Societal Self-Regulation

Todd Hayen

Any group of human beings who are supposedly in a free society and who have a leader (or a council of people who lead), assigned by that group to make decisions for the common interests of the group, must rely on their own “self-regulation,” above and beyond the leaders’ government, in order to survive.

This is imperative as a “check and balance” criterion for a healthy society.

In most democratic societies this is done through the elective process. People are put into power, and taken out of power if need be, through elections, i.e., the popular vote. The people have to keep a keen eye on what is happening in their communities, at the local level, and in their nations, at a national level. And of course, they must exercise due diligence concerning global happenings as well. Only then will they know who to vote for that best serves their community.

This is how we have control, albeit sometimes not enough, of our government. We have little control over non-government organizations (NGOs) through the elective process. But we do have control, again to some degree, on social norms, moralities, values, and other things that may grate against our own “community standards” as a mass, through protest and other demands for accountability. In this regard, our society is somewhat kept in check through a nation’s constitutional requirements, as well as our personal assertion as to what is “right” and what is “wrong.”

Human beings have traditionally been on the same page with some of these very basic tenets. For example, there are very few cultures, if any, that advocate, as a foundational tenet, murder. Very few, if any, that advocate child sexual abuse, or physical abuse (of course, what determines either one of these things can be rather subjective.)

Regardless of the outliers always present when making sweeping statements (which certainly there are, and a discussion of these outliers would take enormous time and attention), human beings share many fundamental tenets of “good humanness.”

Unless, of course, they are pushed away from these fundamental tenets by some external force—corrupt government, con men, evil…Satan. Some will say we have a natural tendency to turn to amoral ways (think Moses stepping out for a moment to collect the Ten Commandments and what then ensued).

That being said, what happens when a culture at large experiences, within that culture, something that deviates sharply from these tenets? The occurrence of such a deviation could come directly from the government, or come from the collective (or, in our current situation, appear to come from the collective, but in fact is an intentional deviation created by the agenda.)

The answer to the first question, in ideal times, is this: The culture doesn’t stand for it. They make their dissatisfaction clear, and they revolt, or at the very least, do not comply with the agenda. They say, “I’m mad as hell, and I am not going to take this anymore!”

Unfortunately, that time when our society would demonstrate such self-regulation is long past. We saw the last remnants of it during the Vietnam era in the United States—and only from a certain demographic of society—and certainly not that successfully.

Since then, the government, or whoever it is behind this march to oblivion, has made certain that such a “dissatisfaction with the policies” of the ruling faction was not questioned, and if it is, the person or group questioning is severely punished. One very smart move toward this gripping mind control was getting everyone glued to a cell phone screen. How “they” did that, and it not being just a natural evolution of technology, would take a book to address.

Despite the underlying reasons why we do not regulate as a society, the simple fact is we no longer do. There was a time, in a galaxy far, far, away, when the culture set these boundaries (if it were free to do so), and although the ruling class would attempt to cross them, they often failed. Today it is far more likely that boundaries can be crossed without even a glance from the masses. Today, they’ve got us eating out of their hands.

I will cite a few examples: Where is the societal outrage when people are forced to inject into their bodies a relatively unknown substance? Although the agenda gave “good reason” for such a thing, where was the evidence behind that reason? If any evidence came up contrary to the notion of a deadly virus killing the world and a vaccine being developed in eight months being “safe and effective,” it was quickly quelled by the powers that be and ruled to be “misinformation” and “dangerous.”

Where is the societal outrage when thousands of young people are suddenly seeking surgery and drugs to support the myth they have “misidentified” themselves based on what they are told is a lie about their biological identity? Where is the “I’m mad as hell” when “authority” determines that they are the final arbiters of truth over children, and their parents can just go to hell?

Where is the societal outrage when we are suddenly told that we will no longer be allowed to use cash, or that we have to carry a digital ID which will fundamentally wipe out any claim to personal autonomy, not to mention a complete destruction of personal privacy?

Where is the societal outrage when a government spends billions of dollars to support the killing of human beings in a “war” halfway across the world for no reason other than to fuel whatever nefarious, and unilateral, goals that government has?

Where is the societal outrage when large factions of unelected “people” decide to take over the governance of the world from lofty, and well-financed, institutions such as the UN, WHO, WEF, NATO, and locally, the FDA, and CDC?

Where is the societal outrage when a country’s government allows the illegal immigration of hundreds of thousands of people without any vetting whatsoever?

This is to name only a few examples. This article would be a hundred pages long if I named even half of these “outrages.”

What is the reason there is no shouting from the windows, “We are mad as hell!!”? There are many reasons, one comes from the concerted effort of those who have the power to implement such an effort. It is to brainwash the society into compliance.

Read this article to gain a little bit of insight into this effort, or at least one possibility, Ghost Words from the Past. It is like we are all hypnotized, and whenever the agenda activates a part of its plan, the silver pendulum comes out and is swung in front of our eyes, accompanied by a soothing voice that says, “All is well, this is good for you.”

Needless to say, that voice could also be murmuring, “The unvaccinated are evil, hate anyone who spreads misinformation, Putin is the devil incarnate, hate him with all of your heart.”

Due to this sort of conditioning, among many other techniques, we as a society have lost nearly all critical thinking—and as a result, can no longer self-regulate as a culture.

No matter how illogical an action is, if we are told it is fine, or if it is framed in some particular way (such as framing a 10-year-old’s desire to change his or her biological sex as an inalienable “right”), we jump right to the agenda’s plan—typically without a second thought. “2+2=5, 2+2=5,” again and again this is drummed into us, and eventually we believe it, and then it only needs to be said once.

Soon it will be, “2+2=6,” and again, most of us will comply, and never give it another thought.

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