25 Comments

My father was a dark tetrad and I his prime target. Other DPs in my childhood--most of them charged with my care--also wreaked tremendous harm. Then some bosses, and, most recently, one of the doctors I turned to for help.

From an Interpersonal Neurobiology (IPNB) perspective, DPs exploit the nervous system's survival mechanisms, causing heightened fight-flight-freeze responses and chronic hyperarousal. Long-term exposure disrupts the autonomic nervous system, impairing self-regulation and resilience, which can lead to lasting PTSD.

Gaslighting undermines interoception (ability to connect to internal bodily states), creating confusion and self-doubt. It can impair the prefrontal cortex’s ability to make decisions, leading to a shutdown of higher cognitive functions under stress.

Emotional abuse disrupts the brain's limbic system, affecting emotional regulation, attachment, and trust. Isolation and social fragmentation deprive individuals of co-regulation through safe relationships, exacerbating dysregulation.

The hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, under constant activation, leads to immune suppression, inflammation, and stress-related illnesses (virtually all chronic conditions, mental health issues, and recurrent pain).

DPs' behaviors target key interpersonal neurobiological needs, such as connection and trust, breaking down social support systems and fostering alienation.

Chronic stress and fear from workplace abuse impair executive functioning, diminishing creativity and problem-solving abilities.

To counter this we need to implement psychoeducation to equip individuals and communities with knowledge about the neurobiology of trauma and the tactics of DPs to foster awareness and resilience.

Build community and create safe, connected spaces for co-regulation and healing to counteract isolation and mistrust.

Implement restorative practices that restore nervous system balance, such as mindfulness, physical activity, somatic therapies, and safe relationships.

Advocate for change and highlight the need to identify and prevent pathocratic dynamics in institutions and governance.

Offer validation and support, acknowledging victims’ experiences and offer practical tools to rebuild self-trust and counteract the neurobiological effects of abuse.

Domination hierarchies are a core issue. Dr. Robert Sapolsky’s research makes clear how hierarchy itself drives stress, inequality, and harm. Flattening these hierarchies isn’t just ideal; it’s essential for our survival as a species, fostering the connection and collaboration we desperately need.

#TraumaAwareAmerica

Expand full comment

Thank you for this Shay.

Expand full comment

Hubbard presents a list of "anti-social" and "social" characteristics which one may use as a kind of checklist when evaluating someone. He likewise was concerned that good people could be labeled "bad" or "psychopathic" based on only one trait rather than a full evaluation. That said, a real and dangerous DP is not difficult to spot, if you can confront them well enough to see what they are actually doing.

Hubbard considered the harm brought about by such people to be our most important social problem. Only second to that is our propensity to be tricked or taken in by such people. You solve this with education and training. Spiritual counseling also helps, though this is a bit beyond the scope of the current discussion.

Handling these people requires a combination of being able to identify them in some sort of fair way and our own ability to stand up against them. For most people at this time, identifying such people is the first great challenge. The concept that such people could be at the root of our social problems has been hidden from us (by them, you would suppose), diverting our attention to "anti-social" ideologies (like racism) and flawed "systems." such as capitalism versus socialism or democracy versus tyranny.

Though those who argue about systems or ideologies have their points, they don't resolve anything if they fail to confront the Dark Personality and the destruction that it causes. It is one of greatest challenges of human society, and the focus of Hubbard's system of ethics.

Expand full comment

What solution did he propose?

Expand full comment

Mind control as it is is a pet theme of mine... having encountered the methods of the CIA myself.

Although all true it shows little of the reasoning why Psychopaths are allowed even to exist...

But in a system of Kakistocracy the outcome will always be a Psychopath in power...

Which leads to the most important Question: Why?

Should we as a society not apply and work together with each others to get the best out of each other?

Yes.. we should to the benefit of society.

So why are we living in a Kakistocracy?

Why do we as a society allow the insane to rule over the sane?

These are the Questions we should ask.

But of course most people fear the answer...

https://fritzfreud.substack.com/p/mind-control-greta-thunberg-and-the

Expand full comment

I once read that a visitor to a far northern tribe (like the Inuit, but I think a different one) learned that they had a special word for dark personalities -- people who lie, steal, start fights, abuse women and children, etc. The visitor asked them what they did with such people. The reply shocked him. "When no one is looking, someone pushes them off the ice."

I stole that for my novel.

Expand full comment

I refer to them as Nexus 6 (Do Androids dream of electric sheep).

You will find them in the Pentagon and in Politics.

They are the Jewish Occult and they are possessed by Dark Spirits.

These people the WEF Bohemian Grove let their bodies willingly to be possessed by "Lucifer" aka an ancient evil spirit... the bringer of light.... the morning star.

That is why Occultism and Satanism is rampant... and you can see them too.

They have no empathy and make decisions against the good of Humanity.

Expand full comment

seems to me that the starting point Lobaczewski highlights is that

°there exists deviant individuals as a fact

°this itself produces the possibility of their inclusion in normal people's affairs, organizations, groups

Two scenarios for the inclusion:

1 a normal group is weak for human reasons and looses capacity to notice the psycho

2 simple membership - no see the psycho

Results is that a group member carrying psychopathological features is not treated as such and the process starts

at some point normality leaves in benefit of new rules. This is where the kakistocracy tends to happen, as membership criterions differ from the original group's rules

They tend to accept good psychopath soldiers instead of normal & critical people (they surely don't want it)

result is a group with an apparent mismatch; we see professional incompetence everywhere (mismatch) while it's a conscious and willed selection taking place

Greta thunberg is a great example lol

Some time ago I was tempted to try telling people around me "hey, don't you find it odd that a 10yo girl gets a phd?"

But this is when you understand that "sea is rising" mesmerized the whole mind edifice and that nothing filters through. People need to witness the glaciation of the Atlantic sea in order to change their minds

Expand full comment

Tundberg is a Rothschild!

In the end... Truth reveals itself!

Expand full comment

We used to cast them out of society and shun them.

Expand full comment

I have heard of various instances of this, but don't know how well documented this practice actually is.

You can see the problem with this, right? It is injustice. There are a million novels written about a basically good person being isolated and punished for some mistake they made. We can assume, in many of these cases, that the psychopaths had taken control of this process and used it to deal with real or fancied rivals. One of the biggest problems in dealing with psychopaths is how to keep them out of positions of power. Political Ponerology was an attempt to address that problem.

Expand full comment

Can you see the other problem? That problem is foregrounding the idea that most cases of shunning are "about a basically good person." The idea that we must guard against this at all costs (read again: at all costs. That's key. One of those costs is "failing to punish the DP for fear of accidentally punishing a Basically Good Person) is what leads us to tut-tutting others who are trying to point out the DPs who need to be shunned.

That's injustice. It's also cruelty. Not compassion. Not enlightened kindness.

Cruelty to victims due to enslavement to a naive "compassion."

Expand full comment

Thank you for pointing this out. I suspect the root problem is that most people still believe that everyone is basically like them. "We're all human". The scary reality is that among us are people who are not "human". There are individuals who are quite different, and they feel no compunction about manipulating us to their perceived advantage.

Expand full comment

Thanks for commenting Josh! Your work is well respected.

Expand full comment

I believe that the question you raised is legit, and if I understand it well, it's about various degrees of implication

My idea on the subject is to meet Lobaczewski's suggestion of sending real root ones to some dedicated structures. Supervision, and surely keeping them away from social affairs - as you say

The main point being how to spot the hard core one.

Overall I believe that only a few people created the whole chain of problems, and that the people you hint at - "semi-problematic", would tend to behave and go along with the flow. And those who cannot even if "good souls", should deserve supervision until healed if possible

What's your take on the subject? But of course this raises the question of if we will be able to arrest the core people at the root of the whole structure

When you mention that psychopaths hijacked the very structure meant to preserve society from psychopaths, this is frightening. An asylum run by the insanes

Expand full comment

We could always shoot them🤷‍♀️ They're a THREAT 🤦‍♀️

Expand full comment

Great piece, thanks. I experienced much that you described at the hands of a DP ex, enabled and empowered by the family courts of the UK. I don't know if Lobaczewski's system provides for pathocracy within discrete institutions, but if he does, then the western family courts certainly fit the bill.

It was a traumatizing and demoralizing experience, which in the short to medium term destroyed my emotional, mental and financial wellbeing. Tragically, it necessitated walking away completely, including from my son. I'm four years on from that painful decision and recovery is slow. The seven year recovery period referenced above sounds reasonable and hopefully that will suffice.

The silver lining to this cloud is that it acted as an initiatory experience, I think. I certainly would not have found this kind of work, and the cassiopean experiment, but for these experiences. Its a pity such suffering was necessary to wake me up, but that seems to be a common pathway to such knowledge and I'm certainly not alone.

Expand full comment

The BBC recently replayed an old black and white 1954 tv play of Orwell's "1984", with Peter Cushing in the lead role [you can also get it on amazon prime] - it was very disturbing and got a lot complaints at the time, and was still very disturbing to watch even now, especially due to how much of it has come to pass. It includes, and doesn't shy away from, the physical and psychological torture parts of the story. I can see that much of what you write here is reflected there.

Expand full comment

I'm trying to figure out how this applies in the case of people overreacting to the U.S. election due to their Trump Derangement Syndrome (a friend of 40 years just disowned me). It seems obvious there's something psychopathological going on.

Expand full comment

Both the Democrats and Republicans have cult followings. These people are completely disconnected from reality.

Expand full comment

When we look at a social phenomenon like this, there is likely a "Third Party" influence involved. Hubbard even asserted that this was a basic social law.

In the case of American politics, the most obvious Third Party is almost too obvious: The mainstream media, and the news media in particular. To be fair, these groups have their online parallels on the "other side." But the news media has considerable wealth and power behind them, while the online "opposition" is relatively under-funded and disorganized.

If you follow both sources of information, you will see how much they slant their coverage in favor of one side or another.

With this theory of social conflict, one important point is that the Third Party doesn't really favor one side or another; it is just trying to create conflict. Thus, commentators on both sides can profess to be "unbiased" - and perhaps they are - but they are being fed information that is intended to create conflict rather than understanding. So most of them come across as being seriously naive. The social result has been seriously destructive. Who knows what it will actually take to repair all the damage they have caused!

Expand full comment

Good points, but I think the media is just a tool of someone or something else.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Nov 22Edited
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I see your two comments in my Activity, but they seem to have disappeared from the main post.

Expand full comment

I've been sharing these on Minds platform.

Not exactly sure that the people I want to see these are. However, they are being received without me getting blocked.

Cherish is the new love, be well.

May God nod to ward thee & thine!

Expand full comment