Behaviorism is a branch of psychology which looks at observable phenomena without trying to analyze too much. 

It is a sort of mathematical approach to psychology which analytical minded people often tend to dismiss.

This page is in the Weltanschauungskrieg section because behaviorism is the basis for the science behind manipulating a population by 'guiding' its worldview.


All kinds of psychology require that a person have a body of experience from which to 'psychologize'.

Analytical psychology starts with the body of experience which some characters from the past had. As it turns out their observations, based on their experiences, seems to work.

But a person could wonder if there are better deductions a person could make starting from their own experience rather than from that of analytical types.

A behaviorist ideally looks at behavior without extraneous material like motives, and tries to find hierarchies which explain the behavior more accurately.

Unfortunately most behaviorists start with academic ideas which pollute their conclusions to the point of ridiculousness.

A common example is the notion of teaching a mouse to run a maze and 'deducing' this or that from the process. A few important things which are ignored.

You do not 'teach' a mouse to run a maze, you force a mouse to run your specific maze. Anybody can watch wild mice and see that they are highly skilled at complicated mazes. So the experiment involves training not learning or teaching, and the one being trained is the person not the mouse. The person is being trained that if you have physical control over a mouse you can force it to do stupid things, then if you are part of a group you can pretend your group is doing smart things, as long as everybody pretends together.


The basic underlying premise of behaviorism is 'fate' i.e., that there is some series of actions that a person will follow, but there is a layer outside that pre determined path which is the 'thinking' part, and lets a person construct explanations, motives etc which explain their actions to themselves in the short term.

The behaviorist 'goal' is to find a 'higher' explanation for behaviors.


Most sciences are taught in a slightly skewed way in universities, because the bounds of sciences vary slightly across paradigms, in other words if any two people were to master any one science completely, each would be mastering a slightly different science. One person's physics, chemistry, etc is not exactly another person's physics, chemistry etc.

The behaviorism taught today in universities is an extreme example of this.

Pure behaviorism is an observational science more than most sciences. Somebody who wants to master this will observe and not experiment. It's purpose is learning, and whatever follows it. Ultimately, as an observational science it arrives at one side of a continuum, with the other side being another science e.g. analytical psychology.

Academic behaviorism is more experimentation. It's purpose is productivity, control, etc, not learning. In other words the 'students' are actually technicians being trained, robots being programmed to create and control other robots.

A person who studies academic behaviorism will run animals through processes to control their behavior. Then the animals will be euthanized and the next group of students the following semester will start new animals on the path to being trained.

An example of observational or 'real' behaviorism

The behaviorism taught in schools has long term problems which negate it as a science, but if you backtrack the development of behaviorism you can arrive at a real science. Here will be an example of real behaviorism, in the context of what this website deals with.

1) There are a lot of 'conspiracyish' theories which refer to 'one worlders' or 'globalists' or 'elitists' or whatever. These theories are based on something which, generally, not even the conspiracy theorists can readily identify, except very locally i.e., their observations within the context of their personal experiences or anecdotes from those around them. These theories have wide appeal though, so obviously they have a sound archetypal basis. They also contain a lot of defensive emotional energy in the conspirators, so its likely that whatever the real issue is, it involves survival at some level.

2) The general ideas within the conspiracy point to two 'groups' among humans. A powerful 'global' group which 'runs things', and a 'victim' group which is slowly consumed by the 'one worlders' or globalists.

3) At this point there are enough similarities with the 'melting potters' vs 'indigenous', or 'colonizers' vs aboriginal', that it is worth examining the possibility that this might be the root of that conspiracy. Any honest study, in fact, will lead to the conclusion that it is.

4) So, at this point, there is a growing popular sentiment that 'indigenous' is threatened by 'globalist'. Should a person on the wrong side of that equation now retreat to false academic behaviorism? Should those threatened by anti colonialist sentiment, which is starting to bubble in to the popular consciousness, use industrial manipulative tools, like 'conditioning' etc to 'control' the threat? Or should they use real behaviorism, observational behaviorism, to see how such conflicts always resolve, and thus not waste their resources on stupidity?

5) The obvious question when looking at this example is 'why would the average person identify with the 'indigenous' side of the question?' In other words, why do 'melting potted' people acting at a more instinctive level identify as 'indigenous' and not 'global' or 'one worlder'? The answer is simply the cyclical qualities of human expansion, and can be observed throughout history when a group expands then bumps into hard borders. People are trying to retreat to 'an indigenous or tribal space', just as they would have in a similar situation a thousand years ago, but today there is no such clear cut tribal identity for most people. An average Heinz 57 modern person, a mix of several 'still existent' tribal entities, can easily see the faraway problem but not the near problem, they can see the 'globalist' side as an identifiable enemy, but they cannot perceive their own side because they are 'mixed indigenous'. There isn't one identifiable tribe saying 'we need to establish a tribal border', there are hundreds of millions of people who don't have a clear tribal identity though they have the instinct to retreat to a tribal border. A lot of this problem is caused by people being trained to perceive false religious and political descendance rather than actual lineages which start with mitochondrial vs nuclear.

6) So, at this point there are two competing 'consciousnesses', a consolidating 'corporate' group, which is people who are conditioned to serve melting pot interests, politicians for example, and a group identifying as 'indigenous victims' or 'people whose real estate is under attack' on the other side. Neither has any individual who accurately represents either side, the two sides are two 'beasts' or 'group consciousnesses' which require gangsters on either side to feed one another.

7) As usual, the simple solution is common sense, but people caught up in gang activities are notoriously immune from that. Nature has a solution though. Inevitably such gang conflicts lead to turmoil that breaks each gang into its smaller and smaller components. 




In Progress