UNSEEN WORLD

Signs and Symbols of Madness Everywhere

Which are Routinely “Overlooked”

Do you ever wonder why interventions are NOT performed on “As Yet To Be Labelled” individuals who seem to think and talk so much like we officially labelled Loons?  Well, me too. Let's all take a closer look here shall we? Conversely, Do Labeled People ever get Better?

 
Veteran's Helping Veterans  TV org
 
 
 

Call Me Crazy 

Has been reproduced here with the full Knowledge and permission of Paula J. Caplan, PhD., Now at Harvard

 
 
Free Handout for Reprogramming Awareness
 
Free Handout- Print at Will
 

Being "Tested"

This is usually done to see what kind of a reaction the "tester" can get from us.

This is also part of why many of us understand we are a bit more aware than others, which is then of course invalidated by our "testers" who want it to be them, who are the "more aware."

Concrete power comes in handy when you want to prove that kind of thing to yourself, while avoiding any challenges to your power and authority, doesn't it?

Let me give you an example out of my own concrete experience in something that occurred not too long ago.

This one is a kind of a cop test. It is also a concrete example of the absence of any real communication because we are not talking on the same level about the same experience of reality as attached to the same premise of thought. Let me demonstrate how people can APPEAR to be having the same conversation when in fact it is on two different levels of thought.

Once upon a time, I got a buzz from the front entrance of the building from someone claiming to be the "police". Now the police told me they were there because I had called THEM. I had NOT called them. So this is the starting point of the exchange and as you can see it is two opposing versions of "reality."

These are-

One: I called the police.

Two: I did not call the police.

Obviously BOTH of these cannot be true at the same time. That means there is information missing, added or spun. So which is it?

There is also a third possibility which may exist which would mean that both myself and the police believe we are telling the truth and that the other one MAY not be, for some hidden reason. That would be in a case that someone claiming to BE me, called the police.

(Perhaps just for a little more "fun.")

Do you understand why, when you are on the receiving end of this kind of performance that you can't make any REAL sense of it?

Or why it leads to "confusion."

Or why you can't trust the people you are dealing with?

Try thinking of it in terms OUTSIDE of the idea that the one "having trouble making sense of things" is having that trouble because she is a genetic defective and try, just this once, thinking about the fact that the "things" she is having trouble making any sense of, don't MAKE any sense, in relation to her and her experience, from HER point of view. You know? The point of view the "superior" minds treat as all but irrelevant. THAT'S the real problem and it is the problem that is also denied to exist. That is why it is perpetuated without interruption to "infinite power."

That is not based on WHAT is REALLY happening but rather on WHO defines and dictates to the "inferior others" what is really happening. It sure isn't about truth or justice. People who have this kind of power over others should be held to a HIGHER standard of ethics and integrity than those over whom they presume to take control and not be excused for their abuses based on WHO is doing it

So when cops at the door tell me I called them, I already have a piece of information that causes me to know SOMEBODY is lying, or trying to con me, or them. That information is my awareness of ME from my point of view. I know who I am and I also know what I did not do. I did NOT call them.

Now I may not know WHO is lying to me, or for what purpose, but I do know for sure that someone is. Is it the cop knowingly lying to me? Is it the partner of the cop doing the talking? Is it someone at the office? Or is someone else lying to them and pretending they are me, which these cops accepted without question. I may have a pretty good idea who is lying about it and a bit of information as to why; but that is not evidence. It's a hunch. I may never get a straight answer to these questions, but that does not make me either stupid or delusional does it?

One thing it always does however is create "trust issues." The same kind of trust issues created when your doctor, or a family member, or an employer etc. lies to you about what s/he knows, or what s/he will do, and then you discover that who s/he says s/he is, and who s/he actually is, are not at all the same thing.

It is very convenient to be able to dismiss the concerns of those you control by pathologizing them in those you will then lie to about it, and very self-serving to hold the unquestioned power OVER those who see it for what IT IS, and who dare to object to it. Intimidation tactics work best on those who have no real power to stop those who are intimidating them, especially if such people belong to a group which by affiliation presumes all its members to be sane, good and well-intentioned in all they do, for no other reason than that they are a member of that particular group which must be seen as an untouchable entity in itself that is always above reproach.

It is much like no one being able to blame "parents" for anything since "everyone just knows" that a "parent" would never harm his or her own child, in any way, despite mountains of evidence in concrete reality that many parents in fact have, and continue, to do so. We like living in the fantasy world of mindless abstract ideas delivered in absolute terms don't we?

It is this fantasy world the masses live in that allows the domination and control types to get away with doing, what they do, from inside such groups, the members of which can never be blamed for anything. Resolution is not the goal; preventing it is the goal and the controllers love your co-operation with their "hidden" agendas.

Now on this particular incidence with the cops at the door; one male and one female:

Since I knew I did not call the cops, I did not buzz them in, but as I was not dressed yet at 9:30 AM, I first put clothes on and then decided to go out and look to be sure, it also occurred to me that this was actually some of the "fun" harassers, I now often attract since my dismissive "labeling" days.

I have attracted quite large number of liars and con artists now including some local students pretending to be other than who they are, as part of the public assessment sessions inspired by The Psych Hospital's "help" with my "paranoid delusions" about the poor innocent, falsely accused, est-ee nurse they have protected so well. It also occurred to me that perhaps is another of those people who buzz people they don't know, in controlled entrance buildings like mine and tell them it is someone who sounds "official" so they will be let in without question. In any case, I went out to look and the two cops were already inside, lurking and watching down at the end of the hall, facing expectantly, in my direction.

The female then asked me this interesting question:

"If you did not call us then why did you come out to look?"

That question is fascinating in itself, don't you think? Non logical since it is based on an assumption in her own mind, while ignoring the fact that she buzzed me herself, and told me I had called them.. But then I am an inferior so what would I know? Still THINK about the question itself.

Why would YOU go out and look if it was your door buzzed, by those who said they were the police and that you called the police?

We then discussed some of the reasons why I and others don't automatically open controlled entrances for those who claim to be authority figures entitled to be there. I included telling her that once just after I moved in here, a male voice buzzed me saying he was Bell telephone here to repair my phone. Since I did not have one then, that pretty much revealed itself to be a lie so I did not let that one in either. But when I looked a minute or two later, there was no one there. Did the scam work on someone else that time? How many people got buzzed with the same message? Was it until someone automatically opened the door?

I told this cop I assumed also that real cops would be able to get in through use of the building, lock box. She told me they could not. Was THAT true? Who knows? I DO know that when anyone in authority lies to people enough, the people they lie to develop "trust issues" as a result, for like in "families' in which the family, as a group, closes ranks and cannot be blamed, even though you KNOW they, or at least some of them, have been lying to you, you can no longer be sure WHICH of the things they have told you, about themselves, others or even yourself, in some situations, can be accepted as truth and which ones were part of manipulative ploys and head games used to con you, or to gain power and control over you. In such cases, trust is gone; the more permanently, if those who have lied to you never "admit" to ANY of it and tell YOU, the problem is in YOU if you expect it to be anything otherwise.

So as I said, I may NEVER know for sure WHO is lying to me or what motivates it, often, for some, it is just manipulating for the sake of manipulating and gaining control as the end game in itself, but I DO know I AM being lied to by some/many people, for some reason. (Purpose)

As the follow up story to this particular cop visit:

I suspect that these two may just have been trying to see what apartment I was in, which seems similar to the bus driver story I heard before on the bus, and at another bus stop where they played, "that's her" as part of that announcement. I also heard then that one of the tenants who let a bus driver into the building and talked to him about other tenants is also the one who called the housing office to report the incident.

It is all likely part of the ongoing intrigue and covert ops that has become a staple of the local group "story" telling and endless gossiping session that tends to characterize the local version of "socializing." This is getting together as a group, to bond by talking ABOUT whomever is NOT there doing it with them. (While denying it of course) Of course to the group, THOSE people talked ABOUT are the problem; not any of the group members.

In any case, about a week after the "you called the police" bit, we had an apartment complex meeting with a police sergeant, talking about being vigilant and reporting "suspicious activity" which again I fear is going to have more to do with WHO reports it, than with WHAT legitimacy is in the reporting. But during this meeting, the topic of police entries into the building came up and a tenant who lives down the hall on my floor, brought up that she had been asked a short time earlier by two cops to buzz them in. (ah ha!) I immediately thought that this must be the same two who told me they could not get in via the lock box and that is how they got in that day to do the "lurk in the hall' bit as "watchers."

As I said, I suspect they were just trying to see what apartment I came out of and they could have just asked but then that would ruin all the ongoing "covert ops" that is the local way of being. Never reveal....keep it surreal...

In any case, the woman who said this at the meeting got this response from the sergeant there then: "Oh I don't think any cops would ever do that."

So she did not bother saying anything further on the subject, which is pretty much what I do also.

Do you understand WHY we don't bother to continue to try to talk? It is because those kinds of remarks as a response to factual experience being stated, come from the closing of ranks with the group to which the one making the remarks belongs. It is an almost automatic response. It is "we" who don't do, what you just stated some of "us" have done. The wall has been erected keeping any further genuine communication out of it.

The suggestion is that either the person who reported the incident is lying or really "believes" what she says, but is just delusional and needs some of that naughty child "correction" stuff. Many of us know from LONG time experience that logic will not penetrate that kind of stuff and unless we have the incident itself on film, with clear sound and officially time stamped, the reporting of it will be rejected pretty much automatically.

So we give up and stop talking. Then of course we suffer from another of our failures as defectives- the failure to speak up for ourselves which is then of course the cause of our getting what we "deserve" for failing to do so. Or sometimes it gets defined as "withdrawal" or a "lack of personality" in terms of course, of a self-contained defect without any real relationship to events or other people.

As my late online friend John McCarthy put it, "You can't win."

No matter what you say or don't say you get "corrected' for it and that IS the point. So most of us stop wasting our time trying to "get though" to those who have no interest in being gotten through TO, and either just stop talking and leave, or some of us now focus in explaining to those forced into the same kind of psycho-spiritual tautological infinite loops/snares, WHYthey can't make sense of it and why, no matter what they say to those they keep explaining the obvious to, they can't seem to HEAR a word we say. The hope for us is that less and less people will ever break down under the weight of the stress and confusion generated by this doublespeak nonsense and will never, ever have to ask for the kind of "help" that is anything BUT helpful.

But to those of you "hiding" in plain sight: keep right on hiding and manipulating since I am so stupid or crazy I will not ever really know when I am being lied to anyway; will I? Of course even if I do, it is WHO has the power to create and define reality itself that matters and not WHAT is actually going on in reality that counts. For it is all how it looks and sounds that matters and not really how IT IS. (est)

They do IT because IT works.

For as they say in my own est-ee protagonist's training, "There is no reality; only perception." and THEY decide for others what that perception of "reality," as defined BY THEM, not us, will be or not be.

Comments

Riddle: what's the difference between being in ANY kind of a relationship with someone and being in any kind of a relationship ABOUT someone?

Answer: in the first case you are actually in a relationship and in the second case, you aren't.

 
To Homewood Staff, Psych Students and ALL of Those Who Follow Wherever They are Led, Without Question
Unlike Myself, Most of You are Very Normal

Stigma
by Patricia Lefave, Monophrenic

One of my readers was telling me that he had been contacted by a professional to participate in a conference about the 'stigma' of mental illness. My reader then discovered that the professional was not really interested in hearing what was being said, just as inside the bio psychiatric system he had not seen any interest in his point of view after the first few minutes when a diagnosis was reached. In part, my answer to his experience included this and I thought I would post it here as I have heard it so frequently.

What 'stigma' means to 'them' and what it means to us is not the same thing. "They" want to get rid of the ''stigma" of 'mental illness' by training the public to become even MORE deaf to what we 'claim' happened to us involving other people, by strenuously promoting the idea that our CLAIMS are just a manifestation of a bio chemical illness 'just like diabetes.'

See the difference? We on
BOTH sides of the meaning admit to the ongoing existence of a 'stigma,' but the understanding of the actual cause of that is completely different. So, while we are using the same WORD, we do not mean the same thing, and 'OUR' side of our own experience is not invited to 'debate' it with the 'experts.' This extreme imbalance (ironically) of POWER and control is what is keeping this going.

It creates a tautological argument that has already been 'won' by the 'experts'
BEFORE our experience of it has even begun. It is also doing a damned fine job of enabling and supporting abusers who want to believe THEY represent all this is 'normal' in the world and they are therefore 'justified' in their abuse of others since we 'others' are 'abnormal.' This is especially true if the abuse is psycho-spiritual/verbal in nature as we can’t parade our 'bruises' or 'injury' in a concrete way.

 It is all about the psycho-politics.

 

000175496