Circe #1 - Social Psychology & the Cabal - Part II

Understanding Katrina's Adversaries

For Part I, click there.

Before I resume, I am delighted to tell you, readers dearest, that this is my 100th post! Yay!

To celebrate, I am minded to expose a few more CIA operatives from the Yasenevo dossier for you.

Let’s start with this one.

That’s one of my contacts, who very graciously and generously took me to the rogues gallery in the sub-basement at the Lubyanka. These are historical spies we’re talking about here, dearest reader. That one on the right there is Sir Francis Walsingham, first ever chief of MI5.

I’m not allowed to tell you who the one on the left is. You guess.

It’s one of the founding fathers, apparently.

---

[24-10-14]

Yes, I am kind of aware about the potential accusation of waffling. But I did say at the outset of part 1 that this was me throwing some ideas out there. It’s not really waffle, though, it adds detail and colour and so on. This part 2 is a continuation of part 1. It will all come together in part 3. Trust me on that one.

Also, the subtitle is the original one (see below).

---

[24-10-14]

By way of an added intro, in response to some of your excellent comments from part 1 (for which I am very grateful), I should do a few clarifications, because there is a certain pre-empting of where I’m going with this. First, I should clarify that I do not deny the existence of a dark triad – it’s demonstrable and somewhat obvious that some people possess those traits – what I am really saying is that those traits are not normal. They are aberrations (hence the cabal is a minority group). Aberrations, after all, do exist in nature/evolution (and they are not just physical, but mental as well – i.e. brain development aberrations). Some of them survive. That axiom ‘survival of beneficial traits and rooting out of detrimental traits’ is not absolute, in other words. This should actually be reformulated to ‘survival of that which is not 100% fatal’. That’s kind of where I was heading for part 3.

What I would also say is that these traits can indeed be created and/or enhanced by what we could call ‘dysfunctional nurture’ (as opposed to dysfunctional nature). This would ordinarily involve forms of trauma-based conditioning (creating a fear-based response – as I am saying, the primary motivational trait of the cabal is fear, and thus the desire for security). At its most extreme level we are talking about trauma-based mind control, which can indeed be done on both a mass/population scale as well as an individual level. This of course is where we get into stuff like MK-Ultra, which I was intending to leave for a later date.

With that in mind, interestingly enough, we could posit a sinister long-term motive for the cabal, which is to create an environment in which dark traits are indeed more beneficial to survival, thus rooting out ‘good’ traits, until the time comes when the aberrations become a majority, and we are left with a planet full of monsters. I would imagine, however, that certain more powerful entities would intervene well before it got to that point. But I will leave that one hanging there for the moment.

One of the most important questions, though, with regards to what I have been writing about and where I’m going with all this, does concern evolution and anthropology – the question simply being something like ‘how can dark triad-type traits survive’, then ‘despite the ostracism prevalent in small groups of humans over their several hundreds of thousands of years of existence before the modern age’. This is the crucial question which I intended to tackle in part 3. As a result of some of these comments and considerations, however, and the fact that fortunately I hadn’t written part 3 yet, I should be able to incorporate these observations into that part. If it turns out to be as long as these two, however, then I’ll split it into two again. I was intending to have that done for next weekend, so there’s my self-set deadline.

So, with that disclaimer in mind, here is the original part 2 (complete with original subtitle).

---

[24-09-16]

That subtitle is a hook. I had the title alone up on this previously blank sheet of paper since this morning, acutely mindful of the distinct possibility that at least half my subscribers would think something like ‘ah, this is another one of her conspiracy theory things, isn’t it’, and then promptly decide not to read it.

Twelve hours later, and I found a better way to start.

But this reluctance to even consider the realm of ‘conspiracy theory’, one might argue, is precisely the reason why real conspiracies happen and the world is a dystopia. This is, for sure, in part because a significant proportion of ‘conspiracy theorists’ really are psychologically unattractive people, if I can put it that way, whilst on the other paw, it’s because the very cabal such types wail against have designed it that way. It’s called cognitive infiltration and I shall be talking about that later here in Classified-K (Operation Witchfinder). Put briefly, they disseminate unattractive ideas into the social groups of ‘conspiracy theorists’, reinforce them in those darker resonance chambers one finds on the Internet these days, and then presents the public with that ‘unattractive’ image of both the conspiracy theory and the conspiracy theorist, such that ‘normal’ people reject them before they’ve even considered any of the content. It’s like a trigger, or reflex action. The creation of unconscious bias, which is this new modern term the cabal’s psychologists use. We just used to employ the word ‘prejudice’. Because that’s what it is. Bigotry is another one.

And it’s been conditioned into people that way.

How do they do it? Social group psychology, that’s how. But we’ll get to that in a minute.

Anyway – to make this more attractive as something to read, I thought I’d do this in my own offbeat manner, and turn it into something of a crossover piece. So it does kind of relate to Katrina’s narrative, but it also relates to this world in which she finds herself. And it is, remember, absolutely intended to be this very world, not some fictional setting. Sure, you will find that she inevitably changes the timeline, as is her pathology, but it has to be recognisable as this world. As I mentioned both in my intro to the story and the first Behind the Scenes, the realism is based on psychology.

---

Time for another spy.

This one started out in MK-Ultra then progressed to head of psyops.

Don’t say I didn’t warn you, eh.

---

Katrina has stated that her world is a utopia. She hasn’t fully explained why or how yet, but the simplest explanation is that benevolent people are in charge. Compare that to this world, in which it should be somewhat self-evident and obvious that malevolent people are in charge.

But that is too simplistic. It doesn’t, actually, truly explain everything. Yes, of course we all understand what is meant by the word ‘malevolent’, but it affords the cabal a kind of mystique which they really do not deserve. It certainly serves their purpose, for sure, to be thought of as superior, more powerful, perhaps otherworldly or supernatural, the so-called ‘elite’, and all the rest of it. The truth, however, as Nietzsche well understood, is that they are nothing of the sort.

This, perhaps, is also one of the reasons why the so-called ‘truth movement’ or ‘conspiracy theorist’ social groups are indeed so unattractive and, well, lost, would be a good word to use. See I haven’t really come across what will be the content of this essay before. If you peruse a lot of the content of online conspiracy theory groups you will discover a lot of chatter about ‘the machinations of the cabal’, together with some speculation about who they are, and what dastardly SPECTRE-esque plan they might have, but you will never really encounter anyone making any truly salient psychological observations about them.

Ah – I have been neglectful – perhaps I should’ve defined what I mean by ‘cabal’. Well, I sort of already did, when I mentioned the malevolent being in charge. That’s the cabal. Others have different terminology, but mine is simply cabal. It’s simple and effective and, well, accurate. Sometimes I might qualify this by prefixing the word ‘globalist’ – as in the title [I changed that bit] – or other times I may simply refer to them as ‘monsters’ – which is equally accurate.

One thing I have certainly never encountered is any anthropological analysis of the social group known as ‘the cabal’. And that is a serious omission.

You see, I contend that ultimately it is irrelevant to ask ‘what are their plans’, or ‘what are they up to now’, or to discuss some of their obvious historical machinations, like ‘9-11’ or ‘the Covid-19 Pandemic’, to name but two, at least without asking ‘why’ – and that, ultimately, is a psychological question. To the open- and honest-minded, these machinations are so obviously and blatantly manufactured events, with a deep structural element to them – that’s to say a ‘catalysing event’ – that it seems somewhat unnecessary and superfluous to actually spend too much time trying to work out exactly what was going on or how they carried out the event, because to do so places one in danger of missing the big picture. Indeed, you must wonder sometimes why the cabal would not only tolerate conspiracy theorists and their theories, but actively encourage them. The answer is that the whole thing is a containment strategy and a grand misdirection. That’s why.

The reason being, the very last thing they want people to do is understand them psychologically. Because a popular understanding of such would lead to the ultimate revolution, that’s why. The cabal, quite simply, could not survive. Sheer weight of numbers acting in self-defence against the one and only threat to humanity’s survival would win the day.

And the cabal know this. And so they spend half their time attempting to conceal themselves from widespread public understanding.

And that’s where this essay comes in.

---

In Katrina’s world, everyone understands the cabal. Historically, in her world, after being exposed to public view (9-11), the cabal were effectively eliminated, or removed from globalist power in the early 2000s, and incrementally replaced by benevolent leaders over the course of, say, a decade or so. I’ll give you more details about this over in the Liberal Socialism section soon enough (bear with me on that one).

The basic difference between utopia and dystopia being, as I may have stated before, in a utopia benevolent people are in charge, whilst in a dystopia, the malevolent are in charge. So far, so easy to comprehend.

But here’s why people in her world understand the cabal. Social group psychology and human identity, that’s why. This is likewise tied into ‘cultural studies’. These subjects are a part of the education curriculum in her world. At least, they certainly are in Britannia, and have been since 2003. Other countries had to play catch up (the domino effect, in other words), but by now, twenty years’ later, every teenage schoolchild would understand these concepts. That provides them with an immunity to the cabal. If some group of people ever arose again and started acting like that cabal, the people would instantly detect them and ostracise them – as they used to do before the neolithic revolution. That is, in part, what an education system should do – provide young people with an understanding of themselves and others, and an immunity to malevolence.

And with regards to human identity, it is essentially composed of two aspects – one, your own individuality (personality, role within the social group etc.), and two, the cultural identity of the social group. This is an integral, psychological part of cultural studies, and should obviously be on the fucking curriculum.

One thing I will say at this stage, though, is that one of the chief mechanisms or strategies employed by the cabal to ‘divide and rule’ is to deliberately create tensions between the ‘individual’ aspect of identity, and the ‘social’ aspect of identity. And by emphasising the social aspect above the individual aspect, thus making the individual aspect insecure, it’s easy to get people to seek security in belonging to a group, and then direct that underlying insecurity towards some ‘other’ group, which is portrayed as a threat.

But it’s always better to understand this strategy of tension in terms of psychology. And again, it’s another one of the cabal’s projections – because the truth is it’s their own insecure social group which feels threatened by the human social group.

---

Perhaps you are already working out, dearest reader, where I’m going with this? I hope so.

Here it is in a nutshell. There is nothing mysterious or mystical about the cabal whatsoever. They are simply a distinct social group, who happen to be a minority, who, over the course of several thousand years or more, have developed a very effective group survival strategy. This survival strategy, please note well, can only function properly if they destroy any vestige of ‘conscience’ with regards to their interactions and dealings with other social groups (or species, for that matter). Their golden rule is ‘any crime against humans is not a crime as far as our consciences are concerned’. Codes of social conduct only apply to dealings between themselves, not to outsiders. Honour amongst thieves and all that.

That’s it. That, ultimately, really is all you need to know to understand them. Yeah, it is that simple. Maybe you were expecting something deep and complex? Well, I hope you’re not disappointed, and don’t worry on that score because I’m sure we’ll encounter some complexes in due course.

I mean, sure, of course there is more to it than this, and it is important to understand the detail, at least psychologically, but once you keep that previous paragraph in mind then you can work the rest out yourself, you can observe and understand the behaviour and actions of the cabal, even predict their next moves, their logically ultimate objective, and, essentially, what we should call ‘the big picture’ becomes abundantly clear to you.

So if you want to re-read that bit before we move on, go ahead. I’ll put a divider in just to help. Maybe an image too. I like images. As you may have noticed.

---

This third spy I’m exposing today is the CIA’s equivalent of Q out of the Bond Movies.

This guy’s CV includes various methods of assassinating Castro, but his tour de force was the magic bullet in Dallas.

---

[24-10-09]

Ok, so it is now over three weeks since I wrote that. I kept thinking firstly I can’t just start with some rambling digression, I have to get to the point straight away. So I re-thought and every time I re-thought the thing in my head (which is how I write by the way – I think it in my head and then write it down once my head is happy with it) I kept digressing into similar diatribes. And I am mindful of the reader switching off. Even if the digression is interesting.

Also, I am educated to postgraduate level so you’d think I’d know how to structure a bloody essay! I wouldn’t be able to get away with digressionary intros in academic essays after all – my supervisor would have words with me. Mind you, I don’t have a supervisor anymore so perhaps this is my rebellious ways suddenly finding an outlet. Same time, these sorts of digressions were what got me shit marks during my first few years as an undergraduate. Like a lot of people, I only started doing some proper work in the final year so as not to be associated with that fucker Douglas Hurd. Desmond Tutu, acceptable. Hurd, fuck no.

Anyhow, here I go again. I am going to leave it as it is, though. One chief reason why I am allowing myself to do that is because in the interim I posted the overview article, as a kind of intro to Operations Witchfinder & Circe. To recap, Witchfinder is simply an investigation of the methods and activities of the cabal’s subversion agents (cognitive infiltrators), whilst Circe is all about the psychology (or psychohistory, might be a better term to use, as it incorporates elements of history, social history in particular, and anthropology). This present essay should come under the Circe header (although it does involve elements of Witchfinder in the sense of the subversive infiltration and distortion of scientific subjects like psychology and anthropology – we’ll come to the distortion of history later – that one’s really fascinating). I wanted to choose some kind of classical name, the first one being Psyche, which kind of fits, obviously, but then Circe has a more witchy feel to it.

One consideration which I should perhaps mention at this stage is in answer to the question ‘why are you interested in conspiracy theories?’. Aside from healthy curiosity you mean? Well, leaving aside the spiritual answer to that one (which I shall hopefully write about soon over in the Paschat section, when I talk about archetypes), the reason, ironically, is a kind of evolutionary survival mechanism. Put simply, in order to survive, one has to understand the world, or environment, into which one is born and finds oneself. If you don’t understand the way the world works, then if there is demonstrable malevolence at play, then you have a serious survival disadvantage.

And without delving too much into my own autobiography, I was made aware of malevolence from a very early age. So for me, there can’t be any ‘scepticism’ about the existence of evil monsters. So I do have to try and understand them in order to survive. And I really don’t mind if you call it a pathology.

Anyway – example: let’s say your malevolent leaders (remember you don’t think they are malevolent if you dismiss it as a conspiracy theory, like they tell you to) tell you that this or that country over there is a serious threat, and you have to be drafted into their army to go over there and start murdering other human beings and quite likely get murdered yourself. If you are the kind of person who blindly swallows up whatever propaganda they spew out on the BBC or CNN these days, then you, perhaps your family and your children, are going to have no objections to getting on that troop transport. But in what way do you benefit from that? I’m not just talking spiritually here.

It's a rhetorical question, of course. You don’t benefit. Normal human beings never benefit from making war against each other.

You can apply this to the so-called pandemic too if you wish – that one’s somewhat obvious.

And here’s the insight – evolution functions over time by naturally eliminating detrimental behaviours or traits, and favouring beneficial ones. It is easily demonstrable that attacking your neighbours, let alone some other people thousands of miles away, is not beneficial behaviour. At least, not to you as an individual it isn’t. Or your family or friends. Your community – your immediate social group, that is to say. Your own 150.

But to the cabal…

Now we are getting somewhere.

To truly understand them you really do have to take your mind way back in time to prehistory. I’m not going to start talking about alleged antediluvian civilisations here by the way so we’ll just stick to the conventional reading of human history for the moment, otherwise we’ll just get confused. So in this, I like to think of, say, Europe during the last ice age, somewhere between 20-40k years ago. The main reason for this is because when you study that period of history you are in fact studying human beings in their natural state. The state into which they evolved over the course of, well, let’s say a million years for sake of argument, since they did the firestarter thing, and experienced that moment of beautiful epiphany in suddenly realising that nothing in nature could scare them anymore. Since that moment, the human brain evolved in conditions of security, not fear (so how did the cabal evolve? – that’s where we’re going in part 3).

So here are some facts for you about 20-40k years ago – there was no war. There is no archaeological evidence of conflict. Given how important it is for human beings to understand themselves and their own nature, people should really stop to contemplate that for a while, I think.

How about money and exploitation of others? Nope. No evidence for that either. If there was, remember, there’d also be war. Because humans are emotional and people don’t like being threatened and hurt. They tend to fight back when threatened, in case you hadn’t noticed.

Have you also noticed how children seem to be almost born with sense of fairness? How often do you see small children complaining that something’s not fair? Quite a bit, I’ll wager. That’s because they are combining logical thinking with emotional feeling. If something feels bad to them, then, logically, it’s not desirable or good or right, is it? That’s where morality comes from, ultimately. If you hit someone, or steal from someone, let alone demand your fucking jus primae noctis, then the other person experiences negative emotions, which are perceived by the brain as ‘pain’ (left amygdala, if you want to get technical about it). All lifeforms, somewhat logically and obviously, are programmed to avoid pain, because pain is an indicator of impending damage. Imagine a lifeform that didn’t avoid damage. It wouldn’t last very long, would it!

Morality, then, is a shared understanding of avoiding damage. That’s why children understand it instinctively. To say a child doesn’t understand is like saying ‘children haven’t yet developed the natural programming of pain- or damage-avoidance’ – and that’s ludicrous, isn’t it?

The same reasoning applies to truthfulness and trust. Normal people are trusting. That’s another observation the cabal made which they use to their advantage. In terms of evolution, this is another child thing. If the youngling doesn’t trust the adult, then it doesn’t learn anything. Remember there’s something called mirror neurons, which fire off in mimicry, and younglings learn through observation of adults. If they were programmed not to trust those observations, then they wouldn’t learn anything, and they’d die out. See, evolution is lovely, isn’t it?

The same applies in reverse. What if ‘normal humans are liars’? So they continually lie to the children, so the children don’t learn, so the children die out.

Like ‘it’s perfectly fine, darling, to go into that forest because of course there aren’t any predators in there’. So little Rosalee wanders off into the forest. Munch munch, goes mister wolf, licking its horrible chops and happily crunching away at a lovely luncheon thrust into its malevolent maw, or swallowing the girl whole between its ravening jaws and, erm, wolfing her down, you know. Or other shitty alliterations.

Must do better.

So, trust and honesty, and a mother’s love for her child, is not just a beneficial survival adaptation, it is a necessary survival adaptation. And therein lies the key to understanding humanity.

And, if you are observant, the blatant contrast of the cabal.

The same evolutionary logic applies to other innate behavioural traits. I don’t need to list them. If you want to understand human nature, I mean, true human nature, then simply follow the logic. Imagine a social group of 150 and simply speculate on what kinds of behaviours are beneficial, and which are detrimental. People who display detrimental behaviours will be ostracised. That means they will be out in that forest on their own and they will not survive. They certainly won’t reproduce, that’s for sure. Extend that over a thousand generations and all those detrimental behaviours have been rooted out of the gene pool, leaving ‘normal’ behaviour as ‘good’ behaviour. And programming it into the human brain.

---

I will be told, or some might say, ok, that may be so for individuals within a social group, but what about relations between one group and another? I would answer that the same evolutionary principles apply. Given sufficient time, beneficial inter-group behaviour is rewarded and becomes ‘normalised’, detrimental inter-group behaviour becomes rooted out. Likewise, the innate pleasantness of the individual also expresses itself when meeting strangers.

We can go a little deeper than this, though. If you, as an individual, or a group, are habituated to treating other people with respect, why would that suddenly stop when you encounter a stranger? Does nature program you to be scared of strangers? No. Aside from anything else, you have the security of the group behind you. It’s far better to trade, and be friends. Perhaps even join together now and then for games, festivals, music, storytelling, intoxication and all that other stuff teenagers still get up to even today. Aside from anything else, like fun, it widens the gene pool.

And I should remind the questioner about the sheer lack of archaeological evidence for inter-group conflict prior to the neolithic/agricultural revolution.

But this is not the story you would hear from subversive cabal-oriented anthropologists. Think the likes of Pinker and Dawkins. Then dismiss every word they say.

But I will ask that rhetorical question again – why would one group just decide to hate or attack another, without provocation? Why would you be scared of another group? Without provocation?

You’d need a reason, wouldn’t you?

And this is where we get to the shocking reveal about this cabal.

But we’ll have a look at that next lesson.

For now, as far as I’m concerned, it’s hot chocolate time…

---

Part III will be next weekend, I hope… Yep - I got it done in time - there’s the link! More Yasenevo Dossier exposes too, if you need a little enticement…