Trauma (II)
The problem with the assertion that the West is traumatised is that it leads to immediate resistance from conservatives. This is because the concept “trauma” is advanced by the left for manipulative purposes—for narcissistic victimhood. Hence conservatives are primed to dismiss all assertions as regards trauma as “whining” or “moaning”—“just get on with it, I was whipped with a bare belt-buckle by nanny as a lad—and it never did me any harm; in fact, I rather miss it (cue descent to Mistress Whiplash’s London Dungeon off Duck Lane).” Yet conservatives miss the point that although the left exaggerates “trauma”—presents faked trauma—it does worship victimhood and its policies do create genuine victims.
Due to the way laws have been relaxed in San Francisco there has been an increase in petty crime in the city. To have your apartment broken into, your possessions rifled, and your bed defecated upon constitutes a trauma—it genuinely is traumatic to be violated, especially as most people do not appreciate until it happens how far they count on their home as a space that is default safe and protected. Sleep in the wild—let alone in an urban area—alone. You will become acutely aware that you are vulnerable; it is this vulnerability that the home protects us from—although we forget it.
Another leftist policy, cannabis decriminalisation: a proportion—not all, but a proportion—who consume cannabis will experience psychosis or find latent schizophrenia becomes active. Others will experience milder forms of distress. This amounts to trauma—people will be traumatised by cannabis decriminalisation, often permanently.
The left creates victims—i.e. people who are traumatised. This makes sense: the left thinks it is high status to be a victim—so it creates more high status people, perfectly rational. Conservatives are complicit in this activity because they deny that anyone has been traumatised at all and write it all off as unwarranted complaint. This means that the systems the left creates to traumatise people are never removed—instead, they carry on without interruption. All the conservatives say is “my grandfather, Colonel Jock McJock McFarland, had his eye shot out, his fingers blown off, and his left testicle eviscerated by a doodlebug—and he never complained, not one peep.”
Conservatives derive masochistic satisfaction from their ability to “take it”—they are people who are proud that they never retaliate; they derive psychological satisfaction from their effortful control as people mess everything up around them—iron self-discipline before all provocation (a position that amounts to never doing anything and being proud about it—at least you never lost self-control, though). When a Trump or Musk appears to spoil the game, conservatives get nervous—it ruins their psychological satisfaction, they’re not allowed to be beautiful losers anymore.
Hence conservatives and progressives are both complicit in the way the West is traumatised. I have listed many other policies elsewhere that traumatise people—chief among them are schools, particularly the American high school model (deployed as comprehensive schools in Britain and also the model for secondary education in the USSR). However, mass immigration, mass divorce, mass pornography, vulgar mass culture, and so on all contribute to a traumatised state.
It is difficult to raise certain issues—as regards immigration in particular—because to contradict the official line is low status; and yet it is also difficult because people are traumatised and like all traumatised people they respond to an attempt to address the issue with denial. “We’re a happy family here—you’re just a nasty person trying to cause trouble by making clever remarks.” Actually, you have a thorn in your paw, and I just think if we removed…“Thorn? Thorn? I’ve always walked like this, it’s better—it’s hybrid vigour...”
This state is not unconnected to the fact that the regime uses psychological double-binds to entrap people. Hence, even when I was a child in the early ’90s, the main news programs on ITV and BBC had black anchors on rotation—even though black people were less than 1.5% of the population. However, this was a double-bind; even to notice was a sign of guilt. “Oh, and why’s that significant to you? Why does that matter?”.
To perceive is forbidden—very much in the way when daddy touches you there it’s because he loves you very much. This doesn’t feel like love. “Don’t be a silly cow, your father did no such thing—you’re such a little liar.” Similar behaviour is seen when people are told simultaneously that “white people don’t exist” and yet that white people bear a unique guilt for historical events—that is a psychological double-bind that people use to cause a person to freeze mentally and be unable to assert and defend themselves. “You don’t exist and you’re guilty of everything!”.
The result is that obscene repressed self-assertion leaks out indirectly—the Pepe craze a few years ago being an example. People who are unable to assert themselves in a healthy way instead use a counter-strategy that pseudo-accepts that they are “evil”—so they post a picture of Pepe in an SS uniform by a gas chamber mirthfully gassing a tear-stained wojak. You throw a party where you let Timmy in the wheelchair win a game (“because he’s special”)—the child who says, “Timmy doesn’t deserve to win,” is marched out and lectured in the car park about how he’s “evil”. It’s the same, except at a societal level—if you can’t say, then you’ll drool and walk with a limp and say, “I’m retarded, give me a prize too!” “Will you stop this outrageous behaviour, this instant.”
Conservatives and liberals, as with most people, are interested in reason—in manipulation; they are very clever, very intelligent at their manipulations. Yet I am for perception; it is not clever, it is intuition—it is to see. It’s not a belief, belief is a prison—yet most will never step from their cells and see, even though what is outside is beautiful.