Changing The Goalposts

google dictionary

Dictionary definition of the word delusional. It means two things. It means confused and it also means purposefully being manipulative. In general in society we all use it to mean the first of these. It is equally as valid to knowingly use the other meaning. A person who is a trickster, is delusional. A person who has been tricked and operating on a false premise, is delusional. The both are delusional, although the incentive is different in each case.

From my experience with this, it has become apparent that people with a cognitive disability or other form of mental impairment react in one of two ways when accused of being delusional. There are two stages in both cases. In both cases, the first stage is to react with hostility. If a person is consciously tricking other people, they will then attack as their second stage. A confident and adept manipulator will often use another person who they have deluded already, to do the attack. This is called proxy. In the case of the delusional person not realising they have been tricked, their second stage is to re-evaluate the situation. Both of these must be compared to a person who if accused of being delusional, does not attack because they are not delusional.

In modern jargon, the second type; the tricked (as opposed to trickster) is known as a flying monkey, from the movie the Wizard of Oz.

The attack of a trickster is likely, within the framework of contemporary culture, to be an allegation that the person exposing their manipulation, is bullying them.

The narcissist will play the victim role in attempt to convince and recruit onlookers (flying monkeys) that they are innocent and that their narrative is the accurate version of events. It creates a smokescreen, disempowering the person exposing them from being able to do so.

The only successful way of dealing with the situation is to detach and take neither side. Although there is no need for sides because this division plays into the hands of the trickster and their paradigm instead of maintaining objective clarity to see the situation as a whole for what it is. Only by stepping back from the situation to analyse it from both points of view can the observer remain positive and non-biased. An objective person hears all sides and questions all, to positively determine equity.

So we have here a problem that the trickster is either recruiting new flying monkeys to protect them and to persecute those who would expose them, or that nobody wants to get involved, has the effect of isolating whoever is exposing the trickster. In either case, the trickster has won their game. This is not to say the exposer wants to play any games.

For the purpose of being able to step back and analyse a situation for what it is, without being drawn into taking sides, it has become necessary to develop a simple framework to help with analysis.

For the purpose of being able to step back and analyse a situation for what it is, without being drawn into taking sides, it has become necessary to develop a simple framework to help with analysis.

The following blueprint has only six steps, which outlines a strategy. Many variants exist. We are calling this The Llanelli Strategy although it is also called “Changing the Goalposts”

1 Establish situation.
2 Agreement. An accord.
3 Second party acts on that accord.
4 First party removes and/or changes the accord. This has the effect of changing the context of 3 the actions.
5 Second party has a human reaction of the ground being whisked out from under their feet and is destabilised.
6 Having been manipulated, second party is now socially persecuted both for having been duped ergo inferior and/or for behaving (see 3) in the wrong way in accordance with the framework of the new context. That the second party has not agreed to the new accord is irrelevant to those who are in agreement with it (flying monkeys).

I have personally witnessed this occur in all levels of society from and including but not exhaustively: single mothers, social workers, school teachers, family counselors, job centre, private enterprise, police, solicitors, mental health functionaries, GPs, nurses, &etc; in all cases the strategy is employed for the purposes of manipulating individuals so as to take from them.

Dealing with this situation has only two possibilities. The winning strategy is not to play it at all, which is impossible. The game is about ‘being played by’ narcissists and their support/abuse network.

There are three aspects of this, correlating to stages of the 6 step strategy;
2 Do not agree. Solipsism in the community is impossible. Aloofness is.
5 Distangle.
6 Expose. This requires indisputable proof (actual evidence which is actual evidence).

Remember: onlookers will enter the situation at step 4 and will be using the new dominant narrative as their operating framework, which is pitched against the target. The flying monkeys rarely know that they are being manipulated. They believe they are the good guys, although by their actions (they are step 2 and 3 in a game while the target is at 5 and 6 in a different game) they are in effect persecuting somebody who has been selected by an abuser who they believe to be a hero. They are also targets being manipulated as part of a larger game.

The defence is to open their eyes to that they are deluded and to objectivity (to change their minds thus recruit them to persecute the abuser instead of the abuse victim). It is all about Context Control.

Unfortunately, the targets context is the one perceived as being abusive; so nobody wants to see things that way. The target is calling for people to question their own actions, which nobody likes to do because it is too close to feeling destabilized for comfort. Spiritual disciples do that by default, which is in part why they are targets by those seeking to dominate others through context control.

The fundamentalist and dogmatic part of the mind which we rely on for stability, is commonly called the Ego (not what Freud and Jung used the word to mean). Narcissists rely on that.



©2018

Case Study

1

A diagnosis is an opinion. It is not a fact. It is not a Truth.

A professional diagnosis is a professional opinion. It is not a fact. It is not a Truth.

When a person claims that an opinion is inaccurate because it does not accurately describe that person, one of two things can happen.

First, preferably, the person is listened to and the situation re-evaluated. This is called common sense and falls within the broader concept of humanitarianism.

Secondly, the person is ignored and the more accurate information is irrelevant to the professional diagnosis. This is called professional misconduct. In some industries it is called neglect of duty. It is called prejudice and falls within the broader context of abuse.



2

When a person listens to a rumour and accepts it as a Truth or as a fact without first getting to the bottom of the situation, that person is not respectable. In psychiatry it is a recognised to be a mental disorder falling within a spectrum which includes cognitive dissonance and disbelief syndrome. If they act on the misinformation without requesting clarification from source, such people are recognised to be not fully functioning human beings.

When a person accepts somebody else’ opinion to be a fact or a Truth, they are not doing their own thinking. They immediately become an agent of the original lie. They become party to the corruption. They are now a component in an abuse network.


3

Identifying the original source becomes imperative in situations 1 and 2 above.


4

Once having identified that a person has lied and that a network exist to expand upon that lie, it is called corruption. All of the people involved in permeating the lie are also corrupt.

In legal terms it is called a conspiracy. It is a criminal offence. To permeate a lie from a position of authority is called fraud if there is paperwork involved, also professional misconduct, misconduct in office, and/or neglect of duty.

Such a person undermines not only their own authority but also the respectability of all positions of authority. That person should be a target of concern by all other authorities.

*in our case study, a professional criminal manages successfully to divert attention away from their own corruption by making a claim that the victim of the corruption is the person whom everybody should be suspicious of. The criminal does this to maintain their hold on office and ensure their personal income. Other conspirators in the abuse network who are also fabricating paperwork to entrench the original lie continue to pursue the course of action of discrediting the original target whenever the original target speaks out against it. It has a snowball/avalanche effect which extends to the discredited individual being set up by the authorities to criminalise him, thus further undermining his outspoken Truth.



5

What makes a person a professional is that they profess to be an acting agent of a principle.

The principle of GP’s for example, general practioners also known as Doctors if they have studied to achieve an expensive piece of paper award called a doctorate although this is not essential to be an active GP and hold a registered office, much the same way a teaching qualification is not essential to be a teacher. The principle of doctors is to doctor situations, which means to alter them. A GP is not a professionally qualified Healer which is a very, very different occupation and principle.

The principle of the GP is to unquestioningly do what the computer tells him to do. The academic text books are also based on opinions and solidified using case studies. The opinions based on observational studies of groups of people somewhere else in the world at some other time under different conditions. In terms of science, that is not proper scientific protocol.

Common Sense and Humanitarianism indicates that if, as in our scenario, the case study is a target of abuse by a criminal network operating through the system, and whose opinion has been undermined and replaced officially by a misdiagnosis, that the existence of case studies is irrelevant if one is attempting to establish the truth of any individual situation. Case studies are inaccurate to the reality of situations and exist to cover up corruption. They are not facts. They are not Truths. Case studies exist to maintain a source of income for professionals in office. They do not exist to heal people for the simple reason that healing people involves actually listening to what that person is saying.

“It takes one bad apple to spoil the barrel.” Ancient Folk Wisdom

See also: Case Study Notes

StigmaWhisper

A Stigmatic Case of Chinese Whisper

"Don't draw what you think you see. Draw what you actually see."

Fine Art Instruction (Da Vinci Academy)

The fictional dialogue (pt 2 and pt 3) is inspired by an actual dialogue (pt 1) in which both real and fictional protagonists tackle a real life prejudice person. Pt 4 is the original envelope notes from which pt 3 is adapted to make it more congruent with the story.

Part One

Case Worker Jewel: “What happened with the job I set up for you with the Company? They told me they have not seen you for months.”

Honest Joe: “After wasting quite a lot of my time I finally accepted that they are not buying the paint and therefore I can not possibly paint their mural. I am still waiting for them to contact me via email to tell me they have bought the paint.”

Case Worker Jewel: “Oh. Well what about doing their website?”

Honest Joe: “I already explained to you that my company charges cost plus 10% for building websites. Which is the best deal on the internet. Most people are charging cost plus 500% or more. I don’t see why I should build your friends website for free. I have already requested you to advertise my company and put me forward for any business grants available.”

Case Worker Jewel: “Well that’s just crazy.”

Honest Joe had the good grace to say nothing because anything he did say at that point would have been to start an argument regarding his right to charge money for his time and skills. His Case Worker’s refusal to put him forward for business grants which he is eligible for combined with her insult that the suggestion to be “just crazy” highlighted to Joe that he is dealing with someone with a prejudiced opinion of him. Joe's belief in common sense is such that when it is clearly evident someone with an agenda has an opinion of you which is prejudice, it is best not to discuss anything at all with that person. The meeting ended very shortly after that.

Part Two

In which the character named Joe’s Logic might equally be described as A Voice Of Conscience. On and for the record, if you have a voice of conscience in your mind then you are technically hearing voices.

Joe’s Logic: “Why have you separated him out as a ‘special case’?”

Jewel: “He is mental health.”

Joe’s Logic: “Do you have a body?”

Jewel: “Yes of course.”

Joe’s Logic: “Health applies. Do you have a mind?”

Jewel: “Yes.”

Joe’s Logic: “Health applies. You also are mental health. What do you mean precisely by ‘he is mental health’ ?”

Jewel: “Oh, he has mental health problems.”

Joe’s Logic: “Explain that precisely please, not bias.”

Jewel: “Well, I don’t know the specifics. He has been diagnosed.”

Joe’s Logic: “Regardless of a GPs opinion*, or a generalization from a third party putting a label on him, what precisely is the nature of his alleged problems?”

Jewel: “Well, I don’t actually know.”

Joe’s Logic: “But you stigmatize him, based on zero actual evidence and a confession of ignorance.”

Jewel: “Well, I am ….”

Joe’s Logic: “Given that you are prejudice and with no verifiable justification of your allegation, it stands to reason that You are ipso facto the one with a mental health disorder.”

Jewel: “Shit, you are right.”

INTERCESSION

In real life, Nobody replies this way (by recognizing their own error of judgement) because it is a confession of self-delusion which breaks the person out of a cycle of self-delusion. Self-delusion is recognized to be a mental health disorder called ‘Cognitive Dissonance’.

What we have here is a scenario where a person evidently suffering from a mental health disorder (and yet with a position of social authority) is actively persecuting somebody who has not showed any sign of a mental health disorder, quite the contrary in fact, and yet who is being prejudiced against because of slander. This is why mentally healthy people do not judge other people by reputation.  

Part Three

*
Jewel: "You said, 'regardless of GP's opinion'. Why do you doubt a professional expert? Why do you question that authority?"

Joe's Logic: "How would a GP know whether a person other than himself hears voices? How would a third party know what is happening inside a different persons mind?"

Jewel: "Well Joe must have told the GP that he hears voices."

Joe's Logic: "That is YOUR assumption. The actual events were that a third party told a GP that Joe hears voices and when Joe denied it, the GP said that hearing voices is schizophrenia and that denial of schizophrenia is a symptom of schizophrenia, thus as Joe has two symptoms he must obviously be schizophrenic. Joe's explanation that the GP is using non-logic has been written up as his experiencing paranoia about state professionals therefore a third symptom."

Jewel: "So what you are saying is that Joe is not schizophrenic although the Professionals have diagnosed him as schizophrenic because of something that somebody else said about him."

Joe's Logic: "That is part of it, yes. That is exactly what has happened. And nobody will back down. The more Joe explains to the so-called Professionals that they have made a mistake, the more reports the Professionals fabricate describing Joe as having symptoms of being delusional about Professionals fabricating evidence to the detriment of his social reputation."

Jewel's Higher Logic: "Of which my own prejudice about Joe was previously a part of!" 

Joe's Logic: "State workers all back the official paperwork version of reality EVEN WHEN THEY KNOW IT IS BOGUS." 

Jewel's Higher Logic: "Which is why you described Cognitive Dissonance as a mental health disorder."

Joe's Logic: "Yes. You see what is happening now." 

Part Four

The GP who lied about me had my mothers smile. They are not prepared to discuss the possibility that muscle being mostly water holds an energetic form and configuration so facial expressions and body posture can reveal who a person has been programmed by - who is whose zombi. It is alarming how dishonest they are that they would have to be prepared to be able to discuss such a thing. It is common sense that a rational and functional person with a healthy mind should be able to converse regarding all that.

When I discuss this, 'they' regard it as insanity. You know to whom I refer by use of 'they' because it has already been established, were you were paying sufficient attention. They regard it as insanity and use that as an excuse to debunk my opinion, so as to cover their tracks. They are in conspiracy. It is a criminal offense at law.

The situation of state professionals telling me that I am mad is designed to destabilize my trust in my own cognitive abilities. it is a power game involving perception and exploration of reality. Expressing concern that i am not conforming to the social contract without accurately discovering what my orientation to that social contract is does not, logically speaking, have any bearing on my own mental condition - it describes the conspirators belief structure. They are using strawman arguments. It is crooked thinking.

Claiming them to be in conspiracy is regarded by the state professionals as being paranoia of the state professionals. At this stage their irrationality becomes bigotry and prejudice. Their paperwork trail does not accurately express my opinion about my situation and neither does it accurately describe my actual mental condition. It is fabrication of evidence, a criminal offense at law. They are guilty of neglect of duty, corruption of public office. These are socially regarded to be serious crimes. It is a Human Rights abuse committed by sociopaths with an agenda. Their job roles are a cover for that.

They cannot or will not accept my own version of me to be an authority on me.

Their assumption that they know me better than i know myself, which their reports indicate IS their game, show them to be making things up. This is symptomatic of a sick society in which this is allowed to occur.



©2017 Ordo Octopia. All Rights Reserved

from The Envelope Notes

Creche mentality

Experience

sponsored by Yr Hwb / back to work projects