1) Academic or 'Opportunistic' Behaviorism vs Observational Behaviorism
Behaviorism is usually minimized by 'educated' people because of how it is defined and taught.
In fact there is a 'real' version of behaviorism.
Here is an example of how fake behaviorism leads to shoddy psychology whose function is only to bulk up credentials.
The notion that 'anybody can be an expert if they follow a specific algorithm' leads to a lot of dead ends, and academic behaviorism encourages that.
2) Whenever a gang uses shills to further an agenda there is heavy evidence, which supporters of the gang refuse to see
In this case, start by assuming Putin's real goal is to consume Ukraine, or, that his 'enemy' is Europe and points West. In that case he would gain in that conflict by simply helping the 'comparable' groups being consumed by his 'enemy'.
Even at the height of the Cold War though, Russia never gave even modest support to Native Americans, except internally, in their own country, Russia, and only for domestic propaganda purposes.
A behaviorist would point out that the net effect of all conflicts so far between Russia and the 'West', just as all conflicts so far between China and India, or all conflicts between any two melting pots, has been to consolidate the larger 'beast' or melting pot which both 'conflicting' faces in the conflict serve.
A further deduction would be that since leaders never last by conning their own populations as long as they can keep their people stupid, real nationalism will replace fake 'melting pot nationalists' who work by using their foreign colleagues as local shills.
Any resolution has to be in one direction or the other, either Putin is replaced by a 'real nationalist' which melting potters would want to be a 'Soviet nationalist', or he is replaced by a number of more local leaders i.e., the Russian melting pot fractures.
The British have long played a game of 'to the brink or we all die' in order to consolidate their gains. Conversely, they have also used the 'force' of economies to portray their face of the melting pot as being associated with civilization or democracy.
Ironically the broad context of WW1 has been used by the British for a long time as a way to con others into the fantasy notion of 'we are all one, let's cooperate', a ruse which should always be a warning sign to adults in the room.
There are two broad paths the world, any group, can take, and one is wise, the other not.
The current 'melting pot' path of consolidating gains to set the stage for China increasing in power until the shift ends with power in the hands of indigenous new world groups, will be a long and messy path with steadily increasing conflict and a heavy growing investment in new weapons as 'science'. This is the 'smart path' up to a thousand years ago. Today it is the 'stupid path'.
A more sensible path is to cut to the chase and start shifting power along tribal lines while consolidating the melting pot i.e., areas of heavily mixed populations, in very well defined 'currently declining' borders which will stabilize quickly.
The 'problem' some people would imagine in that is not actually a problem. In other words the notion that melting potted people are in inherent conflict with tribals is only true until the process described on the Unwinding page is visible to enough people, i.e., once gender ethnic descent is more of an interest. This subject is growing rapidly due to DNA type science, but until it overtakes the also growing danger of melting pot ambition, conflict will have to increase.
3) What leads police to fakesolve cases?
The Jon Benet Ramsey case was a supposed child murder a few hundred miles from the Hser Ner Moo case.
For a long time there were a series of inconsistent clues which pointed to either incompetent police or an astoundingly complex murder.
Then, a few years ago, police revealed that in fact there was no 'murder'. There had been an accident involving siblings which resulted in the death. Suddenly all the 'incredibly astounding mysteries', like both parents and police covering things they shouldn't need to cover, were all explained.
It is about as solved a mystery as you will find.
And yet, police continue trying to fakesolve it.
In recent years they have even created fake DNA trails for their imaginary murderer.
This 'DNA fakesolve' false trail is much more common than most people suspect, and always is associated with a wealthy person or law enforcer facing possible responsibility if the case is solved or facts come out. In this case money or other consideration was given to 'somebody' in law enforcement to arrange a fix. That person probably approached a person directly involved and made a case for 'protecting the family of this terrible crime, by tweaking evidence'. Now, years later, the police can't backtrack too easily without drawing attention to the fake DNA evidence. The next step, probably in 10 or 20 years, will be an investigation which finds that a lot of papers in the case were accidentally destroyed.
Note that there is absolutely nothing wrong with 'protecting the family' in a case like that. The problem is that this 'help' is only available to police officers and wealthy people. There was an accident. Somebody died. That should be the end. Instead there is a fork in the road after such a death. Wealth makes the crime go away while poverty or vulnerability turn the accident into a major crime.
The psychology behind fakesolving is hard to pin down, because 'police' are not a homogenous group, they are a job category. So any search for the roots of 'fakesolving' would be looking at the overlap between people attracted to that job and the bigger population.
Here is a paywalled article that may be related.
4) 'The Motive' is a NetFlix documentary, but not the usual NetFlix fare
Most, or all, NetFlix documentaries which touch on certain issues are laden with fairly sophisticated propaganda. This documentary is quite different in that it provides a small window in which people may recognize certain things which 'counter' the manipulativeness normally built into those documentaries.
At first glance a person might just note that almost all 'impulse' crimes can be connected to either a chemical sensitivity or a mineral issue like heavy metal toxicity, but this case is from decades ago so that information would not be available.
A person can look at any process that has x number of steps and make observations when 'less than x' is the maximum number usually reached. Relevant here is that an event like this should normally proceed to a second step, then a third step and so on. Unfortunately, due to melting pot exigencies, the second step is never reached because the 'legal' system intervenes. In other words laws are initially meant to serve individuals, but in a melting pot that is flipped to force assimilation and consolidation, and individuals are intended to serve laws.
This case is slightly different, or at least hints at the second step, because for example the boy was not killed in retribution, or permanently jailed etc. The focus was, to some extent, on his being made to serve the law, but a hint of a second step was evident notwithstanding the heavily indoctrinated police.
Here is a comparison of the steps in different examples.
1) Jon Benet Ramsey / An accident happens. The family is aware of societal rules and realize they have to cover up. No movement past step one, even aggressive measures to avoid step two.
2) This case / The incident happens. Immediately gears kick in to prevent step two, but because the 'offender' is connected, or for whatever reason, tentative measures indicate the possibility of step two. However the primary requisite of step two, a variation of what Jung called temenos, is quickly eliminated by journalists who feel they must 'protect society by stifling individual development', and by excessively role playing police.
3) Historical legends, like Jesus and Milarepa referred to on another page. Step one, the 'passage rite' adolescent mischief by those characters. Step two, a retreat in which the 'mistakes' are corrected. Step three, etc.
Once the trend reaches a certain point, the population has become so dumbed down that the decay accelerates.
Here are two examples of how the benefits of 'responsibility', but without its substance, slowly transfer to a bureaucracy which then has more and more need to control.
Although the Soviet Union is considered an extreme example, the United States is likely to go much further.
In order to understand the difference in this series a person has to notice a few pieces of evidence, as well as be aware of some background items.
Background item #1) Humans have a number of symmetries.
For example the first symmetry most people notice is left/right. If you compare the left and right of a person they generally appear to radiate from a center which provides the same material in both directions.
A second symmetry in humans is top/bottom. The spine makes a half turn in the neck which creates a symmetry which is more recent and less developed than the first symmetry. This can be figured out by looking at stroke victims or other means.
So a person would ask, 'Are there more symmetries, or does nature count only to two, then stop?'
To get from the first symmetry to the second is not really that easy, but the second symmetry leaves a signature i.e., the half twist. So, looking for further symmetries a person can start with the 'archetype' of the half twist the spinal cord makes.
In a killing like this, generally 'school shooters' or similar types, there is a pretty common thread i.e., the initial root appears to be a boy within a certain age range. In other words they are at the age of a 'rite of passage' which is within the same archetype as 'the half twist' on the spinal cord.
Both ends away from the archetypal 'half twist' are slow areas, developed, drawn out. The half twist itself, for example the 'half twist' or a 'passage rite' in comparison is condensed. From other things a person can deduce that it is not 'condensed' because it is lesser, it is condensed through some quirk in its evolution, and this 'condensed' artefact in fact itself radiates, or tries to expand.
Evidence Item #1) The boy's father has a distinctive moustache
This is significant because a) the killings took place at an age of 'rite of passage', and b) the moustache gives a clue as to how the boy was raised with regard to traditional safeguards meant to minimize 'original ingenuity' by people in passage rites.
Background item #2) In psychology, for example, there is an unspoken 'credibility' associated with dispassion.
In fact the credibility is so great, and the resulting scrutiny so low, that it is a common feature of mainstream psychological frauds to fake dispassion. It is part of the algorithm to pass yourself off as an expert. This is similar to the fake behaviorist who has a secret desire to control and thus creates or furthers academic behaviorism. It's an easy way to 'mint your own diploma' and get ahead.
Unfortunately, the credibility associated with fake dispassion is a product of the sacrificing of the irrational side of science, so it is not just common in psychology, it extends to everything.
Relevant to this case, the father's artistic moustache is his 'dispassion' or his 'fake diploma'. It gives a picture of an element of the background the boy grew up within, which would have influence.
Evidence item #2) Papillon is largely a red herring
It was part of the boy's path, and may have influenced the specific act he selected, but it was one of many factors and not one of the top ten. It's significant though for the false trail it leaves. Anybody with an agenda can pick up this or that item, for example watching Papillion, and turn it into a money maker.
5) Why do groups like the Amish reject vaccines?
Is it 'fear' of new things or an awareness of patterns in certain types of new things?
6) The psychology of 'interior' vs 'frontier' melting pots is different
Britain and Japan are the two frontier melting pots which 'met' in WWII, and 'established' the 'fact' that indigenous Americans were not a part of the global scene.
Today, melting pots on the East/West frontier are a lot bolder because they stand to lose a lot more.
Russia is somewhere in between. Geographically they extend to the frontier, in fact a person could argue that if Indigenous Americans actually exist then Russia is the only frontier nation. But in fact, in terms of geopolitical realities, Indigenous Americans do not exist at the moment.
Anyway, the psychology of 'local' melting pots, vs 'frontier' areas is very different, and it is not clear where Russia falls in that mix.
The United States has used the fantasy connection between 'wealth' and 'liberty' to convince simpler Ukrainians that they should invest in the declining side, rather than move further 'away' from either side. Wealth and liberty are connected, but it has nothing to do with any specific country.
Today the United States is 'helping' Ukraine in its bid to move to Western Europe.
But the Russians have never offered any similar help to the many nations under daily attack from the United States?
Russia now has to choose between doing the right thing, and fracturing with Western Europe.
So far there are no true 'federated' melting pot countries in the world, where 'melting potters' or 'corporate types' federate homogenous groups with the interest of preserving them. Instead the goal has been bigger and bigger melting pots trying to pass themselves off as homogenous.
China has so far been an 'interior' melting pot, and the psychology of its strategies has reflected that.
That may be changing.
Britain got to the top of the heap entirely through a mix of brinksmanship and bluff, which is fine, but it also established global norms for melting pot expansion. Social factors in China may soon cause China to become the hazardous entity that Britain tried to be.
7) The psychological effects of oil consortium machinations in Europe will echo for generations
In this case Germany was maneuvered easily because of a lingering 'conquered' mentality which, slowly, will find a target.
8) Is 'Muslim' the new 'conservative'?
There are a lot of recent articles on the Jeffrey Epstein accuser accepting $500,000 from Epstein to settle 'all future lawsuits against anybody connected to Epstein'. Most of the articles tread carefully to avoid offending the fake 'child protection mafia'. The reality though is that most people feel a bit awkward supporting an accuser who settled for so much money and now appears to want more under the claimed motive of 'helping victims'.
There are plenty of real abuse victims, and the appearance is that this person is being used to discredit real victims with the help of the 'mainstream', though it is very risky for a journalist to say that.
Now, a NYT article headlined "Woman Suing Prince Andrew for Abuse Settled With Epstein for $500,000" which sounds a bit too blunt for an outlet like the NYT.
The article is by https://twitter.com/karenzraick
The Epstein saga is clearly being managed by a powerful group, and the initial legal proceedings, before the Miami Herald exposed them, are full of evidence that the U.S. government's full force was being used to protect Epstein and others who were accused.
Whether Zraick is another shill being used in this process i.e., by dangling journalistic success in front of her like a carrot, isn't clear, but on general terms she seems to be part of a growing group of Muslims in the U.S. who support the 'sensible' side of issues and are bound to conflict with the 'alt right', which does the same.
9) There have been an abundance of articles quietly suggesting laboratory origins for Coronavirus
Even articles almost explicitly saying it.
10) The old legal standard of 'Could they be guilty?' or 'Can they prove they are innocent?' is being articulated more in the U.S., as it was in the early decay of the Soviet Union