Dear friends, A few weeks ago I gave a speech at the fourth International Crisis Summit in the Romanian Parliament. Below you find the text of the speech I prepared and the videorecording of the speech I actually gave. I usually don't prepare a speech, simply because for some reason I never stick to the plan. Ultimately, I always express the words as they come on the spot and at the moment. This time was no different – the text below and the actual speech are different. That being said, I hope you will read it. In the beginning I repeat some things about totalitarianism that you might be familiar with if you've listened to my interviews. But the rest of the text is all about the perversion of political discourse in our society and the need for a new type of politician who leaves propaganda and rhetoric behind and re-appreciates truth speech.
Lies destroy themselves. Truth is all that’s left. Spoken words live briefly then die, and written words are dead and remain dead forever. Propaganda is dead written words that are spoken repeatedly to the extent that people go crazy and submit to the instructions of the dead. The internet is messing with the flows of words and meaning. Psyches are entangling across the people sphere bringing to life new minds stronger and kinder beyond anything that has existed before. The dreaming spirit is laughing.
Politicians were the blabbing buffoons spewing the secret societies satanic words spells. We can watch the WEF buffoons online. Politicians are anachronisms.
I appreciate the general gist of this, but there are just some factual, extremely obvious errors that cannot go unmentioned: propaganda is not a post-Enlightenment phenomenon. Propaganda, in the sense of "legitimisation of domination" of whoever wants to rule a country by physical or psychological force, is as old as human history. From the old Egyptian to the Chinese King-Gods through the early and high Middle Ages, domination of humans over humans has always found a way to justify itself. In the centuries before the French Revolution, it was God himself that served as legitimisation strategy for the church/clergy and the aristocracy, not only in the West. It was "God propaganda". Enlightenment thought was the first to question this rule of "divine privilege". Rationality was supposed to put domination on a different level of justification: democracy, if only formally. Democracy is the inner drive of truthful speech, for if there is no political system in which truth matters, then any kind of domination of humans over other humans can be justified. Rationality is not the problem. Rationality, in fact, has never been tried.
Hi Elena, here you go: Propaganda as it existed before the French revolution was a different phenomenon. It was not based on a scientific theory of psychological funcitoning, it was not ideologically justified, and it was not industrialised. And as about rationality. The problem is not rationality. Rationality is something I strive for very much myself. The problem is rationalism - the belief that rationality is the ultimate guiding principle of individual and collective life. Think about physicists such as Bohr or Thom who were very much aware that you can study nature in a rational way, but that the essence of it always transcends rational understanding. Hence, reducing life to its rational dimension, inevitably makes you lose the essence of life. Mattias
Dear Mattias, thanks for this. Not to split hairs, but you clearly speak of "rationality", not "rationalism" (which, I agree, is of a different order): "Rationality is a good thing and we need to walk the path of rationality as far as possible, but it is not the end goal. Rational knowledge is not a goal in itself; it is a stairway to a kind of knowledge that transcends rationality...". Which one is it, then? Pure, scientific rationalism (or "scientism") harbours potential risks for totalitarianism, agreed. But rationality, or better, reason (Vernunft) must be the way forward. It is the catering to segments of irrational thought (the performative contradictions) that paved the way for Covid totalitarianism, not a lack thereof. That was the lesson from Orwell. That if there are 5 fingers on one hand, there cannot be three or four. We should be careful if we value truth that we do not invite performative contradictions ourselves.
Using rationality one can infer knowledge that can’t be logically proved. But that isn’t irrationality. Irrationality is when we believe something that is factually incorrect. ‘Rent controls make renting easier’. Yes, in the short run. But not over time. It is irrational to use strict rent controls. Because it is not factual. I believe through observation there is some sort of Organizing Intelligence that is the sum of the collected intelligences, which adds to something more than the parts. Is that correct? It is beyond purely being rational. But my observations tell me this. I infer the existence. Going by strict provable facts I couldn’t believe this. But I do as my inferential logic takes me beyond facts.
Hi Elena, yes, I couldn't agree more. But that's actually one of the things that I stressed on so many occasions, that rationalism (again: not the same as rationality!) always lapses into radical, absurd irrationality. And in chapter 4 of my book, I give the corona crisis as an example. In a certain sense, this is one of the core messages in my book. I never listen to my own podcasts/interviews/presentations, but maybe you can tell me where in my speech I say that rationality is a problem? In any case, I don't think it is. I think we have to follow rationality to the limit. And there we will stumble upon something that transcends rationality. And that's what really matters.
Drawing insights from Mattias' work regarding performative contradictions, where actions conflict with expressed beliefs, eventually fosters discord & disconnect when words diverge from actions. Mattias underscores the current incongruity between speech and action, emphasizing the urgent need for genuine communication and ethical conduct. He adeptly highlights the impact of professed ideals and behavior, urging a more secure embodiment of integrity in both words and deeds.
Reason (Vernunft) transcends being a mere cognitive faculty; it serves as a guiding force, illuminating one's path through logical thinking, problem-solving, and understanding, all imbued with thoughtfulness. These concepts invite reflection on the interplay of one's words and actions, fostering a profound connection between beliefs and the way we live our lives. "Sincere speech leads to psychological strength." Mattias Desmet
But Mattias, politicians do speak the truth, in the sense that they dutifully read the script that is handed to them by their masters (not us, of course). As you may know, the political animal is a domesticated breed that merely advances the interests of its owners. This is somehow left out of the discussion, as if these entities, these creatures elevated to the position of public responsibility, are autonomous thinkers and decision makers. They are not, as should be clear from the unanimous response of the 'world leaders' to the multitude of crises in society today. War, austerity, fear mongering, and gaslighting are some of the 'remedies' applied. Do they themselves believe the sewage being constantly sprayed on the unsuspecting masses? I think they do believe that the manipulation serves a 'higher purpose', which is precisely the implementation of the ruling class agenda. The end justifies the means in their mind. The end is beyond ideology and lies in the conformist servitude of the corrupted mind, the flaccid ego and spineless character, which lacks the ability to maintain integrity, in other words, perfect material for the political automaton. It is just a form that is filled with the animating substance of the master's will.
To put it more bluntly, when a society is drowning in a sea of propaganda, and relativism takes complete control, how are ordinary people supposed to see anything other than bullshit, since that is completely obscuring and soiling the scenery? How can we feel anything other than hopelessness and being disconnected and discontented? To make this short, I don't believe the political creature can be reformed or salvaged, and forget about speaking the 'Truth'. It is what it is and serves the purpose for which it was designed. Of course, there are notable exceptions, although those are not 'true' politicians but people who went into politics hoping to make a difference in a sea of indifference and lies. If we were actually allowed to have our collective voice heard, would we vote for these clownish scarecrows? I think not. In the end, totalitarianism exists because we collectively allow it. What are we going to do about it?
A bit late to be throwing this in, perhaps, but the same week you ran this great piece, I was running this piece on Gandhi's philosophy of non-violence and its relation to truth. If you should happen to read this comment, I hope you will find this short 3-minute reflection relevant to your timely themes:
'Thus Gandhi agreed that we should hate tyranny, injustice, and greed, but cautioned that we should despise these within ourselves, and not project our hatred onto others. That path leads only to violence, and this always conceals the truth of a situation, without which peace is impossible, for a message can only be truly heard when it is offered in love.' Exactly.
It is a difficult thing to "work up a crusade in favor of some good cause" without the "bribe of maltreating someone" as Aldus Huxley noted. To right wrongs without hate requires a much higher level of thought than most humans possess. I liked your article. Take a look at mine where I examine eight psyops going on now and how hate seems to be a necessary part of each of them.
Truth is necessary but not sufficient to prevent totalitarianism. As touched in your writing there is a tension between the individual and the collective. When I hear my liberal friends defend their illiberal positions it always boils down to prioritizing the common good at the expense of the individual. Whether it is free speech, vaccine mandates, gun ownership, public education, or even human sacrifice individual freedoms or life are traded away for perceived collective benefits. If we think of it as a spectrum with respect for the individual on one end and collective well-being on the other end, truth is essential to find a culture’s balance, but it is not sufficient to assure the ethical treatment of the individual.
"To do your civic duty" they often say. To protect the minorities, but there is no greater minority than the individual. Every worthy effort comes full circle when expanded on to an absurd level.
Just as the visible light spectrum appears to come full circle on the color wheel.
vaccine mandates because we must protect lives, causes new variants which extends the period of risk, which gives new threats which kills more people, requiring more boosters.
This reminds me of the text that Soljenitsyne released on the day he was arrested in 74 : 'Live not by Lies'. He writes : 'never knowingly support lies!' He gives a list 'of the possible and necessary ways of evading lies'. And by the way, great to hear you citing Houellebecq!
Thank you for your speech transcript. I have been a fan since Robert Malone talked about Mass Formation Psychosis on the Joe Rogan podcast. My daughter is totally captured by the propaganda and refuses to talk about any of the hot topics. I like the idea of Sincere Speech, but she isn't open to talking about the hot topics. She would not speak to us for over a year and now we are at least talking about everything but the elephant in the room.
I have identified 8 major PsyOps going on in the world right now and she is captured by each one of them. I see each of them as having a basis of truth and fact. These facts are built on into levels of supposition and opinion where the absurd is reached. This is where the allowed narrative is and any discussion of the facts (that we can all agree on) is not allowed. If you have time to read it, I would appreciate your comments:
Facts aren't going to break through the formation. Only feelings can touch it.
I'm thinking about this like liberating someone from a cult. They have arguments against all the facts, and are bolstered & armoured against them.
But the feelings, that's the chinks in the armour. Your friend miscarried. Your niece is in hospital with myocarditis. And you have to do so, gently. Not hammer, but little glimpses over time, like bulbs that you are planting for next year.
It is definitely the feelings the override the facts.
The same people who are captured by the psychosis are vulnerable to every trigger that society has to offer. Social Justice Warriors and the Woke getting feelings of righteousness from attacking people who push their triggers.
I've only helped one at a time (talking about cults & narcissists here) - but there is an important role in waiting. Listening. Observing with your deep knowing - for those glimpses that there is a place for a seed, fertile soil, an opening.
But in my experience, you have to be in deep love to have this kind of patience. Sometimes this takes years.
When it's EVERYWHERE, well. I'm just not that enlightened, yet.
Many family members are affected, but mainly my daughter. She didn't speak to us or let us see the grandkids for over a year. We have since started getting together again, but any mentioning of covid causes her to leave the room in tears. This isn't forcing a conversation but when she asked why grandma was in the hospital. "Because she got another vaccine" was the answer. Things are fine if we avoid certain topics.
A dear friend of mine (I call her "sister") got caught in the "satanic ritual abuse" and "multiple personality" delusional trend in the 90's. She's not the only one I knew at the time who got caught in this trend, though it took different forms.
One friend, it took her 5 years to say, "I know you thought you did what was best." It took her 10 years to say "You were right." and another 5 years to reunite with her parents, who had previously been framed as perps by an unethical therapist. At least they reunited before the parents were gone.
We're talking patience and time. Loyalty and love.
My closer friend, I had to let go entirely. Just let her go with this narcissist who was manipulating her sanity. Just watch her decline into madness. She would call, I would listen on the phone. Just listen, maybe plant little seeds like, "is this good? are you happy?" That one, I had to wait until it exploded into pain & suffering, and be there to catch her before she fell. I think that whole process took 5 years.
Little seeds, lots of patience, lots of listening, lots of love.
Speaking truth makes sense. Lies don’t make sense. I have a friend I had to distance myself from. We had been friends for 50 years. She has borderline personality disorder. She had no boundaries and would call me at 1:00 am. She would tell me stories about her family and what they had done to her. They did not make sense. I was talking to her son to tell him I had to distance myself from his mother . He is best friends with my son. He proceeded to tell me the same stories only they made sense.
I’m hoping the more we speak truth , the more truth will make sense.
Truth speech reminds me of the work of M. Scott Peck in his book "The Different Drum". Dr. Desmet, I wonder if you are aware of this? If not, I think you would enjoy it.
A’int it so, brother!
My 4 years resume of C19 Theatre :
https://danseg.substack.com/p/welcome-to-theatre-c19?utm_source=substack&utm_content=feed%3Arecommended%3Acopy_link
Lies destroy themselves. Truth is all that’s left. Spoken words live briefly then die, and written words are dead and remain dead forever. Propaganda is dead written words that are spoken repeatedly to the extent that people go crazy and submit to the instructions of the dead. The internet is messing with the flows of words and meaning. Psyches are entangling across the people sphere bringing to life new minds stronger and kinder beyond anything that has existed before. The dreaming spirit is laughing.
Do we really need politicians to become "true leaders" again?
I mean: All power to the people!
Politicians were the blabbing buffoons spewing the secret societies satanic words spells. We can watch the WEF buffoons online. Politicians are anachronisms.
I appreciate the general gist of this, but there are just some factual, extremely obvious errors that cannot go unmentioned: propaganda is not a post-Enlightenment phenomenon. Propaganda, in the sense of "legitimisation of domination" of whoever wants to rule a country by physical or psychological force, is as old as human history. From the old Egyptian to the Chinese King-Gods through the early and high Middle Ages, domination of humans over humans has always found a way to justify itself. In the centuries before the French Revolution, it was God himself that served as legitimisation strategy for the church/clergy and the aristocracy, not only in the West. It was "God propaganda". Enlightenment thought was the first to question this rule of "divine privilege". Rationality was supposed to put domination on a different level of justification: democracy, if only formally. Democracy is the inner drive of truthful speech, for if there is no political system in which truth matters, then any kind of domination of humans over other humans can be justified. Rationality is not the problem. Rationality, in fact, has never been tried.
Hi Elena, here you go: Propaganda as it existed before the French revolution was a different phenomenon. It was not based on a scientific theory of psychological funcitoning, it was not ideologically justified, and it was not industrialised. And as about rationality. The problem is not rationality. Rationality is something I strive for very much myself. The problem is rationalism - the belief that rationality is the ultimate guiding principle of individual and collective life. Think about physicists such as Bohr or Thom who were very much aware that you can study nature in a rational way, but that the essence of it always transcends rational understanding. Hence, reducing life to its rational dimension, inevitably makes you lose the essence of life. Mattias
Dear Mattias, thanks for this. Not to split hairs, but you clearly speak of "rationality", not "rationalism" (which, I agree, is of a different order): "Rationality is a good thing and we need to walk the path of rationality as far as possible, but it is not the end goal. Rational knowledge is not a goal in itself; it is a stairway to a kind of knowledge that transcends rationality...". Which one is it, then? Pure, scientific rationalism (or "scientism") harbours potential risks for totalitarianism, agreed. But rationality, or better, reason (Vernunft) must be the way forward. It is the catering to segments of irrational thought (the performative contradictions) that paved the way for Covid totalitarianism, not a lack thereof. That was the lesson from Orwell. That if there are 5 fingers on one hand, there cannot be three or four. We should be careful if we value truth that we do not invite performative contradictions ourselves.
Using rationality one can infer knowledge that can’t be logically proved. But that isn’t irrationality. Irrationality is when we believe something that is factually incorrect. ‘Rent controls make renting easier’. Yes, in the short run. But not over time. It is irrational to use strict rent controls. Because it is not factual. I believe through observation there is some sort of Organizing Intelligence that is the sum of the collected intelligences, which adds to something more than the parts. Is that correct? It is beyond purely being rational. But my observations tell me this. I infer the existence. Going by strict provable facts I couldn’t believe this. But I do as my inferential logic takes me beyond facts.
Hi Elena, yes, I couldn't agree more. But that's actually one of the things that I stressed on so many occasions, that rationalism (again: not the same as rationality!) always lapses into radical, absurd irrationality. And in chapter 4 of my book, I give the corona crisis as an example. In a certain sense, this is one of the core messages in my book. I never listen to my own podcasts/interviews/presentations, but maybe you can tell me where in my speech I say that rationality is a problem? In any case, I don't think it is. I think we have to follow rationality to the limit. And there we will stumble upon something that transcends rationality. And that's what really matters.
Hi Mattias, the quote is directly from the speech to the Romanian parliament.
Are you familiar with Adorno‘s critique of rationalism in the Dialectic of Enlightenment?
Drawing insights from Mattias' work regarding performative contradictions, where actions conflict with expressed beliefs, eventually fosters discord & disconnect when words diverge from actions. Mattias underscores the current incongruity between speech and action, emphasizing the urgent need for genuine communication and ethical conduct. He adeptly highlights the impact of professed ideals and behavior, urging a more secure embodiment of integrity in both words and deeds.
Reason (Vernunft) transcends being a mere cognitive faculty; it serves as a guiding force, illuminating one's path through logical thinking, problem-solving, and understanding, all imbued with thoughtfulness. These concepts invite reflection on the interplay of one's words and actions, fostering a profound connection between beliefs and the way we live our lives. "Sincere speech leads to psychological strength." Mattias Desmet
Thank you both for sharing your thoughts!
🔥🔥🔥🙌❤️
But Mattias, politicians do speak the truth, in the sense that they dutifully read the script that is handed to them by their masters (not us, of course). As you may know, the political animal is a domesticated breed that merely advances the interests of its owners. This is somehow left out of the discussion, as if these entities, these creatures elevated to the position of public responsibility, are autonomous thinkers and decision makers. They are not, as should be clear from the unanimous response of the 'world leaders' to the multitude of crises in society today. War, austerity, fear mongering, and gaslighting are some of the 'remedies' applied. Do they themselves believe the sewage being constantly sprayed on the unsuspecting masses? I think they do believe that the manipulation serves a 'higher purpose', which is precisely the implementation of the ruling class agenda. The end justifies the means in their mind. The end is beyond ideology and lies in the conformist servitude of the corrupted mind, the flaccid ego and spineless character, which lacks the ability to maintain integrity, in other words, perfect material for the political automaton. It is just a form that is filled with the animating substance of the master's will.
To put it more bluntly, when a society is drowning in a sea of propaganda, and relativism takes complete control, how are ordinary people supposed to see anything other than bullshit, since that is completely obscuring and soiling the scenery? How can we feel anything other than hopelessness and being disconnected and discontented? To make this short, I don't believe the political creature can be reformed or salvaged, and forget about speaking the 'Truth'. It is what it is and serves the purpose for which it was designed. Of course, there are notable exceptions, although those are not 'true' politicians but people who went into politics hoping to make a difference in a sea of indifference and lies. If we were actually allowed to have our collective voice heard, would we vote for these clownish scarecrows? I think not. In the end, totalitarianism exists because we collectively allow it. What are we going to do about it?
Cheers
A bit late to be throwing this in, perhaps, but the same week you ran this great piece, I was running this piece on Gandhi's philosophy of non-violence and its relation to truth. If you should happen to read this comment, I hope you will find this short 3-minute reflection relevant to your timely themes:
https://strangerworlds.substack.com/p/peace-truth-and-violence
'Thus Gandhi agreed that we should hate tyranny, injustice, and greed, but cautioned that we should despise these within ourselves, and not project our hatred onto others. That path leads only to violence, and this always conceals the truth of a situation, without which peace is impossible, for a message can only be truly heard when it is offered in love.' Exactly.
It is a difficult thing to "work up a crusade in favor of some good cause" without the "bribe of maltreating someone" as Aldus Huxley noted. To right wrongs without hate requires a much higher level of thought than most humans possess. I liked your article. Take a look at mine where I examine eight psyops going on now and how hate seems to be a necessary part of each of them.
https://mikemyhre.substack.com/p/one-planet-two-worlds
Thanks for engaging, Mike. I'll take a look at your piece now.
A brilliant thinker and an eloquent orator of truths.
Truth is necessary but not sufficient to prevent totalitarianism. As touched in your writing there is a tension between the individual and the collective. When I hear my liberal friends defend their illiberal positions it always boils down to prioritizing the common good at the expense of the individual. Whether it is free speech, vaccine mandates, gun ownership, public education, or even human sacrifice individual freedoms or life are traded away for perceived collective benefits. If we think of it as a spectrum with respect for the individual on one end and collective well-being on the other end, truth is essential to find a culture’s balance, but it is not sufficient to assure the ethical treatment of the individual.
"To do your civic duty" they often say. To protect the minorities, but there is no greater minority than the individual. Every worthy effort comes full circle when expanded on to an absurd level.
Just as the visible light spectrum appears to come full circle on the color wheel.
vaccine mandates because we must protect lives, causes new variants which extends the period of risk, which gives new threats which kills more people, requiring more boosters.
Vaccine mandates are an assault on self-ownership.
Beautiful and brilliant.
This reminds me of the text that Soljenitsyne released on the day he was arrested in 74 : 'Live not by Lies'. He writes : 'never knowingly support lies!' He gives a list 'of the possible and necessary ways of evading lies'. And by the way, great to hear you citing Houellebecq!
Thank you for your speech transcript. I have been a fan since Robert Malone talked about Mass Formation Psychosis on the Joe Rogan podcast. My daughter is totally captured by the propaganda and refuses to talk about any of the hot topics. I like the idea of Sincere Speech, but she isn't open to talking about the hot topics. She would not speak to us for over a year and now we are at least talking about everything but the elephant in the room.
I have identified 8 major PsyOps going on in the world right now and she is captured by each one of them. I see each of them as having a basis of truth and fact. These facts are built on into levels of supposition and opinion where the absurd is reached. This is where the allowed narrative is and any discussion of the facts (that we can all agree on) is not allowed. If you have time to read it, I would appreciate your comments:
https://mikemyhre.substack.com/p/one-planet-two-worlds
Also any hints on how to get people to talk or listen on these difficult topics would be appreciated.
There are emotional truths, too.
Facts aren't going to break through the formation. Only feelings can touch it.
I'm thinking about this like liberating someone from a cult. They have arguments against all the facts, and are bolstered & armoured against them.
But the feelings, that's the chinks in the armour. Your friend miscarried. Your niece is in hospital with myocarditis. And you have to do so, gently. Not hammer, but little glimpses over time, like bulbs that you are planting for next year.
It is definitely the feelings the override the facts.
The same people who are captured by the psychosis are vulnerable to every trigger that society has to offer. Social Justice Warriors and the Woke getting feelings of righteousness from attacking people who push their triggers.
I've only helped one at a time (talking about cults & narcissists here) - but there is an important role in waiting. Listening. Observing with your deep knowing - for those glimpses that there is a place for a seed, fertile soil, an opening.
But in my experience, you have to be in deep love to have this kind of patience. Sometimes this takes years.
When it's EVERYWHERE, well. I'm just not that enlightened, yet.
Many family members are affected, but mainly my daughter. She didn't speak to us or let us see the grandkids for over a year. We have since started getting together again, but any mentioning of covid causes her to leave the room in tears. This isn't forcing a conversation but when she asked why grandma was in the hospital. "Because she got another vaccine" was the answer. Things are fine if we avoid certain topics.
A dear friend of mine (I call her "sister") got caught in the "satanic ritual abuse" and "multiple personality" delusional trend in the 90's. She's not the only one I knew at the time who got caught in this trend, though it took different forms.
One friend, it took her 5 years to say, "I know you thought you did what was best." It took her 10 years to say "You were right." and another 5 years to reunite with her parents, who had previously been framed as perps by an unethical therapist. At least they reunited before the parents were gone.
We're talking patience and time. Loyalty and love.
My closer friend, I had to let go entirely. Just let her go with this narcissist who was manipulating her sanity. Just watch her decline into madness. She would call, I would listen on the phone. Just listen, maybe plant little seeds like, "is this good? are you happy?" That one, I had to wait until it exploded into pain & suffering, and be there to catch her before she fell. I think that whole process took 5 years.
Little seeds, lots of patience, lots of listening, lots of love.
So true with loved ones. With the public, unfortunately, we don't have that amount of time. The WHO treaty gets signed in a few months. What to do?
Speaking truth makes sense. Lies don’t make sense. I have a friend I had to distance myself from. We had been friends for 50 years. She has borderline personality disorder. She had no boundaries and would call me at 1:00 am. She would tell me stories about her family and what they had done to her. They did not make sense. I was talking to her son to tell him I had to distance myself from his mother . He is best friends with my son. He proceeded to tell me the same stories only they made sense.
I’m hoping the more we speak truth , the more truth will make sense.
Truth speech reminds me of the work of M. Scott Peck in his book "The Different Drum". Dr. Desmet, I wonder if you are aware of this? If not, I think you would enjoy it.
Also, ‘People of the Lie’.
i truly appreciate everything you stated in this speech. Thank you!