940s, what can be expected of such an intelligence agency. That's right, it will eventually become a stupid agency which is exactly what occurred under the misguided leadership of former CIA Director John Brennan. He's the ex-spook who actually oversaw the leaking of classified intelligence so it could be strategically used against a sitting POTUS—President Trump!

Because the current C.I.A. organization has been fastidiously staffed in this manner, it has become the most ponerized institution in modern history. Hence, the C.I.A. has been used as the premier organ of ponerization throughout in the USA and the world-at-large. All the C.I.A. ever has to do to justify any scheme it wants to implement anywhere, anytime is to invoke 'national security'. In this fashion the C.I.A. has become an incorrigibly rogue agency empowered to destroy and demolish, subvert and undermine, sabotage and disrupt at will.

"There is only one way to effectively deal with a criminally insane psychopath - you don't" [6]

----------------------------------------------------------

Special Note:
The Trump Administration appears to be different from all previous administrations, except that there are still numerous agents of Deep State scattered around the Executive Branch. This predicament poses the single greatest obstacle to the President's goal to "Make America Great Again". It's well known within the realm of psychology and psychiatry that the most effective way to deal with a psychopath is to NOT deal them. As long as they are in the position to exert their malevolent influence, they will quite naturally wreck and ruin everything they touch. Given this inviolable law of psychopathy, the POTUS would be well advised to weed out every Zionist, Neocon, Jesuit, warmonger, globalist, NWO agent, RINO, etc. post haste. It only takes one ill-placed psychopath to take down the whole administration. Which is why extremely dangerous Neocon warmongers like John Bolton have absolutely no place in the U.S. Department of State. (Got that, Steve Bannon?!)

----------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion
In case you haven't noticed, the whole place has been systematically ponerized.

Because the C.I.A. owns and operates the entire Mainstream Media (MSM), it has been ponerized to a great extent. Just look at the anchors on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, as well as the Pulitzer prizewinning authors at the WashPo, NYT, WSJ, USA Today, etc.

Because the C.I.A. (and NSA and DIA) control the U.S. Congress, it has been irreversibly ponerized. So has the Supreme Court, and, to an even greater extent, the leadership of the Federal Reserve System. Likewise, many flag officers, who have been chosen for promotion over decades to lead the U.S. Armed Forces, fit the ponerized profile perfectly. This is precisely why the USA has functioned as the military arm of the New World Order since World War I.

Because the C.I.A. (along with the FBI and NSA) monitor everything that goes on within the Executive Branch of the US government, much of the key personnel has been duly ponerized. Of course, this changes with each incoming administration as it did under President Trump. Nevertheless, the massive pool of government service workers, who operate at a certain level of leadership and above, have been hopelessly ponerized.

The same can be said for many corporate CEOs, COOs and CFOs, especially within the Military-Industrial Complex. When the vast majority of Fortune 1000 companies are led by folks who fit the very same profile, what can be expected but more of the same—ponerization. Going even beyond that grouping, there is the relentless ponerization of the much larger Government-Corporate Complex.

Even university presidents and chancellors, think tank directors, brain-trust executives, research institution heads are not at all immune to the corrosive effects of irreparable ponerization.

Remember, all it takes is one strategically placed, decision-making PSYCHOPATH at the top of any pyramid organization to corrupt the whole bloody institution. Just look at those who were chosen by the C.I.A. to lead the many IT corporations (e.g. Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Google) and social network giants (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Reddit).

Now that the reader is grimly aware of the systematic ponerization of American society, its continual exposure can assist with a de-ponerization process. However, such a major rehab can only take place when the U.S. citizenry firmly resolves to hold accountable those who are behind the entire ponerological scheme. In other words when the ponerized agents of Deep State are more afraid of We the People than they are of their hidden masters of PONERIZATION, things will really start to change for the better.

Perhaps it's time to grab those torches and pitchforks!

State of the Nation
March 2, 2017


Editor's Note
Many armchair analysts have suggested that the C.I.A. cannot be shut down; that the MSM should be reformed not terminated. This article makes it clear why both institutions, along with the FED, must be closed down—FOREVER. Each of these entities is rotten to the core and cannot be salvaged to any meaningful degree. Only by starting something brand new, free of all the toxic baggage being stored in their deep closets, can the nation begin anew. Most of these commentators don't know what they don't know. If they did, they would likely be leading the charge up the hill at Langley, VA. For it is the unrelenting ponerization by the C.I.A. alone that will eventually vitiate everything it touches.
The 3 Pillars of Deep State Must Be Knocked Down Post Haste

Recommended Reading
The C.I.A. And Deep State Conspiracy Finally Exposed

Source
[1] Ponerization

[2] What does it mean to be "ponerized"?

[3] Office of Strategic Services

[4] Operation Paperclip: The Secret Intelligence Program to Bring Nazi Scientists to America

[5] How To Identify A Psychopath

[6] An Open Letter to President Putin and the Russian Military High Command


References

• PONERIZATION: THE U.S. POWER STRUCTURE HAS NORMALIZED A CULTURE OF DEVIANCE
• 'PONERIZED SOCIETY: WEALTH BREEDS NARCISSISM AND PSYCHOPATHIC BEHAVIOR' — SOTT
• Psychopathy and ponerization in America

[Hervé]

Keeping at doing the rounds in trying to understand this "What the hell happened?" that in spite of rigged voting machines and a flood of non-existant voters, Trump managed to get so many votes to overcome all obstacles, dams, levees and sinkholes?

What happened to the people that decided them to vote en-masse and "thisitway" rather than "thataway"?

Well, it seems there is a consensus rising from the election's ashes and that's the one about the "inner fascist," AKA "authoritarian" button that got pushed/triggered whether that was intentional or inadvertent:

What It Is About Authoritarianism That's Drawn So Many People in?

By TM Tshepo Mokoena
Dec 27 2016, 2:15am

The death penalty and sex crimes have had more to do with the psychology of this year's lurch to the right than you might think.

There's a fascist in every one of us. Yeah, you too. At least that's the thrust of an argument first made in the 1930s by an Austrian psychoanalyst who studied under Freud, developed theories on politics and sexuality that infuriated both communists and Nazis, and eventually came to the conclusion that you're more likely to warm to the idea of fascism if you're sexually repressed. Wilhelm Reich, to put it mildly, pissed a lot of people off.

But before his theory linked fascism to stifled orgasms, Reich posited his idea on right-wing nationalism in his 1933 text The Mass Psychology of Fascism.

"My medical experience with individuals from all kinds of social strata, races, nationalities and religions showed me that 'fascism' is only the politically organised expression of the average human character structure," he wrote,

"a character structure which has nothing to do with this or that race, nation or party but which is general and international. In this characterological sense, 'fascism' is the basic emotional attitude of man in authoritarian society."

Meaning the way we defer to authorities – first our parents, then our teachers, then our bosses and so on – bakes a potential predilection for fascism into every society.

Fast forward to 2016. It's been a year when we've struggled to even verbalise the direction in which western politics has drifted. Some call this wave of anti-establishment surprise election results and anti-immigrant sentiment a form of right-wing populism. Others, a pivot towards conservatism, or perhaps nationalism. People first started using the word "fascist" to describe Donald Trump in 2015, before he was even made Republican presidential nominee. We've ended up with a load of different ways to try to express a basic concept: there are lots of people worried about safety and security who want the firm hand of an authoritarian state to shield them from the perceived trauma of globalisation, migration and international terrorism.

Left-wing politics as we've come to know it – centred on the ideas of welfare, openness to other nation states and accepting multiculturalism – has lost ground to a politics steeped in law and order with just a touch of protectionism. And as Reich observed in the 1930s, cash-strapped, overworked people who feel afraid can vote (some against their interests) to pick authoritarianism over liberalism.

But the question is why? Just what is it about, say, Brexit or Trump that psychologically appeals to millions? Voting emotionally isn't really understood, and we easily descend into damaging stereotyping – "'Little England' northerners voted to Leave" or "out-of-touch London elites voted Remain" – rather than proper analysis. But Birkbeck University of London Politics Professor Eric Kaufmann quickly discovered a unifying thread running through the types of people more likely to want out of the EU. And it had nothing to do with class, wealth or location.

"Culture and personality, not material circumstances, separate Leave and Remain voters," he wrote the day of the referendum result. "This is not a class conflict so much as a values divide that cuts across lines of age, income, education and even party." And those values relate more to authoritarianism.

When looking at a 2015 British Election Study survey of 24,000 white Brits, the probability of someone voting Leave leapt to 73 percent if they were in favour of the death penalty. Similarly, if they responded to wanting to see people who commit sex crimes "publicly whipped, or worse", they were much more likely to want out of the EU. On the other hand, the probability of voting Leave hovered at about 14 percent for those who said they were opposed to the death penalty. Boiled down, those more likely to favour a tough-on-crime, conservative approach to punishment leaned towards wanting Brexit.

This not only explodes the idea that the white working class somehow voted as a monolithic bloc in favour of leaving the EU, but also hints at why times of economic and social upheaval push populations towards the right.

"Right-wing authoritarianism is on a level of psychology almost," says Kaufmann, speaking over the phone.

"In one population you're not going to have one response – it's not like 'all whites' are going to say no to immigration. What you have are one group of whites, to put it crudely, interested in change and novelty and experience. They're quite accepting of change, or even embrace it. Another group see the world as a dangerous place and want to be protected from it – they embrace law and order."

Though Kaufmann noticed this in June, more data seemed to confirm it elsewhere. In November, YouGov data from from 12,000 people polled showed that authoritarian populist ideas – once consigned to the margins – were held by about half the population in eight out of 12 European countries. In Britain this figure was at 48 percent, though 20 percent of those polled self-identified as "right-wing". Many still ascribed to an opposition to human rights (itself a deeply counterintuitive view, surely) and anti-immigration views backed by support for strong foreign policy. From Romania to the Netherlands to Poland, a particular value system appears to be on the rise.

Academics have tried to define it for years. In the 1980s, now-retired psychology professor Bob Altemeyer came up with his own extension of a 1940s right-wing authoritarian scale, which is exactly what it sounds like: a sort of ranking system to make sense of why people gravitate towards the right. It encompasses traits like a submission to authority, aggression towards outsiders and loving social norms or traditions. Though Kaufmann isn't a fan of the term "right-wing authoritarianism" he acknowledges its complexities.

"There are really two types: one, social dominance, who really believe in survival of the fittest; and two, those who are fearful and seek order and security and routine," he says.

That bid for comfort feels magnified when life is hard – i.e. during the Great Depression, before World War Two and in today's post-recession uncertainty.

"At the moment, people do not perceive their future as vivid or certain," says Dr Simon Moss, associate professor in psychology at Charles Darwin University.

"Because of this uncertainty, they tend to prioritise their immediate needs over their future goals." In turn, that leads to a heightened response to perceived threats.

"When people bias their attention to information that aligns with their preferences and preconceptions," Moss continues, "they tend to perceive their own group as superior and other groups as inferior. That is, they want to feel better rather than seek accurate information. Consequently, prejudices are rife. They gravitate to leaders that reinforce these prejudices. Brexit and Trump follow."

Academic Matthew MacWilliams pointed this out as early as January, in relation to Trump. Again, authoritarianism looks to be the unifying factor among the president-elect's supporters.

"Authoritarians obey," MacWilliams wrote.

"They rally to and follow strong leaders. And they respond aggressively to outsiders, especially when they feel threatened. From pledging to 'make America great again' by building a wall on the border to promising to close mosques and ban Muslims from visiting the United States, Trump is playing directly to authoritarian inclinations."

And that's where the appeal lies. A strongman becomes both a comfort blanket and a stern, trusted figurehead. They're the ones who can help people "take back control of their borders" or make their country great again. And if there's apparently a little fascist inside each of us, that may be just what they want to hear.


Related:
The rise of American authoritarianism by Amanda Taub on March 1, 2016

A niche group of political scientists may have uncovered what's driving Donald Trump's ascent. What they found has implications that go well beyond 2016.

The Authoritarian Personality - Erich Fromm 1957

[Helene West]

I just read the original post from February 25th. Very interesting article.

My question is:
Let's say hypothetically it's the end of the 4 years of trump.
The economy didn't collapse as predicted by so many, trump didn't repeal roe vs wade, there were no lynchings by white supremacists, there was no wwIII or nuclear holocaust, the wall got postponed or some less dramatic facsimile was decided on, so do the masses of libs stop going to shrinks emoting on and on over trump? do the riots finally calm down or stop? does the hatred and comparisons of him to Hitler over social media finally calm down?

I don't think they will. Because what has been triggered was put there before trump... And so far, no one can figure what was planted in people waiting for the correct trigger...
We know the trigger obviously - but we don't know what was planted.
So at the end of the 4 years as described above, does it calm down with the libs, leftists, etc?

[Hervé]

I have no idea... it all depends on: do the orchestrators get their expected reaction(s) in order to submit their ready-made solution(s)?

One can get a glimpse of what reactions are expected with their MSM keeping clamoring uncertainties about the future in order to keep large swaths of the population in the fear band of the emotional spectrum.

See this post: https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1140976