Most people complain about their lack of control over the functioning of society. They feel they are manipulated, that they have no choice, that real decisions are taken in secret, and so on. It often is a diffuse sensation, but it is shared by a large majority, in many categories of people with very diverse opinions, and even by people with little knowledge of politics. People then call society «the system». From this moment, they criticize the system, accuse, see scheming, conspiracies, etc.
However, it is easy to see objectively that most participants in society behave like simple gears, unable to adapt their behaviour, even when it results in suffering or disasters. This makes that we are all part of «the system», we are all conscious and willing gears. Under these conditions, it is useless to point at any group accused of controlling the society in secret: the «system», whatever it may be, exists only through our masochistic submission, or by the statistical average of our egocentric actions. Average which is then very easy to manipulate (chapter VI-11).
A simple example was the Outreau scandal in France, where dozens of children were deprived of their parents, on the sole basis of confabulations (an idiot paedophile justifying herself by claiming that «everybody is doing the same»). Fact is that this situation lasted three years, despite all the denunciations: hundreds of officials continued to mistreat these children and to sequester their parents, despite the evidence of gross negligence. And even after the fault has been recognized, none of the culprits have been punished. We can find an infinite number of such examples, small humiliations from Pôle-emploi (French employment agency) to bar an unemployed person from the lists, or large stalinist purges: in any cases, people knowingly took part with these very visible dysfunctions of society, without applying their civic duty to correct the evil orders. This problem is very visible and massively recurrent, to the point that everyone can noisily quote several examples where he was «victim of the system»... while carefully ignoring the hundreds of other examples where he himself was an informed and consenting gear of the same «system»!
In a general way, there are many major dysfunctions in society: hunting, nuclear power, airports in the countryside, global warming, sadomasochistic austerity policies, drugs, etc. which endure despite the opposition of the vast majority and the opinion of scientists, moralists, etc. These malfunctions are however only possible with the active participation of the same majority, who votes for the guilty, or works conscientiously to fulfil their crazy orders!
In the extreme case of nazism, people worked for the nazi system. One might think they were doing it under death threats, against their will. In fact, many sincerely believed in nazism, going so far as to commit suicide when their liberators were approaching. Yet in democratic societies, without death threat, we observe the exact same level of submission to serious dangers (nuclear power, etc.). People even vote for their sadistic masters, instead of seizing this fantastic opportunity to reject the hated system! This submission is well interiorized: people think that we must obey the system. They let off steam in the bistro by criticizing it, but they never go further.
From there to say that all the states, and even democracy itself, are pervert «systems», there is only one step, that many take... without me. Indeed, starting recently, the «anti-system» speeches also got an intrinsically anti-social, and even fascist or populist component. It is easy, when one is guilty or perverse, to accuse the police and the courts of being a «system»! (Added July 2017: the previous sentence, written around 2015, was prophetic, we saw what happening during the US elections in 2016, and French elections in 2017: in both cases the «rejection of the system» openly an clearly served evil)
Thus I shall not make the mistake of criticizing democracy in this chapter on the system (I do it in chapter VI-11): it is certainly imperfect, but before removing it, we must think that we do not have better... When we paint the ceiling, we grasp the scaffolding, not the brush!
I will not follow either the authors of conspiracy theories, who accuse this or that occult faction of being at the origin of all the problems. If such factions exist (they each have their wikipedia page...), they are only «opportunistic infections» which can survive only in a social organization which is already sick at heart, by our own fault. Anyone can then seize the levers of that power. And inevitably someone does it, even if it is the sweeper who happens to pass in front of the vacant console.
What I will do in this chapter is to analyse how ordinary people, you and me, can behave in the opposite way of our aspirations, and even of our civic duty, as soon as «society» is in command (or even a group, simple leisure club or great cult, which just as easily can become «systems»).
My personal standpoint, and the conclusion of General Epistemology, is that whatever systems there can be, they do not have to exist. Even nice looking systems are dangerous! However it is useless to destroy the head, if the sadomasochistic submission of the majority immediately produces a new system: the only solution is psychoeducation, which allows people to stop being submissive, and to participate intelligently in society (at need by criticism, or even civil disobedience, if an anti-social system tends to reform).
The scientific justification is made by the foundations of the ethics (chapter VI-2): the system not being a conscious being (let alone a divine injunction or anything of that kind), it has no rights at all, and nobody has any obligation to obey it.
To be noted, however, that disobeying the system is not disobeying society at a whole: if everybody started to disobey today organized societies, we would return to prehistory in only hours. So that stopping obeying the system is more subtle: stopping feeding what is wrong in society, not society itself. It is not an act of delinquency, but clearly a civic action. And among the most noble, as very difficult.
Whistle blowers are the first line of defence against any system. This is why they are so useful, and they must be protected.
To stop feeding the system, we have civil disobedience. I even prefer we name this with a more politically neutral term: civic disobedience©, when it is aimed at an anti-social system instead of political purposes. But this must be reserved for specific actions. Out of these extreme cases, everybody can still boycott harmful things: meat, drugs, nuclear electricity, harmful jobs, etc.
The study of simple case often lightens the more complex cases, indicating general laws otherwise hidden under other elements. The case of the buddies group is therefore interesting to study, because nobody is «enforced», either by the power of a dictatorship, by economic blackmail, or by need. If such a group becomes a «system», then it is purely because of the psychology of the involved persons.
In general, in a normal group, people are enthralled by the common purpose, and rarely dispute. However, with psychoprimitive people, this situation is unstable: random opinions always end up creating disagreements. When these disagreements start to create resentment, we observe several phenomena:
-An informal «authority» appears: a more influential person, with a group of supporters: a relationship of sadomasochistic domination-submission (Psychiatrists will probably prefer terms like «narcissistic», «perverse» or «antisocial personality disorder», but I prefer «sadomasochistic», which better reflects the poo pooh level of the thing). Of course, if there is a sociopath in the group, he will manoeuvrer to be the influential person, and even to create this situation.
-This «authority» starts to favour some people, and to humiliate others.
At this stage, the group stops recruiting new members, and the ancient members leave, usually without saying anything. This is often the first visible symptom of the social cancer which is growing slyly.
-When problems break out in the open, then the dominant (sociopath or not) will talk about «rules», «organization». Sometimes more responsible personalities will try to straighten the group by proposing a new organization. Even if the dominant lets them do, these people will be the first eliminated afterwards. (This stage is the equivalent of creating a new state, or a revolution)
-If the group is a cultural, social or political movement, it ceases to be influential at this time. (In a political revolution, this is the equivalent of the moment when ordinary people cease to be enthusiastic about the new power, feeling instinctively that it has become a new system which escapes them again. But it is not yet questioned by intellectuals. Not yet).
-At this stage, we then have a well-constituted «system», even if we are still «among buddies», without blackmail or violence. And the group actively selects the members. Those who refuse the system are psychologically lynched or «crucified» one by one (this is the equivalent of police repression in a state dictatorship, but reduced to psychological bullying).
I personally saw cases where these lynchings occurred at almost regular intervals, as if they were planned. But this planning is not necessary, it can simply result from oscillations in the energy of the group. In one case one of the dominant was suffering from bipolar disorders, and was followed by the submissives in her mood swings. This is darn scary.
-In such a group, we have of course the dominant, but also a «court» of submissives (see a hierarchy of sub-dominants, like in a chimpanzees tribe) who finds their advantage in submission: social recognition (chapter V-17), physical benefits, sexual gratification (This is the equivalent of the «ruling classes» in states: oligarchy, nobility, nomenklatura, high finance, prelates, technocrats, all accompanied with blond and luscious women).
As all the sociopaths cannot access the central power, some accept secondary roles of «secret police», etc. where the main power gives them license to have fun.
That systems «between buddies» are generally free from physical violence should not lure us: moral violence can lead to family breakdowns or to suicides (I personally knew three, which occurred in this context). And sometimes these groups create «their world», where physical violence is possible, without the members being able to seek protection outside the group. A known case is the Aum cult (the ones with the sarin gas). Indeed such perverse groups often enjoy an effective support from their peers in the main system. Yes, even in the case of the Aum cult, the members who wanted to denounce them met the «misunderstanding» of the authorities. At least one other name springs to mind, a very visible cult which is dangerous to talk about, precisely because of the support it is still receiving today, from intellectuals, politicians, and even from some judges. This is how pervert buddy groups can seamlessly become a pervert government.
Despite these difficulties, I think everybody should try at least once to be in a group, club, association, etc. to understand how these things work. In any case, it is an excellent experience for understanding the human condition in this world.
It is also a pleasant and rewarding experience, as long as it does not degenerate as above.
Of course, if the group is of psychoeducated people, the experience is fantastic. But it is still very rare nowadays (2018). The only groups more or less psychoeducated that I personally known are some Buddhist centres, and still not all of them, or in part.
I also think that such a «buddy group» would be an excellent model to scientifically study the «system» phenomena, with the associated blockages, manipulations and segregations.
(It would, however, be unethical to provoke these phenomena in a group, or to remain passive if they can be avoided, because they can cause great suffering, or break people.
About educators, animators, etc. they obviously have a formal duty to try to avoid these phenomena, or to control them.
However, this is not easy: an educator often needs, or cannot avoid, that a situation of authority appears, to have a real influence on the group. It will then be a relationship of type 1: parent child, or 2: guru-disciple (note 4). But there is a serious ambiguity here: The energy (chapter V-17) powering the relations 1 and 2 is the same as for the sadomasochistic relation 3! Only the motivation of the leader changes: abnegation and education in the case 1 or 2, or egocentric enjoyment in the case 3. Of course an educator will favour the first two cases, and will be at fault if he uses the perverse case 3.
Any training of educator, teacher, etc. therefore obviously includes a component on these issues.
An educator must also exclude from the group any disrupter who tries to establish a sadomasochistic domination for his benefit. The psychiatrist is competent in this case.
Having studied the case «among buddies» now makes it possible to discern what emerges from the parasitic «system», from the mere inconvenience of the normal functioning of a state. I suppose of course that states are not intrinsically systems. But they still are a palliative of social organization for non-psychoeducated people. So they can turn to the system at any time, either openly or more discreetly.
What following will not please everybody: if dictatorships are intrinsically «systems», sickly false states, democracies can also be taken over as a «system» (chapter VI-11). The difference between the two is only the methods used: physical cruelty for a dictatorship, moral cruelty for a «system» parasitizing a democracy.
The main difference between a state and a group of buddies, and the only one which counts in practice, is that when the system parasitizes a state, then it is no longer possible for people to escape. Members of the «buddy group» who disappeared silently at the onset of psychodrama, then become a «silent majority» simply concerned about its survival, and adopting a low profile to avoid attracting the attention of the repression. The most visible symptom is when «we avoid talking about politics». In dictatorships, people suddenly become silent looking away, because a single word can send them to prison, or worse. In democracies, people call us dreamers, utopians, to avoid attracting forms of moral torture such as unemployment or deprivation of social recognition.
It is that a system parasitizing a state has much more powerful means than a «buddy group»: violence, violation of human rights, without the can «call the police» to stop them. In a democracy, the system seldom can openly use violent or physically cruel means (although I could see an offensive grenade exploding at some steps from me), so it will instead use moral cruelties, such as discrediting us on television, or to deprive us of resources. This is just as effective in humiliating and muzzling, while less attracting the criticism of the naïve materialistic intellectuals. For example virtual worlds have been accused of paedophilia, which was enough to cause a massive disaffection of these fantastic spaces of freedom. After that, no need to resort to unsightly blocking of IP addresses.
The dysreality of having to endure an uncontrollable and dangerous system creates an enormous stress. To avoid this anxiety, people, unable to escape, internalize this system, its ideology and its crazy requirements. Or simply by conformism, intellectual idleness, or sadomasochistic submission. Indeed the system always provides a «meaning of life», «standards» and «duties», which are then a simple guide to know what we «must» do, in order to save the effort of asking questions. People then have only to execute without thinking, blindly. Including harming others if the system demands it, while carefully avoiding thinking that in doing so they become themselves a guilty instrument of the system, or that others can at any instant do exactly the same thing to them.
Thus a system, even «soft» or «democratic», can enlist almost everybody into criminal, destructive and anti-happiness tasks, and represent a significant burden for everyone.
A dictatorial example: nazism, despite its weak support and the theoretical disapproval of the majority, nevertheless saw the same majority working for the nazi armament without asking any questions. Of course we can think that people were doing so under threat of death. But this is not the real reason. Indeed:
«Democratic» example: in 2017, the US ungovernment embarked in the perversion and destruction of the institutions of this country, without encountering any major resistance. Not even civil disobedience! At most some officials left the contaminated administrations. But everywhere there were people to obey wonky injunctions to pollute, destroy or disorganize. It is clearly not any death threat, even not unemployment threat, which forced them to do so, but the masochist submissive idea that they «had to» obey illegitimate orders, despite the civic duty to disobey them in this case.
This characteristic is not found in the «buddies groups»: if the delirium goes too far, people leave it before being destroyed in this way.
Such a degree of depersonalization only happens in state systems, or in violent groups (dangerous sect, terrorist groups, gangsters...), when the members cannot leave it: psychologically, the dilemma becomes unbearable, and people are forced to internalize the system, to really think that it is right, and to silence all their doubts, scruples, human feelings and rationality. This process is very similar to the Stockholm Syndrome, where an hostage adheres to his captor's point of view to minimize his anxiety.
But in all cases, the functioning of the system remains the same: the normal working of society is diverted for egocentric, ideological, sadistic purposes, etc. without the persons responsible for executing these abnormal orders (police, administrations, workmen, priests, etc.) disobey it. Often they even not realise that the situation is sick.
In fact, the only difference between a system parasitizing a state and a system parasitizing a buddies group is that there is no escape: torture, death, unemployment, marginalisation or misery are the cost for opposing the system. This explains the submission of a large part of the population, unwilling or downright unconscious. However we have seen with buddies groups that these blackmails are not needed for at least some to voluntarily submit to such a system. Therefore in this case the real reason is masochistic submission (chapter V-12).
It can even be hypothesized that a certain percentage of consenting submissives are needed to force non-consenting people to submit too. Which implies the opposite: a sufficient percentage of psychoeducated people would automatically end any system, «democratic» or violent.
The classic example is the violent dictatorship: nazism, stalinism, etc. In such a system, ubiquitous denunciation destroys any attempt to organize a resistance to the system, before anything can be done. In the case of the Soviet system, the only way to oppose was passive resistance: the majority of people worked slowly. They did not needed concerting for this, and they could not really be stopped. Under nazism, positive people adopted a low profile. For example naturists had to accept ideology in their camps. But they removed them as soon as normal society returned.
A more recent example of a «democratic» system is the anomalous America of 2017. People know that they are not risking death, and even that collective resistance would be very effective. Yet the crazy orders were accomplished. Only masochistic submission can explain such an irrational obedience.
These are special cases of systems, more restricted in their extent or in their perversity.
We saw in chapter VI-4, subchapter «Social peace», the notion of social virus©: when people divert the law, science or democracy, to serve ideological or egocentric interests: a good comparison is with a virus which diverts the genetic machinery of a cell for its own replication. In the case of a social virus, it is the police, the judiciary, the administration, the science peer referee, the elections, and so on, which are diverted from their normal function, for abnormal or anti-social purposes. We find here things like social harassment against ecology, against a race, a religion, etc.
If people create an abnormal society in their own way, we could talk about social bacteria©, which then have their own ideology (chapter I-9). Cults, dictatorships, fascism and Marxism are in this case.
A social disease would be when the whole society is perverted or inhibited in its functioning, without however changing its institutions: corruption, populism, plutocracy, occult powers, and so on.
At last, like the diseases of the body, social diseases can be chronic (corruption, individualism, indifference, poverty) or acute (crisis, war)
These comparisons are not only technically relevant, but they tell the profound nature of any «system»: parasites of the mind. Yes, good fat big sickening tapeworms with a tiny head empty of any purpose. Pinworms which torture us to force us to spread their eggs, toxoplasmosis which anaesthetizes our horror of evil so that we commit it without thinking (Chapter V-3).
We also saw in Chapter VI-4, sub-chapter «Social peace», that society can make its own immunity: militant associations, whistle-blowers, petitioners, civil disobedience, etc. The appearance of such «antibodies» is the sign that we are in an abnormal society, and that people react to this or that problem. These activities are certainly useful, and they sometimes manage to heal such or such evil. However, they are not a durable solution. Let's look at more radical ways:
Facing injustice and perversion, it is tempting to take arms, make militant groups, etc. to eliminate the bad guys. Problem is that, in doing so, we increase the suffering of people. Worse, if we succeed, then our buddy group become the next system in power.
In fact, «fighting the system» does not make sense: the system exists only because we let ourselves be manipulated. If we understand how we are manipulated, then there is no more system. And from there, nothing to fight. Here too, psychoeducation is the only solution. But at least this solution is totally effective, and perfectly adapted.
On the other hand if we try to cut the head (fight or dismiss the ruling class) while continuing to be manipulable, then another head regrows immediately, automatically. As for the Hydra of Lerne. And in more, as in a nightmare, it has our face and our voice! This is the precise reason why no political or military revolution never changed anything to this problem, and will never change anything. On the contrary, the violence of the revolutions often reinforces submission to the new ruling class.
An interesting analogy here is with the ego (Chapter V-10) Indeed, the ego is a parasitic and amoral process which uses the brain instead of the purposeful and sensitive consciousness. Very similarly, the system uses society and its organization to control people. Being unconscious, the system has no rights, and it can be crushed without any scruple. However, just as with the ego, fighting frontally produces the opposite result of expected: the system can impersonate a legit society, and even put on stage its own destruction attempts, as seen with all the revolutions which instantly turned to new systems.
Well, in practice, people do not realize all together in the same time. From where today, (2018) the impression of a stronger and stronger rift, between those who understood, and the stragglers, who still believe that the previous want to steal their cookies. However the system understood that his last days were numbered, so it desperately tries to delay the unavoidable. From there come these new idiotic racisms which appeared recently, against the ecologists, the wind turbines, the vegetarians, the spirituality, the religions, the tofinelles (soy sausages), etc. From there also comes the rage to break the Social Security and social guarantees, etc. which allow people to more easily escape the egocentric economy (Chapter VI-8)
The problem is therefore improving only in the extent in which people are progressing towards psychoeducation. to «fight the system» is ultimately to make people want to be psychoeducated, or to offer them means to do so.
There are, however, no general theories or universal methods. At a pinch, every situation of life, every person we meet, is a unique case. Therefore I give recipes, which everyone can select according to his possibilities:
- Non-violence. Fascism on all sides always used the defence of victims to attack them even more. For example, hitler took the pretext of anti-fascist violence to «restore order».
- No proselytism, always counter-productive. Just reply to questions. Our example is our best advocate.
- Manage your energy: do not try to convince people who forget at the next beer. Devote your energy to other more receptive people.
- «Hit and run»: most people who just accepted a piece of the truth immediately close their minds again. It is therefore almost always useless to try to pass them other elements.
- Do not argue. No controversy has ever convinced anyone. On the contrary, they discredit us, in addition with being a considerable energy drain. In a group, the polemicist will grab all the attention, pumping all the energy and blocking the minds of all the participants. This is the purpose of polemics.
- Do not focus on words, acronyms, parties, groups, newspapers. All can be diverted at any time. When this happens, look for the next idea. If it is to be awaited, then it is time for a spiritual retreat, or alternating with some life with ordinary people. They do not listen at us, but the simple fact of being in contact with positive ideas is useful to them.
- If you have a spiritual path, this is fine. But above all, always keep ecumenical, non-denominational and inter-religious. The greatest victories of collective prayers go to the inter-religious actions.
- I have long cherished the idea of a «party of normal people» to help each other. Maybe it will happen someday. For the time being, the multitude of criteria makes that there are still very few people who understood everything. So the pragmatic attitude is to work together when we agree, and to avoid discussion when we do not. This attitude is starting to become possible today (2018).
I like that word which smells good of old alchemic grimoire. In fact it was invented by Victor Hugo, not in the Middle Ages. He did not provided it with a meaning, but the spiritualists of the time quickly found one, and very useful, for an important and very actual reality: a group of people, whoever it is, forms a kind of collective spirit, in which the feelings of the ones and the others reinforce each other, and spread over all the members. This is true everywhere, be it a family, a club, friends, a religion, a political party, an army, a sports team, a concert, an esoteric organization.
Most aspects of the egregores, and of their effectiveness, can receive purely psychological or sociological explanations: domination-submission (chapter V-13), sharing of ideas, sharing of energy and social recognition (chapter V-16), rich and pleasant fraternal life, etc. All these make that the members of an egregore will more easily adopt the feelings, opinions or objectives of the group, and even outsiders can be attracted by this light. However, spiritualists consider the egregore as a parapsychological phenomenon: a «group spirit» independent of the participants, but still living in them, using their faculties and directing their desires and aspirations.
In fact, sociological explanations are often sufficient. But the parapsychological explanation becomes indispensable when the egregore manages to influence people far away, unconnected, or when it has powerful and instant effects on a visitor. Simultaneous political movements in several countries can only be explained in this way, for example 1968, ecology, or the reactionary wave of 2016 (assuming, of course, that elections are not massively rigged, Chapter VI-11).
The egregores can be useful and positive, to cement a group. But they can also be dangerous manipulation tools, whether inside a group or against people outside of it.
Egregores can form spontaneously, but they can also be organized, during rituals. I could see that rituals to influence politics are practised by some esoteric groups, and probably in most of the known or secret organizations of the same kind. However these rituals do not need to be «esoteric»: they can very well take the appearance of company management meetings, dressed in black sadomasochist suits, like the ones imposed to the employees of certain banks. So the sacrifice of dressing in a morbid and uncomfortable way is the exact equivalent of a religious sacrifice! (see below about evil egregores). It can even be said that many activities of the most diverse groups have no other purpose than to strengthen their egregores: common meals, economic favours, sexual gratifications, cloakrooms with collective undressing, special vocabulary, signs and symbols, initiations, etc. Even unpleasant aspects such as taboos, sacrifices or hazing reinforce the sense of belonging to a special category, or the difficulty of leaving the group (feeling of heavy sentimental loss, or threats to defectors). All these activities are the cultivation of the egregore. Even if people do not use this word, or ridicule it, it is still the same, and as effective as in a highly esoteric groups.
There are many examples of activities which are in fact egregore cultivation, and often even just that. We recognize them either because they are arbitrarily reserved for some, or because they are obstacles, sacrifices or difficulties added without justification:
-In computer science, we have sacrificial rituals of having to endure continual changes in methods, presentation, etc. and especially to spend hours understanding and debugging the system instead of our activity. Just as with the Middle Age corporation, this is intended at repelling people who do not sacrifice a lot of happiness time to get this useless culture.
- Pedantism at school, at university, on wikipedia, etc.
- Hazing is a very precise case of ritual sacrifice: only those who accept it are admitted into the group, or find professional outlets later, etc. They also constitute a sociopathic counter-selection on the lack of empathy (normal people do not bear hazing, or refuse it).
In this study on systems, the most subtle and important function of hazing is precisely a test of the ability to submit to a system: the hazer inflicts pain, while perfectly aware of what his victim endures, for having suffered this himself the previous year. In doing so, he willingly and formally become a gear in a system he knows very well to be unhealthy. Thus, despite the appearances of a «game» activity, «between buddies», hazing is all but a game, it is as serious as Stalin, as could be verified by all those who refused it: barred from the group, victims of mockery and ostracism, and even later refused from hiring in the profession.
The most common case of hazing is sexual mutilation. It is said that the victim must «accept» it to be admitted in the group. But in fact she will be really accepted only when she inflicts the same torture on her own children, while perfectly knowing what they endure. This is exactly the doublethink in «1984»: we know that something is wrong, yet we think we must do it, simply because the system requires it.
Legal consequence: nor the «tradition» neither «culture» or «religion» are excuses to these crimes, which must be punished like all the sadistic crimes.
Needless to say, none of these methods is parapsychological.
They are nonetheless extremely effective in ensuring the conscious submission of a person to a system, that he would never have accepted of himself. And that he sometimes criticizes in the bistro, but without ever posing the slightest act.
For a parapsychological egregore, that it can directly influence the consciousness of other persons can be explained that way: if our consciousness can influence our brain (for example during an episode of free will, chapter V-3), then an egregore can influence several, in the same way. And if this egregore is powerful (formed of thousands, even millions of consciousnesses) then it can have more influence on our brain than our own consciousness! Thus people can for example start to vote in mass, without concerting, for totally barmy candidates. 2016 saw some examples.
This explains why an egregore can be very dangerous: it can annihilate our free will, as surely as a lobotomy. Former cultists are well aware of this, who do not understand how they could have such opinions or attitudes which look so absurd afterwards. Without they realized, the group had «thought for them», and I myself once felt the egregore of a powerful group trying to catch me as violently as a steel grapple, making me feel a deep sadness of not being with them. Needless to say, I quickly scampered off.
Of course our «rationality» definitively does not protect us, since, our egotistical will resulting only from the activity of the material neurons (chapter V-10), it simply has no way to prevent the egregore from influencing these neurons. Thus to manipulate a rationalist or a materialist is easier than to influence any spiritual person: it is enough for the manipulator to be in a suit and tie instead of a guru's turban, and the trick is done. (This is what many former cult leaders do anyway, converted into business coaching, much more lucrative and safe from lawsuits)
Only serious spiritual methods can protect us from manipulation by the egregores. The narrow-minded materialist and the naïve religious believer are both the toys of any influence passing around.
The egregores and the system
In view of what previously said, it can therefore be validly posited that the «system» which oppresses our world is not based solely on psychological manipulation by the media, but that it also has a parapsychological component. It is a funny paradox to see the new priests of materialism, and even scientistists, finally using the same means as wizards or marabouts. But for this they do not need to «believe» or even to have «esoteric» concepts: rituals being in the consciousness, they work whatever the concepts. And if with such powerful manipulation means these people do not yet have the absolute power, it is that they are really hopeless, ha ha ha ha!
Is creating and using an egregore good or evil? The same goes with this as of with many other things: it depends on what you do with it. It is for a reason that I tried to establish scientific bases for ethics (chapter VI-2) before these chapters. In the case of the egregore, there is a specific catch: contrarily to visible communication means, people influenced by an egregore are not aware of this intrusion into their minds (this is why the media denigrate this area: if people understood these things, then the media could no longer manipulate them). This limits the honest application of the egregores to only two specific cases:
- Persons who know what they do, who pursue goals which consequences impacts only them, as long as these goals are in accordance with the bases of ethics (chapter VI-2). Indeed there is no manipulation in this case.
- Persons who act for necessary collective purposes: ecology, freedom, peace, good understanding between peoples, etc. We may think that such goals are forms of legitimate defence, or they might justify collateral damage. However there is a thin line to tread here: deliberately harming people with spiritual means is very close from doing plain evil. This is why there is a very accurate deontology in this case: seeking understanding and emancipation from evil, for the bad people.
On the other hand, using an egregore to influence people for egocentric or immoral purposes (company, cult, political party...) is a manipulation, which should be legally considered as deception or coercion. Which should, because the naive materialistic laws do not «recognize» the egregores... (even not the sociological version!!) leaving the way open to all sorts of criminals, as long as they act only with their bad feelings.
Evil Egregores and satanic Rituals
People who deliberately create egregores for evil purposes use specific methods, which I shall not describe for obvious reasons, but which are usually referred to as satanic rituals. Well, these people do not necessarily refer to satan himself, they can even be materialists or technocrats (who refer to PLUTONium, ha ha ha ha!). But it works just as well in these cases. Without entering into any non-publishable technical details, any spiritualist knows that certain activities are an opportunity to do excellent satanic rituals: war, vivisection, hunting, bullfights, hazing, meat, segregation, terrorism, nuclear power, racism, inquisitions, austerity policies, deprivation of liberty, rape, drugs, halloween, zombies and sorcerers, gore or competitive video games, etc... All these things are therefore to be considered as deliberate satanic rituals, and probably the main cause of stagnation for the present society.
Yes, I know, it's idiot. Because everyone knows perfectly well how satan pays those who serve him. And that in addition he does even not exist. One really has to be darn stupid to be bad.
The trick is, you do not have to be smart to be good, ha ha ha ha!
Indeed, it is not difficult to contribute to the positive egregore which drives the progress of humanity.
- In public, being friendly and positive (including towards evil people). Especially, avoid negative or conflictual discussions.
- In private, meditating on a vision of the free and happy Earth. Many prayers and purification meditations are possible in this case, in all religions, spiritual paths, and even outside of them. To accomplish them in non-action, even Emptiness, multiplies their strength.
- In all cases, practising oeucumenism and the absence of ideology (non-conceptual thinking, chapter I-9).
- And always by ceasing to feed the evil egregore: to stop contributing to the suffering (racism, meat, etc.) to destroy hideous representations (Halloween, zombies, etc.), etc.
Example: When I sorted the stuff my kids abandoned when they left, I threw away the Harry Potter videos. One might object that it would be better to resell them. But precisely, when I asked, second hand merchants refused them: this kind of stuff cannot be sold, for exactly the same motive: everybody is trying to get rid of it.
Building a positive egregore is always a great help for those who do it. We can even think that an egregore for the whole mankind could help it in a whole, in a significant way, even if few people maintain it. However such an egregore must really accept all humanity, in all its variety of tastes, races, cultures and spiritualities, and also defend positive values: freedom, happiness, respect for others and for nature. We saw the effectiveness of such a practice with the inter-religious prayers involving hundreds of millions of people, which were indeed able to influence international politics.
But you should also know that a small but well-disciplined group (Secrecy allowing this group to function without interference, see chapter II-9) could also have considerable power. I am not aware of such groups maintaining a positive egregore. However, this could indeed exist, see Chapter VIII-8.
Actually, we do not need to be formally invited of in contact to take part: we just need to meditate on this purpose.
To protect oneself from evil egregores
Even evil egregores have a weak point: by addressing directly the egregore, we may be able to divert it toward the good. We see such a process in fiction, as in Altor «The Magic Crystal», and partially in Valerian and Laureline «Birds of the Master». This is probably what people like Nelson Mandela or Luther King did, talking to and loving society, unlike a marxist approach which attacks society (which actually feeds the evil egregore).
More generally, we saw in Chapter V-3 that, in order for our consciousness to influence our brain, a connection must be established, in the consciousness → brain way, in addition to the spontaneous connection brain → consciousness. We have not found how it is established, except that the second is indispensable to the first. A parapsychological egregore can use the same information path. Therefore its influence appears as «our idea» or «our feeling», without us being able to distinguish it from our own ideas or feelings. Even the influence of a non-parapsychological egregore (psychological suggestion) will appear in our consciousness as «our idea». The situation then looks desperate, but in fact these properties provide us with a simple and effective way to protect ourselves from any egregore: do not think about it, do not use its concepts and vocabulary, do not feel its emotions (We could say not to «feed» the egregore. As for trolls!). In doing so, we do not establish the path brain → egregore. And so the return path egregore → brain cannot be created, and it cannot influence us in return.
A practical example is the fear of being «invaded by immigrants» fuelled by the way the media spreads very subtly divisive concepts like «us and them» or their racist «secularism» (in France). The direct antidote is to meditate the emptiness of the concepts of «us» and «them», to let arise the vision of people like us. And above all, if we can, act to help the Third World to flourish, instead of people having to escape misery.
Another example of avoiding being taken over by an egregore, is not using its concepts. So, in a Quora question, a user asks if recycling will become a «marché porteur» («growing market») I responded in terms of industry and ecological cycles, so as not to feed the egregore of capitalism. Indeed, as we still have to work or to create businesses, we often are tempted to use the related vocabulary and concepts. This is how many actually become capitalists, even if it was not their initial intent.
There are other «esoteric» methods which are very effective, but which cannot be published.
This problem has slowly matured until 2016, to become a major form of manipulation, sometimes superior to the old normative powers.
Between about 1966 and 2010, «questioning the system» was synonymous with defending our freedom and happiness, against the oppressive powers (finance, politics, dictatorships...). However the media took over the idea, and used the term for any contesting, positive or negative. Then in 2016, in the media blather, an «anti-system candidate» became newspeak for a fascist candidate!
How was such a paradigm reversal possible?
As usual, little by little, so that the ignorant do not notice. Many elementary manipulations led to the confusion.
-In the New Age and cults, many manipulators defended themselves by saying that they had «their truth».
-Anti-cult organizations denouncing imaginary cults: Mayan prophecy, Bugarach, Inedia... claiming that they have many followers.
-Using words like «ufologist» by the media, to name conspirationnists, instead of scientists studying UFOs. The whole accompanied with publications of fake cases easy to debunk, to suggest that there are no real cases.
-Denunciation of false ecological problems, as a boosting disinformation against the denunciation of true problems: «carcinogenic» glass wool, electromagnetic waves, toxic meters, etc.
-The gluten-free scam: to make people believe that a staple known for millennia would be toxic, was a genius manipulation, forcing everyone to take a stand, and discrediting altogether ecology, organic food, medicine, science, etc.
-The attacks against morality, assimilated to arbitrary religious rules
-The most organized manipulations have been actions against climate change, with accusations of pseudoscience against the scientists themselves.
The putting in concepts was finalized by the media during the 2016 election campaign in the United States: facing a mass of false information, conspiracy theories, arbitrary accusations, which people «believed», the Orwellian media challenged the notion of fact, speaking of «alternative facts» and «post-fact society».
It is then in this occasion that they also introduced a new newspeak expression: «questioning the system» to challenge science, democracy, morality, etc. Thus the «anti-systems» are now the most horrible supporters of this system: the extreme right and the populists! So, how to criticize the system now?
This may be a sign that we must stop «questioning the system» in the destructive way of the marxists or May1968. In this 21st spiritual century, we have much better ways, and much more constructive.
The «idea» which emerges from this sludge is that everything would be «good», as long as it is «against the system». If one is against gluten, against science, against fundamental human values, against the equality of races, for flat earth, then one is «against the system». So all those who fought against oppression, against racism, against pollution, are now considered «the system»! At least this is what we read in the media which supports racism and the extreme right (that is nearby all of them).
Everything considered, I prefer being with society (especially with the positive way it is evolving now), rather than being accused of being fascist or racist.
Does coming to such tortuous manipulations mean that the positive values of science and morality have in fact become the majority? In any case, I heard people saying that «the society» wanted them to become vegetarians... So the conclusion is that there is indeed a quick and powerful positive change, but sometimes we still walk on idiots nests, who then scatter squealing.
Of course this sub-chapter is humorous... but often wisdom emerges from humour... so we take this joke very seriously:
General Relativity says that information can only flow from the past to the future, but not the other way around: it is impossible to change the past.
Politics cannot, of course, make an exception: every politician receives information from the past, but not from the future. However politicians have the ability to live with some offset in the past, compared to us. (The present being defined as the moment when the grocer asks us money to be able to eat. But politicians are not causally connected to this moment, since they send servants). Moreover, unlike in physics, in politics the «peer referee» is to mutually cover their nonsenses. Which further isolates these blokes from the present time.
Then everything depends on the epoch those time offset politicians live. Thus authoritarian capitalists live in the 19th century, with Zola. The Marxists all froze one icy evening of October 1917, in their world of soot and coal dust. European labour policies and austerity policies are from the time of petain, in black and white. The French Socialists are from the 3rd Republic, with its endless succession of moustached presidents-clowns. DAESH lives in the time of the tyrannosauruses. The Greens are in May 1968 (that is, paradoxically, before the ecologists, but after Marx, which explains «some» things). The far right, we shall again have a libel case if we say in which epoch they exist.
The fall of the joke? It is that a politician living at a given time offset can only receive information from politicians living in a previous epoch. He cannot, therefore, take into account the warnings of other politicians living in the future (relatively to him). So the European politicians, stuck in the petain epoch, apply their sadomasochistic sacralisation of work: increasing the duration of work and the age of retirement, without realizing that in the 21st century we do not need anymore to work as much as in petain's time. Thus they create massive unemployment, but cannot be aware of this, since for them these unemployed are in the future (but for us it is the present!). This horizon of events translates for them in the fact that we cannot suppress their pay, despite the growing misery and regression they inflict in our time (the present). And it is impossible for us to tell them to stop their idiocy: for us they are in the past!
It is amusing (or not at all funny) to see how relevant this explanation is. So far-right politicians can actually not have heard about concentration camps: for them they are in the future (No no I did not said they are building them). From where the relativistic explanation of negationism, so common with them (Not sure that Einstein takes it, he knew since 1933)
The interesting conclusion is that you have to vote for politicians living in the present. They are easy to detect: do they know what a virtual world is, do they know what it is to live with a social minimum in a high delinquency neighbourhood, do they know how to be loved by a young child, do they know what is thermochemistry or an Ilmor motor, are they psychoeducated (chapter V-12) and non-ideological (chapter I-9), etc.? Added in 2017: oh the present has changed, it is no more the Ilmor engine, but the Tesla3 and the super-batteries. Oououuf I passed the test of staying in the present. Staying in the present is like breathing: you must never stop. Well I will not continue to update this sub-chapter every two weeks, lol
And if politicians, media or technocrats tell us that we are utopian dreamers, it is because they are in the past: it is useless to talk to them, they cannot hear us. Which makes them inevitably unable to represent us.
At a pinch, the best test is: interpellate a politician. If he replies to our question, this means he is in the present. If not, it is that he is in the past, and he cannot hear us.
Ideas, texts, drawings and realization: Richard Trigaux.
Legal notice and copyright Unless otherwise noted (© sign in the navigation bar) or legal exception (pastiches, examples, quotes...), all the texts, graphics, characters, names, animations, sounds, melodies, programming, cursors, symbols of this site are copyright of their author and right owner, Richard Trigaux. Thanks not to mirror this site, unless it disappears. Thanks not to copy the content of this site beyond private use, quotes, samples, building a link. Benevolent links welcome. No commercial use. If you desire to make a serious commercial use, please contact me. Any use, modification, overtaking of elements of this site or the presented worlds in a way deprecating my work, my philosophy or generaly recognized moral rules, may result into law suit.