Question for you here, before I invest myself in this post of yours.
I used to strongly support the Harrison Koehli Ponerology Substack. In fact I wrote the bulk of his comment sections and taught him about the wider sphere of Totalitarianism and the Cluster-B Disorders.
Then I began realizing that he was really a re-packager/paraphraser of the Lobaczewski and Mitchell works, rather than a producer of his own original thought. I have come across re-packagers before; Amazon books has a number of them, and even Jordan Peterson started out as a re-packager. But the supporters need to know that this is what they are getting. That it is the re-hashed work or thoughts of someone else. Some people are OK with that. I am not.
I also tried a few of the Substacks associated with Harrison Koehli. And I noticed another pattern there. I kept seeing the theme of anti-Zionism come up. Actual anti-Semitism in some cases. When I drew attention to or asked about this, I was insulted, smeared and cancelled by the Substack hosts. Oh? Something wrong there. Big time.
So I asked Harrison Koehli if he too was an Anti-Zionist. And he too went a bit berserk. Which told me to get out of there fast. That his Substack was not at all what I had supposed it to be.
Even though he knows that Psychopathy is totalitarianism (because I taught him this), and that Nazism is totalitarianism, and that Nazism and the Palestinian authorities of the 1930s were triangulating together against the Jews......he made no apologies. In other words, he seems to know that Anti-Zionism/anti-Semitism is totalitarian, but this does not bother him. Contrary to what he writes about on his Substack.
So...his pals John Carter of Barsoom, Palestine, and Josh Slocum apparently think this way. Seeing as you yourself collaborated with Harrison Koehli to produce that podcast of Ponerology, I have to ask --- Are you Anti-Zionist too?
Harrison seems to associate too heavily with anti-Zionists for my taste, so now I assume that all or most of his associates fall into this category. If so, I would prefer to avoid them.
We are just trying to present history - when we do, we can get labeled anti-semetic, anti-arab, anti-communist, anti-capitalist, anti-whatever-your-soapbox-is (often on the same video where we are aiming to offer a balanced perspective). Let's just say we are aiming to be pro-truth, as much as we can, with the information we have on hand.
Fair enough. Though I suppose that "presenting history" often entails choosing a perspective. I have to say, my own perspective is clear in that I am against totalitarianism in all of its forms.
I simply don't want to get caught supporting another Substack in which the author has ulterior motives which they do not divulge upfront, and which I want nothing to do with. I refuse to be used by such persons again.
Andrew Lobaczewski, author of Ponerology, was correct in his conclusions, but Harrison Koelhi, Substack host, seems to me to be twisting those conclusions for his own motives. I question now whether he is just using that work in order to have something to re-package; it gives his Substack a basis, and means he does not have to come up with original material.
Well I guess, to be safe, don't commit any financial support and if you feel we are being biased in a way that's not agreeing with your world view, then simply unsubscribe :-)
It is not just the financial support. In fact, that is the least of it. I put my own professional reputation on the line when I contribute material (freely) to various Substacks, and when I recommend certain Substacks to others. I offer posts with substantial information and resources, rather than continual chitchat. The hosts receive the subscriber fees, however. As well as my reviews/recommendations driving traffic their way. Enough of that.
The Substack model certainly has many bugs in it. It has a dark side. But where does an observant Substack-user write or complain about that? I think it was designed not to allow room for critiques.
At any rate, best of luck. Be careful which other hosts you work with....sometimes when you scratch the surface they are not what they seem. Substack sites offer room for deceit, if that is what a host has in mind.
A fantastic, albeit terrifying documentary. I give thanks for sharing this with us all.
Question for you here, before I invest myself in this post of yours.
I used to strongly support the Harrison Koehli Ponerology Substack. In fact I wrote the bulk of his comment sections and taught him about the wider sphere of Totalitarianism and the Cluster-B Disorders.
Then I began realizing that he was really a re-packager/paraphraser of the Lobaczewski and Mitchell works, rather than a producer of his own original thought. I have come across re-packagers before; Amazon books has a number of them, and even Jordan Peterson started out as a re-packager. But the supporters need to know that this is what they are getting. That it is the re-hashed work or thoughts of someone else. Some people are OK with that. I am not.
I also tried a few of the Substacks associated with Harrison Koehli. And I noticed another pattern there. I kept seeing the theme of anti-Zionism come up. Actual anti-Semitism in some cases. When I drew attention to or asked about this, I was insulted, smeared and cancelled by the Substack hosts. Oh? Something wrong there. Big time.
So I asked Harrison Koehli if he too was an Anti-Zionist. And he too went a bit berserk. Which told me to get out of there fast. That his Substack was not at all what I had supposed it to be.
Even though he knows that Psychopathy is totalitarianism (because I taught him this), and that Nazism is totalitarianism, and that Nazism and the Palestinian authorities of the 1930s were triangulating together against the Jews......he made no apologies. In other words, he seems to know that Anti-Zionism/anti-Semitism is totalitarian, but this does not bother him. Contrary to what he writes about on his Substack.
So...his pals John Carter of Barsoom, Palestine, and Josh Slocum apparently think this way. Seeing as you yourself collaborated with Harrison Koehli to produce that podcast of Ponerology, I have to ask --- Are you Anti-Zionist too?
Harrison seems to associate too heavily with anti-Zionists for my taste, so now I assume that all or most of his associates fall into this category. If so, I would prefer to avoid them.
We are just trying to present history - when we do, we can get labeled anti-semetic, anti-arab, anti-communist, anti-capitalist, anti-whatever-your-soapbox-is (often on the same video where we are aiming to offer a balanced perspective). Let's just say we are aiming to be pro-truth, as much as we can, with the information we have on hand.
Fair enough. Though I suppose that "presenting history" often entails choosing a perspective. I have to say, my own perspective is clear in that I am against totalitarianism in all of its forms.
I simply don't want to get caught supporting another Substack in which the author has ulterior motives which they do not divulge upfront, and which I want nothing to do with. I refuse to be used by such persons again.
Andrew Lobaczewski, author of Ponerology, was correct in his conclusions, but Harrison Koelhi, Substack host, seems to me to be twisting those conclusions for his own motives. I question now whether he is just using that work in order to have something to re-package; it gives his Substack a basis, and means he does not have to come up with original material.
Well I guess, to be safe, don't commit any financial support and if you feel we are being biased in a way that's not agreeing with your world view, then simply unsubscribe :-)
It is not just the financial support. In fact, that is the least of it. I put my own professional reputation on the line when I contribute material (freely) to various Substacks, and when I recommend certain Substacks to others. I offer posts with substantial information and resources, rather than continual chitchat. The hosts receive the subscriber fees, however. As well as my reviews/recommendations driving traffic their way. Enough of that.
The Substack model certainly has many bugs in it. It has a dark side. But where does an observant Substack-user write or complain about that? I think it was designed not to allow room for critiques.
At any rate, best of luck. Be careful which other hosts you work with....sometimes when you scratch the surface they are not what they seem. Substack sites offer room for deceit, if that is what a host has in mind.
Thank - we will strive to do our best.