The Psychopathology of Politics
by Henry See
It is a truism that if you want to avoid
arguments, you should never discuss politics or religion. Knowing
this, and considering the fact that we discuss both subjects the
Signs page, we aren't really surprised that our comments elicit
a strong reaction of both argument and criticism!
The criticisms come from all sides. We
get criticized by those who think that we are taking sides (of
course, always the "wrong" side according to the writer),
as well as from those who think that any discussion of politics
is inappropriate because our "salvation" comes from
elsewhere, usually, according to the critics, from thinking nice
thoughts and understanding how "We are all One". This
suggests that we should be "above the fray", as if the
concerns of the material world were "beneath" those
who were spiritual seekers.
Given the thousands of years of disinformation
out there, not to mention the work done since WWII and catalogued
in our Cosmic COINTELPRO Timeline, how is one supposed to even
know what it means to be a "spiritual seeker"?
The more we discover, the more we realize
that nearly everything we think we know is either out and out
wrong, or manipulated, or disinformation. This condition exists
whether we are dealing with ideas about the spiritual path, to
the stories we are told about our history, to the day's news,
to many ideas that are accepted as scientific knowledge. We live
in a virtual reality of preconceptions, assumptions, clichés,
stereotypes, habits, and mechanical responses.
How did we end up in this mess?
What can we do about it?
Politics and religion are often presented
as two ways out.
"We are all One"
There is a view among a certain number
of spiritual seekers that politics is a waste of time. They suggest
that political differences arise from a problem of perception
and understanding: we do not understand that we are all part of
the Grand Scheme of Things, and we, therefore, perceive differences
based upon the illusionary and impermanent parts of ourselves
- skin colour, wealth, nationality, social position, etc. By becoming
aware of these "illusions", we become detached from
them, and then they no longer maintain their hold over us.
Therefore, they suggest that instead of
working on the political level, we should be working to disabuse
ourselves of the illusions of race, etc. We should work to become
In her article Splitting Realities, Laura
has responded in detail to those who think that the discussion
of politics is a waste of time, especially the energy we put into
opposing the war in Iraq. Therefore we will not dwell too long
on that topic here.
On CassChat, the public discussion list
for topics Cassiopaean, a participant recently questioned our
lack of understanding of the "fact" that "We are
all One". This is the catchphrase that is used, almost like
a mantra or incantation, to wipe away our reality. We view this
idea as a form of self-calming, that is, when you are looking
the horrible truth of our reality in the face, and this confrontation
is creating a strong emotional response within you, energy that
could be used to stay firm in the recognition of the truth, the
"We are all One" phrase can enter your mind and steal
away this energy, leaving you in a state of peacefulness and calm.
It lulls you into believing that all is right with the world.
It is as it should be. Twas ever so.
Of course, the world IS as it should be.
But this does not mean that we are above it or outside of it.
The main lines of our reasoning of why
this is an inapplicable precept in this reality is given in the
article on T. Illion's book, Darkness over Tibet.
To summarise it briefly, our response
to this criticism is that, here and now, to ignore the important
differences that indicate that we are not yet all One, is a misunderstanding
of our intended role in this reality and the lessons we have to
learn in this world. From the point of view of "God",
or of Creation, we are all indeed equal, we are One; we each play
our role in the divine scheme of things. God manifests all his
ideas in the world IN and THROUGH us, and to reduce all of this
to "we must all be one" - much in the way of assimilation
to the Borg - is to reduce the mind of God - the glory of creation
- to a "one note samba."
What is more to the point: we are not
yet "gods" ourselves, that is, we have not yet learned
the lessons of discernment, we have not yet anchored the choice
of following the ascending, creation of all the ideas in the mind
of God pathway. Our work in this realm is to make choices and
take decisions based upon an ever-deepening understanding and
knowledge of the differences between the two paths. To ignore
the distinction is to ignore our work; it is to move backwards,
to remain upon the entropic descending path, the path that is
the default in this world. To move off of the entropic path demands
a conscious choice and effort. One must choose to learn these
To speak as if we had already learned
these lessons, and could therefore ignore the distinctions between
entropy and creation, would be arrogant and would be to usurp
the place of the divine and to speak in its name.
Others may think that they have already
learned these lessons and that we are not "advanced"
enough to recognize it. But then we ask "If you have 'graduated',
then why are you still here?"
Unfortunately, this notion that "We
are all One" is very widespread. In fact, George Bush is
an advocate of that path and is seeking daily to implement it
all over the world.
One variant promotes a disengagement from
the world. The path to happiness is to not allow oneself to be
touched by pain and misery.
But whoever said that the purpose of this
life was to be happy?
Unfortunately, a lot of people promote
this idea, and this brings us back to disinformation and how far
removed we are from having an idea of what spiritual growth really
is. According to this, to be happy generally means to turn off
one's brain through meditation and creative visualisation to alleviate
your stress. In short: "self-calming" that buries the
talent of the lessons of this world.
Another variant of "We are all One"
suggests that if we could all just love one another, then there
would be no more war or injustice or violence or exploitation.
That's all fine and good as long as there is a universal definition
of what it really means to "all love one another." There
are many whose idea of loving another consists in consuming them.
As this is clearly an unrealistic concept on the global level,
it then becomes a question of applying this in your own life,
where we have the illusion that we can "control" things
enough to be able to put it into practice.
And to a certain extent, this may be true.
We can turn the other cheek and "understand" the reasons
why the person we live with goes on a rampage from time to time,
be it due to events in their childhood, pressures at work, or
a shift in hormones. This can allow us to anaesthetise ourselves
long enough to make it through, holding out until the calm returns.
But this can only go on for so long. The pressure will build.
It may well explode.
This is not a permanent solution, and,
in fact, can lead to "self-calming", that is, using
various means to refuse to confront the terror of the situation,
to avoid any act to change it. Playing the martyr and congratulating
yourself on your suffering in the face of the vicissitudes of
your relationships or your job or your life may lead to arrogance
and pride, not the conditions within which you have eliminated
the drains upon your energy, drains that will prohibit you from
having the means to do the real work.
Acting upon the belief that "We are
all One" in this world may well turn you into a victim, the
willing prey of the predators in your life. And feeding predators
only allows them to get stronger and prey on others. They also
reproduce, and thus feeding them by allowing them to continue
their predations contributes to the overall suffering of ALL humanity.
And yet, so many have been convinced by the predatory system itself
that feeding the predator makes you "above the fray,"
a martyr, and most definitely, no longer "of this world."
And that does nothing but feed the ego. "How Holy I am! My
rags are more raggedy than yours!"
Thus, from our own experience, we have
arrived at the conclusion that the idea that "We are all
One" and the idea that we should stand outside of the conflicts
of the day is inappropriate. By intervening creatively, according
to the nature of our being, we learn about the world, we add to
our knowledge, thereby bringing closer the day when we may graduate.
We express our BEing through our interactions with the world.
Do we stand up for the principles that we feel in the depths of
our being, or do we compromise, thereby compromising our BEing?
And we always must consider that when we are most truly ourselves,
responding to the world, we are an organ in the body of God expressing
the myriad thoughts of God in this reality.
The question then becomes: how to intervene
in the world in ways to protect our own free will while respecting
the free will of others?
Beginning in the spring of 2002, Laura
began regularly updating the Signs of the Times page. At first
she was looking for curiosities, be they social, strange weather,
atmospheric, or other anomalies. This was the period when Bush
was facing criticisms for Enron. The aggression in Afghanistan
hadn't gone very well, in spite of American propaganda to the
contrary, and the warlords had overtaken most of the country.
Osama had disappeared. The next stage of the neoconservative agenda,
the occupation of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam then moved
to the fore.
But there was no evidence linking Saddam
to Al Quaeda. There was no evidence linking Saddam to 9/11. There
was no evidence showing that Iraq was an immediate threat to the
US. So it had to be manufactured and the American people had to
be convinced that the war against Saddam was not only necessary,
but was inevitable.
With the launching of this campaign, the
articles on Signs became more political. Laura was documenting
the terrible slide towards tyranny wrought by the Bush Reich.
And she began to take a stand.
This is when the criticisms started.
During the period when Bush was telling
outrageous lies to justify invading and conquering Iraq, we were
told that we were "siding with the French and Russians".
Why didn't we criticise the Russians, they asked? Why didn't we
criticise the French? And, of course, the ever-favourite insult
of "Would you prefer to live under communism"?
Those who criticise what they take as
our political positions come - in the main - from the United States,
with the occasional note from an Ameriphile in Canada. Readers
from other countries do not write these types of letters, understanding
much more clearly our real positions. Through the Signs page and
the letters we receive, we have come to understand just how deep
is the cleavage between Americans and the rest of the world.
It is frightening.
American culture is that of the psychopath.
American criticisms have a tendency to
show little knowledge - even abyssal ignorance - of other countries
and other peoples. They are outside of the American purview.
The criticisms we receive come from people
whose beliefs appear to fall into the smorgasboard that is the
American Right. While many criticise Bush and the central power
in Washington, they do not question the position of the US in
the world. They accept the mythology that Americans have constructed
about themselves: the bastion of freedom and democracy; that liberty
grows out of the barrel of a gun; that they are the most advanced
economically, politically, culturally, and socially in the world,
or were until certain non-Europeans started undermining "European
civilization" in the US; that the invisible hand of the "free
market" could proportion goods and wealth according to those
who justly earn it, if only socialist/centralists/liberals/Rockefellers/take
your pick, didn't interfere; that God trusts in Americans as they
trust in Him.
A recent proposal by the Pentagon to engage
in terrorist futures shows that the almost religious belief in
the free market extends far and wide.
There are very few criticisms of this
material that appear to come from the Left in the US, but it may
be that the Left tends toward materialist explanations. Their
"spiritual" preoccupations may run to environmental
issues.__I do not consider the Democrats as either "leftists"
or "liberals", the second being another favourite slur
of the American Right. "Liberal" is now a dirty word.
That Anne Coulter can denounce the Democrats as traitors in her
book of revisionist history on Senator Joseph McCarthy, the man
from Wisconsin who took America on a witch hunt in the fifties
for reds under the bed, shows to what extent mainstream political
debate in the US is little more than name-calling. Of course,
now that we are looking for Osama/Saddam and their "Islamic"
operatives under the bed, who better for the neo-Nazis to enshrine
as Patron Saint than the man who started it all...with Richard
Nixon at his side!
The Democrats, Anne Coulter's insults
aside, are the same thing as the Republicans. One suspects she
is being paid as part of a propaganda campaign to brainwash people
into believing there is a difference, to maintain the farce of
real choice in American elections.
Another favourite bogeyman of the American
Right is the United Nations and the New World Order. These folks
have been so busy tilting at the windmill of the UN that they
don't see that the NWO has been put into place through the auspices
of the US government and the Bush Reich. It is here. It is now.
And it is "your country" that has done the dirty work
while you were out waving flags and preparing militias and arguing
over how many guns you need at home to remain free. And all the
while "your country", via the CIA and the military,
was overthrowing governments it didn't like (that is, who were
not subservient enough, bowing to the power of the US dollar).
YOU, the American Right, the ranters and ravers about the dreaded
New World Order ARE the New World Order! YOU are the BEAST!
As I mentioned, we do not get letters
on this subject from outside the US. It appears that our readers
from other countries have no trouble seeing through the lies,
the manipulations, and the outright arrogance of the United States
in international affairs. The outrageous behaviour of the American
government, as well as the political naiveté of its citizens,
is so clear from outside the US that one has difficulty understanding
why the American people are so blind. Does a diet of flouride,
aspartame, Coke, McDonald's, Fox TV, MTV, Survivor, and American
Idol really affect the neo-cortex to such an extent?
But, then, how many times have Americans
who pose questions been told by their entourage "You know
what your problem is? You think too much."
I sometimes wonder if that isn't a HAARP
Another question that seems to be misunderstood
relates to Israel, Zionism, and the power of the Jewish lobby
in the United States.
We have reported on this, citing in particular
the work of Kevin MacDonald and his book The Culture of Critique.
In the last forty years, it has become
"anti-Semitic" to raise the slightest criticism of the
State of Israel, or to pose the slightest question about the economic
and political power of the Jewish lobby in the United States.
We see responses from different positions
on this question as well: from those who accept the self-censorship
and become de-facto warriors for the Jewish Defence League in
labelling our questions as "anti-Semitism"; from those,
usually on the right, who take a position in defence of "European
civilization", ignoring that the US has long imposed its
own culture on the countries it conquers economically, promoting
the "American Way of Life" with every coke sold and
McDonald's hamburger consumed. It is called "bringing progress
and democracy" to the victim. We see this playing out in
Iraq at this moment. Any attempt on the part of other countries
to protect themselves from this is viewed as "anti-Americanism"
by many Americans.
Without an understanding of the hyperdimensional
hypothesis, of the theoretical existence of other realities and
their effect upon our world, there is no model by which we can
understand what is really going on. It is only in the context
of this theory that one cannot come to an accurate assessment
of the "Jewish Question".
In this model, it can be seen that it
is an error to take sides in a false battle between "American
culture" and "Jewish culture". The majority of
both groups have been set up for a brutal endgame that is now
coming to pass.
We will be returning to this question
in greater depth in the future.
A Political Solution
Although we report on the political events
of the day, we do not advocate a political solution to the world's
This may be why the left ignores us, because
it is obvious to us that no political solution is possible, and
this idea is the cardinal sin for a militant on the left.
When we act - through our exposure of
the lies and our analysis - we do so with no anticipation that
our actions will have any effect whatsoever. Our work on the Signs
of the Times is done simply because we think that if nobody speaks
up for the Creative Principle of God, he is deprived of his voice
in this reality. To believe the lies, and to say nothing when
confronted with them, is to acquiesce, to align oneself with the
lie, the entropic principle, and to give up one's free will to
To align oneself with the Truth is not
taking sides within the political quarrels. What would be the
point? We simply do what is in us to do because it needs to be
done for the principle of creation and for no other reason: No
hope, no anticipation, no expectation of change or reward or anything
else. Nada, zero, zip, zilch.
We think that a new Eden built upon the
ideals of the proponents of the free market, private ownership
of the means of production, and a high degree of individual responsibility,
is no more useful and hope inspiring than the ideals of planning,
collective responsibility and duty, and a socialist ideal of equality.
Or to put it in the terms of the Libertarian thinker Murray N.
Rothbard, who would place "conservatism" and "liberalism"
at the two poles, there is no more hope for such a society from
the "conservative" dream of the status quo than there
is from the "liberal" dream of a permanent revolution
Neither position, nor the positions found
around, between or in contrast to them, deal with the nature of
How can we have an equitable and just
society when the raw material of this society displays characteristics
that must bring us to consider something so truly horrible that
the mind reels from facing this evident fact.
Psycopaths and Political Solutions
One of the major areas of research for
members of the QFS in the last two years has been the question
of psychopathy. Many readers do not understand why we have spent
so much time on this issue. They believe it is a diversion at
best, or a complete betrayal of the earlier work at worst. On
the issue of political change we can see why the issue of psychopaths
is so important.
There is an old adage that one bad apple
spoils the barrel. How many of you have been in organizations
that were functioning very well until the arrival of someone who
decides that it is meant to serve his or her personal interests
to the detriment of all others and the group itself? A person
who is willing to lie, to cheat, to steal, to set one against
another to achieve his or her goals. And we are certain that many
of you have repeatedly witnessed the fact that such a person invariabley
quickly gains the upper hand by these means. They do not care
what means they use to win; winning is all that counts.
Since the beginning of 2002, this group
has done much work in understanding the character of psychopaths
and organic portals. It is very possible that OPs amount to half
of the population, and that psychopaths are a significant part
of that 50%. It is obvious from watching the society around us
that the psychopath tends nearly always to rise to the top because
she or he has no inner controls on behaviour that prevent ruthless
activity to attain their goals. Ruthlessness is a winning strategy
in this world, of that there is no doubt.
Robert Hare - one of the world's leading
experts on psychopathy - spoke about the problem of psychopath's
in the business world over a year ago, discussing how the business
climate encourages the success of the most ruthless and amoral
people. Laura, researching the genetic basis of psychopathy, discovered
some horrifying connections between the nature of the capitalist
economy and the propagation of genetic psycopathy in her article
"Official Culture" in America: A Natural State of Psychopathy?
The Iraqi people have seen one group of
psychopaths being replaced by another: bye bye Saddam, hello,
Bushkreig. The neocons in the Pentagon have no moral qualms about
erasing peoples and governments that stand in the way of a Greater
Israel and US control of the world's oil supply.
One cannot "be nice" to a psychopath
and expect to change them. One can attempt to "be One"
with the psychopath, but this will have no positive effect; the
psychopath thinks of no one other than himself and has no qualms
about using others to achieve his ends. One can propose any number
of political and economic systems, but the psychopath has no desire
to play by the rules.
None of the positions we have looked at
recognise the problem of psychopathy; how can they be expected
to provide solutions for a world where the psychopath is king?
Let us look at the solutions they offer
to the crisis we are facing.
There can be an individualist response
to this situation, that is, stocking up on lentils and rice, arms
and ammo, ensuring a protected water supply on a piece of land
in the country. This does nothing whatsoever for others. It is
a selfish response, and American "individualism" taken
to the extreme.
Groups of like-minded individuals can
band together with their land and lentils and create communities
preparing for disaster to strike either from the heavens or from
the UN or Chinese troops crossing the Mexican border to take power
in the US.
But if these individuals have not worked
on themselves, worked to root out the internal demons, there is
no guarantee that they will not fight among themselves.
One bad apple
And if they had done this work, would
such activities then be the chosen solution? It is the Creative
Principle that is important; it is the soul.
Running away and hiding to preserve one's
own flesh is the physical equivalent of claiming to be "above
the fray," a martyr, and most definitely, no longer "of
Supporting the Creative Principle is not
done by being "not of this world" or by arming onself
and hiding away in a fortress in the country. This is a manifestation
of the entropic principle - turning in on oneself or one's family
and turning one's back on the world.
The Creative Principle of Humanity can
only be expressed through the internal Will, individual by individual.
The Bolsheviks thought that they could
create the "New Man" from the outside. Change the material
conditions of society and you would change the inner man, they
believed. With time, more and more measures of coercion were used
to speed up the process. There was no desire to respect the free
will of anyone. The will was but another part of the New Man to
be molded according to the needs of the State.
Millions were sacrificed. It was an abysmal
failure. But what else could be expected when the psychopaths
had taken over the party, the state, and the apparatus of power?
We are confronted with an insolvable problem:
how does someone who wishes to respect the free will of others
intervene and change a planet under the thumb of the psychopath?
After studying psychopathy, we do not
think it is possible. The only way to such an Eden is through
a splitting of the two paths, the STO from the STS. That is exactly
the task that has been given to us in this world; that is the
core of the lessons we have to learn. In the core of our being,
which way do we lean, which path do we choose?
This is not a choice made while calculating
the costs and benefits. It is not calculated according to game
It is a question of who you really are.
The New Elite
Another proposal that has taken various
forms over the years is the idea that an elite, a group of people
who have done this necessary internal work, who understand the
dire situation that we are in, and who can take up the mantle
of leading the others out of the mess, can come to the fore and
get the planet straightened out. This is the gist of the message
of Boris Mouravieff when he diverts from the authentic teachings
he received and begins to theorize for himself.
Mouravieff writes in volume three of his
there is an imperative need for the new
man - strong and enlightened - capable of resolving the two great
problems on whose solution the future of humanity depends.
1. To make the organization of human society
rational and effective on a global scale;
2. To create conditions which will offer
a maximum opportunity to seekers who wish to develop their Personality
and so reach the Second Birth
Only a social order formed on an esoteric
basis will provide the Statesman who will be needed tomorrow,
men capable of confronting the problems arising from the organization
of life in an Era characterized by a super-abundance of sources
Mouravieff is clear that this transformation
of society can only take place through the transformation of man
To solve the problem of humanity depends
upon a positive solution to the problem of the individual Man.
But how would such a proposal actually
work in this world?
How would this group of well-meaning people
actually achieve this power, that is, the positions in society
that would permit them to implement the necessary changes?
How would this be done without infringing
upon the free will of those who were not yet at a level to understand
what was happening?
Mouravieff, writing in the sixties, believed
that the United Nations could serve as the basis for such a transformation.
He thought that, in addition to the existing General Assembly,
made up of representatives from the different governments, that
there could be a chamber made up of representatives elected directly
by the people of the world.
The essential point is that the structure
of the UN would then be in harmony with the new rhythm of political
and social life characterized by a continually greater interpenetration
of affairs within and between states. This would be accompanied
by the growing influence of economic and social factors on truly
political questions, and in general by a progressive interpenetration
of the factors and influences which together make up modern public
life - national and international. A structure like this demands
real liberty, not one that is conditional or controlled, but one
founded upon the principle of Fraternity, and blossoming in a
climate of effective Equality.
Logically this is the only way of organizing
human society according to the natural flow of its historical
In this vision, Mouravieff sees the growing
development of what it now called globalisation and the concomitant
development of nationalism as the natural reaction. He was struggling
towards an appreciation of networking, of the ability for individuals
and groups to work together towards a common goal while maintaining
their individual differences, talents, and points of view, an
environment where all the peoples of the world could contribute:
...to the flowering of an international
society where war and want had been eliminated, characterized
by the return of different peoples to their traditional sources
in order to finally form a Unity. United in all its legitimate
variety, each national Individuality will be an integral part
of the harmonious Whole which will then be re-established.
Symbolically, this will be a return to
the Tower of Babel, but in the opposite direction: an integral
renaissance of all the historical civilizing types in a return
towards a mutual comprehension based upon a revealed and assimilated
Gnosis. This would be the blossoming of national cultures in the
framework of a unified world civilization - an expression of the
great principle of human Fraternity.
This is a beautiful vision.
Unfortunately, there are some problems.
Could you imagine this happening without
running into the resistance of those who were opposed? And those
who oppose would include very powerful and clever psychopaths
of unmatched ruthlessness.
Even within a framework of what Mouravieff
himself would have called the "A" influences, we see
that serious efforts were made to prevent the United Nations from
taking on such a role. Just look at the theories of the New World
Order that are so popular among the American Right. Who is the
villain? The United Nations, of course.
After demonising communism, instilling
in Americans a completely irrational emotional reaction to the
idea of a communist takeover of the United States, these disinfo
artists then painted the UN in the same colours of "centralist"
and "socialist", as a body that would rob Americans
of their hard-fought rights, and were able to transfer the demonic
emotional energy over to the UN.
Well, the joke, and a very bad one it
is, is on those who propagated this theory. As noted, and as we
can see for ourselves in the daily papers, at least those outside
of the USA, the New World Order is here and it is the US itself
that brought it about.
And so we must address the main problem
of Mouravieff's idealistic approach - a problem enunciated by
Mouravieff himself, though he certainly was unaware of the ramifications
of this problem - the chief problem underlying the failures of
humanity throughout history, and why there is really no possibility
of anything we do being an effective agent of change in this reality.
All of the plans for social change, Mouravieff's
included, ignore a fundamental factor about our world, a factor
that we ourselves learned from Mouravieff, and that is the factually
supported theory of the existence of a "pre-Adamic"
race and the evidence that our world is now run by them. We refer
to them as Organic Portals, and the psychopath is an OP that is,
so to say, turbo-charged. The next major obstacle is the problem
of hyperdimensional realities. If these two ideas are not factored
into considerations of this reality, there is no possibility of
positive, social and political change.
Political Change in a Hyperdimensional
World of Psychopaths
Although Mouravieff discusses the issue
of the pre-Adamic race, he does not integrate it into his understanding
of our reality. He certainly doesn't incorporate an understanding
When one understands the prevalence of
psychopaths in positions of power, and that the capitalist system
itself is a psychopath factory (for an analysis of this, as I
mentioned above, see the article "Official Culture"
in America: A Natural State of Psychopathy?), Mouravieff's proposition
to use the UN as a vehicle seems naïve. Is it possible to
imagine a man like George Bush working to promote Mouravieff's
vision? Bush was unwilling to listen to the UN for something far
Of course, Mouravieff would have had no
illusions about Bush; he knew that before transforming the world,
one must transform oneself. But how could a group of Creative
"Elite" with the orientation of serving others, gain
positions of "power" - a concept that is antithetical
to their very nature - in a world where one must mimic the psychopath
to succeed? And even if certain individuals, the "prophets"
as Mouravieff terms them, were able to obtain a certain number
of positions of power, how could they bring about any changes
when the psychopaths are willing to resort to assassination to
maintain their own control?
A society of the just can only be built
through the choice of all its members. It cannot be imposed. This
implies that - in a world where both choices are options - those
who do not wish to be a part of a just society have the full right
to go off and do what they wish. And then the question becomes:
can a society of the unjust coexist with a society of the just
in the same reality? Keep in mind the objectives of the psychopath,
and the inevitable clashes.
The fact is, in a reality that is mixed,
a significant proportion of the population will remain psychopaths
no matter how many individuals choose the path of respecting free
will. Because in a mixed reality where the conditions are set
up to "teach," to "force a choice" between
"yes and no" or "left and right" or creation
or entropy, and individuals are required to choose a pathway,
psychopaths not only have the right to exist, they are an essential
part of the "school!"
That does not, however, spell doom across
the board for those who have learned the lessons that the psychopaths
teach and have CHOSEN to live in a society of the Just. But it
seems necessary to understand that such a choice being possible
implies making a choice to leave the world of choices...
We mentioned earlier that a just society,
or a society of the just, could only be built if those forces
working against such a society were no longer permitted to wreak
their havoc, that is, by means of a split from the psychopath's
In the years since Mouravieff wrote his
idealized plan, humanity has seen the development of a technology
that permits the work of the Creative Principle to be done, although
in a way that Mouravieff could not have foreseen. It is a means
that bypasses the existing structures such as the United Nations
or other political forms. It is a means that will permit small
groups of people, people with an understanding of the true terror
of the situation - including an analysis of psychopathy - to come
together to make changes in their own lives, realizing the vision
of Mouravieff with the new means at our disposal.
The technology that permits this is the
Internet. A group such as the Quantum Future School can come together
across international boundaries, and through networking of the
Creative Principle, the individuals can do the inner work necessary
while at the same time building new forms of relationships among
the members, creating new forms of interaction in which the psychopath
has been excluded and that he can no longer destroy. Total exclusion
of the psychopath is essential for a colinear society that is,
as Mouravieff described it:
United in all its legitimate variety,
each national Individuality will be an integral part of the harmonious
... a return towards a mutual comprehension
based upon a revealed and assimilated Gnosis. This would be the
blossoming of national cultures in the framework of a unified
world civilization - an expression of the great principle of human
But even with the Internet and the ability
to create a virtual safe haven from which the psycopath is excluded,
they continue to prey. The series Adventures with the Cassiopaea
documents the struggle to break away from Maynerd Most and his
psycophants. The French Connection is documenting our interactions
with the psycopath who was waiting to pounce when Laura and Ark
crossed the Atlantic to find a physical "safe haven"
in France from where they could continue to stand against the
lies and manipulations of the global psychopaths.
But what the psychopath doesn't even comprehend
is the fact that even his own activities are necessary trials
by fire through which we come to a deepening understanding of
the nature of our reality - and the psychopath him or her self.
Through our interactions with psycopaths,
we are able to learn to work together, to forge the bonds of a
new way of BEing and DOing, together.
Through our interactions with psycopaths,
we learn how to deal with them, how to recognise them, and how
to create here and now, a reality where they have no effect. We
can even laugh at them because they are reaction machines, running
a programme that can be brought to light, understood, and even
turned to our own benefit.
They will always remain mechanical in
their thinking and in their actions. They may well surprise with
the depths of their depravity, the lengths to which they are willing
to go to get their way, but armed with the knowledge of their
programmes, it is possible to bring about a "reality split"
wherein they no longer have any effect.
Of course, it is not a transformation
of the entire world. This is excluded from our purview by the
nature of this reality itself. For the world to "be transformed,"
the earth will have to pass through a cataclysm, a cleansing,
a splitting of realities where two doors to the future open, and
where the key to opening these doors is the frequency of your
BEING. Perhaps such a possibility exists, perhaps it does not.
It is one of the fundamental questions that our scientific research
is focused upon.
It is through a scientific understanding
of reality, of its multidimensional character and the cyclical
nature of time, that we can create the tools for an end to politics
as we know them altogether - but only for those who choose such
an end, those who align their choices with Creation, and demonstrate
those choices by ACTING for the destiny of a Creative World.
Without an understanding of hyperdimensions,
there is no way to escape, because hyperdimensions open the door
to a new world were there are no psychopaths. And the key that
unlocks the door is your BEing. And through the other door is