some more misc research
Then there are a smaller number of operators, divas, drama queens, vampires, bitter underminers and soulless careerists.
You will learn to recognize the vampires. They’re easy to disregard. They corner you, physically or digitally. They are coworkers who text you on weekends. They touch you in the office, in an attempt to suck energy through your skin. They stand in doorways, preventing people from passing. They tell you long, agitated and boring stories about people you don’t know. (So do the drama queens.) They post on your Facebook page. They are unable to read normal friendship signals and pursue interactions that you have not instigated. You must not encourage these people; they’ll follow you around for years, even when you no longer work together. You must 100% not engage, and let them have no traction. Eventually they will wander off.
sThe drama queens are a little more dangerous, because sooner or later you’ll “betray” them and become a character in the stories that they bore someone else with. When they finally snap, go cold. Don’t apologize, engage or grovel. If there’s one thing I wish I’d learned at 18, it’s that it’s okay if a crazy person hates you. Everyone else will understand in time. Meanwhile, let them expend that energy. Go work on your novel or whatever.
And the bitter underminers, well, they’re too obvious to even worry about. OMG they’re going to make fun of you on their Tumblr!? That’s okay. They are just frustrated. Be nice to them, they can get better with time, because eventually most of them realize that composing nasty emails about people they don’t really know to their friends all day has been a waste of their energies. Some of these people turn out great actually!
Because vampires and divas and underminers are so loud and distracting, they take up all the emotional energy that we should actually be devoting to the real enemy. This is why we never destroy the soulless careerists. This is, I think, the number one mistake that we make in the world of work.
soulless careerists These are the boys who suck up to the boss’s boss. They’re backslappers. These are the girls who beg you to come out for drinks so they can talk about the tortures of their latest job offers. (In the world of writers, these are often people who are always telling you about what story they’re pitching to whom.) They’re often imperious (but not always; sometimes they disguise their narcissism as insecurity, to be manipulative). Really, they lack fear. They are likely sociopaths. They are identifiable because, if you stop and look, you’ll realize it is unfathomable to you that this person who actually does nothing but complain in the office, and who goes out to lunch every day for hours, should be getting these opportunities. Oh, should I or shouldn’t I take one of these exciting new jobs that I just can’t choose between! they’ll ask you.
And because you’re a good person, you’ll squish down your resentment and annoyance, because you think those feelings make you a bad person. In normal circumstances, you’d be right to do so. (And you should!) But not with these little monsters.
Because if you think you feel weird now, just wait until you read about their $500,000 book deal. Or their appointment as the editor in chief of whatever. (Again, not that you should be jealous or petty about the good or hard-working or hilarious or wacky people who get these things. Try to be excited or at least amused about that! It’s actually easy to love it when your pals become successful.)
The soulless careerists, though: they get where they are because social training doesn’t allow us to stop them. They depend upon our unwillingness to say “bad things” about people. But if you don’t, who will?
It is incumbent upon you to put a fucking boot in the face of the soulless careerist.
When people ask you about them, tell the truth. Practice saying “They’re useless and horrible.” Practice saying “They’re soulless careerists who don’t care about anything or believe in anything and they’re just using us all to get ahead at any cost.” Practice telling the truth. They can’t stand the exposure in the light of day. They can’t keep stepping on people if their previous steppings-on are known.
Perhaps the most intriguing part is that the sounds activate the otherwise dormant visual cortices of congenitally blind people. According to people who are much smarter than I am, our visual cortex organizes data into two parallel pathways – the ventral occipito-temporal pathway (which deals with form, identity, and color) and the dorsal occipito-parietal pathway (which focuses on object location and coordinates visual data with motor function).
MRI scans showed that blind people using the sensory device saw these previously dormat pathways acting as they would if they had had normal vision. For the blind population of the world, this next generation technology could soon see massive benefits.
The irreducible carrier of quantum information is the qubit, named in analogy to the classical bit. But whereas the bit is a simple on-off signal, a qubit is in essence a unit vector whose direction is described by a pair of angles, θ and Φ. These angles describe the superposition of pure quantum states which makes up the quantum information in the qubit. While a bit defines a single binary parameter (+ 1), a qubit defines a continuous complex variable.
When a quantum operation is carried out on a qubit, these angles change, thereby changing the quantum information in that qubit. All quantum computation in the end reduces to combined rotations of quantum states.
Superconducting structures which can store a qubit of information are easily constructed using standard microfabrication techniques. Additionally, such structures couple easily to MHz and GHz radio waves, which provides effective control of the computer operations using well understood electronics.
A larger physical dimension, however, implies there are likely to be more ways in which superconducting qubits can lose coherence through unintentional environmental interactions. This does lead to shorter coherence times than are achieved in other physical implementations of qubits, about 4 microseconds for the UCSB circuitry.
The low-level organization of the UCSB quantum computer is called Resonator/zero-Qubit architecture (RezQu). This consists of a set of superconducting qubits (in the current example, two qubits). Each of the superconducting qubits is capacitatively coupled to a dedicated memory resonator, as well as to a common resonant quantum information bus. The bus is used to couple qubits during computational operations, while the memory resonators are used for storing the current state of the qubits. When a qubit is passed into its memory resonator, the qubit is placed in the ground state.
Using their new architecture, the UCSB group was able to implement the three-qubit Toffoli OR phase gate with 98% fidelity. Universal quantum computation can be carried out using combinations of this Toffoli gate and simple qubit rotations. However, it does not currently appear that 98% fidelity represents a sufficiently small error to permit conventional error-correcting codes to function properly. Thus, the UCSB Von Neumann quantum computer is potentially capable of universal computation, limited only by memory resources and quantum coherence time, but requires increased fidelity to fulfill this potential.
This was “the first reappearance in the Church, since its full hierarchical establishment, of the democratic element—the Christian people, as distinguished from the simple sheep to be fed, and souls to be ruled.” his followers were not to think first of their own salvation. This principle is stressed again and again among the Sufis, who consider regard for personal salvation to be an expression of vanity.
The origins of men’s ownership and control of women are universally thought to derive from men’s superior strength. Biologists also believe that mechanisms in the body and brain predispose men to certain behaviour; for example, diminished impulse control, which has its origins in (among other things) the serotonin housekeeping in the brain; and testosterone, which makes all animals more reactive; for example, the primitive brain structures in men are less well-connected to the rational frontal brain lobes than in women. There are also differences in when male and female bodies make oxytocin (a trust, empathy, and social bonding hormone) and other substances and hormones. These biological differences mean men will, biologically, have more trouble controlling urges that arise in the hypothalamus and the amygdala (where among other basal emotions the aggressive impulse originates), and more trouble running those urges past the (pre)frontal cortex (where proportionate and socially appropriate behavioral responses are constructed). Men will feel these urges in different situations than women will. When we add to that a body mass/strength that gives this creature the real-world ability to force or harm the smaller creature, we have the beginnings of male-female history and sociology.
Eight photon entanglement is in a way incremental progress; previous experiments have measured six photon entanglement, and this particular setup is sufficiently more complex to beg the question of scalability. However, the system is also powerful enough that it is a step forward in terms of optical quantum computation. The authors suggest that their setup may enable quantum simulations to tackle more complicated problems in condensed matter physics than have been possible so far. By exploiting other aspects of the photons’ states besides polarization, additional aspects of entanglement may be explored and used for future quantum computing applications.
All we have, as Vaclav Havel writes, is our own powerlessness. And that powerlessness is our strength. The survival of the movement depends on embracing this powerlessness. It depends on two of our most important assets—utter and complete transparency and a rigid adherence to nonviolence, including respect for private property. This permits us, as Havel puts it in his 1978 essay “The Power of the Powerless,” to live in truth. And by living in truth we expose a corrupt corporate state that perpetrates lies and lives in deceit.”
And it’s true that the King has made a truce with the Duke of Burgundy lasting fifteen days, by which he [Burgundy] must turn over the city of Paris peaceably at the end of fifteen days. However, do not be surprised if I don’t enter it [Paris] so quickly. I am not at all content with truces made like this, and I don’t know if I will uphold them; but if I do uphold them it will only be in order to protect the honor of the King; also, they [the Burgundians] will not cheat the Royal family, for I will maintain and keep together the King’s army so as to be ready at the end of these fifteen days if they don’t make peace. For this reason, my very dear and perfect friends, I pray that you do not worry yourselves so long as I live, but I ask that you keep good watch and defend the King’s city; and let me know if there are any traitors who wish to do you harm, and as soon as I can I will remove them; and let me know your news.
Joan of Arc explaining her generosity to the poor and indigent.
“I have been sent for the consolation of the needy.”
Far from being a purpose-driven life, the existence of many true believers is a crisis-driven life that seeks release, as Blumenthal asserts, in an “escape from freedom.” In the right-wing id, freedom is the emotional release that a hostile and psychologically repressed person feels when he is finally able to lash out at the objects of his resentment. Freedom is his prerogative to rid himself of people who are different, or who unsettle him. Freedom is merging into a like-minded herd. Right-wing alchemy transforms freedom into authoritarianism. They are highly submissive to established authority, aggressive in the name of that authority and conventional to the point of insisting everyone should behave as their authorities decide. They are fearful and self-righteous and have a lot of hostility in them that they readily direct toward various out-groups. They are easily incited, easily led, rather un-inclined to think for themselves, largely impervious to facts and reason and rely instead on social support to maintain their beliefs. They bring strong loyalty to their in-groups, have thick-walled, highly compartmentalized minds, use a lot of double standards in their judgments, are surprisingly unprincipled at times and are often hypocrites. authoritarian followers. They are socially rigid, highly conventional and strongly intolerant personalities, who, absent any self-directed goals, seek achievement and satisfaction by losing themselves in a movement greater than themselves. One finds them overrepresented in reactionary political movements, fundamentalist sects and leader cults like scientology. the paradoxical nature of the authoritarian personality: rebelling against authority while hungering for it — exactly as the contemporary right wing fancies it is rebelling against big government while calling for intrusive social legislation and militarism. a patriarchal, sexually repressive family life, reinforced by strict and punitive religious dogma, is the “factory” of a reactionary political order. Hence, the right wing’s ongoing attempts to erase the separation of church and state, its crusade against Planned Parenthood, its strange obsession with gays.
This thoroughly contemporary movement organises itself through websites, such as Facebook and Live Journal, and video footage of each event with commentaries are posted within the day on the opposition website Grani.ru – GraniTV –and on YouTube. The new generations of Russian protesters exist in a kaleidoscope of action groups and more formal organisations. The Russian authorities, who learned their repressive methodology in the cold war, find these viral movements baffling and very hard to deal with.
denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win
ridicule, opposition, acceptance as self-evident
back-and-forth looping movement of a particle being disturbed by a wave. Emotional intensity moves up and down and up again, while knowledge moves backward, forward, back, and then forward again, until the individual is happy with the way they have integrated the new information with the old.
The slaveholders used tactics that were intended to (1) decrease the slaves’ confidence in their abilities to act freely, (2) deny the skills of a painful literacy, (3) rob the slaves of a liberating silence, (4) increase slave sense of “gratitude,” and (5) dismantle any relationships of family and community. slaves resisted on both a philosophical level (for example, by refusing to accept slaveholder ideology) and a practical level (say, by resisting their sale).2 In the end, this resistance often counterbalanced the weight of oppressive education.
Increase suggestibility and “soften up” the individual through specific hypnotic or other suggestibility-increasing techniques such as:Extended audio, visual, verbal, or tactile fixation drills, Excessive exact repetition of routine activities, Sleep restriction and/or Nutritional restriction.
Establish control over the person’s social environment, time and sources of social support by a system of often-excessive rewards and punishments. Social isolation is promoted. Contact with family and friends is abridged, as is contact with persons who do not share group-approved attitudes. Economic and other dependence on the group is fostered.
Prohibit disconfirming information and non supporting opinions in group communication. Rules exist about permissible topics to discuss with outsiders. Communication is highly controlled. An “in-group” language is usually constructed.
Make the person re-evaluate the most central aspects of his or her experience of self and prior conduct in negative ways. Efforts are designed to destabilize and undermine the subject’s basic consciousness, reality awareness, world view, emotional control and defense mechanisms. The subject is guided to reinterpret his or her life’s history and adopt a new version of causality.
Create a sense of powerlessness by subjecting the person to intense and frequent actions and situations which undermine the person’s confidence in himself and his judgment.
Create strong aversive emotional arousals in the subject by use of nonphysical punishments such as intense humiliation, loss of privilege, social isolation, social status changes, intense guilt, anxiety, manipulation and other techniques.
Intimidate the person with the force of group-sanctioned secular psychological threats. For example, it may be suggested or implied that failure to adopt the approved attitude, belief or consequent behavior will lead to severe punishment or dire consequences such as physical or mental illness, the reappearance of a prior physical illness, drug dependence, economic collapse, social failure, divorce, disintegration, failure to find a mate, etc.
Spiritual practices, and especially primary religious practices, carry risks. Therefore, when an individual chooses to practice with the assistance of a guide, both take on special responsibilities. The Council on Spiritual Practices proposes the following Code of Ethics for those who serve as spiritual guides.
- [Intention] Spiritual guides are to practice and serve in ways that cultivate awareness, empathy, and wisdom.
- [Serving Society] Spiritual practices are to be designed and conducted in ways that respect the common good, with due regard for public safety, health, and order. Because the increased awareness gained from spiritual practices can catalyze desire for personal and social change, guides shall use special care to help direct the energies of those they serve, as well as their own, in responsible ways that reflect a loving regard for all life.
- [Serving Individuals] Spiritual guides shall respect and seek to preserve the autonomy and dignity of each person. Participation in any primary religious practice must be voluntary and based on prior disclosure and consent given individually by each participant while in an ordinary state of consciousness. Disclosure shall include, at a minimum, discussion of any elements of the practice that could reasonably be seen as presenting physical or psychological risks. In particular, participants must be warned that primary religious experience can be difficult and dramatically transformative.
Guides shall make reasonable preparations to protect each participant’s health and safety during spiritual practices and in the periods of vulnerability that may follow. Limits on the behaviors of participants and facilitators are to be made clear and agreed upon in advance of any session. Appropriate customs of confidentiality are to be established and honored.
- [Competence] Spiritual guides shall assist with only those practices for which they are qualified by personal experience and by training or education.
- [Integrity] Spiritual guides shall strive to be aware of how their own belief systems, values, needs, and limitations affect their work. During primary religious practices, participants may be especially open to suggestion, manipulation, and exploitation; therefore, guides pledge to protect participants and not to allow anyone to use that vulnerability in ways that harm participants or others.
- [Quiet Presence] To help safeguard against the harmful consequences of personal and organizational ambition, spiritual communities are usually better allowed to grow through attraction rather than active promotion.
- [Not for Profit] Spiritual practices are to be conducted in the spirit of service. Spiritual guides shall strive to accommodate participants without regard to their ability to pay or make donations.
- [Tolerance] Spiritual guides shall practice openness and respect towards people whose beliefs are in apparent contradiction to their own.
- [Peer Review] Each guide shall seek the counsel of other guides to help ensure the wholesomeness of his or her practices and shall offer counsel when there is need.
master suppression techniques
Understand that when the those seeking resolution of such crimes proceed in attempting to uncover truth, they try their best to present factual information constructed as an argument for a particular chain of evidence towards a particular solution to the crime. This can be a largely experimental process via trial and error, with a theory developed over time to perfection or defeated by the process. This is their most vulnerable time, the time when a good disinfo artist can do the greatest harm to the process.
A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key) the argument. The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not.
It would seem true in almost every instance, that if one cannot break the chain of evidence, revelation of truth has won out. If the chain is broken either a new link must be forged, or a whole new chain developed, or the basis is lost, but truth still wins out. There is no shame in being the creator or supporter of a failed chain if done with honesty in search of the truth. This is the rational approach. While it is understandable that a person can become emotionally involved with a particular side of a given issue, it is really unimportant who wins, as long as truth wins. But the disinfo artist will seek to emotionalise and chastise any failure (real or false claims thereof), and will seek to prevent new links from being forged by a kind of intimidation.
Moreover, particularly with respects to public forums such as newspaper letters to the editor, and Internet chat and news groups, the disinfo type has a very important role. In these forums, the principle topics of discussion are generally attempts by individuals to cause other persons to become interested in their own particular problem, position, or idea — usually ideas, postulations, or theories which are in development at the time. People often use such mediums as a sounding board and in hopes of pollination to better form their ideas. Where such ideas are critical of government or powerful, vested groups (especially if their criminality is the topic), the disinfo artist has yet another role — the role of nipping it in the bud. They also seek to stage the concept, the presenter, and any supporters as less than credible should any possible future confrontation in more public forums result due to successes in seeking a final truth. You can often spot the disinfo types at work here by the unique application of “higher standards” of discussion than necessarily warranted. They will demand that those presenting arguments or concepts back everything up with the same level of expertise as a professor, researcher, or investigative writer. Anything less renders any discussion meaningless and unworthy in their opinion, and anyone who disagrees is obviously stupid.
So, as you read here in the NGs the various discussions on various matters, decide for yourself when a rational argument is being applied and when disinformation, psyops (psychological warfare operations) or trickery is the tool. Accuse those guilty of the later freely. They (both those deliberately seeking to lead you astray, and those who are simply foolish or misguided thinkers) generally run for cover when thus illuminated, or — put in other terms, they put up or shut up (a perfectly acceptable outcome either way, since truth is the goal).
25 rules of disinformation
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the “How dare you!” gambit.
3. Create rumour mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumours and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such “arguable rumours”. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a “wild rumour” which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Side-track opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviates”, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint. Example: “This stuff is garbage. Where do you conspiracy lunatics come up with this crap? I hope you all get run over by black helicopters.” Notice it even has a farewell sound to it, so it won’t seem curious if the author is never heard from again.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutia” to illustrate you are “one who knows”, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man — usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the “high road” and “confess” with candour that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, “just isn’t so.” Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for “coming clean” and “owning up” to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best items qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarise the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalise, Antagonise, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how “sensitive they are to criticism”.
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralise sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralise all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favourable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favourably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
Scantly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as “bump and run” reporting.
Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the “facts” furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.
Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges “expose” scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.
Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, “What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?” Don’t the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.
1a) Insist on Your Boundaries – Resist Abuse
Refuse to accept abusive behavior. Demand reasonably predictable and rational actions and reactions. Insist on respect for your boundaries, predilections, preferences, and priorities.
Demand a just and proportional treatment. Reject or ignore unjust and capricious behavior.
If you are up to the inevitable confrontation, react in kind. Let him taste some of his own medicine.
Never show your abuser that you are afraid of him. Do not negotiate with bullies. They are insatiable. Do not succumb to blackmail.
If things get rough- disengage, involve law enforcement officers, friends and colleagues, or threaten him (legally).
Do not keep your abuse a secret. Secrecy is the abuser’s weapon.
Never give him a second chance. React with your full arsenal to the first transgression.
Be guarded. Don’t be too forthcoming in a first or casual meeting. Gather intelligence.
Be yourself. Don’t misrepresent your wishes, boundaries, preferences, priorities, and red lines.
Do not behave inconsistently. Do not go back on your word. Be firm and resolute.
Stay away from such quagmires. Scrutinize every offer and suggestion, no matter how innocuous.
Prepare backup plans. Keep others informed of your whereabouts and appraised of your situation.
Be vigilant and doubting. Do not be gullible and suggestible. Better safe than sorry.
Often the abuser’s proxies are unaware of their role. Expose him. Inform them. Demonstrate to them how they are being abused, misused, and plain used by the abuser.
Trap your abuser. Treat him as he treats you. Involve others. Bring it into the open. Nothing like sunshine to disinfect abuse.
(1b) Mirror His Behavior
Mirror the narcissist�s actions and repeat his words.
If, for instance, he is having a rage attack � rage back. If he threatens � threaten back and credibly try to use the same language and content. If he leaves the house � leave it as well, disappear on him. If he is suspicious � act suspicious. Be critical, denigrating, humiliating, go down to his level.
(1c) Frighten Him
Identify the vulnerabilities and susceptibilities of the narcissist and strike repeated, escalating blows at them.
If a narcissist has a secret or something he wishes to conceal � use your knowledge of it to threaten him. Drop cryptic hints that there are mysterious witnesses to the events and recently revealed evidence. Do it cleverly, noncommittally, gradually, in an escalating manner.
Let his imagination do the rest. You don’t have to do much except utter a vague reference, make an ominous allusion, delineate a possible turn of events.
Needless to add that all these activities have to be pursued legally, preferably through the good services of law offices and in broad daylight. If done in the wrong way � they might constitute extortion or blackmail, harassment and a host of other criminal offences.
(1d) Lure Him
Offer him continued Narcissistic Supply. You can make a narcissist do anything by offering, withholding, or threatening to withhold Narcissistic Supply (adulation, admiration, attention, sex, awe, subservience, etc.).
(1e) Play on his Fear of Abandonment
If nothing else works, explicitly threaten to abandon him.
You can condition the threat (“If you don’t do something or if you do it � I will desert you”).
The narcissists perceives the following as threats of abandonment, even if they are not meant as such:
Confrontation, fundamental disagreement, and protracted criticism When completely ignored When you insist on respect for your boundaries, needs, emotions, choices, preferences When you retaliate (for instance, shout back at him).
(IIa) Fight Him in Court
Here are a few of the things the narcissist finds devastating, especially in a court of law, for instance during a deposition:
Any statement or fact, which seems to contradict his inflated perception of his grandiose self. Any criticism, disagreement, exposure of fake achievements, belittling of “talents and skills” which the narcissist fantasizes that he possesses, any hint that he is subordinated, subjugated, controlled, owned or dependent upon a third party. Any description of the narcissist as average and common, indistinguishable from many others. Any hint that the narcissist is weak, needy, dependent, deficient, slow, not intelligent, naive, gullible, susceptible, not in the know, manipulated, a victim.
The narcissist is likely to react with rage to all these and, in an effort to re-establish his fantastic grandiosity, he is likely to expose facts and stratagems he had no conscious intention of exposing.
The narcissist reacts with narcissistic rage, hatred, aggression, or violence to an infringement of what he perceives to be his entitlement. Any insinuation, hint, intimation, or direct declaration that the narcissist is not special at all, that he is average, common, not even sufficiently idiosyncratic to warrant a fleeting interest will inflame the narcissist.
Tell the narcissist that he does not deserve the best treatment, that his needs are not everyone’s priority, that he is boring, that his needs can be catered to by an average practitioner (medical doctor, accountant, lawyer, psychiatrist), that he and his motives are transparent and can be easily gauged, that he will do what he is told, that his temper tantrums will not be tolerated, that no special concessions will be made to accommodate his inflated sense of self, that he is subject to court procedures, etc. – and the narcissist will lose control.
Contradict, expose, humiliate, and berate the narcissist (“You are not as intelligent as you think you are”, “Who is really behind all this? It takes sophistication which you don’t seem to have”, “So, you have no formal education”, “you are (mistake his age, make him much older) … sorry, you are … old”, “What did you do in your life? Did you study? Do you have a degree? Did you ever establish or run a business? Would you define yourself as a success?”, “Would your children share your view that you are a good father?”, “You were last seen with a Ms. … who is (suppressed grin) a cleaning lady (in demeaning disbelief)”.
There is no real difference between:
a) You as victim, spouse as abuser. b) You as Judge, spouse as penitent.
They are just psychological and emotional mirror images.
It’s just as unhealthy and dysfunctional for you to manipulate and control him as it is for him to manipulate and control you.
If you do that you flip the cycle of abuse over…but you don’t come close to stopping it.
Abuse is about CONTROL…controllers (this is going to be hard to believe, but it’s true) relate almost as easily to BEING controlled as they do to controlling…the only way to break that up is to get them AWAY from control and into healthier situations…same goes for the victim…
Healthy people in healthy relationships do not maneuver each other, they rather accept and try to understand each other and grow as much honesty and intimacy between them as they possibly can.
1. Jealousy & Possessiveness – Becomes jealous over your family, friends, co-workers. Tries to isolate you. Views his woman and children as his property instead of as unique individuals. Accuses you of cheating or flirting with other men without cause. Always asks where you’ve been and with whom in an accusatory manner.
2. Control – He is overly demanding of your time and must be the center of your attention. He controls finances, the car, and the activities you partake in. Becomes angry if woman begins showing signs of independence or strength.
3. Superiority – He is always right, has to win or be in charge. He always justifies his actions so he can be “right” by blaming you or others. A verbally abusive man will talk down to you or call you names in order to make himself feel better. The goal of an abusive man is to make you feel weak so they can feel powerful. Abusers are frequently insecure and this power makes them feel better about themselves.
4. Manipulates – Tells you you’re crazy or stupid so the blame is turned on you. Tries to make you think that it’s your fault he is abusive. Says he can’t help being abusive so you feel sorry for him and you keep trying to “help” him. Tells others you are unstable.
5. Mood Swings – His mood switches from aggressive and abusive to apologetic and loving after the abuse has occurred.
6. Actions don’t match words – He breaks promises, says he loves you and then abuses you.
7. Punishes you – An emotionally abusive man may withhold sex, emotional intimacy, or plays the “silent game” as punishment when he doesn’t get his way. He verbally abuses you by frequently criticizing you.
8. Unwilling to seek help – An abusive man doesn’t think there is anything wrong with him so why should he seek help? Does not acknowledge his faults or blames it on his childhood or outside circumstances.
9. Disrespects women – Shows no respect towards his mother, sisters, or any women in his life. Thinks women are stupid and worthless.
10. Has a history of abusing women and/or animals or was abused himself – Batterers repeat their patterns and seek out women who are submissive and can be controlled. Abusive behavior can be a generational dysfunction and abused men have a great chance of becoming abusers. Men who abuse animals are much more likely to abuse women also.
• Making your partner afraid by using looks, actions, gestures.
• Smashing or destroying things.
• Destroying or confiscating your partner’s property.
• Abusing pets as a display of power and control.
• Silent or overt raging.
• Displaying weapons or threatening their use.
• Making physical threats.
Using Emotional Abuse
• Putting your partner down.
• Making your partner feel bad about himself or herself.
• Calling your partner names.
• Playing mind games.
• Interrogating your partner.
• Harassing or intimidating your partner.
• “Checking up on” your partner’s activities or whereabouts.
• Humiliating your partner, weather through direct attacks or “jokes”.
• Making your partner feel guilty.
• Shaming your partner.
• Controlling what your partner does, who he or she sees and talks to, what he or she reads, where he or she goes.
• Limiting your partner’s outside involvement.
• Demanding your partner remain home when you are not with them.
• Cutting your partner off from prior friends, activities, and social interaction.
• Using jealousy to justify your actions.
(Jealousy is the primary symptom of abusive relationships; it is also a core component of Love Addiction.)
Minimizing, Denying and Blame Shifting
• Making light of the abuse and not taking your partner’s concerns about it seriously.
• Saying the abuse did not happen, or wasn’t that bad.
• Shifting responsibility for your abusive behavior to your partner. (i.e: I did it because you ______.)
• Saying your partner caused it.
• Making your partner feel guilty about the children.
• Using the children to relay messages.
• Using visitation to harass your partner.
• Threatening to take the children away.
Using Male Privilege
• Treating your partner like a servant.
• Making all the big decisions.
• Acting like the “master of the castle.”
• Being the one to define men’s and women’s or the relationship’s roles.
Using Economic Abuse
• Preventing your partner from getting or keeping a job.
• Making your partner ask for money.
• Giving your partner an allowance.
• Taking your partner’s money.
• Not letting your partner know about or have access to family income.
1. Pointing out potential problems
This manipulation often utilizes statistics or failure stories they heard somewhere. It sounds realistic, practical – and uninspiring. A variation of this approach is to point out the negative side effects. They may admit that the change you are trying to implement is positive, but also point out the potential negative effects. Some even imply you might lose your relationship. . .And they often add this line,“I just don’t want you to get into trouble.”
2. Direct put-down disguised as a joke
It’s supposed to be unsociable not to understand jokes, and they utilize this social conditioning. They say something really un-nice, and when your feeling is hurt, they treat you as naïve. Here is my acid test for jokes: Does it make you feel light and warm or does it leave you a nasty taste in the mouth? This test works for all kinds of jokes, whether it is aimed at yourself or others. Watch out for fake jokes.
3. “Count the blessings” you already have
“We are happy as we are. We should be. Look at what you’ve earned – and there are lots of less fortunate people out there, you know. . .” This is a twisted logic. Of course, we, each one of us, are blessed as we are. But it doesn’t mean we should stagnate where we are. Don’t feel guilty for seeking more.
4. “What is the point?” apathy
From their perspective, the glass is always half empty, no matter what you do. They don’t even point out potential problems. They don’t pretend to be content. They are, in effect, half dead and want you to be the same.
5. Acting out
You talk with your family about your decision to go back to school. Everyone seems happy. So you start the application process. Suddenly, out of the blue, there is a surprise in the family – some kind of crisis – like your spouse’s car breaks down and you need a chunk of money to buy a new car. Then you find out your brother is checked in for rehab and he and his family really need some moral support. And . . . I don’t mean they cause the crisis on purpose. It just happens – one after the other – until you are completely distracted from your aspiration, or you figure out “It’s just not the right time.”
How to cope with manipulation You don’t. Coping only encourages more manipulation. Dodge them, and just do what you have to do. Just do it.
I took the extreme route and moved myself across the Pacific Ocean. This was not just to dodge manipulation from my family but was in line with my dream to complete college education and build a new life. Nevertheless, it ended most of the subtle and not-so-subtle manipulations. Prior to my migration, they tried to change my mind by counting the blessings of the comfortable life in my home country. They even tried to bribe me. . . “Do you want a new dress? We can dine out at nice restaurants if you stay around. Are you aware you will be financially stressed if you go to America?” They also threatened me that I’d be robbed and murdered in America – very realistic-sounding potential, but somehow I have happily survived for 13 years – and counting. Oh, and they tried to dampen my dream. “Why do you need to complete your education in the US? What would you get for the time and money you invest?. . .”
action – the action toward your aspiration — is the antidote to manipulation. I don’t think talking back or reasoning things out work really. Nor reactions to manipulation.
“The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them. ” Albert Einstein
Then you will know that they do not truly have any power over you. Their power is an illusion that you can free yourself from. When a manipulator’s subtext makes you feel bad, remember that on some level you just chose to feel bad. You can just as well choose not to let them impress you. You do have this choice. Guilt is frequently used by manipulators to blackmail people. “If you don’t do xyz, I will be sad.” Well, too bad for them if they choose to feel sad! That’s their problem, not yours. Same with actions: you are NOT responsible for other people’s actions. “If you don’t do xyz, I will drink myself into a coma.” Oh yeah? What they do with their life is their decision and none of your business. In case you think that is heartless, I disagree. This is the most loving attitude I can think of. You don’t do anybody a favor by taking the responsibility for their life away from them. Actually, it is highly disrespectful. If you are scared of something, it’s very easy for someone else to gain power over you. They just need to trigger your fear. They just need to suggest very subtly that what you fear could come true if you don’t do what they want – and you do it. The lower your self-esteem, the easier you become a prey for manipulators. The more you have problems with yourself, the more you’re vulnerable. If you think bad things about yourself, it’s easy for others to push those buttons. Only what you resonate with on some level can hurt you or have any power over you. If you have no problem with the way you are at this time, nobody can use any of your self-perceived weaknesses to make you do what they want. When your attitude is “Yes! That’s how I am. So what?!”, manipulators have a hard time with you. So, accept yourself fully, as you are. I know this can be difficult, but if you succeed at it, you’re invulnerable! A lot of fear and guilt stems from our identification with things that do not truly belong to us. If you strongly identify with your job or marriage, then you’ll be very afraid of losing them. If you strongly identify as your mother’s son or as a helpful friend, you’ll feel guilty when you don’t behave accordingly. But if you recognize that you are not all that, it will be easier for you to let go of the fear or guilt. You can never truly lose anything. We are all connected at all times. When things or people fade out of our life, you are still connected to them. And ten new things or people will show up in your reality instead. The Universe is infinitely abundant. All those things change nothing about who you are at your core anyway. You are at all time wonderful and whole. Whatever is, is, and is perfect. 🙂 What has power over you is your belief that your feelings are caused by the situation you are in instead of by yourself. What also has power over you are your own fears, guilt, self-hate or attachment to roles and things outside of you.