A kind of legacy, perhaps.

2018 Fallout

Going through the fallout of our quest is like going to a garage sale. It’s fun and every now and then you find a treasure.

Social psychosis

Plan A meets the definition of psychosis: It is a mental condition that causes you to lose touch with reality. Psychosis is an abnormal condition of the mind that results in difficulties determining what is real and what is not. Symptoms may include false beliefs (delusions) and seeing or hearing things that others do not see or hear (hallucinations).  Social psychosis is an umbrella term; it means that its individuals have sensory experiences of things that do not exist and/or beliefs with no basis in reality.


The thrust of the Plan B sociotechnology, the psychological strategy, is to assist the individual to understand what drives social system behavior and how this knowledge can be used to get things important to social system evolution accomplished. He needs guidance and examples as to how to create order out of a mass of contradictions, baffling behavior, and inconsistent representations. Society conditioned you to believe that madness offers a better perspective on reality that pragmatism.

Where the world of psychology/psychiatry is concentrated on the “self” and not on what he achieves in his collective interactions, the Plan B approach is to assist the individual to drive social prosperity. When that is taking place, the contributing individual automatically improves in all psychological departments. As his self-image rises, so does his goal-seeking productivity. In operation, this reinforcement cycle is a marvelous dynamic to behold. It produces a surge in oxytocin for everyone.

Carl Rogers

Trust is developed with an individual when you have genuine interest in:

  • What they say
  • Their experiences with others
  • Their behavior in disturbances
  • What they produce and create

The reality is the individual can only change himself from a platform where he is accepted for what he is, as he enters the process. It provides psychological insurance that he will be accepted for what he is, after he improves.

When you grant some credence to the various discipline theories about social behavior, the integration appears to be an elastic construct with mutually contradictory properties. It is part true and part false. It is part known and part unknown. It is part public and part private. It simultaneously preexists and is in the process of coming into being. It is part observing and part observed. It is both independent and interdependent; part “you” and part “us.” Of course, when disturbed, social behavior is always shaped by mythological, historical and contextual forces. Social systems have a generic component, a signature style, and a unique turning-over roster.


Roles represent implicit or explicit expectations for behavior. They are essential to hierarchy and govern every facet of social life. Each role defines appropriate attitudes and actions for that role. When roles are diffused or botched, animosities take control of social behavior. Roles form the superstructure of your identity. Roles allow you to accentuate different aspects of yourself.

Roles provide blueprints for your thoughts and actions and instruct you how to respond to new situations. Each of your roles comes with ready-made prepackaged scripts that can make you effective, efficient, and convincing. Scripts help you to be comfortable in your roles. The crux of the MitM dilemma is that the head-shed-approved scripts for the foreman are at odds with his intrinsic role in the hierarchy. The role of the MitM is specified by the mathematical physics of hierarchy, not management whim. The powerful influences of socialization shape the nature and direction of your life, inducing you inhabit standard life stories that have a beginning, middle, and end. Like a Greek tragedy, you carry on as if you could modify your fate, while the chorus in the background proclaims what you must do.

You have no control over your social conditioning, most of it written out before you were born into a life. But you do have control over your efforts and, ultimately, your psychological health. That is the opening in the Plan A system which Plan B exploits.


Compelling Purpose

It is necessary to your mental health to have a purpose of your life; that your life is important and matters. Meaning conveys a sense of preciousness to our experiences that constructs our lives. To stream your sense of purpose, you must live a life that is special and fueled by emotional conviction. It is your specialness that justifies your evolutional worthiness for eternity. It turns out this narcissistic attitude has high survival value. This self-image is validated on the altar of your mind when others appreciate your efforts. Buttressed by the certitude of your convictions you are empowered to confront the very social forces that left you drained by angst.

The alternatives are horrible. If nothing matters, incentive to act dissipates and control is lost. You become desensitized to your inevitable nonexistence. In Plan A you are forced to act in ways that have no justification and ignore evidence to the contrary. Socialization blurs the relationship between psychological truth and objective truth. In social life the obvious reasons for dysfunction are rarely the factual reasons. Never assume the reporter is unbiased and that his audience is an unbiased learner.


Appearance is a complex phenomenon. The rebels of fashion form a strict code of stylized fashion of their own. The social gap is self-maintained as top priority. Since the elite can never be wrong in taste and fashion, differentiation in appearance is the tool of choice. False appearances have a limited life span.

Imitating social superiors leads to changes by the social elite to differentiate. Identify with one class excludes you from the others. Usually the hierarch identifies with one class, excluding himself from the others. Since the MitM identifies with no class, he is considered an outsider insider.

The whole idea of a “ruling class” for social systems of all sizes was delusional from the start.

The purpose of your “life” is not to compensate for perceived failings of reality.

Most of the social issues that surface in the operational reality are the signature consequences of rule-based, Plan A collectives.  In a performance-based Plan B social system, the conflicts do not arise in the first place.

In Plan A, dreading the context of his work, man finds himself poor company. In Plan B, thriving in the context of his work, man is proud of his self-image. In Plan A, the membership is preoccupied with self-deception and self-denial, doctoring up the facts and finding excuses for his self-defeating behavior.

The self-deception required by business as usual is right at home with the delusion-speak community in Plan A organizations. However, when people deny, rationalize, project, suppress, or repress reality to a degree that conflicts with advancement, these self-protecting mechanisms no longer serve the function of survival and adaptive functioning. No good can come from this hypertrophied condition where delusion interferes with your ability to cope with reality.

It takes full-time effort to make your self-defeating behaviors comprehensible to a rational person. When adaptation is no longer possible, self-deception becomes pathological.

For most people into self-destructive Plan A, life leaves much to be desired. While fantasy can help make living more comfortable, it doesn’t deal with the engine of cause.

While there are many forms of truth, absolute truth and certain knowledge are not on the list.

Mental indolence takes you to the path of least resistance. What matters is the forms of truths, practical truths that enable attainment of worthwhile goals.


The term “personality” represents a descriptive label for the totality of an individual’s internal experiences, attitudes, specific behaviors, and general lifestyle. These enduring patterns of attributes, which contribute to the distinctiveness of the individual, are known as traits. While everyone has personality traits, not everyone has a “personality disorder.” The concept of a personality disorder indicates the existence of a maladaptive or inadequate set of attitudes and coping behaviors which consistently bring the individual in conflict with others and prevent harmonious social adjustment.

Regardless of the particular type of personality disorder, the attitudes and behaviors of these individuals usually possess a number of common denominators:

  • They tend to be rigid, inflexible, and stereotyped, and therefore highly predictable in response to certain situations.
  • They hinder rather than help in the realization of both short range and long-range goals.
  • They become accentuated under stress.
  • They are conducive to the development of secondary neurotic symptomatology and may be associated with other forms of socially deviant behavior.
  • They are more at conflict with the expectations of significant others than with those of the individual himself.

The complexities and wonders of human consciousness and mentation defy comprehension. A specific mental operation, such as memory, let alone creativity, discovery, and philosophy, cannot be explained by monism, dualism, or parallelism. While the psychiatric physician may marvel at workings of the human mind, his clinical task is a pragmatic one—namely, to detect and remedy cognitive aberrations or abnormalities which are indicative of a disease process or which compound ordinary problems of living.

The term “cognition” is broad. According to Webster’s, it refers to “the act or process of knowing including both awareness and judgment.” Though theoretically possible to categorize cognition into countless components, each depicting some important variation of mental functioning, this would be entirely impractical for clinical purposes. The clinician need only be competent in learning to distinguish pathological from normal mental functions with regard to six general subcategories of cognition. These categories are (a) deviations in consciousness, (b) thought processes, (c) general memory, (d) knowing and language functions, (e) insight into illness, and (f) abstraction.

Recognition of any of the cardinal symptoms and signs within these six areas should be sufficient to provide the clinician with adequate information upon which to formulate a differential diagnosis of all high to moderate probability disorders which may interfere with cognition. The most fundamental and essential cognitive activity is consciousness—the awareness of self, others, and the physical environment.

Without consciousness, all other mental activities become superfluous. Alterations of consciousness may be operationally defined as a relative hyporesponsiveness or hyperresponsiveness to external stimuli compared to the responsiveness noted under normal waking conditions.

Not all alterations are pathological. Some represent normal daily shifts in consciousness or artificially induced alterations which are socially condoned or potentially beneficial for the individual; abnormalities pertain only when the alteration persists beyond generally accepted temporal norms or transcends the bounds of personal control.


Man, in general, cannot tolerate uncertainty, ambiguity, and the unknown. A world without direction, meaning, and structure, a world which does not acknowledge the special needs or even the existence of an individual, is a frightening, hostile world. In order to cope with such an intolerable situation, explanatory systems are developed as a means for reconciling basic ignorance with emotional need. If the explanatory system becomes imbued with emotional conviction, it represents a belief. If the belief is consensually validated by a social system, it diminishes the isolation of the individual and can improve social functioning. If the belief is rejected by the social system, it may estrange the individual even further from his world and diminish social functioning. It is this latter situation which is regarded as delusional.

It should not be surprising to find delusional thinking so prevalent among serious psychiatric disorders. With disruptions in brain function, ordinary reality props begin to dissolve and the world becomes a “whirling, blooming confusion.” In such a world, the patient feels buffeted about by unknown forces and exposed to unknown terrors. The formation of delusions seems to represent an adaptive attempt on the part of the individual to re-create structure and solidity in an otherwise chaotic world and thereby to explain the unexplainable.

The degree to which long-standing personal conflicts are integrated into the delusional system of the affected individual relates less to the nature of the conflicts than to the rapidity of onset of the illness. In an acute psychotic illness, mental changes occur so rapidly that the individual does not have time to integrate his earlier experiences into his delusional interpretations of what is happening to him. He is frantically formulating and testing new explanations to account for the confusion he experiences. In less acute illnesses the patient can slowly incorporate real-life experiences into his evolving and increasingly stable delusional system. Because of this extended time frame, during which “evidence” can be accumulated and interpretations made, the delusional belief can potentially become more credible to others.

For good reasons, delusions represent strong beliefs unshakeable by logical persuasion. Rational arguments cannot prevail against in­ tense emotional needs which must create a predictable and ordered universe to explain the unknown. Most delusional systems contain a “kernel of truth,” which is mostly derived from past experiences or interpretations of them and upon which the delusional superstructure is built. For the patient, denial of the delusion becomes equivalent to denying this basic truth and, without this foundation, he risks the collapse of his entire psychological world.

Because delusions appear in many illnesses, their presence cannot be regarded as specific to any psychiatric disorder. Despite this generalization, a reasonable differential diagnosis may be formulated, based on two major features of delusions: (a) the degree to which they are nonsystematic or systematic, and (b) their predominant themes.

Non systematized delusions tend to appear in illnesses with a rapid onset and progression, especially in younger people, and pervade all areas of the patient’s thinking. Confusion and disorientation, hallucinations, and insomnia are common. Affect is labile, but anxiety and psychomotor agitation are prominent. Because the patient feels bombarded by all varieties of stimuli and puzzling events, his delusional system undergoes constant change to account for the massive number of clues to be explained. Social functioning, naturally, is grossly disturbed.


Psychotherapy refers to any interpersonal process in which a therapist, through the media of words, psychosocial procedures, or special features of the relationship, attempts to help the patient accomplish certain desired cognitive, emotional, or behavioral changes. This process can vary both in form and content. In form, it may be applied on a one-to-one basis, with couples, families, or groups within sessions of varying length and frequency. In content, the nature of psychotherapy conforms to the theoretical system upon which it is based and the therapeutic goals. The form serves as the vehicle for the expression of the content.

Psychotherapy is not a unitary process. It is a broad term which encompasses many subclasses of therapeutic techniques and goals. In general, the efficacy of any of these techniques is a result of both nonspecific and specific factors. Nonspecific factors contributing to successful outcomes include the strong motivation for help and realistic expectations on the part of the patient, the charisma and optimism of the therapist, placebo effects, and the extent to which the disorder is self-limiting or subject to spontaneous remissions. Specific factors which contribute to treatment outcome include the skill of the therapist, the therapist-patient “fit’ ’ the specificity of the therapeutic techniques, the nature of the problem or disorder, and the environmental supports available to sustain behavioral change.

There tend to be three major views about the goals of psychotherapy. The first view regards the therapist as an expert whose function is to decide what is wrong and what procedures should be used to produce change in the patient; the patient is presumed to be either unaware or misguided about the nature of the problem. The second view regards the patient as sufficiently mature and responsible to set his own therapeutic goals; the therapist is supposed to serve as a facilitator in this process. The third view maintains that, as a precondition for therapy, the therapist and patient are obligated to agree on certain goals toward which they both can work. Each of these views is represented, in one degree or another, in the different schools of psychotherapy.

Not all therapies are designed to accomplish the same goals: some are more suitable for certain goals than others. Examples of common  psychotherapeutic goals for individuals include gaining a personal awareness and understanding of underlying motivational forces, the realization of personal potential, the modification or elimination of disordered responses (such as unpleasant affects, undesired habits, or self-defeating thinking), the development of new sources of pleasure or gratification, the acquisition of new skills, learning of other options and choices, the resolution of interpersonal difficulties, emotional support and personal advice, and even relief from boredom.

In order to meet such a wide range of therapeutic expectations, clinicians often have to be skilled in the administration of several basic treatment modalities, selecting the one most appropriate for the particular problem. Regardless of therapeutic goal or type of therapy, there are certain general patient and therapist characteristics which are presumed to facilitate an optimal therapeutic outcome. The patient, on his part, must be in distress and dissatisfied with at least some of his behavior—a poor treatment response can be expected if he takes pleasure in his habitual behaviors even if others judge them abnormal. The patient must accept and conform to the general guidelines for therapy. The patient should also be able to observe and communicate in a reasonably accurate way what he or she thinks and feels. And lastly, the desired attitudinal and behavioral changes expected to occur from therapy must conform to the principles of learning.

While many psychiatric disorders respond well to psychotherapy alone or psychotropic medication alone, all sociopsychological and somatic interventions must be viewed as complementary. There are no psychiatric disorders for which the simultaneous use of an appropriate form of psychotherapy cannot aid in the production of optimal treatment results. It is the rare medicated patient who cannot also benefit from increased insight, awareness of environmental contingencies, improvement in interpersonal and vocational coping skills, more constructive interaction with significant others, or, for that matter, the assurance of treatment compliance.

Major Classes of Psychotherapy

There are four general classes of psychotherapy: attitudinal, behavioral, experiential, and supportive. While there is considerable overlap among these categories, they are distinguished by their relative theoretical emphases, therapeutic goals, special techniques, and the roles played by therapist and patient.


Attitudinal therapies include two main subclasses: one emphasizing the importance of insight and the reliving of past experiences, and one emphasizing the importance of rational or realistic thought. Common to both is the view that the understanding of the thoughts, beliefs, and attitudes underlying behavior will permit the patient to control behavior.

There are also obvious differences between the two. Insight therapies maintain a developmental view of man and place a great emphasis on early life influences and situational forces. Rational or cognitive therapies do not usually operate within a developmental framework but instead place a major emphasis on current events and cognitions.  Therapists tend to be less active with insight therapy and more active with rational therapy.

Insight-Oriented or Psychodynamic Therapies

Different schools of thought place different emphasis on the primary genesis of psychological conflict and behavioral deviancy. Despite theoretical differences about the nature of man and the forces which shape his destiny, all are remarkably similar in a number of important respects.

All schools maintain that the primary goal of psychotherapy is for the patient to gain an understanding of the obvious and obscure determinants of his behavior. This understanding is usually regarded as insight, and while it may lead to symptom relief and behavioral change, this is not always the primary goal of therapy. Insight in its own right is regarded as useful because it provides a basis for personal growth and responsible decision-making.

Since symptomatology is viewed as an expression of some underlying psychological conflict, treatment is mostly directed toward the resolution of the basic conflict rather than toward direct symptom relief.

Unless the basic conflict is resolved, symptom relief by itself is regarded as inadequate because new symptoms can be expected to appear.

For all forms of insight therapy, the relationship between therapist and patient serves as a central focus for discussion. In essence, the patients is required to work through the unrealistic attitudes and expectations he attributes to the therapist, whether they are presumed to arise from past attitudes toward authority, strivings for dominance, or inhibitions in self-assertion. The patient’s thoughts, feelings, and attitudes represent the substrate for the therapeutic process. The therapist mostly serves as an impersonal reflector of patient verbalizations, removing roadblocks to self-understanding and occasionally interpreting patient responses within the context of the particular theoretical system. As best as possible, the therapist tries not to let personal biases about the patient influence his objectivity and effectiveness.

In a sense, the function of all insight-oriented therapies is to resolve ambiguity, uncertainty, and confusion by subtly teaching the patient a theoretical system within which all symptomatology and behavior can be interpreted. For this to happen and become sustained, the understanding must meet four criteria.

It must be internally consistent and sufficiently organized to serve as the basis for secondary insights and further generalizations. The deductive elaborations based on the original insights should be stable and logically sound enough to withstand doubts and criticisms by self and others about their validity.

It must display continuity within some stream of social tradition in which its applications can be tested. This understanding must be acceptable to patient, therapist, and some appropriate social group. Insights discontinuous with social tradition are regarded as weird or delusional.

It must have direct personal consequences with respect to symptom relief so that the individual can demonstrate to himself that it works.

It must have positive social consequences which reinforce the conviction of the individual in the truth of his insights.


Insight therapies are indicated for all those psychiatric conditions in which faulty learning, underlying conflicts, and environmental ex­periences, rather than biological factors, are presumed to play a primary role. These conditions include anxiety and depressive states, certain personality disorders, situational reactions, existential-type dilemmas, certain psychosomatic illnesses, and sexual role disturbances. As an adjunct to appropriate medications, these therapies may prove beneficial in the management of a wider range of more serious psychopathology. Patient characteristics presumed important for treatment success include psychological-mindedness, capacity for symbolization and abstract thinking, introspection, and ability to tolerate anxiety, fear, and depression without significant impairment in social performance.

Approaches and Techniques

Psychoanalysis, existentialism, nondirective therapy, individual psychology, analytic psychology, and interpersonal and analytic psychotherapy represent examples of different schools of insight therapy.

Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy

Psychoanalysis, the prototype, presumes that all symptomatology represents a balance between unconscious instinctual drives (collectively known as the “id”) striving for direct expression and the mental apparatus responsible for reality-testing (known as the “ego”), which attempts to channel, modify, or inhibit this expression in accord with reality demands and the dictates of social conscience, internal standards, and ideals (known as the “superego”). Although neoanalytic theories acknowledge the importance of certain adult experiences in  modifying and shaping personality, traditional Freudian theory remains strictly deterministic, maintaining that the basic foundations of personality are essentially established by five years of age and that the degree to which individuals are fixated at one or another early psychosexual stage of development, through conflict or inadequate satisfaction of needs, will determine the predisposition to certain types of psychopathology.

The therapist encourages and works within the context of a warm, therapeutic alliance. Treatment goals tend to be more present-oriented, structured, and limited, directed mostly toward symptom removal or the resolution of interpersonal conflicts. There is less emphasis on the modification of personality than on the restitution of prior function. To this end, the therapist adopts a more active, face-to-face role, offering reassurance and advice, making interpretations and encouraging emotional catharsis and behavioral change. There is a greater stress placed upon coping than upon the in-depth understanding of psychotherapy.

Nondirective or client-centered psychotherapy developed principally by Carl Rogers, bears some similarity to existential therapy. The essential philosophic orientation of this approach is that man is fundamentally decent and positive and possesses the potential for fulfillment, maturity, productivity, and contentment under circumstances which foster personal growth and knowledge. As a consequence, the major aim of therapy is self-exploration and discovery.

With this orientation, the skilled counselor attempts to enter the phenomenological world of the client—the way the client perceives and responds to the environment and others—so as to help the client reconstruct subjective reality in a healthier manner and to correct any distorted perceptions of experiences. To accomplish this, the therapist or the counselor strives to display three qualities. The first genuineness or self-congruence within the therapeutic session. This is important for building trust since the client probably will sense the counselor’s true attitudes and not be taken in by artifice or facade. The second is empathy.

This involves the ability to understand, experience, and communicate significant aspects of the phenomenological world of the client. The third is unconditional positive regard. This pertains to the uncritical and nonjudgmental acceptance of the basic value system and orientation of the client.

The nature of the sessions is nondirective with the counselor eschewing any attempt to advise, instruct, or prescribe. Placing great store in the fundamental freedom and dignity of the client, the counselor believes that the client will eventually select appropriate goals and make sound choices if expected to do so. The techniques used to facilitate this “self-actualization” include empathic listening, clarification, and reflection of the client’s feelings.

All rational or cognitive psychotherapies presume that human emotions and conflicts are caused mostly by the individual’s attitudes and thoughts (9). Irrational or unrealistic thoughts or interpretations of situations inevitably produce unpleasant emotions and maladaptive behavior. The goal of therapy, then, is to point out inappropriate thought patterns and to train the individual to supplant them with more appropriate ones.

These therapies place emphasis on the patient’s role in creating his own misery through harboring a number of irrational assumptions.  Some of these assumptions are that unhappiness can be caused by other people or external events rather than by the automatic interpretations of the patient, that it is necessary to be loved and respected by significant others, that solutions must be found for all personal problems, and that certain automatic emotional responses (such as anger or sadness) are required under certain circumstances (such as rejection). Many of these basic assumptions are challenged and supplanted by others which are less likely to induce negative emotions.

With this orientation, early life determinants of personality and behavior are not regarded as being so important as current patterns of thought and interpretations of events. Unlike the procedure in insight therapies, the therapist plays a far more active role, mostly as instructor.

The therapist analyzes and dissects out the inappropriate cognitive The aims of supportive psychotherapy are (a) to promote optimal psychological and social functioning, (b) to bolster self-esteem and confidence, (c) to improve reality testing, (d) to forestall relapse and, when possible, prevent deterioration or rehospitalization, (e) to enable the patients to use only that degree of professional support which will result in the best possible adjustment and thereby prevent overdependency; and (f) eventually to transfer most of the source of support to family, friends, or appropriate outside agencies provided they are available.

Unlike psychodynamic psychotherapies, supportive psychotherapy does not attempt to bring about a personality reorganization or even insight into motives; it mainly attempts to restore the prior emotional equilibrium by reducing anxiety and enhancing coping abilities. When environmental stresses appear overwhelming or complicate treatment, the most obvious support approach may be hospitalization. The patient may experience dramatic improvement in symptomatology and coping abilities by the simple expedient of getting away from home and occupational responsibilities for a short while. Rest, nurturance, and emotional support have remarkable curative powers. Where family or marital difficulties complicate the problem, the therapist may hold sessions with the relevant members and instruct them about better ways to relate with the patient. Where vocational or avocational problems exist, the therapist may suggest job changes and new avocational interests.

In direct sessions with the patient, the therapist often employs other supportive strategies. Emotional catharsis and ventilation of suppressed feelings are encouraged, the personal assets and constructive forces of the patient are positively reinforced, social skills are taught, reassurance, guidance, and advice are offered, explanations are vided to alleviate guilt, and aid is given to enable the patient to make important decisions and solve problems. All these interventions are likely to help the patient feel less lonely and more secure.

Individual behavior, in a context free of social entanglement, can be condensed to POSIWID, “the purpose of the individual is what he does.” For the same individual subject to social flux, his behavior condenses to: “The purpose of his collective is the consequences of what it does.” This is the principal distinguishing difference and an insight you can put to helpful use. It is how, exactly, Establishments coerce their honest citizens to kill people in other populations they don’t even know.

 Bloodwork validation

While it might seem absurd to conformists, the direct connection between particular organic chemicals circulating in your blood stream and your social behavior is beyond dispute. Everyone has experienced the high testosterone condition prominent in Plan A. The head shed pulls rank and we workers respond with efficiency withdrawal. Both actions are acts of aggression, an instinct. The testosterone self-reinforcement cycle and the angst it delivers is on display everywhere social systems operate. Most everyone has experienced surges in oxytocin, a happiness drug to which we are unabashedly addicted, on special occasions of social collaboration, e.g., weddings.

While the social system is foremost a network of subconscious entangled minds, the subconscious mind is also control central for managing the endocrine and immune systems. This material association between blood chemistry and social behavior is accentuated because the Oxytocin molecule, a peptide, cannot attach to a receptor site already occupied by Testosterone, a steroid. This one-way condition gives a mechanical advantage to testosterone, which is why punishment of the good guys by management, one that triggers a tsunami of testosterone, throws oxytocin off the receptor sites, producing instant aggression. You have experienced this onrush several times.

When the social system is latched on Plan A, the global norm, testosterone levels increase, obliterating trust and amplifying aggression, which keeps testosterone impacts at flood stage, accumulating angst, also measurable by testosterone-triggered hormones. When the social system is latched on Plan B, amplifying trust-based cooperation and collaboration, testosterone levels plummet. Oxytocin production levels also surge as a function of joint performance and have receptor sites, vacated by testosterone, available for attachment. Unlike testosterone which self-reinforces on automatic, oxytocin is event-driven. Enjoying an oxytocin surge takes conscious intelligence and work. An oxytocin surge has to be orchestrated. There is no endowed instinct to automatically keep oxytocin going.

In the Plan B social system, glued together by performance, encouraging an oxytocin surge is made easier by the instinct of reciprocity. You’re not the only oxy-addict around and reciprocity makes the task much easier. One common example is the use of humor. Making fun of social system comrades, a mutual sport, is a marker of brotherhood solidarity. It signals: “I know you are a unique human with many characteristics different from mine, but as long as we keep performing better, those differences matter not and making fun of them is the proof.” In Plan A, the same differences fuel conflicts and unrest.

The special attribute of the endocrine system to social system performance is that bloodwork chemistry is a foolproof, completely independent signature of Plan A and Plan B. As the ultimate in ground truth, there is no disputing bloodwork results. As you know, your Dr. goes from the bloodwork values directly to diagnosis and treatment – your opinion carries no weight.

In Plan A, the entire organization gets sick on elevated testosterone and the civil wars it delivers. Plan A organizations are notoriously poor performers. In Plan B, testosterone levels are below “normal” and oxytocin concentrations are far above normal. Only organizations running on oxytocin, essential for trust and collaboration, can be high performers.

That’s right, the entire Wall St. industry, and its problem with truth and honesty, could be replaced by blood work. From experience, the Plan B organization encourages bloodwork testing because it will reveal the distinguishing differences between it and its competition. From experience, the Plan A organization goes psychotic at the prospects of being found out, in an undeniable way, that it’s a chronic low performer getting worse. It would be the end of the M&A industry. Your takeaway:

  • A testosterone-based organization can never be Plan B
  • An oxytocin-based organization can never be Plan A

The material connection between particular organic chemicals circulating in the blood stream and social behavior is beyond dispute. Everyone has experienced the high testosterone condition prominent in Plan A. The head shed pulls rank on us and we workers respond with efficiency withdrawal. Both actions are acts of aggression, an instinct. The testosterone self-reinforcement cycle and the angst it delivers is on display everywhere social systems operate. Leaving social behavior up to the vicissitudes of your endocrine system is irresponsible.

Most everyone has experienced surges in oxytocin, a happiness drug to which we are unabashedly addicted, on special occasions of social collaboration, e.g., weddings. You wonder why people can’t do this wonder for all their social occasions – so happy, so productive.

When the social system is latched on Plan A, the global norm, testosterone levels increase, obliterating trust and amplifying aggression, which keeps testosterone impact at flood stage. Yes, there is a high-octane testosterone. When the social system is latched on Plan B, amplifying trust-based cooperation and collaboration, oxytocin levels surge as a function of joint performance. Unlike testosterone which self-reinforces on automatic, an oxytocin surge has to be orchestrated. There is no instinct that automatically keeps oxytocin going. Enjoying an oxytocin surge takes conscious intelligence and work.

In the Plan B social system, glued together by mutually-observed performance, encouraging an oxytocin surge is made easier by the instinct of reciprocity. You’re not the only oxy-addict around and reciprocity makes the task much easier. One common example is the use of humor. Making fun of social system comrades, a mutual sport, is a marker of group solidarity. It signals: “I know you are a unique human with many characteristics different from mine, but as long as we keep performing better, those differences matter not and making fun of our quirks is the proof.” In Plan A, the same differences fuel conflicts and unrest.

You can’t control what your endocrine system will produce. When you have exhausted your rhetoric, your bloodwork will ruin you. There is no court of appeal for bloodwork. Refusing the bloodwork that will prove the truth of your claim, exposes your fraud. Refusal, in legal terms, is deliberate ignorance – a felony.


Plan A man handicaps himself in dealing with the operational reality by pseudo-expediency: Arnold Ludwig

  • Personifying abstract concepts
  • Reifying the abstruse
  • Analogizing
  • Symbolizing
  • Simplifying the complex
  • Confusing cause and effect
  • Jumping to unwarranted conclusions
  • Faulty reasoning
  • Assigning fantasy meanings to events
  • Arguing from bias rather than ascertainable facts
  • Obedience to authority


If you can get punished for telling the truth, you might work in an organization that was founded by geniuses but is being run by MBAs.

The top can only deal in delusion, gossip and rumor. Nothing material to expose. No error detectors. No benchmarks.

The 2½ rule states that any interface that is 2½ or more layers away from mutual ground truth, can be told reality truth but cannot transmit it the next interface without losing fidelity. The lie-based society produces runaway distortion as each interface compounds error. It requires an infallible groupthink in order to function at all. Trust is impossible. The realm of the subconscious which can seamlessly process lies. The 1½ rule means that truth can go in but can’t come out of the receiver.

The revenue crew can only deal with AQI truth, ground truth, and has reality instruments to validate. Because of proximity and frequency 2.5 rule. Trust is essential. Recognized fallible groupthink

Reciprocity is huge in implementation joint efforts. Not so in delusion. No trust.

Rule-based behavior roots the choices of task action in social necessity. It’s predicated on the false premise that what’s proffered as good for the social system is as good for you as it can get. Plan B exposes this fraud with the great results obtained by “What’s good for you is good for your social systems as well.”

The runaway contamination of information, by reciprocal lying, necessitates groupthink infallibility in order to get anything done.

Any “standard of care” prepared by any organization can only be met with Plan B behavior.

Delusion-speakers can’t express what they want in material terms. Thereby they don’t know what to do. Modelling is implementation.

In Plan A, the membership becomes the disease, the menace. When the organization is captured in the diagnosis of Plan A, its essence disappears. All the self-images are plagiarized.

Evanescent nature of reality – drastic changing.

The Plan B social system organizes itself. Performance is the common denominator.

When the auditor is welcomed as part of the revenue crew, you’re in Plan B.

When above the mentor line, your competencies in guile and cunning have no use.

To explain away your experiences and be consistent with underlying assumptions and explanations, creates the illusion of personal control. The very process of assimilating experience into our narrative in a way that makes sense, gives one the delusion of mastery over fate.

If your strategy for reaching Plan B conditions is predicated on appealing to the perpetrators of social dysfunction to do what is “right,” you’re dead in the womb.

The test of implementation is POSIWID.  If what the system is doing does not align with stated goals, its “operationally real” goals are alien ones. The lies of coverup only make matters worse.

Translation from image to implementation in reality requires the FF, faithfully converting the abstract to the tangible aligned towards the specified goal. The FF requires systems-think, which is socially at odds with groupthink and every discipline in the world.

The less you know about the mechanisms of action of social dynamics, the less control you have over your behavior.

Every deception, every delusion is an assumption of power.

Knowledge building reinforces the center of strength within yourself

Trust cannot exist as a duty

Tie complaint to system-covered item

MitM peers as “veterans”

Inform Plan B exists. Issue never arises. Is a Gödel system matter

Benefit package for fixing system

The mantra of groupthink: “I’m no worse than the others.”

MitMs are created by taking an individual in a hierarchy and purging his social identity

Getting to Plan B conditions is a clinic in brute-reality truth. By necessity, all streaming prosperity is truth-based.

People would rather deceive on credit than tell the truth for cash. Hypocrisy and deception

Men reduced to hoping that their delusions are capable of realization.

The dead end of reality.

Insignia of the social elite.

The rules of etiquette are inviolable. A breach of faith may be tolerated, but a breach of decorum is the universal social sin. There can be no excuse for bad manners.

Avoiding whatever may jolt the mind of the audience, all potential clashing of opinions.

All that matters for goal-seeking and survival is tangible utility. There is no material utility in delusion-speak.

While human nature is invariant, the means for survival and prosperity has dramatically evolved.

Crammed with emotional vulnerabilities.

The fickleness of taboos.

Control provides an arsenal of offensive weapons

Avoids pursuits of the impossible

Meddling is a form of punishment

SMO slow moving obstacles

Putting this sociotechnology to work. Get to Plan B and have fun doing it

Plan B cannot fail for the same mind-network reason the Plan A social system cannot fix itself.

The plan, generic, can be executed by any MitM as-is. The procedures and milestones are in strict sequence. There are several unalterable milestones in tandem. Your 10% conscious mind must be ON, in hot standby, for the duration.

There is no escape from Rogerian triad to build trust. Personalization. Effective, prosperous community operations. The time and effort it takes to attain and maintain the trust limits the unit workforce size.

Concepts in accord with reality

Lies are statements concerning reality that are ascertainably false.

Truths are statements about reality that are, by evidence, incontrovertible

MitM can be fully responsibly for himself and his workgroup

If you subscribe to groupthink, you are responsible for the consequences.

Reform without violence

Explicans – meaning of words

Plan A leads to crisis

A repudiation of intelligence

Infallibility’s excuse is that it can’t exist

I have a bad memory for facts

Purpose and meaning

Fix system to get block improvement and enable further improvements that last

Fixing a system component independently is always temporary. The Nash dissolves it back to original and worse for the trip.

Slave of circumstance

Directly-aware truth

Antique nonsense

Momentum of the past

Authority is delegated. Power is created by performance

Angst blowdown: MoA, ubiquity, network

There has to be a common-sense cutoff for doing harm to society

Direct immersion in Plan B implementation is the best hyper-learning method and truth serum

You can dictate a task action or you can offer an opportunity to take responsibility for results. It is impossible to dictate task action and assign responsibility for obtaining the results sought.

Make stoprules known early

Can’t attain difficult network goals using ineffective learning methods

Why was it that all the leaders, the pious, the academics, and the philosophers never developed Plan B? Why did it have to wait for berserk engineers?

Satisfaction comes from contrast

No attempt to make your pathological reactions impossible. You have the freedom to decide between Plan A and Plan B.

Those who attempt to defy a natural law leave the domain of meaningful discourse.

The combination of social comfort and powerlessness

The appraisal reference must be implementation success evidence, not groupthink opinion.

Site goal is a proper choice-making choice. How to leverage the opportunity is your option.

Groupthink is an attempt by the ruling class to get control over the sensory world, the laws of natural phenomena.

Lunch-bucket issues

Regular people with nothing taken away. Don’t even know the inalienable rights taken away. Control of the tribe involves taking rights away. Restore original state

Stoprules, offensive, is your protection from theft of your rights.

Meaning of knowledge. Not a store of knowledge aloof from implementation.

Groupthink as immaculate conception

Plan B is essentially a revision process.

To act in ways agreeable to others is fatal to self-image

Communication over the network is at the core of cooperation and collaboration

Intellectual duct tape

Intellectual alibi

There are natural laws that shape and limit behavior in several basic areas, independent of instincts


Propagation of truth – interface

Everything wants for improvement

What? You have no thugs to burn people who do not agree with you?

Groupthink is the sound of divine flatulence hissing into the ears of the ruling class.

In OD social comparisons as guide to action is self-defeating.

Angst is the physical consequence of a conflicted mind

Self-assured of your coping capabilities.

Head sheds depend on credulity

OD is a ferocious menace. Either transmute it or flee from it.

Discord is the great seal of invariant human nature. Understanding the mechanisms of social action is necessary to avoid its consequences.

Human nature is an equal-opportunity chameleon. Only the coloration differs.

The focus on actionable quality truth is not negotiable.

Hate feedback? You’ll love extinction.

There is little natural about OD life

A homage to infinity

OD labels sins and virtues on grounds oblivious to social consequences

AQI is hard to come by

An audience where you get applause for breaking silence on issues concerning them

The head shed sent jobs overseas as intentional workforce abuse – enlarging delta. Also M&A.

Delusion panics up on direct implementation evidence

Authority-based delusion v evidence-based implementation

Nature does not evolve your social instincts so you can remain effective in changing conditions

Don’t get near management without Plan B v Plan A productivity measurements. Evidence-based

MitM is of no country

Better understand what they see from what they hear.

If your audience doesn’t synchronize in sharp attention when you break silence on important matters, your audience is a mismatch to your message.

MitM angst, a psychological phenomenon, is generated by a misconception of the MitM role in the organization.

What happens when the engine of cause, a system, resides above the mentor line? Can’t teach system or control

Worker entanglement ends at the foreman. Nobody is below and managers are strangers.

Foreman entanglement up ends with his immediate overlord. The head shed roster are strangers.

Now that we have global access to global knowledge, we have raised a generation that lacks the intellectual tools and the desire to develop knowledge of reality.

What is knowledge apart from reality?

How you know when the issues are system-caused? When all attempts to fix the isolated consequences, independently, regardless of cost and time, have failed – and system change succeeds.

The system bears no resemblance to any of its various effects.

You can’t buy your way out of OD consequences. The controllers of the treasury are delusion-speak, clueless about the implementations of the revenue crew.

Delusion is prejudice

Distinguish independent problems for system problems. If a system cause, different kind of fix required. If fix the system, what other issues get fixed. Evidence-based conclusions

MitMs are trained to grossly underestimate their organizational power

Shift focus from understanding the details of OD atrocities to leveraging the knowledge to benefit person and group

You can’t help your social system until you have fixed yourself

Leave Plan A rants to the books. Getting to and holding on to Plan B.

Anyone can do this. MitM/worker and JQP. For reasons now understood, management won’t.

Refusing to follow up by auditioning and interviewing on-site does not prove you couldn’t get to Plan B or that Plan B is impossible. Making believe that Plan B doesn’t exist when it does is choosing to lose by willful blindness. “I’m not going to change. Keep that feedback away from me.”

Criticism is anti-Rogerian triad. Judgment.

This Plan B sociotechnology has something beneficial for everybody. There is nothing to buy to implement and failure is impossible. You can get far by your own volition and effort.

Use criticism for defense of insecurity

What others think as value reference. Feedback of reality of no interest. Only subjective

Not growing? You’re rotting. 2nd Law

Trust – personalization and situation details

Know me, know my situation

Criticism is living up to another’s expectations.

A stunning lack of self-awareness

No merchandise

Rules for delusion-speak

Groupthink  – fixed, infallible

Shared dogma channels social behavior

What others think is important. Opinions count

No learning, feedback or system think

Abstract, subjective, intangible, opaque

Avoid implementation, feedback

GIGO-oblivious, quality of information immune

Debates, opinions, mutual criticisms end in stalemate

Plan B impossible

Evidence and ascertainable facts

Truth AQI, GIGO intolerant

Oblivious to what others think

Refusing to follow up with auditions of implementations meets the criteria of “deliberate ignorance” in law. Like the instructions to the jury, when willful blindness is established, treat the perpetrators as if they had full awareness of what they were doing. Establishing deliberate ignorance makes the case for the Plan B promoter.

If you don’t know the value system in use by POSIWID, your efforts are likely to be wasted.

War correspondents biased as well

Everything wants for improvement (2nd Law)

Foreman are cloistered, sequestered in their workgroup, accessible

OD is a social cancer that only keystones can remedy. All else fails.

Forget debating skills. Your unmatched power is implementation speak. Hard evidence-based conclusions

Plan B success is a fact that can be used by anyone for any purpose at any time.

Stop rules what and why

Observe and evaluate what management does and the consequences – POSIWID

It’s hard to believe that management willfully prefers to allocate their efforts on Plan A consequences, absent altogether in Plan B. Blind-spot protected

If you aren’t sure of the value system in, run tests. You can’t change the beginning but you can change the ending

Don’t play the delusionist’s game of eternal stalemate. You cannot win. Trick them into playing in your arena and you can’t lose. Offensive

You need nothing from management. Asking nothing from management. There is nothing to buy.  You need neither permission nor approval.

Patiently wait for the delusionists to stumble into a tripwire topic. One that hits your stoprules. Then announce the fact Plan B exists and this issue never emerges as an issue.

You have expressed a strategy that is significant and profound. Since it is impossible to falsify a negative. We will reserve judgment until we have examined and evaluated your implementations. Inability to disprove does not prove. If you have no implementations we can audition, we have nothing to say about your claims.

Plan B strategy implementations are available for examination and evaluation. Refusing to audition Plan B does not controvert it.

Anyone can use the fact of Plan B to advantage exactly as the MitMs. Risk-free.

Get act together – understand, test, and contrast

Peer inclusion plan follow up action

Measure variables between A and B

Stop rules – offensive

Switch to petition mode

Hate Trump as successful master implementer. Puts pressure on delusion-speak to engage operational reality.

Require delusion to provide implementation evidence by setting Plan B example

Delusionists facing implementation knowing it will reveal their false assumptions and incompetency.

Attempts to avoid implementation does not prove your delusions are infallible.

Keep your own products of your creative subconscious mind to yourself.

The vector is the only role that can design the social environment within which he works.

Rules for Implementation-speak

It works because the same invariant human nature that the subconscious brain exploits to produce OD can be exploited by the conscious brain to produce happy prosperity.

If Plan A is the only world there is, you’re stuck in it. If it’s not, until you act, you’re still stuck.

The cognitive rents in OD are very low, but it’s a terrible place to raise children

Plan A low cognitive rents. Plan B high cognitive demand.

OD is where you are required to go to a class on “managing disappointments” and the teacher doesn’t show up.

The advantage of the MitM is that he doesn’t have to appear reasonable to anyone.

Get it right, you’re got an eternity to get it wrong. Who could ask for more?

Think Plan B as if your way of life depended on it.

Don’t fret about reality. There’s no hereafter, only here.

There’s nothing to avenge.

If luck was steady and reliable, you wouldn’t need it.

Groupthink is an anesthetic for the consequences of OD – Lest we remember.

Bottom line: The Plan A organization:

  • Makes no use of the intelligence, productivity, and innovation power of the workforce to amplify and secure prosperity.
  • By “driving” the workforce instead to rule-based behavior, a head-shed offensive, the instinct of workmanship is blocked. The workforce, in defense, withholds at least 25% of its “natural” productivity level. Defense
  • The combination of efficiency withdrawal and the quarantine of the workforce potential to contribute towards prosperity reduces the actual from the attainable revenue by more than 50%.


Get them to reject that which is plainly beneficial in public – a subconscious reaction. Then they know their cover has been blown and the truth is out. They have exposed their shameful value system.

Infallibility defense requires unending commitment to the intellectual alibi and the strangulation of reality feedback.

Groupthink is a narcotic of the mind.

What does everyone

  • Already know
  • Instantly accept
  • Struggle with
  • Reject

You know by personal experience about dealing with the processes and consequences of Plan A. You have witnessed consequences of Plan A operations impacting others. You have endured years of complaints from everyone about the consequences inflicted on them by Plan A. You have heard the loud wishes of the abused underclass to escape their chains and cells and echoed their pleas for a better life.

Since everyone can only have the same experience, the ascertainable facts drive to the assumption the population:

  • Wants to be free of bondage to authority
  • Wants to live in a prosperous society that has its act together
  • Will, accordingly, embrace the Plan B opportunity to escape and partake of the better life
  • What you couldn’t know

Since no one had completed the A to B transmutation process, no one ever had sustained Plan B experience available as a frame of reference for evaluating the consequences of Plan A.  Without evidence from reality, the assumption was formed that the victims of Plan A would flock to the metamorphosis process to reach Plan B conditions. People, like us, are rational and logical in how they choose to live in society – right?

What couldn’t be known before Plan B existed was that this intelligent assumption about the response to Plan B was entirely fallacious – in the extreme. Without evidence from experience, you couldn’t know that the Plan A folks would aggressively refuse to leave their cages. All the lamentation about Plan A processes and consequences and relief from Plan A incarceration was a lie. All the aspirations for a Plan B better way of life was a lie – echoed in concert by billions of people around the planet. They only cry out for the salvation of a utopia after knowing it doesn’t exist.

Now that the truth about the captive victims of Plan A is out, an opportunity formed whereby by the knowledge gained can be put to personal benefit – by anybody on anybody. That, by live demonstration, (offense) denial of the truth about Plan B rejection by Plan A victims is no longer possible. Denial becomes willful blindness, a felony.

You will be surprised at how easy it is to demonstrate that a Plan A organization is in Plan A condition and that its management aggressively rejects the Plan B opportunity. Running the demo is easy, quick, and final. No training or special conditions are necessary. There is nothing to buy. It is always a show-stopper. You can even run the demo on yourself and experience the same reflexes. Think about what that means.

The capability to expose the truth on organizational behavior, regarding Plan A, is foremost an offensive tool. It obliterates the blindspot and levels the playground. It is not taken a whistleblowing. You can use this tool to great advantage. Perceived as a terrifying weapon, it prevents people from lying to you. Since lying is the fibre optics of Plan A communication, you will be avoided. Your parting shot can be their felony of deliberate ignorance. It is the gift of our legal system that keeps on giving.

You treat this proof of willful blindness exactly as the judicial system does. The instructions to the jury require them to assume the defendants had full knowledge of the facts surrounding the alleged crime. Accordingly, you can safely conclude the felon, in full possession of the facts of Plan B, chose to remain in Plan A. In other words, POSIWID, the consequences of the crimes of plan A are the outcomes intended by the “victims.”

Plan A is a closed, self-healing system. Any internal actions to replace lose-lose Plan A with a win-win Plan B system are successfully repulsed. This is where, exactly, the MitM/vector comes in to the social equation. He and he alone can make the distinguishable difference to the organization. MitMs have no social standing to lose and replacing Plan A with Plan B makes their own way life so much better. For the MitM there is no downside and benefits commence immediately. When they prove it works, by working it, the rest is downhill

Prime mover is “system”

The system that is a social system is a psychological system – a network of entangled human minds. It has no mass, no inertia

Patience for opening. When delusionists are on a subject that hits the “list”

Ask for implementation evidence, where to audition.

Reveal that in Plan B, the issue never emerges and this fact can be falsified by direct audit on mature implementations. Doing bloodwork on the endocrine system is the ultimate validator.

Reality, objective transparency

Progress on goal attainment, transparent, navigates social behavior

You need no permissions or commands from anyone to implement getting to Plan B. Your control is unilateral. The first milestones involve your effort alone. The m-i-t-m.com website is all the companion reference you need. It contains samples you can customize for local particulars (stop rules, proposal)

Fosters a coalition having access to an offensive arsenal

Protracted prosperity is anchored to proximity to AQI and short supply lines.

Trust, a psychological phenomenon, is effectuated by notable performance, especially in entropy extraction.

You must be in immediate touch with reality to sustain high performance.

Without proximity to reality-truth, authority can only exercise its power to punish.

Psychosis is a radical loss of touch with reality. Neurosis is heading that way.

It’s therapeutic to know:

  • The system scope of Plan A OD
  • The mechanisms of its durability
  • Which of the ongoing activities are unique to Plan A

As group size increases it passes through threshold conditions for social behavior. Levels added to the top have a role limited by its elevation from ground truth.

Fiction is a subconscious affair. It is no danger of implementation where the menace of the operational reality devours it. Reality truth takes lots of cognitive effort.

What society really values is achievement.

You learn you carried on with bad information when your project fails. You validate your AQI tied to reality by virtue of your success.

Without entropy extraction there can be no trust.

The least you can do is measure system OD scope and notice that your level of angst has subsided. You’ll be surprised how much of your angst is tied up in not knowing what is going on and why.

The maximum size of a stable tribe is congruent with the 2½ rule.

A short high-bandwidth feedback connection is a requisite for prosperity.

Entropy extraction is lie intolerant. No advancement without entropy reduction.

Implementation is to delusion as the cross is to Dracula.

Without an inflow of ACQ information, positive power is impotent

Don’t expect your targets to put the Lego blocks together in the right configuration by themselves.

Stop rules are ascertainable conditions that trigger an activity stoppage, no debates or overrules

  • Attempt to defy a natural law
  • Attempt to defy established principles
  • Deploying practices known to fail
  • GIGO
  • Responsibility/Autonomy
  • Violation of conditions of license

Gödel violation. Blinkered Specialization on System Cause

  • Productivity
  • Availability
  • Quality
  • Safety
  • Health – Physical/Psychological
  • Turnover/Absenteeism
  • Damage and Waste
  • Regulatory Hassle
  • Public Relations
  • Competitive Advantage
  • Positive Reciprocity
  • Delta chart items in isolation


There is a right way of evolving to Plan B and myriad ways that fail, and there are no two ways about it.

Etiquette guarantees an infallible appropriateness to all social behavior. The etiquette of Plan B.

Obedience to the rules of etiquette disguises your vulnerabilities.

Bad manners betrays every emotion which animates them. Anger provokes anger.

Lies are submerged by material performance.  The aristocrats can’t deliver prosperity so there is no disincentive to lie.

The blinding drive for social status is profound. You must employ any degree of hypocrisy, dissimulation, and blatant lying at your command to reach it.

The social gears have an innate tendency toward friction and jamming.

In Plan B you are free to obey the dictates of common sense.

Aim your praise remarks to a quality previously unnoticed.

Seeking social identity can be a full-time job.

The importance of outward conformity

Nature destroys all forms of life that fail to adapt themselves to the operational reality. To survive, every human being must continually readjust himself to his environment – one that includes other people. (K.C. Ingram)

It makes no sense to antagonize people who play such a small part in the proceedings

Magna Carta is a peace treaty

Social interchange with a minimum of mental effort: Plan A.

A struggle against social conformity is futile.

Evolution is a fundamental change in the rules of social etiquette.

Healthy evolution relies upon the impetus for achievement, individual by individual.

When you attempt to get management buy-in, your appeal has to offer something that management thinks has value for itself – helpful to their own ambitions. Plan B is not it. No potentate ever asked for Plan B affluence.

Security is a top-flight human objective. Insecurity kills creativity.

Outward respect for the convictions of a superior is paramount.

People are more focused on their own interests and preoccupied with their own lives, ambitions, and problems to care about the issues of others.

In social success there are no ethics. The ruling class are psychopaths and confidence men.

Dominance is an important biological drive in man.

The unnecessary lies are believed to be necessary and the necessary lies are believed to be dispensable.

Conformity no longer serves as a solution to social adjustment issues. However, man has always found more reason and security in conforming than in individualism.

When conformity no longer insures security, it is no longer practical. Then you discover freedom of action is a myth.

Freedom of action is attended by moral responsibility.

Outward conformity spares the individual from fighting a losing battle with society.

In Plan B individualism with security by performance – is always practical.

You are just as insecure as your conforming brethren.

Superficial adoption of the dominant vogues of belief and behavior.

In plan B, performance overrides the Plan A problems of social status. It is equal parts individual performance and organizational performance. Efficacious forms of behavior.

Lying and deceit are integral parts of any political social system.

Truth is what people can be persuaded to believe.

An effective slogan involves:

  • Rhythm
  • Alliteration
  • Repetition of sounds
  • Affirmation
  • Appeals to Punning
  • Curiosity
  • Sentiments
  • Loyalty


Rule-based behavior attests to the natural propensity of man to falsify and corrupt everything.

MitMs need to band together to form a social identity.

Information communicated without secure standards or evidence being present.

It’s better to be guilty than miserable.

The MitM is spared the depressing tedium of a narrow life.

The hierarch gives sanction to his words that control his behavior and attitude. “Why should I be responsible for my actions when someone is willing to assume the responsibility for them.”

Natural mental indolence sets us up to follow the rules of society that distinguish right from wrong. Relief from the responsibility of thinking demands complete conformity in belief and behavior.

As long as a man believes that his society influences his life and that he can influence its influence, he is a captive.

The duties to groupthink and duties towards humanity are in inverse ratio.

Faith is the great explainer which explains nothing.

Losing his temper when facing the dictates of reason

Mistakes the name for the derivation.

Professing to know what cannot be known

Faith is allied with ignorance, thriving on the lack of real evidence. Its function is detrimental to the pursuit of truth.

Psychotic behavior exalted as ideal by the ruling class.

Forced to accept a credo of rituals and sterile practices as a condition of membership.

The credo of the hierarchy is that belief must precede understanding. Faith is how you adapt to an incomprehensible universe.

Self-satisfied social inertia

Plan B is individualistic

The aim of groupthink is to corrupt reason and deceive the intellect.

Imagination is everyone’s own special possession. It plays a crucial role.

While fantasy helps to endure Plan A, in Plan B reality beats fantasy hands down. Plan B, grounded in the operational reality, stays in step with man’s hopes and ambitions.

Love and objective reality are continually at odds. A temporary delusion suffered for the sake of nature.

No one ever got to Plan B by fantasy. All imagined utopias, anti-individualistic, crashed and burned early in implementation.

Plan B, neither servant nor served, is at one with reality. Like Plan A, Plan B is foremost a state of mind.

Man prides himself in freedom, initiative, imagination, and creativity.

In Plan B you can be as noble and moral as you like.

Any social system that forces subordination of its individuals’ interests to the common will and good, cannot endure. Kill creativity and the 2nd Law kills the society.

Plan A feeds on the natural aversion to reality. Plan B resolves the conflict between the subjective and objective life.

Conscience is a substance that is completely soluble in alcohol.

Goal-attaining performance itself becomes mental morphine.

Angst is emotional conflict

Catatonia – an utterly helpless subconscious

You can induce catatonia at will. Is that social power or what?

The steps and milestones to Plan B

When there is an interventionist running the FLLP for a group of MitMs, he takes care of meeting the milestones. All the MitMs have to do is learn and apply, episode by episode. While the established steps and milestones work for everybody, the interventionist cuts the work to get to Plan B in half.

Step One

MitM angst blowdown, features two milestones in tandem:

  1. Coming to grips with the blindspot that conceals Plan A irrationality
  2. Validation of MitM organizational power

The blindspot that sedates a person to live in Plan A without “seeing” its utter irrationality has to go first. The MitM has little trouble with this step, but he has to make it with his 10% conscious mind. Because that’s all it can “know,” his 90% subconscious mind steers him right back to Plan A.

Understanding the difference between authority and power is going against the grain of social conditioning. It takes both silence-breaking and local testing by the MitM to reach the milestone. There are several strong reasons why the power to bring prosperity to the organization is located exclusively with the MitM. Fortunately, by engaging the material world, the MitM can easily demonstrate his power to amplify his goal-seeking with his workforce by exercising it.

Angst blowdown is essential to free up a good supply of internal energy for getting to Plan B. You can’t spend the energy on goal-seeking you haven’t got to spare.

Step Two

Confidence-building, is running a series of tests in the MitM’s workgroup. The best way to gain confidence in the transmutation process is by making test installations with the provided tools. There is a nominal two-month time lag to run a trust-building test on the workforce. Once trust has been established, the time lag for introducing change reduces to zero.

Once trust-building has begun, it’s time for the MitM to make contact with veterans. This contact builds confidence like no other. Combined with his test experience, the MitM sees first-hand that his task as workforce vector can’t miss.

Step Three

Baseline measurements. Using the parameter chart of Plan A v Plan B, the MitM gathers the operational facts. Putting the baseline facts together is another unique experience. The MitM discovers the facts of Plan A performance are distorted, disguised, and difficult to access. Realizing nobody in charge knows what he’s doing, he uses the worker contacts of his workforce to get around the opacity (ground truth). As a rule, the parameters of organizational dysfunction performance inflicting the most damage on the organization are the most heavily fictionalized. The workers actually enjoy digging out the truth. It’s a free exchange and truth is workroom power.

Baseline measuring is always a task full of surprises. It builds confidence while reducing the number of people who lie to you, for fear of being unmasked if they do. The body of ground truth that goes into baseline measurement puts you in high esteem by the workforce and the general staff. You become the go-to man for the truth. Knowing the truth always puts you in advantage over those operating on lies. Your stuff works. Their stuff can’t.

Step Four

Personalization of the workforce. The MitM begins the process of trust-building by using the Rogerian Triad on his reports. It is a requisite for angst blowdown by the revenue crew.

Step Five

Bringing the revenue crew up to speed on getting to Plan B. It has a lot to unlearn and a lot to learn and it takes whatever time it takes. You know success in this task when the crew replaces Ca’canny with their instinct of workmanship. Like angst blowdown, it comes as a whoosh. At a propitious moment in the acclimation of the immediate revenue crew to Plan B, the MitM reveals the grand plan. There is a good reason for the work crew to increase performance on its own and it has a right to know what it is.

 Step Six

Measuring the Plan B performance against the Plan A baseline established in Step Three. This compilation is the wide-ranging benefit package that comes with Plan B.

During this time, the MitM begins reaching out to his MitM peers to consider joining up with the metamorphosis. He reveals the grand plan. He has veterans to assist. The process goes much faster with the peer MitMs because they have the example of Plan B windfall benefits in their midst.

Step Seven

Bringing the bulk of the workforce into Plan B performance so that the contrast with the Plan A baseline is complete. This establishes the value of Plan B to the organization beyond dispute.

Step Eight

Preparing the “collective petition” for engaging the head shed done by the veteran vectors as a group. The presentation to the head shed is done by the group. If the head shed decides in favor of Plan B continuation, a square deal to share the continuing windfall is then negotiated. If plan B is turned down, the workforce switches back to the original Plan A performance level.

Experience with this orchestration shows a 100% success rate. Like the Magna Carta, no potentate can refuse their foreman in evidence-based solidarity. To do so would be the end of the social enterprise, a truth even the subconscious mind of King John could figure out. Magna Carta Libertatum, 1215, Runnymede England




Views: 130