36 Comments
Apr 27, 2023Liked by Todd Hayen, PhD, RP

Just a quick response to a most enjoyable essay – thank you.

I think most of us are cowardly most of the time; it’s a survival thing.

Hence, we automatically categorise the size of the opposition and back engineer our response accordingly. For example, if the opposition is far more powerful than us we immediately find an excuse not to challenge it and we swiftly move away. If our opponent is weak/vulnerable, we know we are safe to squash it and then boast of our prowess.

However, I think karma sorts things out eventually.

Expand full comment
author

This is an excellent observation. How many of your out there in shrew land are known for supporting the underdog, and just historically gravitate toward the smaller, or less powerful, groups...I certainly have a history of that.

I am also curious to know how many of you have been bullied as a kid (you don't have to share this of course). I was, big time. And a very informal survey of my shrew clients have indicated that most of them were bullied. Of course MANY are bullied, but I can see that commonality making sense...bullied folks are more likely to look over their shoulder, be a tad less trusting of the "big and powerful"...it may be a common denominator...

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2023Liked by Todd Hayen, PhD, RP

Normally, I would make mention something about sheep and their talent for not hearing what they don’t want to hear or not seeing what they don’t want to see, ignorance as stated by Todd, however, as I’m sure maybe a few of you out there might agree, this act of trying to help sheep understand things from a different angle and if you miss judge the line of acceptability just slightly, to the point where you are shut down as a conspiracy theorist, tin foil hater and so forth. And once labelled, anything you say after that is obviously laced with nonsense from their point of view. So I chose to just put out there what has helped me get through the enormous amount of information in a quicker and more efficient manner.

Expand full comment
author

This is definitely a trait of sheep...it is a tactic to make the decision easy to not listen. If you are associated in anyway with a "known" piece of crap, then you are done for. If you like spinach, and it is known that Donald Trump likes spinach, then you are a Trumpster, thus an idiot, thus a person not to listen to.

This is one reason why I love the idea that Bobby Kennedy Jr is running on the Democratic ticket. You can't link him to being a republican, then a Trumpster, then an idiot. His "anti-vax" status precedes him, and is the only formidable deterrent to his nomination. But he IS a Kennedy! He IS a democrat! He IS a liberal! He is an advocate for human and civil rights!!...these things will confuse the hell out of sheep...they will have a difficult time dropping him into the hate bucket.

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2023·edited Apr 26, 2023Liked by Todd Hayen, PhD, RP

Nice article! It does remind me of when I was telling my wife about how my dad used to drive us to kids and my mother at the ages of 9 and 11 (no pun intended) up to the farm in his van where our seats were the wheel wells, the outer casing around the wheels that protruded into the back cabin, there were two sets, one set upfront the others in the back in between a lot of rolling space on the floor and some extra fun, the challenge off shifting toolboxes and steel metal rods to duck and be mindful of trying to find your seat (I use that word so loosely) again once being knocked of the wheel well bump, happened at least a few times during the 50km trip on back roads . I always thought a handle would’ve been a nice touch, however we all have our hopes and dreams I guess sometimes they’re just too big. Obviously talking about seatbelts is a bit of a joke in such a scenario. However my sister and I are both still alive and have all our limbs. and we made it through all those summers planting trees on the farm oh I remember one time is about 5000, parents did seem to get a bit more out of their kids back then, back in the day, in my opinion, work wise not lip.

I think one of the things we need to become better at is being able to filter information quickly, and establish whether the writer has any useful information to give. This takes practice, also your gut will give you a pretty good idea right from the get-go whether this is something that is following an agenda or has truth behind it, videos are even easier I feel. I find myself skimming a lot more, as we don’t have enough time to take it all in, however I believe there are strategies in order to make the best use of out time. Perhaps adopting some of these might be better than just dedicating more time to it. Just a thought I had that I thought I would share .

Expand full comment
author

Thank you!! I love your "wheel well" story! So so true. I have many similar stories about life putting me in harms way. My mother, much to her horror, would basically let me do whatever I wanted (within some sort of reason obviously...she was just as frightened as any mother would be, but back then all mothers understood their boys will be boys).

I was allowed to use a little shed on our property as my "radio shack" and science lab. I ran electricity to this shed from my bedroom using lamp cord, plugged into a wall outlet...and probably pulled 20 amps from this one, lightweight, line. You would think as a ham radio operator I would have more understanding of electrical loads than I did, but I didn't. I blew fuses left and right (thank god we had fuses!) but I didn't burn the house down...which was certainly more likely than not.

I also was probably shocked by 120 v electric a dozen times. Good thing I didn't live in Europe.

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2023Liked by Todd Hayen, PhD, RP

I grew up in the 1950s, when the manual for the Gilbert Chemistry Set had instructions for making gunpowder and nitroglycerine. I made gunpowder a few times. The man at the drug store (not sure if we even called them pharmacies back then) would not sell me the chemicals. Thanks to him, I am still alive. The gunpowder was fun though., and fortunately I still have my limbs and eyes.

Expand full comment
author

Wow!! My chemistry sets of the mid sixties probably had the same capabilities...that is very cool...

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2023Liked by Todd Hayen, PhD, RP

I don't know how dangerous my 1978 chemistry boxed set and sturdy microscope were but after a short bit I moved on to the really risky life habit of book reading.

Expand full comment
author

By '78 you might have been out of too much danger, but maybe not. Of course the government would be more concerned about what you were reading than whether you were going to blow up the neighbourhood or not.

I remember one of the first detentions I got in High School was because I was reading Marx in class (Communist Manifesto)...not because I was a communist, I was just curious!! I also bought and read Hitler's "Mein Kampf" while in High School...but it couldn't be found in the library...again, curiosity!!

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2023Liked by Todd Hayen, PhD, RP

The issue of denial is something I think about a lot . I look around at those who I would refer to as sheep and I know that many of them are aware ( some a lot some a little) of much of the truth eg Covid etc. I have come to believe that they do not have the emotional bandwidth ( strength) to confront fully what is in front of them.

Expand full comment
author

Very true...I am hoping to add to this experience running into sheep who are turning the corner and wondering what just happened to them. I have not yet seen that.

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2023Liked by Todd Hayen, PhD, RP

Mary, I think you are right about this. When I tried to explain what the American Birthright curriculum is doing in our local schools to my dear, sweet, Christian neighbor she literally yelled at me, " I DON'T BELIEVE IT!!!!!" When I offered a printed article about it she said that she didn't want to know! So there. Period. Final. Refuse to listen, refuse to learn about it. It's just too upsetting to her world paradigm and she can't cope with a challenge to her organized, peaceful existence in her church circle. It would just be too hard for her.

Expand full comment
author

This is also a very common response. These people do NOT want to know...denial...of course.

Expand full comment

A dear friend and 9/11 scholar died yesterday. He did manage to finish a remarkable book just a few weeks ago. I will post it shortly if I can find it. It illuminates so much of the despicable CIA corruption! Great post Todd!

Expand full comment
author

Would love to see this book!

Expand full comment

I have the link: The Pentagon’s B Movie - Looking Closely at the 2001 Attacks

by Graeme MACQUEEN

https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/Sep11PentagonsBMovie/

Expand full comment

Have searched and cannot find it.

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2023·edited Apr 29, 2023Liked by Todd Hayen, PhD, RP

At this point, it's safe to assume that whatever the official government position is on any given subject -- then the opposite is true. And I don't say that "tongue in cheek." That's why you hear people say that things are upside down. It's not just social issues, it's damn near every issue. Every event, and it's not by accident.

Here's one of my personal favorites. Giant toxic cloud over Palestine Ohio, it looks like some shit from Ghost Busters, The Apocalypse, whatever. Government says, it's safe, you can return home. Then the CDC's own employees, sent there to check toxicity levels, start getting sick. This is AFTER people were told to return home.

The Chinese balloons weren't sending data, the military made sure of that. Then a few weeks later, "The balloons were transmitting data..."

I could go on endlessly.

Not having time to research every issue; when in a pinch, assume that the government position is total nonsense, you'll be right more times than wrong.

If the government is lying to the public constantly in order to avoid scrutiny, what the hell are they actually doing? And why are they so worried about the public finding out? These simple questions are never answered without research.

Expand full comment
author

This is one of my personal rude awakenings...and I have started to scrutinize EVERYTHING just as you say, and EVERY TIME I find that the government position was a lie. This is pretty disconcerting! To say the least!

I have finished up an article titled "Trojan Horse Stampede" that ventures into this idea a bit. It should be up in a few weeks.

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2023Liked by Todd Hayen, PhD, RP

I have a book written by Mark Zepezauer from 1994 titled The C IA's Greatest Hits and he explains the main purpose of intelligence agencies is to carry out covert operations involving economic warfare, rigged elections, assassinations and genocide.

Expand full comment
author

Yep...when I was in High School I thought it would be cool to work for the CIA...I had a college roommate whose wish was to work for them, or some other clandestine organization. It certainly would an interesting job!! But man, what a history that organization has...it is like a cancerous tumour in the body of America...and it can't be cut out.

Expand full comment

Does it get into why, and who benefits from this manipulation?

Because that's where most people get lost. Without the who, the why doesn't matter so much.

Expand full comment
author

Every kid is intrigued with spies...secrecy, being able to do something no one else knows you are doing, tricking people, etc. There is a very interesting archetype at work here that is little understood...intrigue/trickster/introversion....interesting to note how many spies become double agents...it does not seem to be a dedication to some nationalistic ideology...it is more about the actual fact of being a spy...a double agent is like going from cocaine to fentanyl.

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2023Liked by Todd Hayen, PhD, RP

The sheep could do a lot better than the "La, la, la, la". Since they enjoy having a darkened mind to facts and truth, I suggest the more infantile "I know you are but what am I".

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2023Liked by Todd Hayen, PhD, RP

Libertarianism is also part of the problem. Many just want to be left alone to do their own things, but that means they do not engage in the fight for a decent civilization.

Expand full comment
author

That's a good point...if we are a community, which I can't see how it would work not to be, there does have to be some community responsibility. I am warming up to voluntaryism...at least as a philosophy.

Expand full comment

To some extent. The real problem I believe is that we have a government that has engineered a legislative structure, to where they can govern themselves from the inside.

But you're right. I call those people the, "They're never going to do that, that would be political suicide... Nobody is advocating for that..." types. That might have been true at some point, but now that these politicians don't even have to worry about gaining voters, or swaying public opinion, there is zero accountability.

Our goose was cooked once it came down to holding politicians accountable through elections only. At that point, there was only one more piece that needed to be put in place. Rig the elections, and there's no accountability -- at all.

This is made evident by the fact that democrat candidates don't want to debate. They don't need voters anymore, they just need ballots. If and until that changes we're screwed.

Political consultants must be loving this trend. You don't have to do anything, because votes no longer matter, just make sure that your candidate is visible, sometimes.

https://ogre.substack.com/p/why-are-nearly-all-conservative-pundits

Expand full comment
author

Another good point...about no need for voters...

Part of the agenda and brainwashing is to convince people that government is totally, fully, without question, benevolent. Even the founding fathers of the US knew that was too much for the public to buy hook, line, and sinker, so they supposedly built in checks and balances to avoid too much power gone awry...I agree, it might have worked for a while...but the cancer from within eventually ate it all out, and now there is nothing further from the truth...but the myth is still perpetuated.

Expand full comment

Nice post, Todd.

You write: " I mean, do we really have the time to check everything? Well, now I think we have to make the time, and, of course, not everything is important enough to require vetting it for truth."

Yes, unfortunately every institution is corrupted and so are all public-facing experts. I think you will like Roosh's take on this point: https://www.rooshv.com/why-do-i-need-to-know-everything

You also write: "What I am talking about here is when you know something and do not deny it, but simply rationalize it away with a statement like “they must have a good reason for doing that,” or similarly, “maybe we don’t know all that there is to know about that.” Which is often followed with, “and I don’t have the time, (inclination, care, interest, curiosity, ability, intelligence, etc.) to look into it further.”

This is the Gell-Mann amnesia effect as explained by Michael Crichton: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#GellMannAmnesiaEffect

Curtis Yarvin argues that the Gel-Mann Amnesia effect is rational because the costs of generalized dissidence is too high for most people. He states, “Given Conquest’s law—‘everyone is reactionary on the subjects they understand’—many adopt a craven, but all too human, corollary. After taking a bold stance in their own specialty, they have no stomach for any other fight. Reactionary enlightenment in one field should cast Bayesian doubt on other fields. Instead, local enlightenment reinforces global ignorance. Logically, the specialist should reason that if his own field, which he knows closely, is corrupt, other fields which he cannot examine in detail may be corrupt as well. But emotionally, the cost of a general dissidence far exceeds the value of extending the inference. The sweet spot is general compliance, local dissidence.”

Lastly, I would ask the extent that most people have *any thoughts at all*. The concept is astonishing, but according to a 2007 University of Nevada Department of Psychology study on college students, regarding the frequency of common phenomena of inner experience (inner speech, inner seeing (aka images), unsymbolized thinking, feeling, and sensory awareness), only between *22% to 34% of the individuals studied had frequent internal dialogues*: http://hurlburt.faculty.unlv.edu/heavey-hurlburt-2008.pdf

Expand full comment
author

Wow...!! That is rather astounding (the Nevada study)...and that was 15 years ago!!!

I am seeing this clearer everyday with my younger clients...

Expand full comment

Amazing links. All new to me. Thanks.

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2023Liked by Todd Hayen, PhD, RP

Curiously, though, I’d think a lot of the supposed sheep (especially in the more liberal, or traditional lib? bent) would agree with you on the absurdity of many of the American-led wars in the Middle East. Especially because many (or at least some?) tend to be far more anti-anti, and even anti-American-rule (or anti-colonial).

Expand full comment
author

"Pointless wars" seem to be something many people have in common, certain liberals since at one time that was one of the primary tenets, "no to war"...considering the Ukraine debacle that seems to have clearly left the building.

Expand full comment

Rush Limbaugh covered this many times.

Leftists are leftists first. They are going to go along with what the party says and does, before they are going to do anything based on personal beliefs.

The Jewish vote is the best example of this. All of the most recent democrat presidents have been cold towards Israel, yet democrats always garner the Jewish vote. Why?

Expand full comment
author

Good point...

Expand full comment