Admit You’re Wrong, Or Die

Todd Hayen

OK, so maybe (maybe) not so dramatic as that, but come on people, alright already, you’re wrong, admit it and start what you need to do to heal!

With people dropping left and right, diseases and cancer on the rise, excess deaths, heart issues, clotting, if many people don’t actually admit they are wrong they may die, or at the very least, eventually get very sick.

Sure, we don’t know the extent of the danger of these experimental drugs. But we do know they are not what they have been cracked up to be. Most of the people still following this lying agenda (safe and effective? Was this ever the truth?) simply cannot admit they were wrong.

I honestly believe they would rather die, in a lot of cases, than admit their error. I am a psychotherapist, and have seen hundreds of couples in marriage counselling. It is so rare, at least in the first sessions, for either party to admit they are wrong about just about anything. If I am successful with them, they will begin to back down, but it takes a lot of work.

What is this? I am a pretty old guy, and I do remember a time when people were more flexible. Sure, no one likes to admit they’re wrong, but they actually used to do that, at least occasionally.

When I was a Hollywood film composer, writing music to The New Lassie, one of the producers would occasionally disagree with my music choices (producers are wont to do that, disagree).

But I loved this guy because he would always say to me, “I don’t really like what you did there, do you?” Of course I did, I wrote it. So usually I would say, “Well, yes, I do like it, I think it fits the scene well.” He would seldom insist I change something, but rather would ask me to pitch my choice. “Tell me why I should like it.”

I always had a good explanation, and very often he would sit there and stare at me for a moment after I had explained why the music was excellent. “Hmmm,” he would often mutter, rubbing his chin. “OK, that makes sense to me, let’s leave it.”

Anyone reading this who worked or currently works in the film biz knows that what I just described is a rather unusual scene. Producers, at least in the music end of things, very seldom give in to a composer.

The point I am making here though is that people really did at one time change their mind about things. Maybe my producer boss wasn’t admitting he was “wrong” (music is a very subjective medium) but certainly could change his mind. He was flexible, and most importantly, he would let me explain my position. And if he saw something in my explanation that made sense to him, he would relent and shift positions.

Forget that now. It ain’t happening.

It is what I try to teach my couples in therapy: be more flexible, do not be so rigid, try to see another perspective. Couple’s therapy deals with a lot of subjectivity as well. So, it makes a bit of sense that people in relationships see things differently from their partners.

But what we have been dealing with during this Covid era is not subjective at all. It is black and white, truth and lies, life and death. And people are insanely sticking to their own narrative, which is just a reflection of the mainstream narrative—like snapping turtles who won’t let go until lightning strikes, and I doubt if, in this case, lightning will do a damn thing.

I suspect there are a lot of circumstantial reasons for this stubbornness. I fall back here on Desmet’s theory about mass formation. The powerful thought form egregore could also have its influence if you believe such things (I do). And needless to say the mainstream narrative has been relentless in driving all of this into the hearts and souls (and heads) of those who are susceptible to such brainwashing.

I will stick to the idea that much of this resistance to absorbing the evidential truth and changing minds accordingly has to do with a decades-long priming. People in general no longer know up from down—as they blindly navigate the bizarre-o streets of the 2000s. Not much that their senses pick up is automatically, as it used to be, identified accurately.

Instead, the identification can be easily confused. I mean, every photo we see could be photoshopped to appear to be anything under the sun. We have even seen this technology applied to video and audio and have no idea if we can even trust a recorded speech from a politician or anyone else who has the intention to deceive.

We have been bombarded by commercials for decades that only the weakest mind trusts to be truth. Nothing is real. Our senses can’t tell us a thing we can trust. I even wonder sometimes if the actual scenery I gaze upon while taking a walk in the neighbourhood has not been digitally manipulated (ha ha).

Certainly, we can no longer believe anything we see in the cinema or on television. Used to be that real human beings executed stunts, which made the event spectacular and jaw-dropping. CGI has taken over digitally, and synthetically, painting nearly every scene in a film. Even the actors may be fake.

Everything else is fake; nothing is to be believed at face value. Anything our senses are asked to evaluate as evidence is rejected as such, like in a magic show. Nothing can be trusted anymore, until some certain type of authority says it can be. There’s the catch.

Who or what can do this? As per dozens of articles you may read, it is the great skill of the “powers that be” at the head of all this psychological manipulation. And it makes things easier that the masses fall for it all, hook, line, and sinker. And I’ll tell ya, once they’ve got ‘em, they’ve got ‘em for life. Or so it seems.

If you have nearly no system of determining reality (your senses and common sense), and have never been taught to critically think so you can ascertain truth with a blindfold on, then you are going to be looking for someone to whisper in your ear to describe what it is you are looking at but cannot see.

Some of us at least. Not all.

So who is bestowed this great honour and thus becomes the chosen one to help the blind see? There are a lot of theories on that, but I believe the people who have obtained this exalted position have become much like a mother duck who gets her ducklings to follow only her around. Imprinting—being in the right place at the right time, and continuously being told by others that the imprint is legit and you indeed are following around the true, and trustworthy, momma duck.

Now, this could happen to any of us, anyone can easily decide that the wisdom, intelligence, and charisma of a leader or expert or authority is the way to go. But sheep are the only ones that seem to get imprinted.

Shrews don’t. If some other piece of information comes forth with sound evidential support, we drop our connection with the one that contradicts facts and truth and find a new duck to follow, or just follow our own light. Sheep get imprinted, and there is nothing that can drag them away. That momma duck can lead them anywhere, and if she is nasty, she can lead them all the way to their death.

Todd Hayen is a registered psychotherapist practicing in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He holds a PhD in depth psychotherapy and an MA in Consciousness Studies. He specializes in Jungian, archetypal, psychology. Todd also writes for his own substack, which you can read here

SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN

If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.

For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.