97 Comments
Nov 6, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

As a young policeman, I learned not to argue with drunks, junkies, the mentally ill or the ideologically possessed. For this reason, Rosenberg's theories only apply among the sober, sane, and open-minded.

Jordan Peterson described how Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn dealt with the "ideologically possessed" Marxists who filled the Soviet gulags. Even with the time afforded by their captivity, Solzhenitsyn recognized the futility of discourse with such people: "One cannot argue with Mindi because there's no Mindi there. You'd only argue with her daemon."

While it's good to open one's mind and heart to hear others, it's just as important to dismiss them before one become's their captive. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w84uRYq0Uc8&t=2500s

Expand full comment
Nov 6, 2023·edited Nov 6, 2023Liked by Celia Farber

My communications skills have improved by listening to Marshall's "Nonviolent Communication" seminar and putting some of his suggestions into action in my personal and business life. More things for me to untangle, but listening to this seminar has gotten my off to a great start.

Thank you for bringing Marshall's work to our attention, Celia

Expand full comment

Manipulating the will of any Free Soul will surely sow the seeds of unharmonious outcomes. When has tyranny ever been good for human beings? Thanks for posting this.

Expand full comment

“Better to light a Candle than curse the darkness."

Expand full comment
Nov 6, 2023·edited Nov 6, 2023

To diagnose often leads to a self-fulling diagnosis…

To prognosticate often leads to a self-fulling prognosis too….

The power of suggestion can be deadly.

Expand full comment

Very good! Thought provoking!

Labels are a road to dehumanizing "others." Once you've dehumanized, there is seemingly no punishment against that "non-human" that can't be justified somehow. Clearly this tactic is used to silence people. Why should a "racist" or a "homophobe" enjoy any 1st Amendment rights? It's not even required to produce any evidence the person actually IS in any way racist or homophobic. Just the unsubstantiated label alone justifies almost ANY vile act against another, in the social justice warrior's mind.

Expand full comment

I watched about an hour to the clip of Marshall Rosenberg and now I see how the USA arrived at the point it is at now, a deplorable trainwreck. The degenerate indoctrination of Mr Rosenberg molded so many gullible Americans into marxist zombies. So it is a shame he did not have a clear picture why manipulating another is always a bad thing, even when you desire that people are communicating with each other as giraffes, to keep their heads up high, a fine piece of symbolism of arrogance. This was a poor sentimental exercise in my opinion. I am sure I will now be banned for life to give any further comments in this place, because I am too much of a Jackal.

Expand full comment

Yes! Then there are all the violent and drug/alcohol filled Hollywood movies. There should be way more movies featuring people teaching self-defense as shown on Walker Texas Ranger. Chuck Norris is a great man, teaching self-defense to people living in the seedier areas of Texas (or any other major city). It would also be a great addition to K-12 P.E. classes and for families that are interested (maybe for a fee).

Expand full comment

The perennial orthodox tradition from Plato to Paul (and beyond) is that human nature is a paradox of good and evil. Beware any snake oil salesmen who come along saying human nature is only good, or only evil. Rosenberg then compounds this problem by setting up a form of this paradox contradicting his "human nature is innately good" premise.

Expand full comment

"Labelling and diagnosing is a terrible way to communicate", yet, that's exactly what psychiatrists do on a daily basis.

Any doctor worth his salt will tell you that patients are not only stunned but are grateful when the diagnosis of terminal cancer is revealed to them. They are even more grateful when he communicates to them that there is a cure. Therefore, I cannot agree with Marshall's statement.

"...we will see that punishment never works." Give me a break! I grew up where punishment taught me respect and was also a deterrent. Even when a child reaches up and touches a hot burner on a stove, they don't need to be punished by their parent; the burn was enough punishment and deterrent from doing it again. Adequate and appropriate punishment / experience is quite often the best teacher.

We need to seriously think some of these so-called professional statements through. Heck! Just look at society around us today...positive proof that the advice and teachings of the so-called "experts" failed miserably to make it better than it was only four years ago! Here's a statement worth considering...

If punishment wasn't worthwhile, then why do we have laws and so many jails and prisons? Apart from being job-making places, they actually deter a lot of crimes, and some inmates actually do come out rehabilitated, against the desire of aforementioned institutions.

Expand full comment

Noble sentiments ...Unfortunately, the violent are not listening.

Expand full comment

I found Marshall to be very interesting and entertaining Celia. I listened to nearly the whole thing. It was more enjoyable for me in the beginning. Trying to process all of that info made my head hurt.

Expand full comment

Well, I fundamentally disagree with the notion that bombs, etc are EVER *necessary*.

Not sure if I already posted this portion of my longer "standard" comment here. If so, please disregard the repetition. For me this kind of information can't be shared enough...

And remember, genital mutilation is ROUTINELY practiced by both Jews and Muslims AND Americans!!

***

Lisa Enos

This may be of interest...

CIA MIND CONTROL EXPERIMENTS

One area of the CIA’s research that is rarely talked about, or even known, is male circumcision or genital mutilation. PRACTICED ROUTINELY by #JEWS, #MUSLIMS and #AMERICANS!!

***

Cansever describes a study of the psychology of boys circumcised between the ages of 4 and 7 both before and after the surgery, based on various methods of psychological examination, and reports the following trends among the subjects:

- lower IQ as measured 7 days after the operation

- infantile regression of drawings and expressed wishes

- greater measured levels of aggression

- new fears and anxieties

- weaker control over primitive impulses to the point of maladaption

- greater aggression towards their mothers

- withdrawal from human relationships and difficulty responding to demands of external world

- perceptions of having been castrated

It turns out that in 1961, the CIA had payed “Cansever” to study the effects of circumcision, and he found that it made boys dumber, more infantile, more fearful, and more aggressive, with less control over their base instincts and a healthy dose of aggression towards the most significant female figure in their lives, their mothers.

If the findings of this study hold true for boys circumcised younger, it might suggest that the United States contains some 100+ million men who have been psychologically altered, from as early as infancy, to be stupider, to have lower impulse control, to tend towards aggression and violence, and to possess an instinctual distrust of women. Throw in the diminishing effects of circumcision on penile sensitivity and the consequent difficulties of sex and tendency towards paraphilias, and a picture begins to emerge of an organic golem that can be manipulated more easily by carrots and is less able to establish a normal, healthy relationship with a woman—splitting the family apart or preventing its formation has always been a goal of oppressive regimes, including the one that currently rules over the US.

Unfortunately for many of us, there exists, at this point, ample evidence that events in infancy can and do have measurable effects on the hindbrain, the part of our brain that drives instinctual, “gut” reactions and behavior. This is especially true when it comes to traumatic events that trigger stress hormones such as partial amputation of the penis, routinely performed at birth in this country. Although humans are cognizant of their lives, making behaviorism a dead area of psychology, it is still understood that instinctual behavior plays a role in decision-making, which is why propaganda and advertising are so widespread. How attached will men be to their women if they are surgically predisposed more to masturbate to pornography than to enjoy normal, PIV sex? Is it really a stretch to claim that enjoyment of sex is determined, in part, by the existing or removed enervation of the sex organ involved, and that this might have an effect on the interpersonal relationships of men and women across the country?

It is also worth noting that, according to Leonard Glick in Marked in Your Flesh, circumcision of gentiles is twice used in the Old Testament as a means of disfiguring humiliation and domination by Israelites, and it may still be interpreted as such by a certain religiously-minded tribe. I am not a mind-reader, and intelligent minds can differ on the motivations of various groups that encourage circumcision in the United States, but the historical context of mass, non-consensual circumcision of gentiles may be a clue as to what is going on here."

Link to PDF:

https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:5efe4c81-59b6-483d-8283-8b2181c7b251

Expand full comment

Pacifists would love Leon Tolstoy’s “The Kingdom of God Is Within You” (1894) wherein he argued in favor of non violent resistant as taught by Jesus Christ. The “turn the other cheek” syndrome.

I respectfully disagree. I prefer the “go ahead make my day “ technique . Not because I enjoy violence but because there are certain humans out there who use violence because they are lazy and dishonest-

for example the Biden Junta will attempt to to impose the so called “Green New Deal” on us because it is an unworkable socialist scheme wherein some will profit and which most will reject because it will bring about misery and tyranny.

Do that means I love violence? Of course not . Violence is a reaction based upon self preservation and Liberty of choice . A necessary evil.

Expand full comment

I detect an apparent paradox early on in his worldview:

1) Humans are innately, naturally good.

2) Yet humans have successfully persuaded millions (maybe billions) of their fellow humans to enjoy evil through jackal language.

Does he resolve the paradox by answering the question -- how did #2 develop so massively and sustained for so long, if #1 is true? Do I want to continue watching to find out? I'm not sure.

Expand full comment

Just took the time to watch this. Thanks for sharing! ♥ I read his NVC book years ago; time to read it again.

Expand full comment