This is a melting pot archetype closely related to the 'White Police Rape Van' symbol

It is the projection of one's worldview into a comprehensive false construct, by a person who has been given control of a small part of their environment, usually through membership in a gang.

This person creates a fictional world with fantasy rules then continually constructs one part of their Doll House as other parts collapse.

A part of this archetype is the 'false parent' construct

Generally when a person tries to control others they are living out their own general recollection of their parents actions towards them.

So in an administrative organization, a bureaucracy, giving an individual false authority to 'pretend parent' others is giving them 'authority' to live out that part of their own parent's behavioral history which they do not understand yet.

A child will be 'controlled' countless times by a parent, and over time most of these events will reach consciousness. For example a parent prevents a child from going near a red burner on the stove, and over the years the child starts building a construct around the parent's behavior which is both rational and irrational, and which is defensible using nature. It arrives at a construct, or archetype, which is largely invisible, but completely valid. The construct makes no 'noise' since it reflects natural laws, and there is no reason for it to make more noise than is involved in simply being aware of it.

But there are many parental controls that never reach this level for the simple reason that they reflect something in the parent which never became conscious. The parent was able to use their physical superiority to enforce control within some sphere involving the child, but it was not something which extended out and could be verified naturally. So to the extent the adult child continues looking to prove, rather than understand, their parents' actions the adult child will look for ways to get enough power to enforce what they do not understand but still 'believe' to be valid. As a person ages, decays in this regard, the target of the validation gets molded more and more by others who have replaced their parents in some regard until finally it is simply power that they want i.e., they associate 'power' with 'validating their own parents actions'.

They project their ungrounded 'parental' actions onto groups first i.e., unfocused projections, but need force to go beyond that, because by then they have still not internalized i.e., understood, their own parents actions in regard to what they are projecting and their projections are not realistically sustainable in anything involving only one other person. It is not possible to defend a false construct unless you have the means to oblige others to pretend with you. Gangs, governments etc provide this power to any individual willing to trade something for it.


Katherine Schweit is called a widely respected expert on violence who constructed the 'Active Shooter' protocol the FBI teaches to school districts, including Uvalde. 

She has at least two websites selling various things. 

And a book. 

She has many hundreds of followers on Twitter. 

As dubious as her skills may be though, there are many in law enforcement even less qualified to deal with school shooters. 

A male cop issuing a 'gonna kill you' warning to adolescent boys in schools. Not brilliant.

How does such an utter moron become sheriff?

By pandering to voters even stupider than he is. 

Eventually Sheriff Einstein will learn that adolescent delinquents with guns are the big monkeys. 

The Doll House  is usually evident in a woman, often the result of an overly nurturing father, but there is an equivalent parallel archetype that corresponds to men and is easy enough to figure out. In both cases the distinguishing quality is that the builder wants others to move into their Doll House i.e., to accept their worldview, and they use a group to herd others into their flimsy construct rather than letting something rest on its merits alone.

It can be contrasted with an actual viable construct based on real expertise rather than 'group validation'.

In many or most cases the Doll House is constructed using an academic formula which is then sold as innovation or expertise. Somebody is trained to follow a series of mechanical steps to solve 'any problem', and they apply those academic steps to construct their 'new' Doll House.

As such it is an extension of the hyper academic or hyper rational Western approach to science i.e., the idea that formulas mechanically taught and memorized can be used to solve any problem or build anything.

Because the foundation of the 'architecture' is validation from a group, rather than actual expertise, the Doll House never gets too many willing inhabitants until the sponsoring group forces people in.

An interesting aspect of the Doll House is the dynamic of the 'validation' that empowers the builder.

A female Doll House builder will typically have a father who genuinely teaches her, but then she will move to a group where there are men simply playing the role of 'teacher' in exchange for power. So in the second stage she gets more and more professional authority, but it lacks the authenticity of any natural authority she got from what her father taught her. The males know that if they 'mentor' her and validate anything, no matter how stupid, if they think they can sell it, they will be on solid professional ground within their group.

These men in the second stage, higher level FBI employees in the example above, are building their own careers by creating artificial experts, Doll House builders. A massive circular Ponzi that eventually bumps into the reality that the so called 'expertise' being promoted is utterly empty of any substance. The Doll House withers from flimsiness as the promoters desperately try to get a new generation to perpetuate their self serving Ponzi.

This series of steps in the Doll House is just a rerun of the basic melting pot 'we are all one family' scam, but with a group of males leveraging their professional authority i.e., their commercial skills, to convince an ambitious female that they are guiding her, and therefore she should validate their authority, i.e., her mentors' professional authority, with the authority she gets from their validation, which she will usually do because she was hired on the basis of having that trait, loyalty. An honest mentor, of course, would tell somebody like Ms Schweit that she is not actually an expert in her 'field of expertise', even with any business steered her way by group 'mentors'. 

Following the example above to the next level of decay, a person gets to experts that don't even have a basic understanding in what they are pretending. There is not even a veneer of schooling or job history or anything else which might let a person wonder.

Hillary Clinton actually became Secretary of State in the United States. She had zero skills, of any kind whatsoever, which might be applicable to that job, she didn't know where a lot of important countries were, nor who their 'leaders' were, but she had mentors willing to pretend, and try to force others to also pretend.

She wasn't able to construct much of a Doll House for the simple reason that nobody really took her 'expertise' seriously, except those who directly profited, and that was simply not a big enough group to give her much power.

A step past Hillary Clinton, and a person is in an especially flimsy realm of dollhouse architecture. 

Jews were persecuted in Europe pre WWII, but after the war many countries cooperated in creating space for Jews, largely the result of political power by Jews in the United States.

One of the liberties Jews had after WWII was the liberty to pretend some accomplishment, and then have substantial support for it. In other words the basic 'dollhouse' idea but on a broader scale.

As this liberty dries up there are still many people trying to extend it by pretending it.

The state of Israel is in a precarious position, and many people understand that once Israel falls there will be no 'consolidation' of Jewish influence in the United States.

One reaction to this reality has been an attempt to create a network of powerful influences at the top of various societies. Thus there are a whole slew of, for example, 'progressive' Saudis working with 'progressive' Jews, and 'progressive' Arab media wondering what happened to abortion rights, etc.

A thin veneer of manipulation which will utterly wash away in the next Arab Spring.


In Progress