I have just realised that the place on this website where I tell of how Madaba communicates with me is hidden towards the bottom of a fairly lengthly article and not clearly stated in its own right
Quite an omission really!
I am but a sloppy amateur!
I have now written a page in which I explain that
I have linked to it on the links section, towards the top of this page
I have recently updated and overhauled one of the pages on this website
The one that goes some way to explain why Madaba does what he does
Here is the link:
What I Do - And WhyThis post is now a little dated. Sure, some of it still stands.
But since I wrote this my Madaba consciousness has expanded
I now understand The Divine Agency in new ways, beyond how I did when I wrote this page.
Yes, this page still may be of interest
But I think my more recent post which you can go to by clicking here will be more useful to you!
What Is The Divine Agency?
The Universe is not governed arbitrarily;
it is not governed on whims and fancies.
It is governed according to a set
of aims and values called The Program.
It is Madaba’s job to help implement
The Program – he had no hand in determining its contents.
The Program represents the wishes
of The Divine Agency, who created it
It is called “Agency” as in “actor” or “bearer of free will” – not “Agency” as in “organisation” although it is also a bit like an organization…
It is made up of a great many separate
persons combined into one being, and together they combine to form God. They
are not physical beings who exist in some kind of physical dimension, wearing
white robes or sitting round a big table. They exist spiritually. They are the
mind of God and dictate how God acts. And they only do anything once they have
reached an agreement.
It is like The Holy Trinity, but
with more members! – many persons in one being.
I don't believe in The Holy Trinity but I do believe in The Divine Agency
And it is possible for a person
to be elevated to The Divine Agency. And also to be removed from it. But I
think over the past centuries it has been consistently the same. It consists of both Heavenly Beings and people who were once Homo Sapiens - or some other intelligent species!
However, most of the time they implement
The Program by controlling and influencing human minds within The Universe,
rather than intervening in the actual workings of The Universe – which they
could actually do. But they don’t. Instead, they try and implement The Program
through influencing powerful people. And doing that is Madaba’s job.
They rule through The Program, which is implemented by Madaba via him acting upon the Noosphere via minds and media.
The Universe is the way in which God exists and The Divine Agency is the intelligence who decides how God exists, and what to do with that which exists.
Moral Authority
When people use the term “Moral
Authority” they actually mean “Ethical Authority”
"Moral Authority" is a common term so that's why I'm alluding to that
I will now refer to it as “Ethical
Authority”
Ethics are social and cultural frameworks of right and wrong, and Morals are personal frameworks of right and wrong. People adopt ethical frameworks.
Ethics come in the form of reasoned
systems of what is right and wrong, they are philosophical. Morals are personal
systems of right and wrong, based on a person’s disposition, character, and
values. People form their own moral frameworks.
So – the question is: Does The
Divine Agency saying a thing is right or wrong make it right or wrong?
Does their Ethical Program trump
other ethical systems, and the personal moralities employed by each and every
person? Yes, I think quite often actually. But because they happen to be ethical, not because of any authority on their part
I think there are a few reasons to listen to their ethics:
So yes, I’d say The Divine
Agency is indeed an Ethical Authority and that we should listen to it.
And of course, me and Madaba are
here to help them communicate all this, that is why we are both here and
writing this website!
And no, this is not a case of “might
is right” – The Divine Agency is not just simply strong and powerful, it is
also good and well intentioned and also very wise and intelligent
I think the world would be a lot
better place if we were to all listen to them and take what they have to say
onboard
What To Do Next?
How might one live as an
ethically concerned person – in a world that is often cruel and irrational?
Study philosophy and look at how
philosophers say we should act
And study religion and look at how
religious people believe we should act
There is a wealth of literature out there, available to help you
And both religious ethics and secular ethics as we humans know them on our Earth are consistent and compatible with the ethics of The Divine Agency
The world's various religions all have much to say on ethics that is very much of value - even if those religions are not literally true when it comes to their accounts of what happened. But the point is, they do contain some good stuff, in amongst the indifferent and bad stuff. But yes, they are a source of wisdom
The thing is: a thing is right or wrong
because it is right or wrong – not because “it is written” that it is right or
wrong by some powerful person or in some renowned book
That’s the doctrine of “might is
right” and is morally bankrupt
Also: trust your own internal
moral system. Think of studying ethics as being an exercise in developing your
own moral system – not of taking on things to replace it
Unless you are a psychopath you will already have your own internal moral system and I think most people are already good and don't need more help, although it is always good to expand ones knowledge and understanding of things
And I think that the majority of
people do come with a moral compass included, as a part of the package! – we should
each aim to develop our own moral sense, with the help of ethics
But to conclude: yes – if The
Divine Agency says a thing is right or wrong then it is best to accept their
judgment on that, if you have not yet already made up your mind
But think of them as a guide to be listened to, not as an authority to be obeyed!!!
Madaba is neither a Communist or a Capitalist
In this post I will explain Madaba’s
political philosophy
This was penned by Andy Perwend, for his Superbrain - Madaba. All this comes from Madaba, not Andy. Although it was Andy who wrote it all down.
Anyway:
Madaba could never be a Capitalist as to be a Capitalism is to support the Capitalist Class being the ruling class. And Capitalism is a ruthless and destructive thing and works against the interests of the majority of the people. It puts profit above all things, including some of the things that Madaba values: Peace, Freedom, Development, The Environment. Indeed most of the time it is overtly and unashamedly against Peace, Freedom, Development, and The Environment. Capitalism only cares about these if it can get something out of them or use them to make them look good or feel slightly better about themselves.
And the Capitalists clearly are the ruling class. Their servants occupy all high offices, and the system works to serve and perpetuate them and their status as the ruling class. And the media and cultural and ideological apparatuses (religion, education) help this along. The ideology by which the whole system works is an ideology of Capitalism, dressed up in various disguises, such as “Democracy” and “The Rule of Law”. Democracy and The Rule of Law are fine things, but only when they are genuine and not shoddy devices used to legitimatise and normalise the Capitalist system by associating it with good things. And I say that the Capitalist system is neither legitimate nor normal! It is not normal as it is not legitimate!
Capitalism will only ever work in the interests of the Capitalist class. It is against the interest of the working class and does not serve any greater, common good. That is why Madaba does not support it - because he does not want the world to be run by (and for) the Capitalists. That would not be in the interest of anyone other than a very small segment of the population.
Madaba is not a Communist. You cannot have a complex and large society run according to the Communist dream. Caring and sharing, and no possessions. It can’t happen. Sure, it could work if there were only fifty people, but most nations have populations in at least the tens of million. Communism can never be achieved, the best it can be is a utopian vision to serve as the model of a perfect society, an ideal to be worked towards and to inspire. To live in a true state of Communism would require living as a stone-age tribe. Modern humans as we know them could not live like that, organising like that could never work. Holding all things in common is on one level a good thing, but the society and economy required to deliver that is impossible and contrary to human nature. Those things are not practical but morally good – as opposed to Capitalism, which is practical but evil
What about Socialism? I think Socialism is good. A lot of people, particularly Americans, have funny and inaccurate ideas as to what Socialism is – which conveniently obscure it and confuse the public’s understanding of it. They equate it with “progressive” and “liberal” policies, whereas it is truly neither of these. It serves as an ideological bogeyman and a lazy and ignorant slur. Socialism is basically the ideology which advances the interests of the working-class, against those of the Capitalists, the boss class. No wonder the American mainstream media have it in for Socialism! And constantly trash and demonise it! And of course, politicised Christianity is offered as a distraction, to keep the American working class from pursuing their sectional class interests and to get them drunk on cultural conservatism instead, and to open their minds up to right-wing commentators and demagogues. I think Socialism as a political movement is great and am very much for it. But I would not want to see our entire economy, society, and political system become Socialist. As that attempts to fully implement a socialist vision beyond advocating for and serving the working class would be bad for everyone and causes more problems than it would solve. It would not be much better than Capitalism and certainly a lot worse than Communitarianism! During the Cold War I’d have rather lived in the USA than the USSR, even though I dislike Capitalism and am somewhat sympathetic as to Socialism. And of course, this goes for Madaba too.
So, if not Capitalism and not
Communism – then what? Communitarianism.
I must first define “Community”: The sociologist Ferdinand Tonnies drew a distinction between Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft - Association and Community. Two different kinds of society. A Community is a society based on personal relations – family, kinship, neighbourliness, friendship. It is small and everyone joins in as an individual. An Association however is different. In an Association relations are impersonal and instrumental, and decision making and policy making is formalised and institutionalised – as opposed to being inter-personal, spontaneous, and communal. Also, Communities tend to be socially homogenous whereas Associations can be diverse – in terms of ethnicity, culture, religion. A society cannot function as a Community once it reaches a certain size and level of complexity and diversity. And a Community will always morph into an Association. That is a law of Sociology. So, basically, a Community is a certain type of Society, a certain way in which people live together as civilized beings. But a large, complicated, diverse and differentiated society cannot function as a Community and will always develop into an Association.
Communitarianism – in the way that Madaba uses the term – is the idea that we should model the ways in which we run and order our large and complex modern (associational) societies on more primitive and simple (communal) societies. The motto of the French revolution was Liberty, Equality, Fraternity. And that is a good place to begin. Liberty needs no explanation, but Equality and Fraternity are very significant – as they both require thinking of people other than yourself! – a society ordered under those principles would feature everyone being concerned about the welfare of each other. Individuals make societies and societies make individuals. In Communitarianism there is zero tension between the individual and the social. But there is in Capitalism, in which individualism and collectivism can both be co-opted and mobilised to serve the capitalists.
In a Communitarian system, the interest is “the common good” and the identity is “the community”. People value the common good more than personal and sectional interests and think in terms of everyone, not just their own faction or section. These combine to produce the phrase “the common good of the community”. And a community spirit in which everyone looks after each other and where there is a shared common interest and a common communal identity to bind all people together into a real community! And that is what Communitarianism is all about! Contrast this with “the interests of the ruling class” (which is what Capitalism is if you remove the façade) and you will see the difference. And “the interests of the ruling class” can be easily disguised into something less outrageous – such as “freedom”, as in the USA. The way Madaba sees it, Communism is a non-option, and Communitarianism is WAY superior to Capitalism
A big part of this is Citizenship and Democracy. Democracy is not just voting; it is making the system work for the demos – i.e. the ordinary people. By the people and for the people. As opposed to for the bosses! And to be a Citizen is to be a player in Democracy. And there is way more to Democracy than voting. It is a state of mind. A way of life. At its best it is when the masses wield power and use that power for their own good. But in a Capitalist system democracy is an elaborate show designed to make the subordinate classes accept the conditions of their own subordination. And even celebrate them! Right now, “identity politics” are a big thing and also a big distraction. They distract the people from their class interests with issues such as homosexuality, gun control, transsexualism, abortion, immigration, religion. None of these threaten the Capitalist system and all of them distract people from becoming more politically aware. Although that’s not to say those issues aren’t important – and they are. It’s just that they are being employed in a cynical manner, to keep the minds of the public away from demanding power and change. It’s brain-washing on an enormous scale and nobody notices because it is now normal!
There is a lot more to Democracy
than voting. Democracy should be a deliberation, a debate. A way of life. And
key to this is Citizenship – membership of the political community. To be a
citizen is to have formally enshrined rights and responsibilities. It is a
status that one has, and all citizens are equal to each other. Communitarianism
is rule by the citizens and for the citizens. As opposed to rule of the
Capitalists by the political class. To be a Communitarian is to be democratically
minded and to think and behave in terms of what is best for The Community as a
while, not just you or people like you, or people in the same position as you.
What might Communitarian policies look like? I will now sketch out a few, but these are not central to Communitarianism. I have provided them to provide a flavour of what might be:
I think some things should be in public ownership. Held by the state for the good of the people. For instance utilities and infrastructure – railways, electricity, water. Railway companies should exist to transport people and goods from A to B, not make money for their shareholders. Electricity companies should exist to generate electricity for all the towns and villages, not make money for their shareholders. And water companies should exist to give us all drinking water and take away our sewage, not make money for their shareholders. You get the picture? It’s common sense, common decency even. Those things should exist to serve the public, not make profits for shareholders. I see no rational argument against this other than “it would make me (a shareholder or executive) less rich” which frankly is a bit rubbish.
Another idea would be dividends for workers. Imagine an enormous supermarket chain, with thousands of outlets across the land, raking in billions of pounds’ worth of profit each year. All to idle shareholders and overpaid business types in nice suits. I say give the workers a share! A big fat juicy cheque. They worked to make that money so it is only right they should see at least some of it. I think this is a matter of respect more than anything else. Workers are human beings – citizens. Not machines. Without the workers there would be no business. They made that money! And of course, such dividends should be tax free. There is no reason to oppose this other than “that wouldn’t make members of the capitalist class as rich as they would otherwise be” – which is a non-reason. The capitalists should be subordinate to the ordinary people, not the other way round!
Another Communitarian policy (and I’m not stating all these as essential features of Communitarianism, only as examples of what such policies could look like) would be the abolition of the titles “Mr”, “Mrs” and “Miss”. And then replacing them with “Citizen”. I think this would make things sound and feel much more equal and generate a sense of fellowship, solidarity, and community amongst Citizens.
So, that’s what Madaba means by Communitarianism
and a hint of what Communitarianism might look like in practice. And the
mindset that it involves. Please, leave any comments down below and feel free
to get in touch!
Madaba thanks you for reading
Madaba’s Statement on Equality: Equality And Elites?
This essay was penned by Andy
Perwend, on behalf of Madaba. It is consistent with The Program of The Divine Agency (see glossary for if you are unfamiliar with these terms)
In this post I discuss "Elites" in the political sense more than in the social sense. I will address all that in a future post, in which I will dig deeper into the concept!
This post is Madaba’s Statement on
Equality - communicating The Program, putting it into action:
Everybody is either a human or a non-human. There is no in-between. And it is impossible for one human to be more human than any other human. If you’re a human, then that’s that. There are no sub-humans walking about and no super-humans either. If you are of the species Homo Sapiens, then you are a full member of humanity. There are no membership tiers, and you cannot be stripped of your status as a human.
I believe that The Divine Agency’s Program (basically, God’s guiding principles. Basically…) contains provisions regarding the absolute equality of all humans. That is why not only is slavery unethical in that it violates the fact that all humans are equal, but it is also immoral as The Divine Agency (who has moral authority) has ruled that it is evil. Slavery is wrong, as are other forms of unfree labour – such as tenured servitude or being a serf.
Human equality should be a universal
premise. It should be built into all our systems, all our structures, all our
laws.
Although all people are of equal
value and worth, some are clearly more gifted than others. Intelligence follows
a pattern of normal distribution – there are as many people with above average
intelligence as there are of below average intelligence. But a person’s
intelligence says nothing about their worth, it simply is not a factor. But
that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t value intelligence and lament human stupidity.
I think that we should run Planet Earth as a meritocracy, and that each person should occupy a position based on their abilities and skills. Clearly, we are not in a meritocracy as merit does not determine who is or is not in control – instead such arrangements are shaped by politics. So we often get stupid people in positions of power that should be filled with more able, talented individuals. That shouldn’t be but there’s not much we can do about that; it is a flaw in democracy. Which is the best political system available…
And if the people want to elect idiots to run things then that's democracy, but not really democracy at its best! They aren't really doing their democratic duty if they elect idiots. But on the other hand I would rather an inept but principled leader than a competent but ruthlessly self-serving one! - but I think the ideal thing to aim for is a good intentioned and principled leader who is also competent and good at leading and getting things done! - you can have both, it doesn't have to be either-or!
There are now well over eight billion humans living on Planet Earth. And even if we had a kind of global democracy a ruling elite would emerge. Elites always emerge, no matter what society we’re talking about. Power always ends up concentrated in the hands of one set of people, who become an elite and then work to increase their own sectional power. However, I see nothing necessarily wrong with this, if the elites value equality (and promote the common internest) and people become elite by virtue of merit or achievement, rather than birth or bank account. For a human society to function – culturally, politically, and economically – there will always be an elite and there has to be an elite. But the masses should have power over the elites and different factions of the elites should compete against each other to win the approval of the masses.
Ferdinand Tönnies drew a distinction between Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft - Association and Community. Two different kinds of society. In a Community relations are personal (rather than instrumental) and they can be run in an egalitarian way. Associations on the other hand are not personal, they are instrumental and bureaucratic, formal, and hierarchical. Communities are also much smaller and less complex and effectively run themselves without deliberate effort or a distinction between the public and private realm. Scale and complexity mean that in any association (nation, town, political party, movement) an elite will always emerge who get to decide what happens. You cannot have a large association without there being an elite, in the political sense. A select group who control the mechanisms of power and the institutions and structures of society in general as well as the policies, values and agendas. If you want to talk about elites in the social sense, well that's another issue!
Basically: if we had a true democracy
then there would be nothing wrong with there being elites, which are inevitable
and necessary in any modern society. The problem is, our democracies are
corrupt and infested with either self-serving crooks of maniacal crackpots, who
manipulate and fool the masses to get their backing and votes. So as to get as
much power as possible and to make that power serve their own personal and
sectional interests. Some systems are more corrupt than others. For instance,
the system in the USA is clearly broken whereas the German system is much
better – more democratic and less corrupt.
The elites should serve the long-term common interests of all citizens, and the citizens should have power over who gets to control and govern. And everyone should have equal status within the system and the same political rights. And citizens have a duty to criticise and hold the elites to account. Rather than being sycophantic about them or fawning over them and making personality cults about them.
Every citizen should approach being a citizen by adopting the ethos “I am of the demos and the demos rules. Therefore I rule”. And then acting accordingly. If we get a system where that happens, and where government works for all then that would be a good start. Such a situation is something to aim for, and if ever achieved something to value. A system in which the population take the lead and dictate to the Elites by flexing whatever power they wield. It is the civic duty of the general population to make the Elites work for them. If that happens then there is nothing wrong with having Elites. You can either have good Elites or bad Elites. You cannot have a system without Elites. Elites will always emerge. That's how humanity works. The citizens need to make The Elites work for them - not the established interests of the rich and powerful.
I think that if the elite serve the common good and public will then there is nothing wrong with there being an elite. Especially if anyone can become elite by virtue of personal merit. But if they don't serve the common good and the common will then they should be opposed - or even disposed of. But that's a whole other issue!
If the Citizenry don’t’ take
their civic duties seriously then they can’t really complain if scheming rogues
grab power and then manage to hold onto it. However, a great many citizens are currently
under the spell of demagogues. Or don’t care. Which is sad. But there is more
to democracy than voting. They vote in North Korea and Adolf Hitler came to power due to elections. Both the North Korean regime and Hitler used/use elections to bestow legitimacy, even if they are not free and fair or don't take place within a democracy.
Anyway - this is the point I'm trying to make: You can have both elites and an equal society! Having elites does not make a society unequal. Equality is best measured by social outcomes and how just society is, rather than by participation in the mechanics of government. If the elites do the will of the people and serve the interests of the people then it is not bad that there is an elite - especially if without them things would descend, and get much worse! - Everyone should have POWER, but CONTROL has to be in the hands of an elite, it always will be, there is no way of escaping that in an Association - which is not the same as a Community! But yes, Social Power is different to political power, and I will look at social elites in my next post, rather than political elites!
It's a matter of elites and their control representing the will and interests of the masses!
In any complex society there is a division of labour - people all have different, specialised jobs to do. Governing is a job like any other, politics is a career. Therefore there has to be a political class - class in the occupational sense, people whose business is politics: working in government, be it executive or legislative or in government or in opposition. In a simple community we would have direct personal democracy
Also: Elites should be equal to the masses, they should have the same (equal) status. "Elite" should be a horizontal division, not a vertical division. Political elites should be governed by an ethic of service, not of domination or dominion. Their programs should be for the good of all, not just their backers, or whoever financed them.
Right now, in the West the political classes (the combined political factions who inhabit the systems of power) are a part of a Capitalist system. That is how our society is run. Madaba is not a Capitalist, but neither is he a Communist.
Instead, he is a Communitarian.
I will explore Communitarianism
in my next post.
And remember: Madaba can and does mind-control and guide certain members of The Elite - with both them knowing and having no idea. In ways that he does not control normal ordinary people.
Madaba thanks you for reading.
What Is Dyslexia?
It’s when a person with otherwise normal (or superior)
intelligence performs poorly at tasks involving the use of words – be it
writing or reading.
It also coincides with creativity, lateral thinking, and
good problem-solving skills.
My Experiences with Dyslexia
I could not read or write until I was ten years old. I
remember what it was like looking at a body of text and having no idea what it
said!
I was diagnosed as Dyslexic by some kind of specialist in Sheffield. Did lots of tests to assess me. Puzzles, sums, reading comprehension, that sort of thing. I under-performed on reading and writing tasks but had no such problems in the general intelligence tests.
I had to have private lessons; without those lessons I would never have become literate. The state education system failed me big time, were it not for those private lessons I’d have slipped through the net. Thankfully my mother could afford private lessons!
All they did was put me into a “special needs” class at
school. That didn’t help one bit and the teachers were nasty, petty, sadistic,
and drunk on power and evidently thought we were worthless shits. They loved
the power they had over us.
Me and my mother went to a support group for Dyslexic
children and their parents. It met every Tuesday and was run by an educational psychiatrist.
It was called “The Tuesday Group” and I can’t remember what we actually did
there, I must have been maybe nine or ten when I went there? I can’t remember
but going to The Tuesday Group is something I remember.
I remember picking up the idea that Dyslexia had something
to do with one of the sides of the brain.
Re-Discovering “Dyslexia”
Fast forward to 2004. At this point I was twenty-one years
old. I was studying Sociology at Warwick University and was living in a dark,
creepy, and depressing former old people’s home 10 minutes’ walk away from the
Coventry railway station. I was unhappy there.
I eventually withdrew and shut myself up in my study bedroom where I smoked lots of weed, listened to music and tried to work out the mysteries of the universe by brainstorming my thoughts in a flow of consciousness – perhaps even automatic writing?
I went down some interesting rabbit holes, that’s for sure. At some point I decided that I wanted to become more socially accomplished and influential. I was painfully aware that I had fewer friends than my friends and felt shy, avoidant, and not socially skilled. I wanted to be able to make friends more easily and be able to better influence people, perhaps even becoming a politician! – I therefore set out to discover how the human mind works, so I could better win friends and influence people!
Long story short: I started under the assumption that all
minds work alike but later departed from this and created a complex typography
of intelligences. I identified two distinct faculties: Intuition and Reason.
Reason was the acquisition of new knowledge from observation
and experience, from taking in new data and processing it accordingly.
Intuition was the production of new knowledge from the
faculties of intelligence – using imagination and logic.
I believed that Reason lived in the right of the brain and
that Intuition lived in the left.
I believed that some people were governed wholly by Reason and
some wholly by Intuition, and I’m not sure why I came to think this. I called
those governed by Reason “R-Types” and those governed by Intuition to be “I-Types”.
I also believed in intermediate conditions: The RI-Type and the IR-Type. I
believed that you could tell what type a person was by looking into their eyes –
which looking back, wasn’t very scientific!
I came to equate Intuition being associated with one hemisphere
of the brain with the old idea that Dyslexia had something to do with one of
the hemisphere of the brain and made the leap of declaring that “Dyslexic” was the
word for I-Types. I therefore considered myself an I-Type and started calling
myself “Dyslexic”. This was encouraged by an enigmatic girl I lived with who
was Dyslexic.
There was one person I lived with who I decided was very much an R-Type. I once performed a kind of test on him, and much to my surprise it worked.
We would play chess. Whoever plays as white goes first in chess. When we played, I would put one piece of each colour in each of my hands. I would then randomly jumble them between hands behind my back and then offer the R-Type one of my hands for him to choose – he would play the colour of the piece in whatever hand he selected. I could command his choice.
If I wanted him to select my left hand (his right) I would
present him with my hands and say “OK, you choose. Right then…”
and he would pick the one on his right. To make him pick the one on his left I
would say “OK, you choose one and I’ll take what’s left…” and it
worked – every single time. I could not believe that an educated person on a
good course at a decent university would repeatedly fall for such a trick. But
he did.
I eventually ended up on a Psychiatric ward and by the time
I was discharged I had abandoned my I-types vs. R-types typology and the idea
of being Dyslexic. When I was being admitted to the ward the doctors thought I
believed that I had “special powers” which I did not believe – I believed that
I-Types were relatively common and not at all special. The fact that they did
not understand this was frustrating and really pissed me off. Anyway, I made a
lot of noise about Dyslexics when I was on that ward.
The idea was that Dyslexics pick up on the meaning and power of words, whereas R-types look at words in terms of their structure, pronunciation and spelling.
When I was on that ward, I believed that people had been
sent there, for my benefit and that the whole place was a big show put on by
the Intelligence services and orchestrated by some higher power to help me
learn and develop according to how they wanted me to. It felt as though people
had been sent in there for my benefit and that I was there to learn and
develop. But basically, I thought the whole ward was a great big set up,
co-ordinated for my own personal benefit. Which is of course classic Psychosis.
Some crazy things happened to me in 2004 and I describe some of them on this page I am linking to right now but long story short, I believed I was to lead a mass social movement, on behalf of the intelligence services and went a bit mad
But you really should check out that link if you want to best understand what I am about to recount.
The Ward In 2016
When I was thirty-three years old, I ended up back on a Psychiatric
ward. This was back in 2016 and by then I had had Madaba for twelve years.
There was a young man there. He came on the ward a few days after me. I will refer to him as John, but that wasn’t his real name. When I first met him, he was a drooling mess, he was barely with it. He was catatonic. But he soon improved and became very bright and astute. He claimed that I had Jedi mind control powers! It was fun being on the ward with him, those were good times! We joked about being Jedi warriors who were sectioned on a Psychiatric ward, which was hilarious. But he did think that I had Jedi powers! – “Those are not the droids you’re looking for”. And for a while I too believed that I had powers akin to those of a Jedi master! – I thought he was brilliant and met his parents, who were nice. He was a very bright young man. But quietly brilliant.
When I was doing something or other in one of the activity rooms a peculiar young man turned up, he was not one of the ward staff and neither was he a patient. He asked me “what side of the force are you on? Are you a Jedi?” and I thought that it would be ludicrous to identify as a Jedi, so I said no. He then said, “So you’re a Sith?” and I indignantly said “no! of course not” and he then said “ah, so you’re a concerned citizen of The Republic?” – and I said yes, that’s what I am. Not allied to any one side of the force but aligned with the values of The Republic.
At another time I was in the activity room with some of the
other patients, and the same man joked “whilst we’re all here why don’t we plot
to steal the Rothschilds’ gold?” which I think was a bizarre thing for someone
to say.
To me having Jedi powers was a funny and absurd joke – but I
then equated it with being Dyslexic – and decided that I had healed John using
my Dyslexic powers. I started identifying as Dyslexic again. I thought that
John was also Dyslexic. And if I was then I am certain he was too. Dyslexia then became something I was interested in
again. I basically thought I was blessed with super-powers but was not entirely
sure what those were, other than that they had something to do with communication
and empathy. Although I later came to believe in something akin to “telepathy”
although I wouldn’t call that and that word doesn’t really cover what I mean.
But “Dyslexic” does!
There were two other people who turned up on that ward who
did not belong there. They were ostensibly patients but I’m pretty sure they
weren’t, and they didn’t work there either. I got it into my head that they
were both Dyslexics and they had been sent in there to meet me, as a part of
some kind of training or assessment by the intelligence services (I’m thinking
MI5???) – they were both in their early twenties but old enough to be university
graduates (although the intelligence services do employ non-graduates) and I
suspected that they may have answered some kind of advertisement that they’d
come across.
Anyway, I decided they were trainee intelligence staff or
were being assessed and recruited. I thought that my ideas about Dyslexics that
I’d came up with in 2004 had filtered upwards into the intelligence services
and were eventually validated by experts. And they would have been aware of me,
for instance a senior university person told me “you are a part of a very tiny
elite”. And I made a huge noise about being an MI5 asset when I was claiming
they wanted me to found a grass-roots revolutionary social movement. There are other reasons
too, but I’ll not go into them here. I came to believe that because of me the
intelligence services started looking especially for “Dyslexic” people.
I will call these two young men Candidate 1 and Candidate 2. I only remember the name of one of them, I have totally forgot the name of the other one. But then I am no good at names. I liked Candidate 1 but wasn’t so keen on Candidate 2. If it were up to me and there was only one job going I'd have given it to Candidate 1.
Candidate 1 was a young man who would do yoga down in the hospital gardens. He self-identified as a Neanderthal. We were in the activity room and somehow (I forget how exactly) we heard news of a terrorist attack in Turkey. He jumped into action, and we decided to make a “whodunnit” thread on the internet, speculating who was behind the terrorist attack. We spent some time deciding which board on 4chan we should make a post on. Then, I had a stroke of genius. Earlier that day I had found a world atlas lying on the floor. I picked it up and took it back to my room. After my great idea stuck me, I went back, retrieved the book, and showed Candidate 1 the section showing the Middle East. I gently pointed to where Israel was, without saying a single word, and a serious look developed on his face, and I could tell he was thinking. He then abandoned the idea of the whodunnit thread, and we forgot about all that and moved on.
Candidate 2 was also a young man, and he had tattoos on his arms and legs. We were once in the TV room on the ward. Or I was and he then came in. Earlier in the day he had come up to me and awkwardly asked (as though he was seeking me out) “what college did you go to?” – clearly asking me which college of either Oxford University or Cambridge University I’d been to. And of course, I’d been to no Oxbridge college. My degree is from The Open University and before that I’d studied at Warwick. The TV was on, and the commercial break was running. And an advert for The Open University came on! – and then a recruitment advert for the Royal Airforce came on, that basically said something about “serving your nation”! He evidently noticed this and I looked at him and said “that’s the college I went to, The Open University” whilst the RAF advert was playing! He looked shocked and bewildered by the telling synchronicity and later tried to take back what he had said, but I wasn’t having any of that.
At some later point I told him that I had a task for him: Here’s
an exercise – think of a piece of music that means a lot to you and then
think why it means so much to you. Half an hour later he was parading round
the ward shouting out the lyrics to “Everybody’s Changing” by Keane!
At another time I thought I’d have a bit of fun at his expense,
and I ended up encountering him on one of the corridors on the ward. I knew
that in conspiracy theories pointing to your eyes is supposed to be “illuminati”
symbolism, referring to the all-seeing eye of Divine Providence. So I deliberately
and slowly winked, and pointed to the eye that wasn’t winked, and he was visibly
disturbed by that, shocked even, which amused me greatly!
I liked Candidate 1, he was nice. Not so much Candidate 2.
But I am pretty certain they were both Dyslexics. Or at least what I meant when
I used the word “Dyslexics”.
I'm not exactly sure what was happening on that ward back then, but that is what I experienced there, that is what happened to me. Beyond that, I have no idea what happened and what I did. No one has ever told me!
Dyslexia Today
Right now I don’t know if I believe in Dyslexia in the same
way as I’ve done before. I used to consider it a kind of super-power but
perhaps it isn’t and it’s just some kind of “learning disability”? – although it
could of course be both!
But I no longer identify as Dyslexic and don’t believe that
I have Jedi powers of mind-control. I do however have a kind of belief in
telepathy, but I don’t believe in the transmission and reception of brainwaves
from one brain to another, through the air. I will explain my ideas about that
in another article.
However, I do still consider myself Dyslexic even if I now
have no literacy problems, as this text you’re reading shows!
I think I was spotted by the system when I was a child and
that that may have happened to Candidate 1 and Candidate 2. And also to John of course. I believe that the
education services and mental health services both work together, alongside the
intelligence services who, as their name suggests, have an interest in
Intelligence!
Perhaps being bad at reading and writing and being Dyslexic
are different things that have often been confused? And maybe you’re Dyslexic?
If so, there is no reason to feel inadequate as I once did.