Theory and Practice of Provocation - I

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

There were times when I successfully used provocation in my life to achieve some educational goals. Now I do not do this, because I realized that it was wrong, although it brought the result I PERSONALLY needed quickly and almost always guaranteed. Nevertheless, I decided to describe the theory of provocations in the form in which it took place by the time I completed this activity. Of course, this theory is far from complete, it reflects only a small part of all the mechanisms that I used in practice, and I had far-reaching plans to fully describe it. But these plans will not be realized. Why did I decide to describe what I managed to somehow systematize? And then that it will help a lot of people NOT to do what I did and therefore NOT get negative feedback for it. And it will help other people learn to look more correctly at the vast majority of all existing information messages. Yes, that's right, I claim that almost 100% of all information that you have ever come across is provocation. An exception may be some small amount of knowledge acquired in school or university, but very little. Perhaps someone disagrees with this, but I'm only talking about how exactly I looked at things, and this view is fully consistent with real achievements in practice. I warn you that the presentation will be somewhat chaotic and not structured, because I did not finish what I started, stopping in time. The style of presentation WILL BE provocative and rude, this is necessary in order for you to better immerse yourself in the atmosphere of my past life. I know that because of this article I will lose many readers. Well, that means they weren't my readers, they were only pretending.

The text is deliberately written in a demonic style to immerse the reader in those early years of my study of "black magic". Now I don’t do that kind of shit, it’s not interesting anymore.

Let's start with the definition. Firstly, I deeply do not care about the classical … well, well, I realized that you can't start like this, because the reader will not understand why I didn’t care.

Let's start then with the person to whom this series of articles is addressed. It is addressed only (I emphasize: ONLY) to people with a pronounced demonic disposition of character, or to those who have passed this age (this is possible, for example, through the lightening procedure). The rest of the readers are unlikely to understand even a small part of the content, so I do not advise you to waste time. This information will not teach other readers to resist provocations, because their thinking is not even prepared for their correct perception. Perhaps there are readers with a persistently human type of psyche, nothing of what has been said here or anywhere else in this blog applies to them.

So the previous paragraph is an example of a provocation. But this is not the point, the point is that he explains the reason for my TOTAL indifference in relation to the classical definitions of those phenomena that did not fit into my personal life practice. In other words, you need to have a very strong demonic character in order to stand in such a position, and moreover, steadily and productively. There is I AM, and there is the rest of the world, and if in the rest of the world something goes or looks not the way I would like it to, then the rest of the world is wrong. It was this position that allowed me to change definitions and break established stereotypes, and there is no need to look at it with judgment, because in most cases it brought tangible benefits, not harm. After all, I tried to clarify and identify contradictions in the logic of people, which helped them to become better, and to break stereotypes along with stupid traditions - this was part of the work that could not be done without a demonic attitude towards the "rest of the world." Yes, sometimes something valuable also broke, but what can you do …

Now I can go on to define provocation. So, I deeply do not care about the classical definition, I do not even know it and do not want to know. I give mine. A provocation is any transfer of information to any subject in order to force him to perform such an action or to form in him such a thought that he will inevitably pay for this action or this thought, and the following points are important:

• the subject WILL understand the reason for the reckoning, but his malice and pride will NOT allow him to accept mistakes and correct immediately, he will certainly commit or think something bad a few more times until he is finally "finished off" by negative feedback. Only then will he really change for the better and correct a significant number of his vices;
• as a result of provocation, the subject receives many times more severe punishment than he could have received without provocation, because he KNOWS that he is doing evil, and because the provocateur WILL MAKE him do evil in ANY case, whether the subject wants it or not, unless the subject has time to change for the better before the provocateur finishes carrying out his provocation.

What can be immediately said from this definition? If the reader is familiar with the Concept of Public Safety, then he perfectly sees that, in my understanding, provocation is nothing more than the exploitation of God's Permission in relation to the subject, that is, I deliberately bring the subject to a state in which he will do something bad, and as a result of objective reckoning for this bad thing, he will be corrected. The second thing that can be seen: the subject must have vices or other shortcomings for which he can be hooked, and since ANY person has a very, very wide range of those, he is absolutely inevitably prone to provocations. If a person has a vice, then in principle there is no salvation from a competent provocateur. And 100% of the people I know fall into this category.

The third thing that can be seen is less obvious: provocation is a malicious act, and therefore the provocateur himself will surely fall under the distribution sooner or later.

The previous paragraph is also a provocation. But now you already know why. If you fell for it, then very soon you will understand this by changing your life circumstances. I will also provoke you throughout the entire subsequent article. But here on my part there is no malicious intent that could have been several years ago, because I describe the technique through the technique itself, and this is not surprising, moreover, I warned you in advance about what I would do with you. Anyone who is afraid closes the blog and knocks out of here, preferably without returning, because at the very beginning I warned very well for whom this article was, and it’s not my fault that you didn’t understand.

Since no one actually closed the blog and continues to read, let's move on. So, just as the BER says that “any transmission of information is control,” I can apply the same technique of deliberate incorrect generalization and say that any transmission of information is a provocation. Because the subject may react incorrectly to any information, as a result of which he will receive a cap. Only here the main thing is also HOW to submit this information so that from ordinary management it guaranteed became a provocation.

But now let's look at a number of examples from my real practice with increasing complexity of execution. These examples will help you better understand the subject under discussion. I have selected the most informative stories that can be read. But you will never know about many other things.

Example 1

I am standing in anticipation of the green light at the crosswalk, another twenty people are standing with me. Suddenly one of them starts smoking. He knows very well that now all two dozen people will breathe tobacco smoke, and none of them gave permission for voluntary persecution, that is, he acts maliciously, with intent. I shout to the man: “Do you hear, moron with a cigarette, are you completely fucking smoking here? Look how many people have to breathe smoke now! The phrase must be uttered with the utmost confidence and impudence in order to achieve the effect of surprise. And so it happened: the person is so crazy that he can not say anything in response, and then the green lights up - you can go on. In those places where I did this there were surveillance cameras, which I knew in advance. If someone wanted to commit physical violence, then in case of success (which is already doubtful), I would force him to pay substantial compensation through the courts. Fortunately, it did not come to this in all situations, the person just stood rooted to the spot and could not drag on his cigarette, which was required.

Let us examine this provocation in more detail. Any person who allows himself to smoke in a crowded place already automatically has a whole bunch of shortcomings. One of them is known to me for sure: militant self-centrism, expressed in this case in the form "I don't care what happens to the others, the main thing is that I feel good." If someone tries to shake the position of such a person, then MANDATORY, 146 percent of the self-centrist will have a negative emotional reaction. Knowing this, I inflict two blows on a person at once: an insult and PUBLIC criticism of the described stable position (yes, some in the crowd then whisper in a whisper: “the guy is great, he was not afraid to make a remark to the smoker”). Further, a person inevitably formulates in his head an extremely negative thought in my direction and in some cases even reads it out after me. This is exactly what I need: an evil message in my direction will ALWAYS return back to the person, because I DO NOT accept this message, I am waiting for it and I know that it will be. This is the first thing. The second is that this smoker MUST continue to smoke in crowded places and WILL remember that this is wrong, continuing to maliciously harm in order to regain a sense of the stability of the position "my life is more important than the life of the plebs around me." Third, which is less obvious, for the next few days, pulling out each cigarette, he, in principle, will remember this public humiliation and get annoyed even more, which will quickly bring him to depression or a milder form of defense, for example, to a breakdown on someone from the family or bosses … Evil generates evil, and the more of it there is around this person, the sooner he will guess to begin to set his own brains.

Someone may ask, was there a danger of physical violence? Yes, there are cameras that I knew about in advance and that will help me make money in the event of a massacre, but if a person also knows about cameras (in principle, in normal cities they are located at almost every intersection for safety, and many people know this) and wants to hunt me down and attack somewhere in the alley?

Firstly, in order to track me down, you need to have a more developed strategic thinking, which, in principle, a person cannot have, whose logic does not even allow to understand an elementary thing like the inadmissibility of smoking in public places in the modern world (I am NOT talking about situations when years 50 years ago it was normal for almost all people, there were different cultural norms, and tobacco was, in principle, different). Secondly, even if I miss such tracking (which at that time had never happened, because no one tried), there are remedies and an understanding of how to use them without breaking the law or without the ability to prove this violation. Thirdly, even if nothing helps and they still beat me, then my provocation turned out to be monstrously successful! Just imagine, the person was so offended that he thought out a plan of revenge very, very carefully, so thoroughly that I could not disclose it, that is, he spent a lot of time, all this time he nurtured a feeling of revenge and aroused the thirst for reprisal, and then also implemented it. I didn't care for all this, I trained to keep kicking in the face for five years and was beaten more than a dozen times, I got used to it, but the poor fellow will receive such negative feedback for his malice that my injuries will be childish abrasions compared to his. And he will NOT care.

Thus, please pay attention to how well thought out even such a simple provocation, in which the base feelings of a person are pulled out in the maximum possible number of ways in a very short time (another of the unnamed methods of provocation in this example is my frail appearance, which is and tempts to give me in the face with impunity).

Someone will argue that maybe a person will simply not pay attention to me. In principle, this cannot be. He may not show it, but if he allowed smoking in such a place, then this absolutely definitely means that he has other negative qualities that my provocation will definitely catch on to. That is, even if he didn’t show it, the thought I needed would appear in his head anyway. It will be either an evil thought (which is just wonderful), or a kind one like: "Damn, but he is right, but since I am proud, I will not pretend that he hurt me and will continue to smoke now, but then I will never do that again." Even in this last version, the person still does the wrong thing, which does not stop immediately, and therefore, at least a little bit, may receive his punishment. Nevertheless, by realizing his mistake, he will subsequently bring much more benefit, and this is my main goal of this provocation.

So, in this simplest example, you realized that personally I have always pursued in provocations only a constructive goal that is useful for society or an individual person, but if the control object refused to come to this goal, he inevitably fell into the trap of provocation and harmed himself very, very much … The position as a whole was this: either humanity immediately comes to love and mutual understanding, or comes later, but through pain and suffering. A competent provocation should either immediately help a person become better, or it should, without any additional actions, drive him into such a swamp, from which he will still come to what he needed from the very beginning. In my opinion, this is exactly how our entire sandbox called Earth works, and in my own defense I can say that in the course of my activity I tried to copy exactly this superficial side of the manifestation of our world visible to me. Only later did I realize that God does not use provocations to achieve seemingly the same (externally) goals.

The rest of the examples are in the next part.