Gaslight – FLNWO #08

09/17/201354 Comments

In this edition of Film, Literature and the New World Order we welcome Thomas Sheridan, author of The Anvil of the Psyche, to discuss Gaslight, the 1940 British psychological thriller that introduced us to the concept of ‘gaslighting.’ In the discussion we point out how common gaslighting is, ask “Are you being gaslighted?”, talk about techniques for defending oneself from gaslighting, and talk about how this technique is used on a societal level by the psychopaths at the top of the pyramid.

For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.

For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).

Watch this video on BitChute / DTube / YouTube or Download the mp4

Next month: Rudyard Kipling’s Kim – (audiobook)


Filed in: Film, Literature & The New World Order
Tagged with:

Comments (54)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Duck says:

    I can recall doing exactly this kinda of gas lighting behavior to bully a kid back when I was a young teenager. I just moved things around and did simple slight of hand to drive him to the point where he had a freak out and started banging his head on the wall so I decided it was too much external result for my small amount of pleasure so I stopped.
    I can recall how fun it was though, the feeling of getting one over and feeling smarter then someone else- a person with no empathy would probably find it addictive just for the buzz let alone actual gain. THAT may be why you see the gloating, hate filled ‘revelation of the method’ kinda thing where people with power lie and know that their lies are so obvious even an idiot could see it but that ‘YOU’ dont or dont dare say anything about it.
    People have for some reason become weak and think that the world is naturally a fair and nice place and everyone is as nice and docile as them. Wild people were never so stupid as to think their rulers loved them.
    Its funny how Sheriden says that psycopaths lack creativity because I thought the ‘force awakens’ was exactly what a person who had no creativity or understanding of storytelling would THINK a star-wars movie should be like- and to be honest what TV and most movies i have watched these last 10 years has been more like BAD fanfiction of themselves.
    Glad I skipped the last 10 years of TV and music though because honestly I have seen a creepy kind of change in the opinions and attitudes of several people who run the box constantly in the background

  2. generalbottlewasher says:

    Well rounded entertainment and educational presentation. Spending time in these pursuits are rewarding. Much more rewarding than looking at what the TV airwaves offer up. Thank you James for your insight and the content you put forward. Well worth twice the cost of admission.

    TV of the 50s and 60s encapsulated in a song by the Dresden Boomers. ” Bang Bang I shot John Wayne!”

  3. Drazen says:

    Although I agree with Thomas about the “Shadow Work” perspective and identifying and resolving personal fears and insecurities, I’m going to offer a slightly different perspective.

    These psychopathic individuals can and do serve a purpose in identifying and bringing these insecurities to the surface. This is the first step in resolving issues, one has to become aware of them. It’s impossible to resolve issues that you aren’t aware of. The vast majority of people do not want to be aware of them because they feel that they are far too difficult to face and those that do face them, are usually dragged kicking and screaming, at least initially.

    A humorous analogy from Big Bang Theory would be the time Penny was driving Seldom in her car and Seldom comments that her “Check Engine” light was on. Her reply was that the sticker covering it must have fallen off.

    It’s easier to cover up issues than it is to deal with the reality of them, but in the long term this can be disastrous.

    The existence and prominence of these psychopathic individuals is a natural outcome of a humanity that is not prepared to face its own darker aspects, its own shadows. They are there to make it difficult for you to avoid the shadows, because they draw those shadows out onto the surface of your reality.

    There is a reason why the corrupt and perverse primary drivers of humanity are hidden deep in the shadows of societal structure, while at the same time presenting a calm and civilized facade. It’s a direct correlation to the state of human consciousness. There is a deep-seated festering wound in the human psyche which drives human behaviour from the shadows, but also presents a calm and civilized face in an attempt to avoid detection.

    This topic takes a lot of words to explain adequately, so it’s difficult to fully expand on in a forum post, but once you see it and get it, it seems so obvious.

    Another thought,
    The source of Evil is the denial of duality.
    Light is not inherently good and Darkness is not inherently bad. But the denial of one over the other is the source of Evil itself.
    Natural dualities continuously flow from one to the other. Political dualities are in constant opposition to one another.
    (Political power is the power over others)

    The subconscious labyrinth of human fear and insecurity is very deep and goes into very dark places. It is not something that is resolved over a weekend by waving crystals and chanting mantras.
    Awareness is the key. Awareness is the way out/home.

    • manbearpig says:

      Wow! Provocative and intriguing post. A collective consciousness with institutionalized psychopaths structured into our “psycho-society” as a mechanism of… collective …health? Manipulatively bringing darkness to light? …wow…

      “The source of Evil is the denial of duality…”

      I’ve kind of wondered about this…

      on another note, the gaslighting done to deal with such issues as chemtrails and the technocratic agenda (via climate change)

      makes me Wonder on what other more fundamental (and thus more invisible) issues we’ve been gaslighted on… if you see what I mean…?

      but unfortunately, for the moment, I must get back to work…


      or… must I…?

      😯 ??

      • Drazen says:


        That’s a good of putting it.

        Another example is the biological mechanism of physical Pain. Pain itself is not the problem regarding physical health and well being but instead, is the indicator of a problem. Pain is part of the healing process, it brings awareness to the problem and where awareness goes consciousness follows/flows. Because ultimately it is consciousness that truly heals. Repressing pain represses the flow of consciousness to the effected area that requires healing, generally speaking.

      • Drazen says:

        Also, the more one avoids dealing with these emotional and psychological wounds that cause the pain, the greater the manifest difficulty will become. Because the more it festers, the more urgent it becomes to resolve the issue.

        It’s like someone whispering in your ear, trying to letting you know that a small bush in your yard has caught fire. As the fire spreads, the voice gets louder. If you continue to ignore the fire and it starts engulfing your house, the voice will be screaming at you. Eventually the voice may get to the point of getting a 2″x 4″ and smacking you over the head (figuratively speaking) to get you to at least acknowledge the issue.

    • pearl says:

      The source of Evil is the denial of duality.

      Wow. It’s refreshing to read an honest summation informing and warning how you function in the world. In the protestant swamp where I struggled for so long with such cruel insanity, my search took a few years and led me to a handful of other people who did the mental heavy lifting, dissecting the platonic philosophy of dualism and illustrated how it’s the bedrock of all tyranny, particularly as it is manifested in Calvinism/Protestantism. At last, my experience in “Church” finally made sense.

      One such person has a blog and I think it would be awesome to read an exchange between you and him. He would love it!! Here’s a sample of one of his older posts:

      The problem with metaphysics is that no one seems to be able to get away from duality. No one can figure out how to get a multiplicity of reality from a singularity, even though they may assume and/or assert that their dualism is in fact a singular metaphysical primary. Which is understandable. It’s certainly a complicated paradox to unravel. And on the face of it appears to be wholly contradictory, and this is why I think philosphers and psuedophilosopers didn’t and don’t seem to possess an indefatigable resolve to reconcile it. Because they don’t recognize it as a paradox, but as a contradiction. Of course the irony here is that once you reject a singular metaphysical fundamental as a contradiction, and thus necessarily adopt a dualistic metaphysic (e.g. existence/existing (is and action), darkness/lightness (good/evil), the ying yang of far east philosophies, total existential insufficiency/moral responsibility a la Christianity, the interplay of the infinite and the finite a la Jordan Peterson) contradiction, itself, becomes the fundamental. By conceding that contradiction is not possible, and thus rejecting either implicitly or explicitly a single metaphysical fundamental, contradiction, by virtue of a dualistic premise where contrary notions are fused, becomes everything. Somehow, by some contortion and distortion of logic, mutually exclusive propositions relate to each other and compliment each other. And somehow this passes for the singularity metaphysics demands.

      To be blunt, this is absurd. You don’t get to select opposites like infinity and finity, or lightness and darkness and then magically make them a corollary and then claim to have solved the metaphysical problem. This must be understood: Opposites are not corollaries. They cannot, and never were, and never will be corollaries. They are opposite. Which means that by definition they are not functionally the same thing. Once opposites become “two sides of the same coin”…that is, once opposites become One, then truth is impossible. Because by this logic truth and lie become One; good and evil are One; is and is not are One. And from this there is no limit to the madness and the destruction madness will spawn.

      • Drazen says:

        It’s interesting that you use the term heavy lifting, because I often use the following analogy.

        If one wishes to become physically strong, then a good option is to go to the gym and lift heavy weights. So, in time as strength develops, the amount of weight a person can lift increases.

        Lifting heavy weights is hard and unpleasant, but there is a measurable difference in the physical body when engaging in such activities.

        Therefore, if one is to become emotionally/psychologically stronger does it not seem reasonable to exercise the emotional/psychological bodies in a similar manner?

        But, what does one use as weights?

        How about the hard and unpleasant emotion and psychological difficulties that we encounter in our own lives? Over time there will be an appreciable increase in ones capacity in dealing with difficult and overwhelming situations until we get to the point where there are no more overwhelming situations that cannot be handled.

        I must stress, I am not saying that people need to go out and deliberately create hardship and difficulty for themselves or others. Life itself will give you what you need, when you need it.

        When you speak of “Philosophy of Dualism” and “Calvinism/Protestantism”, I am not familiar with these subjects specifically, sorry.

        When the person you quote speaks of “Metaphysics” I’m not really sure what he is speaking of because I have not studied the subject of “Metaphysics”.

        Why do we have to get away from duality? How do we accurately define what is meant by “Singularity”?

        Why are “Truth” and “Lie” dualistic opposites? For me, “Truth” is transcendental, meaning it exists beyond duality. A “Lie” is not something that exists in the natural world.

        Why are “Good” and “Evil” dualistic opposites? “Good” and “Evil” (I would prefer the term “Bad” instead of “Evil” in this context) are value judgements. Find me the manifestation of “Good” or “Bad” in the natural world. Would you say that “Good” corresponds to “Pleasant” and “Bad” corresponds to “Unpleasant”? If you say yes, then you can have unpleasant experiences that have good result, such as treatment for an injury or illness. What is to be made of this? These are just personal value judgements. There is nothing wrong with these, just recognise what they are, they have no real meaning in the nature of reality.

        My perspective of “Evil” is that which I stated previously and it stems from a corruption of a natural state. That is, the psyche in a natural and healthy condition cannot be “Evil” because it accepts its dualistic foundations. Only when it has been corrupted by having its dualistic structure contorted against itself does “Evil” get a foot hold.

        Not sure if this is very clear, feel like I’m rambling a bit now so I’ll stop.

        • pearl says:

          I appreciate your grace and diplomacy, Drazen.

          Tough questions, no doubt. Observing nature is one of my favorite past times, and not a day goes by where I don’t entertain a “deep” question or two depending on what I witnessed. It’s interesting to me that within a kind of animal, say chickens, there are unchanging behaviors like the pecking order, exerting dominance over another and it’s just accepted. For example, one hen may find a cricket and begins to carry it away to enjoy it in peace, but this other dominant hen sees it and rushes to steal it away, a chase ensues, and the dominant one wins, takes it and gobbles it up! No hurt feelings, no sense of injustice – it’s just the way things are. Though I love our chickens and dote on the weaker ones, theirs is not a society I would want to live in and thank my lucky stars I wasn’t born one.

          That’s just one example. The insect world is incredibly diverse, beautiful and horrific. From this broad spectrum, I’d have to say that there are “good” creatures and “bad” creatures: the good ones are the pollinators who do no harm to other creatures, but if it does, it’s defensive, like the honey bee (only that one dies when it stings). From the selection of pollinators, I’d have to go with the caterpillar/butterfly as being the ideal creature. It’s independent, no hive mentality. Any “deception” by way of camouflage is merely defensive, to protect its own life from predators. The “bad” kind of insect is the parasite. I have in mind this kind of fly who lays its eggs into the caterpillar, such as the monarch. The monarch caterpillar prematurely leaves the plant and proceeds to the chrysalis stage, where it suffers a slow death of being eaten alive. The parasitic fly’s very existence depends on inflicting harm on another insect.

          As people, I believe mankind is a special creation. Though we may be born into a tribe or family, we are not bound by instinct to remain. Different from the animal kingdom, we can educate ourselves, and ultimately carve out our own new path, and hopefully one that does no harm to others, but is actually beneficial, like pollinators.

          • Drazen says:

            Thank you Pearl.

            To your proceeding comments in this post, I would just like to add the following.

            You are evaluating Creation/Nature from a narrow Human values perspective.

            Creation/Nature has a vastly different role or responsibility to fulfill than Humans do.

            Natures role is to not only to promote and sustain Life but to enhance it and make it prosper as well. To make it the best it can be at any give moment. It carries out this role without fear nor favour for any individual element or species within creation. Survival of the fittest, if you like. (Of course, the “Fittest” is not always the one with the best physical attributes, although within the physical realm this does help).

            But it has to be like this, it has to attain to higher and higher levels of expression of itself because the only other alternative is stagnation. The next step after stagnation is death. The fundamental cause of illness is Energetic stagnation, if the stagnation persists for too long, death is the result. Energy must flow for Creation to maintain health. The paradox here is that at the Conscious source of Creation you find absolute stillness.

            An analogy to Natures role would be an Artist/Engineer creating a functional work of art. But this work is not a static piece, it is a dynamic one. One that uses the perfection of its previous state as a foundation and context to create the perfection of its current state and then moves on to create the perfection of its new state.
            At each moment there is perfection because if there were not it would not be possible to create the new state. (By Perfection, I mean that each moment is perfect for what is needed to be learnt and understood within that moment. This then creates the context for the next moment).

            Going back to,

            Consider a circle. Within that circle there is an area/space. This area/space allows you to move anywhere within that circle, in fact space implies movement.
            Now, at the absolute centre of this circle, I would suggest there is no space therefore no movement. But the centre of the circle is fundamental to the creation of the circle.

            • pearl says:

              Your observation about my having a narrow view is somewhat accurate, in that what I shared here was my interpretation of a facet of nature, a sort of visual proverb (“Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise: which having no guide, overseer, or ruler, provideth her meat in the summer”).


              I absolutely agree.

              The mistake I see, however, is carrying over to mankind the same laws of nature such as survival of the fittest, which must naturally manifest a callous outlook, like regarding psychopaths as nature’s tool. Animals are primarily governed by instinct, man by conscience and reason. As much as I dislike the parasitic fly, it truly is “innocent”, not “bad” or “evil”; it simply survives. But mankind lives on a different plane, and I simply can’t make the leap that excuses what I regard as “evil” or “bad” as merely being evolution’s tool to make us better in the long run. True, what doesn’t kill us makes us stronger, but we still expect justice. Why is that?

              • Drazen says:

                I get the sense that you feel I discount Human value systems. This is not the case at all, it all comes down to context and definition.

                Human value and legal systems define how Humans interact with one another and the reality around them. They have no jurisdiction on Nature itself. Humans can have a value system that has us in constant violent conflict or we can have a value system that resolves conflicts in a peaceful manner. It makes no difference to nature. If a group of waring Humans gets in the way of Nature doing its thing, then Nature will just blink and move the impediment aside. No big deal.

                On a personal level I would much prefer to resolve conflict in a peaceful manner, but if violent conflict comes then we do what we must do. Some level of conflict will always be present within Human interaction because it’s the conflict which creates the angst to challenge ourselves for deeper understanding. But this conflict is based more on resolving the conflict within ourselves individually. When inner conflicts go unresolved for an extended period of time they manifest themselves as outer world conflicts. Fear of conflict equates to fear of looking deeper for understanding of ourselves.

                Just to highlight the point, Human value systems belong to Humans. They have value and are important.

                Nature has its own value and “justice” system but it has nothing to do with right and wrong and it plays itself out over a far long-time span.

                The term “Justice” implies “Victim”.

                I would offer two different definitions of what is meant by the term “Victim”,

                1. Victim in a legal sense, based on whatever value system is defined. If you have a legal system based on property rights then if someone steals your property then legally, you are the victim and recompense should be sort.

                2. Victim in a psychological sense. This sort of victim always feels hard done by, the world is against them, the poor me types. No one has done anything to them directly but they always demand that others give them more. More time, more money, more affection.

                Justice is important from a Human values perspective based on the definition of a victim in a legal sense.

                Just a closing thought on being a victim in a broader Natural sense.
                Imagine walking through a jungle when suddenly a lion jumps out and attacks you. You manage to survive and run away, but now you feel like a victim.
                Who are you going to take this up with? What legal system is going to take up your case? Who can do anything to assuage your feelings of victim-hood?

                No one. Nowhere. What now?

              • Drazen says:


                The Human Psycho-Biological organism does not exist outside of Nature and is subject to the laws of Nature just like everything else in Nature. It’s just that Human intellect offers us a greater time cushion to resolve any physical or psychological health issues or corruptions that may have set in before nature takes steps to remove the corruption by eliminating the source of the corruption. Basically, we have more time to heal.

                For example, if a wild animal was to break a leg, that animals time cushion for survival is very short. It could no longer fulfill its role as an animal and the resources taken up to manifest its physical form could be used to construct other life forms. This process is seen in people who suffer spinal damage and are left paraplegic. After a while the muscles in their legs atrophy because they’re not being used. The body could use the resource the muscles take up, more efficiently elsewhere.

                If a modern-day Human, with our current technologies, was to break a leg, then they would most likely be fine after a few weeks, because of this greater time cushion that we have for survival based on our intellect.

                There are Natural healing mechanisms that kick in that do their best to resolve any issues so a terminal end is not required, like the immune system of any biological organism. But again, these work within a time cushion.

              • pearl says:

                You’ve been incredibly patient and obliging. Thank you, Drazen.

                I’m definitely struggling with something here, but I don’t know what it is. So far, what you’ve said, specifically in your last two replies, makes sense to me. You provide observable examples, contrasting raw nature to man’s modern existence, as well as concrete definitions which assist us in resolving conflict. So far so good.


                I believe the splinter bothering me is in here somewhere. The conflicts I have in mind are human predators fine-tuning their skills on other humans. It’s not the burden of the “victim” to look inwardly and ponder what “corruption” therein lies. Also, where is dualism at play? I’m honestly not seeing it.

              • manbearpig says:

                Interesting exchange.

                Walking home from work I decided that the splinters
                bothering me are the premises that

                -humans have “light” and “dark” sides and

                -psychopaths are a service to humanity.

                As far as I can tell, humans have primary needs and instincts, a conscience and context, all of which can serve to bring out various aspects of their personalities formed by nurture and nature (another debate). Everything ideally should be done to optimize the performance of conscience, the quality of context and the satisfaction of basic survival instincts (interconnected).

                Light and dark when applied to subtle hues of house paint is relatively objective. The same terms when applied to human characteristics are vague, generalized, subjective value judgements.

                Just as the parasitic gut-sucking fly may be a very key element to the food chain and thus to the equilibrium of the ecosystem,

                anger and selfishness can serve very positively creative and laudable imperatives for the equilibrium of a human being

                and generosity and wanting to help others can be destructive.

                There is that minority of pedophiles, serial killers and sadists who for whatever learned or genetically inherited reasons need to be managed for the good of the majority of the population who for whatever learned or genetically inherited reasons live more or less closely according to more or less universal moral values.

                I don’t think serial killers, pedophiles or sadists serve humanity. They do not create the conditions that help people grow individually or collectively. They create death, gratuitous pain and profound traumatism.

                As for a lack of empathy, it too is a human trait that can be crucial for survival and I believe it to be the norm to widely varying degrees due to widely varying contexts and education.

              • alexandre says:

                Manbearpig, I read your comment with interest and something occurred to me. Something related to the word “shadow”, which can be very difficult to accept. One could see the existence of the pedophile, and other predators, as symbols of our collective shadow. Dark, negative aspects of our own psyche that we ourselves repress – put under the carpet (don’t want to look at) – and then, because they are pushed into the abyss, appear manifested in reality. These unconscious aspects are autonomous, they’re not inventions or anything easily controllable by will, so they cannot be “dealt with” by some intentional decree. The whole subject is very dense and complicated – and avoided like the plague by the entirety of the planet by now. I think the same about governments – psychopathic institutions that only exist because the individual (I) didn’t deal properly with my shadow. Hard to talk about this in the actual scientific / evidence / facts language (it’s hard to scientifically “prove” a dream), but that’s more or less it. One small lie here, one false reaction there may seem inconsequential, but when you multiply it by millions, monsters start to appear. We can “send them to Iceland” if we want. Not only other monsters will appear again, but that’s much less productive than to see them as symbols, or symptoms of something WE are not looking at as individuals. Since the collective body is but the sum of individuals, a society made up by sane individuals would be a sane society. Of course it’s more likely that a camel goes through the eye of a needle (how was that one?) than such a thing ever happening, but the individual is the center, not the collective. The more collectivist we become (“persecute and kill the heretic!”), the more we focus on “them”, the more pedophiles we’re gonna have. Just a suggestion.

              • manbearpig says:

                Well… Alexandre,

                Perhaps inscrupulous governments exist because each separate person, in general, doesn’t want to admit to possessing relatively benign shortcomings (occasional greed, egotism, violent feelings), benign on an individual scale

                but these benign shortcomings when amassed, conglomerated, accumulated, open the door to the minority of inscrupulous power hungry entities who assume dominance by relieving the ordinary human being of the tiring task of constantly measuring right and wrong, by creating laws and decrees to justify their power…and satisfy everyone’s cowardice…?


                jeepers, thanks sincerely for the question but,

                I need to sleep now…


              • Drazen says:

                First to your comment Pearl,


                You characterize this as a “Burden”, this characterization indicates a “victim” in the Psyche.

                Could it not be viewed as a challenge rather than a burden?

                I don’t what to trivialize being in a state where you feel constantly tormented, battered, bruised. Like your entire world is falling apart around you. Where everywhere you look its absolute darkness. Where you wake up each morning in a state of extreme anxiety, go through the whole day with this constant background pain which is only interrupted with shots of higher intensity. Then when you go to bed, you hope and pray that by some mercy, you don’t wake up the next day only to repeat it all, again.

                I know the depths of darkness.

                It’s here that Life’s greatest secrets are hidden. Do you think that Life is going to leave its greatest treasures lying out in the open for just anyone to discover? Do you leave your most valuable possessions lying out on the street?

                What then would you do with the most precious thing in the entire Universe? Would you not create the most difficult, elaborate, perilous systems to ensure that anyone who discovers it, deserves to discover it? Not only should these people be tested just once, but over and over and over and over and over… again. For every person that starts out on this “Journey”, (Cringe) how many do you think will make it?

                This may come across as callous, but form this physical form, I did not make up the rules. When you get to this point of Understanding you cannot feel callousness towards those that are yet to embark. You feel empathy, compassion, because you know and understand how truly difficult it is to get to where you have come. You thank me for my patients, this is why I am patient.

                It’s Hard, you say.

                Yes, I know.

                You ask, where is the Dualism (Duality)?

                Predator/Prey. Both hone their skills on each other. As the Prey gets better at eluding the Predator, the Predator has to become better and so on. You think that on a Soul level you have only ever experienced existences as the Prey? I guarantee you; you have also experienced being the Predator. This is what true Karma is, it is experiencing Duality from both sides, over many life times. It has nothing to do with atoning for sins.

                But the point is not to get trapped in this cycle but to Transcend it. Thus the Transcendence of Truth.

                This is something I have written on, in the “Charter” section.

                “There are religions that talk about Heaven and Hell and they inform us that both are found in opposite directions to one another. This is a false and deliberate diversion. Hell is what stands between where you are now and Heaven. Heaven is also open to everyone, but YOU need to find the courage and a way to get there.

                You may also be surprised at what and where Heaven and Hell are. They are not “Out there” or “Up there” or “Down there”. They are not found outside of your own Being but are states of your own psyche.

                Hell is a simple equation, it is the sum total of all your deepest and most intense fears multiplied by a lot.

                Heaven is the peace you will find when you have explored and understood every facet of this equation.

                “The cause of insanity is the denial of legitimate suffering.”

                Intense suffering will come while engaging your fears, but from this suffering something new is born; courage, resilience, a greater understanding, a deeper sense of Self; until the final realization.

                Organized religions are part of the control mechanism, they are there to distract and divert you from following your true path home. Because once you have made it back, you can never be anyone’s slave.”

                Hope this helps.

              • pearl says:

                Well, thanks Drazen, for your directness and honesty by laying it all out. After a day of questioning my sanity and wondering if I was jumping to conclusions, I can exhale and relax, knowing that my instincts were dead on target.

                I read the charter you authored (just curious, who wrote the history?). Potent stuff.

                Organized religions are part of the control mechanism[…]Because once you have made it back, you can never be anyone’s slave.

                I’m with you there!

              • Drazen says:

                I wrote the whole Exygen section.

                Just to add, The seeming prevalence of so many predators around us at present is because the are so many of us acting like prey.

                In the wild, if the number of prey gets out of hand, Nature creates predators to balance them out.

                Because of the imbalance and conflict within individual Human Psyche surrounding this, Predator/Prey Dualism, Natural mechanisms require a balance in the material world.

              • pearl says:

                I neglected to respond to you, manbearpig. But I must say, reading how well you isolate and break down difficult ideas, getting to the root of things is like watching a cowboy on a stallion, racing after and corraling wild horses.


              • manbearpig says:

                Mornin’ lithely leapin’ lamb!

                leapin’ out the door here myself!

                Dunno how I do with difficult ideas

                but you seem to do a pretty damn good job!

                and uh, thanks for the video…harrowingly, breathtakingly aesthetic…

                I sure hope no one broke a leg though…seein’ as how stuff went for those beautiful creatures during Ben Hur…

                but, uh…actually

                I’m allergic to horses!


                (not polite to look a gift horse in the mouth however)

              • Drazen says:


                Let’s explore this Predator/Prey situation a little more, as I sense that this is what people are most interested in at the moment.

                All Prey are Predators and All Predators are Prey.

                We can accept that a lion is a predator and that antelope are prey. But antelope are also predators of the grasses and plant life they consume. But what then are the predators of the lion? Microorganisms. Some microorganism cause disease and illness which could kill the lion.

                So why is the predator a Predator? It must sustain itself so it has the capacity to ward off or keep a distance between itself and its own predator. Its predator is a threat to its own existence.

                Now if we then look at this on a Human perspective, people who feel like they are prey will seek to ward off or keep a distance between themselves and their predator, real or imagined.

                Some of the methods that they use are,
                1. Aggression. They can try and scare potential threats away. Real or imagined.
                2. Violence. They can injure or kill potential threats. Real or imagined.
                3. Deception. They can create some sort of trick to ward off threats. Real or imagined. An example of this is obesity, people make themselves appear physically larger than what they would naturally be.
                4. Hoarding. Cushioning themselves with things that they feel will protect them. Money, material wealth.
                5. Political Collectives. Organise themselves with people who also feel threatened by the same predator. Real or imagined. The goal here is to get as many people to joint as possible because size matters in this game. But then comes the problem that these larger groups fracture and create groups within themselves to protect from perceived internal threats, Real or imagined.

                This is not an exhaustive list but it should give you an idea.

            • Drazen says:

              For those still reading this forum thread, I would just like to refine and expand on a statement I made earlier. It may be of interest and value to some of you.

              “Energy must flow for Creation to maintain health; Energetic stagnation ultimately leads to death. The paradox here is that at the Conscious source of Creation you find absolute stillness.”

              Consider a circle. Within that circle there is an area/space. This area/space allows you to move anywhere within that circle, in fact “Space” implies the potential for movement.


              Also, this potential for movement within the circle does not immediately translate to movement. Something else is needed. How do you turn this potential for movement into actual movement? It’s almost like you need to create some sort of difference between two points/states within the circle to get a movement from one point/state to the other. A difference between two points/states sounds like a Duality.

              Duality is the cause of all energy movement within reality. It can be observed with waterfalls, electrical circuits, air movement from temperature differences, flow from pressure differences.

              Form is created when energy coalesces into a denser state. To create a denser energy state there needs to be a difference of state within the energetic field itself.

              Gravity Wells?

              Nassim Haramein in his talk “The Black Whole” discusses how he discovered the existence of Gravity Wells within the core of every atom. What is a gravity well? It’s most commonly referred to as a Black Hole.

              How do we control what Form is actually created?


              By creating frequency within the Energetic field along with different Energetic states or Gravity Wells we can not only create Form but create the type of Form.

              An Energy that has frequency, what could that be?


              • Drazen says:

                I’ve been waiting for someone to posit the question,

                “What’s Love got to do with it?”

                I enjoy your song Tina, but you are wrong. Love is not a second hand emotion.

                Love is not an emotion at all.

                Love is the driver of all emotion.

                Yes, Love makes you feel happy, joyous, at peace. But hasn’t Love also made you feel sad, angry, restless?
                Love is not one specific emotion, it’s all emotions.

                As far as Creation goes; All Creative expression is an expression of love. In fact, you could say, all expression is an expression of Love.

                An Artists creation is an expression of love, an Engineers design is an expression of love, A Writers storey, a Singers song, A Chefs dish…

                But to create, do you not also need to destroy? In all of the above examples and many others, was something not destroyed so something new could be created?

                The mere act of Expression means Love is at play somewhere.

                Does Love = Consciousness? Does Consciousness = Love?

                I have yet to find a difference.

        • cooly says:


          I too prefer the word Bad instead of Evil in this context. It irks me whenever Evil is used because it’s just not accurate. That is a word that belongs in religious texts. Just my own opinion.

          Also, good and bad are absolutely nothing more than value judgements that exist in the mind of each individual. “We came, we saw, he died. Hahahaha (HRC)” comes to mind. Good and bad are not organic things that exist in the world.

          I do not wish to offend anyone who believes otherwise about these things. It is just how I see them.

          • Drazen says:

            “That (Evil) is a word that belongs in religious texts”.

            The word still has merit, just not in the Good/Bad context but more in the context of a Corruption.

        • Drazen says:

          One thing that is still bugging me that I want to address is the use of the word “Dualism”.
          I use the word “Duality” because I am describing something. I am not referring to a theory or a philosophy.

          Thank you Pearl for using this term as it gives me a chance and a context to respond.

      • Drazen says:

        “A “Lie” is not something that exists in the natural world.”

        Just considering my own statement. Is a “Deception” and a “Lie” the same thing?

        There are animals that have deceptive attributes such as camouflage for survival purposes.


        • manbearpig says:

          I once had a teacher at uni who said “I Don’t know what I think until I see what I say”…

          That marked me and has proven absolutely true in my case as well. Which is one reason why I spend so much time on this site.

          Articulating to others, communicating with and testing others on this board, helps me find the flaws in my own profound suppositions and the devil in the details…

          Deceptive behavior and survival of the fittest… ask a spider…

          “…The struggle to survive and reproduce is intense for all organisms, and we should not be surprised that cheats are everywhere. What’s remarkable is the extent to which animals and plants exploit one another and the level of sophistication involved. Nature is a brutal place, so it’s a good idea to cheat and deceive if you want to be successful…”

          ??? (be successful = survive?? hmmmm)

          justice, however, is, I believe, an exclusively human construct…unless dear or elk fighting it out with their antlers as an accepted form of justice that keeps relative peace within populations…

          Survival of the fittest… all’s fair in love and war…?

          perhaps I should stop procrastinating now…

          • Drazen says:

            I’m still pondering whether Deception = Lie and whether it’s not just semantics.

            These animals deceive by nature but do they actively lie?

            • manbearpig says:

              degree of conscious intent…implying free will…

              is every human action performed out of some perceived survival necessity?

              do humans, perhaps somewhat emancipated from immediate survival concerns, have greater free will than animals?

              animals appear to automatically do what they know how to do to survive.

              and humans? how automatic is it?

              if man is a social animal…

              have the ego-driven mores and power games of society created a more amoral and deceptive subconscious jungle where psychic survival is an instinct and free will is as illusory as that of a spider?

              if not…

              than I’d say the degree of intent involved in a lie does not apply outside of human existance, making lying a human construct…like justice…

              free will…

              • Drazen says:

                Now your opening up a substantial discussion which would require a fair bit of background information. We would need to go into the make up of the Human Being as a whole not just the Pshyco-Biological Human vehicle. What is the physical body, how do emotion come into it, how do the body emotions and psyche work together, what is the ego…? What is the Soul, what is the nature of the Soul, What is the Souls relationship to Consciousness, are you the Soul, are Souls eternal or are they also born and do they die and if so what/who are you actually… ?

                But just briefly, Consciousness is difficult to define because once you say it is this particular thing then you are automatically implying that it is not some other thing, so it just doesn’t comply to definitions.

                Free will at this level of reality? I say no.

        • Drazen says:

          After considering the equating of Truth and Lie as dualistic counterparts, I would instead replace this by equating Honesty and Deception as dualistic counterparts. Truth, I would still class as transcendent.

          • Drazen says:

            Just a followup on this last comment about the Transcendence of Truth.

            Truth has no dualistic counterpart.

            A crude definition of Truth would be, “What Is”.

            Truth is the foundation on which Duality/Reality is built.

            Truth cannot be “What Was”. Nor can it be “What Will Be”. This would imply Birth and Death.

            Truth is always Alive. Truth is Life, Truth is the Present, Life only exists in the Present. “What Is”, is in the present, “What Was”, is Dead, “What Will Be”, is yet to be Born.

            If you define a Lie as an Untruth, then a Lie cannot exist. If you define a Lie as Deception then it’s the dualistic counterpart of Honesty.

            If Untruths existed then there would be holes in the foundation of Reality which would make for a very unstable Reality.

            When Consciousness first conceives Creation, it first lays the foundation of Truth.

    • scpat says:

      “Awareness is the way out/home.”

      Sounds like you’ve been meditating, my friend…

      • Drazen says:

        Yes, meditation is part of it but it also depends on what you mean by “Meditation”.
        Just because a person can sit in a lotus position for a while does not mean they have entered anything resembling a meditative state.
        Creating pleasing visualizations in your head, chanting mantras or just going through the motions of pretending to meditate is not it.
        It requires intent and resolve. The intent is required to accept anything that comes to your awareness, pleasant or unpleasant. The resolve is need so as to maintain awareness and not to shy away from these things until they play themselves out naturally. This can be intensely uncomfortable painful for situations that one has a strong emotional and psychological attachment to or desire for.

        • scpat says:

          Very good points. And I really agree with what you are getting at generally. But I would say that people should consider the word ‘intent’ carefully. According to Merriam Webster, intent is defined as: having the mind, attention, or will concentrated on something or some end or purpose. The great paradox of meditation in my opinion is that when one meditates, they should not be trying to achieve something, or be concentrated on some end or purpose. Instead, they should simply become aware, non-judgmentally, of the world around them, including their thoughts. But the problem is, why are many people drawn to meditation in the first place? Because they have the intent of solving some problem with themselves, or achieving a higher state of being. They have intent. But the state of true meditation can only be achieved with purposelessness, with non-doing, with non-intent.

          • Drazen says:

            Good point.

            I also didn’t want to use the word “Focus” for similar reasons.

            But I did want to emphasis that it shouldn’t just become mindlessly ritualistic. Were the person just sits there and daydreams.

          • Drazen says:

            I take that last comment back. It’s not the best approach.

            If a person just sits and daydreams, that’s fine. It’s helpful for someone to at least be by themselves with there own thoughts for a while.

            When they need to learn a meditative state they will naturally find a way through trial and error or through insights from others.

  4. scpat says:

    From Truthstream Media’s recent video, “Do People Realize They Are Creating Their Own Overlords?” gaslighting is mentioned in the context of AI from big tech companies committing the gaslighting. See queued video.

    When Google, Amazon, et al., can perfect their gaslighting, they can impose even more control on the public. And when we realize big tech = government/big brother, we are in a bad, bad situation.

  5. cas says:

    awesome to see the pieces coming together, socially and psychologically. gaslighting is done in massive ways by those in positions of social influence. just look at you tube recently with their censoring and omitting to address the true reason. instead people are met with stonewalling/silence (covertly denying existence of the problem) or gaslighting (lying about the real reason and causing the target to feel they have done something wrong instead).

    until we understand the root cause of the issue, we cannot find a way to navigate, heal and grow. I feel that ‘shadow work’ is just more blame on the victim. yes, they have things they need to work on, but to have a narcissist, psychopath or sociopath in their life to show them this, is definitely not necessary and only does more damage. understanding ourselves does not need to be found through pain.

    there are many who can help with information on this type of abuse: dr judy rosenburg, Meredith miller, permission to exist and dad surviving divorce. most people have experienced it socially via media but some have also experienced it in their personal life. peace, strength and courage to all victims of this.

  6. HomeRemedySupply says:

    I’m glad James posted this September 2013 conversation (Gaslight – FLNWO #08) as a “REVISIT”, in light of recent references to Gaslighting.

    I always find conversations about psychopathic & toxic behaviors fascinating.

    However, I came into this interview with a more narrow definition of “Gaslighting”.
    I had the previous notion that Gaslighting was a specific method that a psychopathic personality-type would utilize to shake another’s observed sense of reality. (i.e. hide things, telling another “That’s not true”….)
    For example:
    The Z.P. Bazant hypothesis of the WTC Tower top crushing all floors below it, when that theory does not even match video footage (reality).

    Well, I guess the DEFINITION of the word, “Gaslight” has a much broader brush stroke, especially in the field of Psychology.
    This interview helped me to grasp that broader definition of the word.
    Now, to me, the word essentially means “psychopathic behavior”.

    This is a Psychology Today article which goes along with the interview and aspects of Gaslighting.
    11 Warning Signs of Gaslighting
    Gaslighting is a manipulation tactic used to gain power. And it works too well.

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      I did watch the movie last night after work, during dinner.
      (Link may go away, as it is “ThemTube”)

    • zyxzevn says:

      From article:
      Warning signs of Gaslighting:
      1. They tell blatant lies.
      2. They deny they ever said something, even though you have proof.
      3. They use what is near and dear to you as ammunition.
      4. They wear you down over time.
      5. Their actions do not match their words.
      6. They throw in positive reinforcement to confuse you.
      7. They know confusion weakens people.
      8. They project. (accusing you of things that they do themselves)
      9. They try to align people against you.
      10. They tell you or others that you are crazy.
      11. They tell you everyone else is a liar.

      Mainstream media and many politicians and many “skeptics”
      check most of these boxes.

      Hillary checks them all.

  7. michael.bc says:

    The subject of gaslighting gets more and more important by the day – not only on a personal level but on a societal one. We are all being gaslighted via such fake memes as ‘conspiracy theory; ‘war on terror’; ‘The Russian menace’; ‘Me-To; ‘The Internet of Things’; ‘Transgender liberation’; ‘save the world from humans’; etc etc. You name it we’re being gaslighted.

    However be very careful about the messenger who gatekeepers the message. Thomas Sheridan is not what he appears to be. Beware Greeks baring gifts James.

    This article from SOTT who have done more than most to bring to our attention the true nature and threat to the human species of the intra-species predator succinctly out Sheridan as both a gatekeeper on the true nature of psychopathy and as a predator himself.

    • cooly says:


      Thanks for the link. Illuminating.

      We make the brain we need in life? Did he actually write that? What a comically absurd thing to say.

      Psychopaths have eclectic musical collections? Well then. I guess I’m a psychopath. Good to know.

  8. Peripatêtikos says:

    Wow. I am surpised to hear the name Dion Fortune mentioned in a Corbett Report interview. The interview itself is very interesting.

    Armchair psychopath diagnoses aside (an annoying trend in itself), there seems a gnostic Weltanschauung behind Sheridan’s presentation… and this is not a bad thing.

    To summarize the position: We are blind. The phenomenal world is itself a mechanism of our own gaslighting. Worldy rule by its very nature perpetuates this ignorance. It is encumbent upon all to understand and get beyond this. Realizing that this is the case is a matter of personal experience, a kind if first step. It is not merely the adoption of a defined theory or dogma. Understanding it in full — the implications are extensive — is called Gnosis. It is ultimately a religious experience, not rational. (In Hinduism and Buddhism, this is consistent with the concept of Maya [illusion], the result being Avidya [ignorance, literally “not seeing”], and the salvific knowledge Prajna [wisdom]. For the Orthodox, the human condition is Hamartsia [missing the mark]. Maybe Paul had something similar in mind with “For now we see through a glass darkly….” Of course, I strip down cognate religious concepts for comparison only. I do not assert that “everything is the same as everything else” by any means.)

    As above, so below… the Hermetic dictum applies here, bringing a world view down to earth. For someone interested in psychology — that is, in the workings of one’s own psyche, and not in the cheap and plentiful self-help, blame-mongering grist of Sott or Psychology Today — a familiarity with Gnosticism, with Jung, with western esoterism bears value.

    Dion Fortune is worth reading — if one likes English written very well, and, again, if one is interested to learn of actual esoterism, devoid of low sensationalism. Fortune also wrote themed novels (minor works, but interesting) relating to The Golden Dawn practice, and authored a definitive volume titled The Mystical Qabalah. (Approaching these symbols and schema, one should know and remember it is not a belief system.)

    I fear however that Sheridan, while he makes some interesting comments on an interesting topic, and calls out the New Age canard, like so many other self-styled experts, he uses the “C” word (Crowley) to titillate, to excite. Crowley developed his supreme bad-boy reputation for this very purpose.

    Occultism, ceremonial magic, Alchemy, Gnosticism, Neo-Platonism, Hermeticism — the Western esoteric traditions — are quite an open book, in other words. Those streams continue, and from all indications they are no more uniquely wedded to the elites in power than is their office furniture. It is in the culture, not only in the elite, in other words.

    James and Sheridan deftly though briefly point out that it is indeed being weaponized, and that we needn’t consume it or be scandalized by it in its toxic, corporate media form. I think the media saturation and bombardment of esoteric (faux esoteric) material needs more clarity, more emphasis.

    Because inferior writers and commenters, forever content to simply stir the ordure, use the “point and sputter” method, decrying — but not describing, not attempting to understand — the appearance, the signficance of this or that symbol, this or that adherent to this or that occult or non-mainstream spiritual tradition. They are enablers. They don’t say what it “means” or perhaps that it means very little, because they neither know nor do they care. It’s simply enough that the Eye of Soron (or Soros) resembles the Eye of Horus.

    Well, my eye also resembles these, and so does yours. I wonder who is gaslighting whom, then?

  9. alexandre says:

    Well, just to add my tiny drop of water in the ocean of words, watching this conversation with Sheridan (again) I had the idea to start watching everything Corbett already posted. I’m sure I missed a lot and, before going on and on, maybe it’s a good idea to stop and go to the archives. What came to my mind is that maybe Corbett should slow down somehow, make more documentaries (the big ones) or something, because things go too fast and this is good for advertising or soap-operas, not for complicated and deep subjects. “Mind-control this and that, yeah, gas lighting, yeah, Bilderberg, Technocracy, frauds, false-flags, yeah….” and I wonder if we’re really digesting everything properly. I think not. Or suddenly everyone knows perfectly what Jung meant by “shadow”?

    Most probably I’m getting old and slowing down myself, but one book, when read properly, may be worth 100 books. I guess I’m trying to advise against the internet disease here. A billion facts per second are worth nothing because they cannot possibly be properly digested / absorbed / understood etc. James already has a vast library of stuff and I think he would not lose his audience if he slowed down a bit. Just a thought.

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      I understand.
      There is so much to digest.

      I do like it when Corbett reviews some of his past work during interviews. It is a nice rehash of important points.

    • flammable says:

      That is great advice Alexandre. Take in the information properly. I often find myself caught in the trap of thinking I need to keep up and take a ton of information.

      • alexandre says:

        Yep. I just hope James doesn’t get caught in that trap himself.

        Incidentally I just remembered a dream I had many many years ago. It was before the internet existed, but this modern “keep up” thing was always there. In the dream I was following a bunch of people that were ahead of me. It was on a coast and we’re walking on the beach. They passed a corner of rocks and before I could reach it, a high tide came in and covered the rocks. I had to wait, so I was always behind, trying to catch up. At some point I gave up and thought “fuck them” and to my side I saw a big hotel, very old. I went in and the owner was my grandmother from Argentina. I sat down with her, we talked in Spanish, I could eat lots of those delicious pieces of bread with butter and I told her I should “come to Buenos Aires more often”. I woke up in such a bliss, like I had found my own time. We try to follow other people’s time, but we must find our own time and follow that. It was such a relief. So, maybe there are people that can take all this info in very fast, but it doesn’t mean we have to. I had seen the Sheridan interview before, but I watched it again now and still there were lots of “new” things in it. Once is not enough for “my time”.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top