Psychology 101

Those who feel an injustice has been done to them, because they live in obscurity, will find in it a methodology to rise above it. In its freedom to pretend, it discovers the power of insinuation; the shadows a place to hide and to reshape their own reality, perhaps their own destiny; the stress of the unknown, lurking in the dark, a force to be used to convincingly promote a caricature. Obscurity becomes the foundation of their exposure: innuendos, vagueness, directing thought, implying what cannot be justified, impressing gullible minds with an appearance that is never present – the power of suggestion used to its fullest.
Then there are those who find in obscurity a place to hide, evading detection, masking their essence in plausible deniability, feeling insecure about being exposed – afraid of the disparity and the costs this will accrue, over time.
The former, often tries to pass itself off as the latter.

Psychotherapy fails to produce results, on the individual level, because it cannot correct centuries of accumulated past. It can only medicate it, chemically adjust it, reducing it to a level that can be socially managed. Its only pragmatic effect is on the group level, because there its insights do not insult the individual directly, manipulating the social instincts, through which the individual can wilfully, if not consciously, include and/or exclude itself. The individual’s defensiveness, resisting one-on-one interventions, reduced by group dynamics. The individual becomes too skeptical and self-conscious when he knows he is being studied and, perhaps, manipulated, under the rubric of healing, or of intentionally correcting an undesirable behaviour. This, natural, defensiveness is reduced when he can either associate ‘self’ with otherness, losing himself in a crowd, or an abstraction, or find in it a distinction to exclude himself, preserving ego, while being swept along by the crowd.

True. The meds never fulfill my ancient barbarian needs.

Only a quarter of people in University have 'inner speech', unable to talk to themselves in a back-and-forth dialogue.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Quote :

Chris Heavey and I gave random beepers to a stratified random sample of 30 students from a large urban university and interviewed them about the characteristics of their randomly selected pristine experiences. Five main characteristics emerged, each occurring in about a quarter of all samples (many samples had more than one characteristic). Three of those five characteristics may not surprise you: inner speech occurred in about a quarter of all samples; inner seeing occurred in about a quarter of all samples; and feelings occurred in about a quarter of all samples. The other two phenomena occurred just as frequently but are not so well known.

Consider inner speech. Subject experienced themselves as innerly talking to themselves in 26% of all samples, but there were large individual differences: some subjects never experienced inner speech; other subjects experienced inner speech in as many as 75% of their samples. The median percentage across subjects was 20%.

Interesting content:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Now we know why so many need constant attention, and constant company.
They are silent, inside....dead.
Nothing going on.
If not for others, they would have nothing to consider dialectically, and honestly.

Just as imagination is the playground of a child, indulging in detached from reality fantasies that exaggerate the experienced real, so too is obscurantism the playground of the hypocrite, the coward and the narcissistic.
Hiding behind the necessity to evade persecution, or to express the complex so as to evade the necessity of dumbing-down language, the hypocrite uses it to hide his own inferiority, in clouds of convoluted language-games, and his ignorance in innuendos. It is a practice modern fArtist know all too well. Lacking talent they indulge in nonsense to imply what they cannot present.
What changes is the motive. In the first two motives the individual wishes to hide, or to discriminate among his peers. In the last the individual wishes to expose himself, and to distinguish himself from his peers. But there's an easy way to distinguish one from the others, and we can use painting as our medium.
A talented painter can proceed to offer a different style, expressing the complexity of his reaction to reality, only after he's gone through the phase of proving his quality by offering works that inspire and represent reality, proving not only his motives but also his talent. Only when such a display has been offered and appreciated can any subsequent art, using abstractions, be taken seriously.
If no such art can be produced, where even the simplest of minds can appreciate the talent before him, then the only motive that can be assumed is one of hiding a lack of talent, and an inability to perceive and to represent reality in detail.
We may tolerate the artist who having displayed his talent, in relation to reality, can proceed to experiment with presenting his reactions, his personal feelings, sensations, in regards to this reality, but what is intolerable is a pretentious talent-less hypocrite, unable to display his talent, because he has little of it, using abstractions to, and obscurantism, to sell himself as an artist of note.

We can say that this detachment from reality is a symptom of aging, or of illness.
Art reflects man's psycho-synthesis, ion relation to the environment. His health.
Gradual detachment from the real, is a falling away, or into a coma - self-referential, pure subjectivity. The brain is cut-off from the world outside, and falls into sleep and dreams.
Art reflects this state of decline. Philosophy being the art of language, in relation to world.
The Greeks practiced it using poetry, rich in metaphors. A necessary aspect of the noumenon, which language mirrors, and phenomenon.
Also the risk of becoming trapped in linguistics, or confusing artistic representation for the actual.

What Obscurantism does is exploit our inability to accurately deduce motive.
The absence of absolutes forces us to approximate, and approach, through reasoning and perceiving patterns, the real, or what we call 'truth'.
Then we can evaluate our accuracy, after-the-fact, or by making predictions.
Hypocrites use this to imply that their motive is that of evading the wrath of the masses, or to engage a superior audience, and so it imitates obscurantism to hide ignorance, and feebleness
Placing the argument and the evidence in an internal, subjective, esoteric domain, there is no way to prove or disprove it, if the actor is motivated by a desire to impress and to hide his own motive.
When a theory is un-testable, it is also inapplicable....so it can claim all events, all outcomes, prove its veracity.
Making the argument internal, as well as the definitions of words, it can appropriate any, and all thinkers and thoughts, by simply altering the definition of words.
With no objective standard i.e. an external indifferent world, there is no restriction to re-interpreting and re-defining symbols.  

Some signs may be a denial of understanding to those who criticize and reject, and a readiness to approve and to accept as profound understanding, those who flatter, or show a willingness to surrender authority, and to accept.
Unable to accurately judge motive, the individual uses its own motives as a measure and projects motive upon other.
Judging using patterns of behaviour over time, and with no objective standard outside self, the individual's only option is to use his understanding of himself, and his own motives, as an example.
This understanding is also incomplete and subjective, corrupted by ego and emotions; by the pleasure and death drive.
The typical individual (modern) presumes the most negative aspects of himself to belong to other, preserving the most flattering, positive ones, for himself. He/She unloads what he fears he is most guilty of, upon other.

Philosophy, and art, becomes a methods of manipulating psychology and selling itself to the gullible and the desperate. It becomes political.
Personal insecurity and weakness seeks power in and through otherness...but not otherness which is immune to linguistic manipulation, such as animals and inanimate matter, but only humans.....so world is redefined as humanity, extending the potential extent of power, or the cosmos is declared conscious, so as to make it vulnerable to semiotic manipulation.
It's a psychological word-game where one's own psychology is seeking refuge in other.  

On the opposite side of the spectrum, denying all meaning, declaring language impotent, pure nihilism, is a way of reducing all to self - seeking parity of self with all.

It's the either/or of Nihilism.
Either all is free-willed, or all is determined.
Either all usage of words are meaningless, or all of them are meaningful.
Either all is ordered, or all is chaos.  
Either morality is universal, or morality is a manmade construct.
Either the concept of God is absolute oneness....or it is absolute nil.

Pure vs Positive Nihilism = bipolar dualism, build on linguistics taken literally rather than as representations.
Within this absolutism bipolarity, duality, of nihilism the individual mind pretends to be thinking, and to be exploring world, seeking an approach to the real - it is, in fact, hiding from itself, in itself.

Absolute = indivisible, immutable, whole, one - singularity.

Psychosis of Political Left

Might through being wrong. MANifesto: Right<>Left Psychosis of Political Left
Strength through weakness – Orwellian newspeak for the post-modern age.
There is no error, no wrong choice, no bad judgment. An insinuation of correctness by avoiding the concept, pretending to not have it in mind, to be 'free' from its arrogant, authoritarianism – a non-concept concept.
Indirectly directing 'self' to the 'right' with a series of concentric 'left' turns, governed by an esoteric, occult rightness; right-brained artistry, pirouetting to confuse others and to dizzy the ego, so as to avoid shame and guilt.
For the post-modern Nietzsche has forever associated both shame & guilt Judeo-Christianity, offering them an excuse, an escape, on the grounds of a discredited Christian dogma. A psycho-sociological emotion was eliminated, liberating the mind to the opportunities of shameless irresponsibility, and guilt-less identification. Along with the herd the tribe was reduced to a remnant of primitive psychology to be overcome by an individual declaring his own values, and therefore his own righteousness. This is how Will to Power was redefined and integrated into the neo-Marxist dialectics of post-modernity.
Not God, not the State, the collective, but the individual was now the one and only authority, making compromises only for the sake of self-interests; a man-child, becoming a man-god, that could do no wrong, because in his subjective reality he could never be wrong. This is how perspectivism was reinterpreted – not as an admission of a prejudice, a weakness, but of an innate authority, a power that did not have to be earned but only acknowledged, and accepted as a given.
It is circling itself on its, usual, weakest side, the left side, using the 'right' side of the brain. Not to be 'right', in relation to reality, but to claim it indirectly, by eliminating the very idea of rightness – being 'right' by admitting to no 'wrong'.
A feminine word-game.
There is no 'might' to be found in being 'right', but only in being 'wrong' about it, like everyone else. With no right all error is, automatically, not-wrong, which is another way of implying that it is right – the individual can do no wrong, therefore he/she is always right – ego made mighty in its evasion of error. The epitome of subjectivity, reliant on mystical internal inversions, denials, circularity.
Fatalism, determinism, places reason upon what cannot be changed, nor resisted. One's actions are determined so he/she is never accountable. All choices have already been accounted for, and can never be the product of a wrong judgment, since there is no such thing. All behaviours are right, having been determined by secret forces, and unknown circumstances. Nobody is to blame, and certainly not the self that can do no wrong, but can only endure the rightness, and affirm it as another audience member in a play he cannot edit – he is not a director, not even an actor, but an observer of his own existence.
The feminized mind cannot claim to be right, when it will contradict its own idealistic ploy that there is no such thing as 'rightness', and no advantage to be gained from it, so she can only insinuate it, using humility as an argument, swaying judgment. She simply states that the very idea of correctness, of being right, is wrong, implying that there can be no wrong, so all judgments are right, except the one that contradicts this central idea(l); there can be no wrong action, behaviour, unless it threatens the central principle. This claim is declared 'right' by declaring all judgments as equally so. 'Rightness' is made into a universal absolute, but not directly, risking exposure, but through insinuations.
This is at the heart of determinism, or those who denounce free-will as either 'absolutely so' or 'absolutely not so', preferring the 'negative' since no absolute evidence for absolute freedom, or for anything, for that matter, can ever be given, since there are no absolutes – a negative with positive implicatinos.
Therefore, if there can be no absolute right, no God, no absolute freedom, free-will, it follows that there is absolute non-freedom, no right/wrong, no error – no inferior judgment and therefore, no inferior mind.
The feminine 'right-brain', artistically implies what it refuses to state clearly, because it would contradict itself, and expose a paradox of its own making – a linguistic hoax. By eliminating the external standard, one liberated himself/herself from its authority, and justified this by using esoteric validations that did not have to prove themselves to anyone, but only to self. A comforting solipsistic self-referential strategy, always finding in itself the reasons and the evidence in support of its own judgments.
But the psyche needs external validation. Humans are social creatures.
They must find support, validation, in and through others of their own kind, so the individual must seduce, coerce, convince multitudes to accept its own ploy as a universal truth that may not be called so, but only attained through the humble means of admitting to no untruths. It is a method that will seduce multitudes to its obvious utility.

What then, remains to use as justification other than feelings, sensations, pleasure?
The hoax is covered in sensationalism; hedonism softening skepticism, feminine games work on the hardest man.
Who can say no to pleasure? Who would doubt the feeling?
Motive shifts from 'truth' to what feels good.
What does it matter who was right and who was wrong when there's pleasure to be enjoyed? Immediate gratification, curbing reasoning, calming uncertainty.

The underlying psychology is that of Abrahamism....Judeo-Christian-Islamic spirituality.
Using psycho-babble, they purport to present free-will as an accusation, the holding of others accountable when the reverse can also be claimed...that the denial of free-will, understood in absolutist, nihilistic, terms, is the holding nobody accountable.
The individual is absolved of all responsibility, and so is other, who is no longer responsible for anything he may do to him/her.

Trapped in Abrahamism they perceive shame/guilt in Judeo-Christian contexts.
Trapped in Nihilism, the either/or of noetic abstractions, represented in semiotics as literal, they cannot let go of the absolute.
God is dead, but he is not.
He's only changed names, or simply adopted one of his many monikers.

If not absolute Freedom, defining free-will, then absolute un-freedom.
Binary logic....dualism.
No subtly, no gradations, no approximation...no uncertainty.

Marxism secularizes this, absolving the individual of all natural identifiers, allowing him to become entirely determined by State, and then, after post-modern adjustments, upgrades, to be given entirely to the individual, as God in himself - subjectivity raised to the divine.
"I am whatever I say I am". I am God, as are all humans....Humanism, makes the Human God's other name.
Not 'man in god's image' but an inversion....'god in man's image'.
In both cases the world, the experienced, is left outside.
'Outside' signifies the noetic that usurps the phenomenal....the ideal usurping the real, the idea replacing the aesthetic, the empirical.
Now world must adapt to man's abstractions, his ideologies, his theories.
The exoteric usurped by the esoteric, requiring no evidence, other than feeling, conviction, belief, certainty.
The idea can never be disproved but only accused of being useless, or negative: hurtful, insulting, degradation, limiting, shaming.
Natural selection, selecting fit from unfit, can now be accused of being fascistic...to be overcome with confident proclamations, repeated and reaffirmed by a collective.
The individual is now both set-apart, in theory, and included, in practice - Americanism.
Stripped of his past he can reinvent himself, in his own mind, but this reinvention requires communal validation, otherwise it fails. The collective must affirm the lie, the pretence, for it to maintain the semblance of truth, and for ti to survive in a indifferent world.
Paradox of Nihilism. Conundrums produced by this noumenon/phenomenon, ideal/real dissonance.
Lying is how it covers it all up.
The Noble Lie, as Strauss called it.

The liar need not know the truth in order to cover it up, but only deny that it exists altogether, claiming that the absence of absolute truth is evidence of any truth.
Binary Logic, faced with Flux, can choose to think Top<>Down, but only if it refuses to abide by its own reasoning, or if there is a protective collective present and willing to intervene, buffering the costs for such detached delusions.
Golden Rule is essential to absorb the individual's failures - an agreement of reciprocity maintaining communal insanity for a short time.

The defensive psychology has realized it can place no confidence in what it considered, and still does, absolute truth, but it can niether abandon the investments in time and effort made over decades of living.
All that's left for it to do is to discover and exploit flaws in positions that threaten this investment, believing that by ridiculing or discrediting them their own uncertainties can remain safe, and their own cracks can remain hidden; the possibility of their truthfulness intact.
The Nihilist becomes a nit-picker of destruction, abandoning the subtle details of constructing.
Unable to create, but only procreate, he/she destroys, and in the destruction feels powerful and vindicated.
With no absolute it worships himself deconstructing, finding weakness, cracks in the imperfect approximations of minds interpreting fluidity - he becomes cynical, in his own defence, laughing to expunge internal stress.
It is the power of the feminine that giggles at male promises and pretenses of power, knowing no man can ever stand against the degrading consistency of fluctuating interactions; no order can persist, for long, against chaotic attrition.
She ascends the throne of nature's agency, smirking at all who claim it as their own, and when they speak of perfection, and her beauty, she hides her insecurity beneath faked superiority.

Feebleness does not have to prove itself strong if it can imply it by pointing out weaknesses in others; idiocy does not have to prove its genius when it can imply it by exposing intellectual failings in others.
An easy task when there are no absolutes and all perspectives are approximations.
Absolute no-thing can be as powerful a god as absolute thingness; the nil as inspiring, to a recovering Abrahamic, as the one. It is cut from the same cloth. Part of the same frame of mind.
Does anyone ever completely recover from a crippling disease? Does one return to his past virility after months in a coma?
What of the one who never truly awoke but went from childish dreams to adolescent slumber? Can he claim to have a memory of health to return to?
All he can do is imagine it: inflating it to extraordinary proportions, excusing himself, or ridicule it, deflating it, to comfort himself.

When a mind has faced defeat, and comes to terms with his not knowing, and not seeing, he finds some healing pride in assuming that nobody can ever know, or will ever see.
Unable to create, or discover the superior, the most probable, they settle for a smug pride of knowing there can never be a perfect, certain absolute.
Plenty of room for the inferior to sneak through the fissures when the superior is not omnipotent nor omnipotent, leaving no room whatsoever.
With no absolute order, inferiority can use chaos to imply its own relevance.

It's all in the psychological approach.
For the Pagan, it all begins with what he never had. He advances, incrementally towards greater, knowledge, more awareness.

For the modern degenerate it all begins with what he's presumed he always had, the absolute.
All pales in comparison to this perfect, wholeness, and its certainty.
What fails to meet this standard is equally imperfect, equally dissatisfying.
The average, born and raised on nihilistic mind-control, the belief in the Abrahamic God, filled in this void - surrender to it equalized all in its name.
For others the death of this God, its discrediting, left them with this emptiness, and this addiction to absolutes. Nothing short of it would never be enough.
The absence of perfection was a 'perfect' excuse, or a void to be filled in with semiotics, and confident declarations simulating certainty.
For a few the absence of absolute evidence, absolute proof, absolute certainty, was 'perfect' to reject all, and to settle for one's own ignorance.

People (NPCs) like to say that labeling someone as an NPC is a knee-jerk reaction to new acquaintances or an inability to empathize with others. This couldn’t be further from the truth.

You have to get to know someone pretty well before you discover there’s nothing there at all. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Faceberg (@thefaceberg) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

We always begin with ourselves as a template for understanding the other.
Unless we already have formed a different template and categorise said person differently from the start.

"Hello, fellow White people..."
"We are all valuable human beans, aren't we?"
"We all bleed red, think of me as being just like you."

Let's cut to the chase - I really don't want you to know me because you would leave me, ignore me or kill me. So don't find the differences between us, thereby getting to know who I am.

NPC isn’t a title you use to write off someone you don’t know or don’t know too well. It’s a title used when repeated exposure to someone renders you certain that there’s nothing of substance to be found within them. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Faceberg (@thefaceberg) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

NPC isn’t a fixed state. I’ve known people who have regressed into NPCs over the time that I have known them. When someone wants to be “liked” above all else, they will wholeheartedly adopt the beliefs of the crowd.

“Everyone likes this. If I like this, everyone will like me!”

— Faceberg (@thefaceberg) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This way of being is at the core of “celebrity worship”, pop culture, Hollywood. NPCs or those soon to become one reason that if everyone likes Celebrity, if they like Celebrity, everyone will like them.

There is no going back once someone has reached this state. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Faceberg (@thefaceberg) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

POUR CONCLURE:

NPCs aren’t as prevalent as you think they are, but they without a doubt walk among us.

To think that they don’t exist is merely an error of projecting your better self on to other people. Not everyone is the same as you, for better and for worse.

— Faceberg (@thefaceberg) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Great..., I just could have posted his continuing tweets to basically come to the same conclusion.

It's a social glue for/in a narcissistic society which lives mostly in their own heads, preoccupied with protecting their blown up self-image.

There are three kinds of lies:
1-The lie that fabricates a lie, by knowing the truth. If this hypothetical 'truth' is accurate, or not, is besides the point. The intent is what matters.
It may fabricate a lie with a total disregard for ‘truth’, freeing itself to pursue the most potentially pleasing fabrication, or the one it judges as promising the highest potential for happiness.

2-The lie that slightly modifies the truth. The most effective lie is the one that modifies what is true, by inflating and/or deflating parts of it, or by selectively reveling and concealing. .

3-The lie which withholds the truth. This can be excluded from the category 'lie', since it isn't proactive but passive. We can also include conspiracies in this category because conspiracies are not fabrications, requiring large and sophisticated organization, and the silence of hue numbers of individuals but can be based on a small number of individuals knowing the truth and stepping aside, allowing the event, the consequences to unfold so as to then take advantage of them. But there's a more insidious version of this last 'lie' of passive silence, and withholding... the cultivation, or support of the errors produced by ignorance.
Not only does the conspirator not reveal the 'truth', preventing the consequences from unfolding, or the error from producing consequences, but he may validate the error, step in to eliminate any resistance, any chance of revealing the truth; he may proactively intervene to prevent the 'lie', from being disrupted from unfolding. A conspirator does not have to organize and set into practice a plan, requiring organization and a lot of people knowing and keeping silent, but it may be possible for a small group to know, the truth, secretly and persistently eliminating all possible resistance and revelations, promoting the circumstances that allow the lie to persist uninterrupted, or by intervening to eliminate all possible resistance that may stand in its way.

It's ingrained into the female's psychology to use manipulation to become effective.
A female's role is such that it must depend on the group to survive and to carry-out her sexual role.
Reading people, finding allies, gaining trust, reputation, are crucial to her role and her subsequent status. Her form is round, and soft, triggering parental emotions.
Roundness, softness, plumpness, is how the baby ensures that the parent will take care of it. It is non-threatening, helpless totally dependent.
Female forms imitate this.
Tone of voice, gestures accentuate it.
Being a 'victim' attempts to garner sympathy, to play the helpless dependent non-threatening role.
Victimhood is the feminization of mankind normalized.
We live in a world dominated by a nation, the US, that uses victimhood to justify tis flexing of tis power.
It adopts the appearance of Rome, but has an opposite psychology.
"Why do others hate and attack the US?" Because they are jealous of it, and its 'way of life' and its 'freedoms'. Envy is how women explain why others are 'mean' to them, why others as 'cruel' towards them. It's a feminine go-to excuse to blame others and to evade responsibility.  
The current post-modern empire adopts it as a method of internal and external 'soft power'.  
Feminine in a Judeo-Christian sense of the word. Vindictiveness, pay-back, called 'justice', a 'setting things right, again'.

Water seems to be a common theme with 'savants' and those suffering from some degree of OCD.

Math, the most abstract language, almost as abstract as music, becomes the code that the mind obsesses over. It is the mental map the mind can explore continuously, finding patterns within the patterns, because the noumenon can only represent fluidity by subdividing it, fragmenting it infinitely.
Math is music given a code, other than a tone, a musical note.
The mathematical algorithms become as beautiful as a symphony.

The mind feels like it is tapping into something profound, because it is tapping into the representation of order, using different contexts, referring to different sensual organs, or combinations of them.    
The dominance of one sense organ, over the others, establishes a hierarchy which then express itself artistically....and language, including math, is an art-form.
Elsewhere I've briefly commented on how organ hierarchies are, in my view, how personality is determined.

Severe trauma, can alter this, changing the hierarchies by decreasing one or more organs strength, in relation to the others.
The degree of its power, relative to the other organs, determines the subtle differences in personality and the subsequent development of the outward expression of this personality, called 'character'.
The character is, essentially, a performance, determined through upbringing (nurturing) where the mind learns what parts of tis personality, and to what degree they can be expressed.
Character, as the word implies, is a caricature, social avatar, a mask we all put on, and underneath it is the secret personae, the self, which is not entirely known.
Ego is the lucid part of self, and self, is the continuum, stretching to beyond one's birth, determining the personality/personae. It is, the sum of all past, or all previous nurturing....including that of one's parents, and their parents, and so on.
This establishes potential which is then cultivated to tis fullest, or left to atrophy.

An often unstated prejudice is that the left is populated by intelligent, sensitive, minds, and the right by unintelligent brutes.
There is some validity to this , but it is based on the difference between feminine and masculine demeanours.
Nihilism has no reference to reality to justify its claims, so it must find reasoning, in books, in text, provided by other minds. Nihilism must refer to other noumena, and circumvent the indifferent 'viciousness' of reality that contradicts their ideology without intent.
So, a leftist must find language in books to validate his detached from reality idealism. He must be well-read and refer and defer to authors, text, and 'experts'.
Noumena referring and deferring to noumena. Theories, ideals, referring and deferring to theories and ideals with no reference outside minds.
This is circle-jerking, or inter-subjective solipsism, to be more polite.
By contrast a right-leaning mind needs no such reference and deference, because his ideas are validated by experiences and reality. His basic premises begin where even a simpler organism finds validation for its judgments - empiricism, we call it, the reference and deference to the apparent (phenomenon).
He may seek support in other thinkers but it is only to deepen his understanding and defend it from the conniving word-juggling mechanizations of more feminine minds.
The masculine s always more direct, predictable, obvious....hiding nothing. It is the feminine in all that is sly and hypocritical.
All individuals being a synthesis of the feminine and the masculine demeanour. Its degree determining how masculine and/or feminine the individual is.

Additionally, the leftists prefer to mask their egotism, and selfishness behind the pretence of selflessness.
The reasons are sociological, shaping a strategy that must defer to social dynamics, as the feminine is want to do because of its role in the reproduction process.
A certain talent for reading others, and for using language to seduce and manipulate is developed as an innate quality. The feminine is always linguistically more adept than the masculine, because her survival depends on it - she measures herself, and her quality in relation to how she fits into the group.
Her mind is entirely dedicated to inter-group dynamics, social status, relationships etc.

Selflessness imitates parental sacrifice, building trust between individuals with fewer genetic similarities. It is a method of parentally opening up the other, triggering his/her infant instincts.
We see the evolution of femininity as rounder, less threatening, confrontational....imitating parent/infant psychology so as to ensure trust and care.
The left has adopted this feminine strategy to achieve tis socioeconomic goals.  
It is always talking about selflessness and group cohesion, love and tolerance, accusing resistance of hatred, and selfishness. It implies tis own selflessness, when underlying its actions and choices are very profoundly selfish motives, similar to parental self-sacrifice hides a deeper selfishness.
The method is more intricate and involves more sophisticated tactics and applications of ego, when compared to the more direct and obvious method. So, it requires a more sophisticated identification of self, often involving projection and deference.
For example, a feminine mind must identify with her offspring, with which it shared half her genes, so as to enable her to risk and sacrifice on tis behalf. Projecting self, into other, evolves to  develop the maternal instinct.  
A similar method is used to develop inter-group cohesion in many social species, such as wolves and lions, and chimpanzees...and humans.
It is the same method as the conceptualization of a universe. The mind projects itself, 'noetically' in an 'outside' space/time, spacelessness/timelessness, from where it conceptualizes the sum total of what exist, as a one, a whole. This, of course, is a mental trick, a method....producing many paradoxes, and the noumenon/phenomenon dissonance which almost always sides with noumenon, as the more malleable, intimate part of the dualistic relationship. Another way to conceptualize it is as subjective/objective, ideal/real.  
The mind idealizes the cosmos by projecting itself 'outside'.....into the unreal. Only the mind can contradict space/time....explaining why and how Nihilism evolves in organisms where self-consciousness has emerged, beginning the Cartesian dichotomy of mind/body.  

The more honest method would be to conceptualize the cosmos from the Bottom<>Up, or from within it, moving outward, without ever attaining the 'outward'.
From within the cosmos we can only experience multiplicity, mutability, divisibility, (inter)activity. No paradoxes are produced when the noumenon, the idea(l) must adapt/adjust to the real, and not vice versa . The idea(l) is forced to discipline itself to the real, and not the inverse.  
The idea(l) of a one, universe, is nonsensical if we consider it more than just a method of representation. Like the concept of the Abrahamic God. It is a representation that is believed in literally. Projected, noetically, and sought out.
This absurdity becomes a theory man must now contend with, when it is absurd to begin with, if it is defined and understood literally. The only way to content with an absurdity is with another equally absurd concept, where nothing can ever be resolved because both concepts, as they are defined, have no reference to anything real....they are both unreal.  
This either/or dichotomy is the very essence of Nihilism and tis bi-polar binary, duality, creating a noetic alternate space/time - an ideological reality.

This methodology requires sophisticated linguistic mind-games, using semiology, and others, as validation and justification
This complexity of duplicity, and self-deceit, is mistaken for a sophistication of motive and mind.
By contrast, the more honest approach is one that begins with the self-evident, obvious and simple and builds complexity, whereas this begins with pretentious complexity to hide the simplicity, and obviousness of its motive.

Penis envy
Females are angry at any male who denies them the means, such as abortion and contraceptive technologies, so that they can also behave as if they were male.
Their anger is against nature, that 'damned' them to carry out this role, of being impregnated and carrying to term a foetus.
They demand that males humour them, or freely provide and invent technologies that will 'correct' this fact, so that they too can be as promiscuous, carefree as males seem to be. They demand it as a 'right', based on the ideology of equality = all born unequal, different, shall be made equal, the same, by any means necessary.
Anyone who denies them this 'right' or simply points out the facts, is a Nazi, or a paternalistic bigot.
Progress means promoting a Utopia where there is no natural identifier, but only social identifiers. Sounds like Marxism.

Though we know of the 'Napoleonic' and the 'Messianic complex', and we have been made ashamed of our love of father & mother by the 'Oedipal complex' thanks to Freud, we have never heard of the 'penis envy complex', and how it warps female psychology.
We're quick to psychoanalyse male behaviour and cast it in a negative light, diagnosing naturally evolved behaviours as psychosis, but nobody dares criticize female psychology.
How many of us know that the Napoleonic complex is not only a male 'thing' but the same psychology can be adapted to females, born with a short stature?

Satyr wrote:

I remember about the same time this was posted this video kept popping up in my YouTube recommendations. I also know that some videos on some channels can sit there for years with barely any views, then they suddenly explode. I wonder if it's all "natural" or there's something else at work.

Had the video also in my recommendations list.

I'm pretty sure they have certain profiles for different kinds of people.
Either it's automatically created profiles, created by an "A.I." which will inevitably have created something like the alt-right/European dissident kind of profile even without realising it, or they have deliberately created profiles which they can manipulate intentionally if they choose to do so.

Weakness needs strength to seize control and comfort it with its certainty....and a woman needs a male for the same, as a child needs a parent.

The common man awakening to himself, needs a comforting 'lie'; to settle its growing uneasiness and sense of insecurity; to cope; to feel like someone knows and understands and all will be alright; to lead as if he knows where he is going; to give it certainty, wholeness, completion...because it cannot find it in itself.

When one absolute is discredited it needs a replacement. Here is where the parasite reigns.

A female's filtering nature means she has to be able to become as forgiving and humble, while still being able to become unforgiving and arrogant.
Her double edged nature reflects nature's order/chaos duality.
As vulnerable and thoughtful as she can be, she can also be callous and intolerant, on a level no male can match.

This duality is represented by Dionysus.
It is the difference of opening up and allowing to pass, and to close off, and denying passage.
Her reproductive role has evolved her to be as she is...both lovely and monstrous, both mother and whore, both tender and vicious.
She may not know why or how, but she trusts her intuitions, and follows what they direct her to do.
If they tell her to give herself totally and completely, she surrenders; if they tell her to reject and deny, she will not be swayed, and any rejection of her decree is considered an affront, a rape, because it denies her the only power she embodies; her judgement is the judgement of natural selection.

Marketing - There is a lot of psychological analysis which works in the real world at work in marketing.
Psychology TM - There's a lot of bullshit sold under the umbrella of psychology. More about what the "patient" would like to hear than what is actually an accurate description of what's going on in the psyche.

Marketing is applied psychology, just like politics.
Then they mix it in with lies, to discredit it, or cause confusion, to make any awareness improbable.

Like when they dismiss gender, and race as  social constructs, or declare 'human nature' to be a myth, when both bases its strategies on a recognition of race/ gender and an underlying human nature.
It disarms the reaction to the application, increasing its effectiveness.

Humans do not like the idea that someone can know them more than they know themselves, and use this to manipulate and exploit them.
The simplest minds declare their complexity, as a denial, and the psychotic who can more easily be exploited and manipulated, also denies anything that will expose him/her to himself, most of all.

Because objective knowledge places the subjective within its proper dimensions.
The subject denies, or dismisses, anything that makes it vulnerable to external will....and this denial makes it even more vulnerable to it.
The cynic laughs at everything to avoid what his ignorance and vulnerability and susceptibility to psychological manipulation exposes about him/her.....not only to other but to himself/herself.
It's the existential anxiety I spoke of elsewhere...a product of self-awareness, where nihilism takes root.
To perceive self in relation to other, forces the mind to take account, to accept responsibility for himself as part of a continuum.....inheritance. It forces the mind to see itself as it is, rather than how it wishes it could be.
Denial, cynical dismissal, is an easy way to avoid responsibility and accountability and the necessity for action, for adaptation to circumstances....to accepting self, warts and all.

Psychology is decisive in determining personality and what character we will play outward.
I've placed it in the neurological synthesis of mind/body.
Therefore, the race, sex, of the individual is more decisive than the culture it finds itself within. Nature/Nurture describes how much potential and in what traits one inherits, whether they wish it or not, and how much of this potential is cultivated or what traits are nurtured and enhanced, and which ones stifled and allowed to atrophy.
This can't but affect our approach to world, and how we relate to it - rooted in the fight/flight mechanism, we can use the male/female reproductive roles to differentiate Apollonian from Dionysian, order from chaos, the esoteric versus the exoteric approach.
This combination determines the kind of meme we will find more appealing, closest to our genetics.
Entire cultures can be divided using this criterion.
It's the gene/meme synthesis.
Each combination, and degrees each dominates, establishing a way of approach reality, and the survival strategy adopted....in other words the idea(l)s that will govern the groups art, ambitions, social hierarchies, traditions, and inevitably its fate.
All this is reflected in philosophy, or how each type applies and evaluates philosophy, as an indication of tis attitude, its relationship, with the world beyond itself. The subjective/objective relationship.
In feminized systems a feminized philosophy is more popular.
The esoteric takes a more important role, the subjective is where it seeks refuge....adopting the flight reaction rather than the masculine fight reaction.
This attitude is reflected in how it treats its females and males....whether it inherits its identity matrilinilealy or patrilinileally, or from nowhere but an abstraction of the pater/mater, the institution, in secular systems, or from a one-god, from religious systems.
All this comes forth in its application, usage, and understanding of language....since language is a product of the nervous system, synthesising mind/body and data collected from internal and from external sources - empirically/emotionally, rationally/logically or intuitively/emotionally evaluated.

Which will dominate the feminine, the poet, the artist, or the masculine, the scientist, the philosopher?
Any combination is possible....adjusting degrees to explain the multiplicity of approaches.
In philosophy, it is evident, that the masculine must dominate the feminine aspects of self, without denying them existence, or their say. The philosopher must dominate the poet....otherwise instead of representing, artistically, the real, the individual begins to project his reaction to the real, as art.
The esoteric, the internal, dominates and overwhelms the exoteric, the empirical, the rational.
Not even a perfect balance is desirable, because this will only create confusion, confusing the ideal for the real, and the real for the ideal.  
It is the masculine that must dominate.
No mincing of words, no prose and poetics...a more Doric approach. Less flowery language and more obviousness....less obscurity and allegories and more clarity and directness.
The feminine has no place in this masculine discipline. Whether male or female, the masculine must stand forth....with courage and honesty, and not with lies. The presence of the feminine forces the masculine to adopt feminine ways, or stay silent....and where the feminine dominates the masculine cannot speak honestly, so is forced to stay silent, or lie.
This is the current War Like no Other state of things.
Nihilism is used to raise the feminine as the desired attitude, forcing the masculine into hiding...fleeing rather than fighting...or dying rather than lying.

A feminized war necessitates feminine rules of engagement.....adopting feminine methods, to defeat a feminine adversary....or exposing it to itself, revealing the truth, beneath the lies. Exposing the esoteric to what it is intimidated by....the exoteric. Teaching the feminine respect for what it wants to exterminate, because it cannot be it.