‘Fact Checkers’ Say No Such Thing As “Mass Formation Psychosis”
Well, butter my buns and call me a biscuit… if this ain’t the biggest revealing tell in years.
Apparently Big Tech and big propaganda media, Reuters and the Associated Press, have joined together to refute the concept of “Mass Formation Psychosis”, and pushed their collective narrative into the narrative engineering system.
The Associated Press – SEE HERE and Reuters – SEE HERE, quickly rush to the “fact check” typeset to stop people from recognizing what is most likely the cause of their own psychosis.
In a world where things are no longer shocking, this is, well, a little shocking, in a weird and seemingly Orwellian kind of way.
Yes Alice, the same “experts” and media who are credibly accused of creating/enabling the mass formation psychosis would like to assure us that no such reality exists. This is almost too funny.
(AP) – […] “The concept has no academic credibility,” Stephen Reicher, a social psychology professor at the University of St Andrews in the U.K., wrote in an email to The Associated Press. The term also does not appear in the American Psychological Association’s Dictionary of Psychology.
“Psychosis” is a term that refers to conditions that involve some disconnect from reality. According to a National Institutes of Health estimate, about 3% of people experience some form of psychosis at some time in their lives.
[…] The description of “mass formation psychosis” offered by Malone resembles discredited concepts, such as “mob mentality” and “group mind,” according to John Drury, a social psychologist at the University of Sussex in the U.K. who studies collective behavior. The ideas suggest that “when people form part of a psychological crowd they lose their identities and their self-control; they become suggestible, and primitive instinctive impulses predominate,” he said in an email.
That notion has been discredited by decades of research on crowd behavior, Drury said. “No respectable psychologist agrees with these ideas now,” he said.
Multiple experts told the AP that while there is evidence that groups can shape or influence one’s behaviors — and that people can and do believe falsehoods that are put forward by the leader of a group — those concepts do not involve the masses experiencing “psychosis” or “hypnosis.” (read more)
Reuters offers this simultaneous rebuttal:
(Reuters) – “Mass formation psychosis” is not an academic term recognized in the field of psychology, nor is there evidence of any such phenomenon occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic, multiple experts in crowd psychology have told Reuters.
[…] There is no evidence to suggest a “mass formation psychosis” has occurred during the pandemic, experts told Reuters. The term itself is not recognised among academics, and modern research into crowd psychology has shown that crowds do not behave in mindless or non-individualistic ways. (more)
Once a collective group creates an alternate reality of itself, in this case a totalitarian reality based on government needing to create an irrational illusion of fear that becomes part of the accepted national identity, how can anyone call attention to the outcomes without finding themselves in front of the board of inquisition who organizes the collective?
Put another way… if the pod under your bed malfunctioned, but the pods under all the other beds in the city worked, what happens when you awaken and realize you are not one of them, but you must engage in the world of them while looking for others -like yourself- whose pods hopefully malfunctioned?
That is the current challenge for anyone trying to communicate on contrary evidence and yet avoid the ire from the collective board of COVID compliance who have successfully brainwashed the audience.
As a rather prescient Lewis Carroll shared so brilliantly in his novel of Alice, Through The Looking Glass:
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn’t. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn’t be. And what it wouldn’t be, it would. You see?”
So here we are.
Cheers !
See more here: theconservativetreehouse.com
Header image: Nota Zaman
Editor’s note: There are multiple entries on the net for mass formation psychosis, all the ones I saw refuting it exists, and the Wikipedia page for it currently looks like this:
It states: “The purpose of this redirect is currently being discussed by the Wikipedia community. The outcome of the discussion may result in a change of this page, or possibly its deletion in accordance with Wikipedia’s deletion policy.”
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Dave
| #
There is no such thing as a “Fact Checker”
Reply
Juan Conchobhar
| #
“Fake-checkers” and other agents of censorship and propaganda always are tricky. Although Robert Malone is using the expression “mass formation psychosis”, professor Mattias Desmet, the psychologist who introduce the concept of mass formation to the conversation to explain the psychological manipulation of the public in the COVID-1984 operation, said “mass formation” or “crowd formation”. He never added “psychosis” to the psychosocial diagnosis. Desmet expressly warned that adding the word “psychosis” is inaccurate.
Desmet’s “mass formation” or “crowd formation” comes from The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind (1895) by Gustave Le Bon. This is a quote from Wikipedia’s article on the thought of the French polymath:
Le Bon theorised that the new entity, the “psychological crowd”, which emerges from incorporating the assembled population not only forms a new body but also creates a collective “unconsciousness”. As a group of people gather together and coalesces to form a crowd, there is a “magnetic influence given out by the crowd” that transmutes every individual’s behaviour until it becomes governed by the “group mind”. This model treats the crowd as a unit in its composition which robs every individual member of their opinions, values and beliefs; as Le Bon states: “An individual in a crowd is a grain of sand amid other grains of sand, which the wind stirs up at will”.
Le Bon detailed three key processes that create the psychological crowd: i) Anonymity, ii) Contagion and iii) Suggestibility. Anonymity provides to rational individuals a feeling of invincibility and the loss of personal responsibility. An individual becomes primitive, unreasoning, and emotional. This lack of self-restraint allows individuals to “yield to instincts” and to accept the instinctual drives of their “unconscious”. For Le Bon, the crowd inverts Darwin’s law of evolution and becomes atavistic, proving Ernst Haeckel’s embryological theory: “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny”. Contagion refers to the spread in the crowd of particular behaviours and individuals sacrifice their personal interest for the collective interest. Suggestibility is the mechanism through which the contagion is achieved; as the crowd coalesces into a singular mind, suggestions made by strong voices in the crowd create a space for the unconscious to come to the forefront and guide its behaviour. At this stage, the psychological crowd becomes homogeneous and malleable to suggestions from its strongest members.
Wikipedia being part of the Covidian Censorship and Propaganda Corps, it isn’t a surprise that we are misdirected if we look up “mass formation”. As I’m writing this comment, Wikipedia redirects you to the article about Sigmund Freud’s Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego (1921), which is not the origin of the concept.
Reply
THOMAS W ADAMS
| #
https://canadianpatriot.org/2022/01/05/breaking-the-spell-mindspace-trance-warfare-and-neuro-linguistic/
What we are looking at now is the culmination of a century-long process of mass psychological control. This new precision accounts for the spell-like quality that seems to have enraptured so many people, often even highly-educated or well-meaning citizens, including doctors, teachers, law enforcement etc. However, the structures of these “spells,” rather than being magical, are due to scientific precision in behavioral science and social psychology. Unlike more traditional and earlier forms of information and psychological warfare, which used certain rule-of-thumb practices for manipulating “groups,” subliminal messaging etc. the new “context model” elaborated in the UK Cabinet Office’s MindSpace takes a different approach. Rather than simply giving people false or confusing information per se, or attempting to sway their conscious minds and faculties, it is about directly steering their unconscious minds using the “magical” language of NLP, unconscious “Nudging,” and trance-inducing public messaging “incantations.” The basis for these concepts and their application can be found in the pioneering work of John Grinder and Richard Bandler, which they formulated in The Structure of Magic I & II. Even among the chapters of The Structure of Magic I, one can find titles like “Becoming a Sorcerer’s Apprentice”and “The Final Incantation.”
Reply