BLOWING THE WHISTLE ON THE DANGEROUS CULT OF HYPERIANISM
• FROM THE CITIZEN JOURNALISTS OF THE AC •
“Take Hyperianism to the Morgue” has revealed to us an enormous amount of what was going on inside this cult that we had no clue about. We have been genuinely shocked by many of the things we have discovered. But many people will also be shocked to discover that throughout 2018, we discussed with NK and Irene how dreadful we thought Hyperianism was. None of us liked Morgue and we often tried to work out why he was popular at all (at least among his group of devoted fans).
NK and Irene were MUCH smarter than Morgue. There’s no question about that.
NK said:
I have brainstormed with Irene why people come to Morgue. They are for the following reasons: Morgue gives them purpose; Morgue provides them with a stable social group and belief system; Morgue provides them with sexual energization. These are certainly the traits of a popular figure and entertainer, but a leader needs more nuance.
Here’s the problem with Hyperianism: Morgue wants it to be a popular movement. Good! Then there are only two choices and they are mutually exclusive: either go full out to become that popular movement, or take the time to actually build people up and build credibility. Morgue is very motivated to remain the center of attention, but he still thinks he should somehow care about people. The movement ends up being a muddle in the middle, without the dynamism needed to go farther. A popular movement today can be done with one person, but it needs more ruthlessness on the part of Morgue and less sentimentalism.
Hyperians are primarily of the “Orphan archetype”. A brief survey of the orphan archetype is attached in this email.
[Actually, the Orphan archetype – the abandoned child – is, we now see, extremely closely connected to pathological narcissism. Rose-Emily Rothenberg wrote, ‘This article explores the archetype of the orphan and traces it through myth, story, fairy tale, literature, and perhaps most importantly, through the author’s personal experience. This is a treatment of the theme of abandonment that details the “inner orphan’s” predicament. … Persons who are not orphans, such as adopted children and children of divorced parents, may also encounter the psychological trauma of loss. Even when both parents are present, feelings of abandonment can be experienced by the child who feels not listened to or heard by the mother. When children are not accepted for their reality, the authenticity of their own feelings is not experienced. Alice Miller (1981), in Prisoners of Childhood, noted that this invalidation of feeling creates a sense of emptiness, futility, and homelessness on the part of the child. One doesn’t have to be an actual orphan to experience the feelings of orphanhood, but these feelings are more intense in the literal orphan.
At a very early age, the mother represents the Self. A living connection to the mother who carries this important life-giving projection is crucial to the newborn’s sense of security and self-worth. The mother also carries a link to the maternal past that goes all the way back to the earth. When there has been damage to this fundamental primary relationship, or when in the infant’s new life it is cut off at birth, the ego is prematurely thrown back onto itself and reduced to its own resources. The infant then experiences abandonment.
As I conceive it, three dominant psychological complexes, basic to the psychological profile of the orphan, frequently result from such a catastrophe. First, there is a profound sense of unworthiness. Maternal warmth gives one a sense of worth at a primary level. When that love is taken away, one feels rejected, that one has done something wrong or has been found totally unacceptable. Neumann (1973) wrote that “a child expelled from the primal relationship is expelled from the natural order of the world and comes to doubt the justification for its existence”.
This feeling of unworthiness is commingled with the second most prominent feature in orphan psychology, the feeling of guilt. This is an archaic guilt, not to be confused with the more conscious guilt one feels when leaving the parents, but more closely akin to the guilt for becoming more conscious or for being alive. Neumann said, “not-to-be-loved is identical with being abnormal, sick, ‘leprous’ and above all ‘condemned”’ (p. 86). Instead of blaming the world or humankind, the orphan feels guilty. Since the Self has not been constellated, the orphan feels that the Self (the mother) has turned away, and that this is a higher judgment for which the orphan must carry the guilt.
The search for the missing parent, or for what she represents, is foremost in the life of the orphan. Born out of an insatiable need to fill the gap created by the mother’s death, the orphan looks for the mother everywhere. In his article, “Paracelsus as a Spiritual Phenomenon,” Jung (1967) wrote: “The more remote and unreal the personal mother is, the more deeply will the son’s yearning for her clutch his soul, awakening that primordial and eternal image of the mother for whose sake everything that embraces, protects, nourishes, and helps assumes material form from the Alma Mater of the university to the personification of cities, countries, sciences, and ideals” (p. 112). This endless search for the mother can lead one into many troublesome predicaments. The orphan usually feels that there is a wound that cannot be healed and thus indulges in self-pity, expecting others to feel sorry for him or her and to be taken under their protective wings. There is a feeling of being the “injured one” and needing all the care the person can possibly get. This state of mind brings on a dependency problem of considerable magnitude. Because the orphan has lost connection to the original source of life-giving sustenance, he or she clings to the person who offers the longed-for security as if very survival depended on it. To this end the orphan will hold on to whatever object, person, or form of behavior that may represent security (sex, money, etc.) until finding the object no longer carries the same meaning—that is, it no longer carries the projection of the mother. At this point, the orphan might simply discard the object of the projection or turn away, often harboring hostile feelings toward the one who did not fulfill his or her needs and expectations.
Because the orphan does not have enough “self,” he or she feels worthy only in the presence of another person. Being with others becomes vital, but it only serves to give the illusion of security. If a mutual dependency develops, they both may become entangled in unconscious power motives to keep each other in an unconscious symbiotic bond. Neither can leave this bond of union until the contents of their involvement can be made conscious.
This condition of dependency puts the orphan in the “innocent child position” and constellates the parent in the other person; the orphan then becomes the child-victim to the other person’s induced authority, feeling that “if I’m the good little child, maybe they will mother me.” This helpless-victim identity elicits the compensatory witch–bully archetype on the other side. Sometimes it happens the other way around. The orphan may begin to behave exactly like the witch or the bully, assuming these characteristics and behavior patterns. Living out either of these roles—the victim or the oppressor—suggests that one is possessed by the negative side of the parent–child archetype. Identified with or possessed by either side, one abdicates one’s independent functioning.
This overly dependent state of affairs between two people creates an unproductive and consequently perilous psychological condition for both individuals involved. In order to avoid the suffocation such a situation inevitably creates, one or the other will be forced to leave. This event sets into motion one of the most obsessive of all the orphan’s complexes: the fear of being left. This fear includes the ever-present concern about the possibility of being “left out” and conversely, the constant need to be included.
The orphan has an immense fear of being left or abandoned, especially by a person who has carried great significance for him or her, and will go to untold lengths to prevent this from happening. This fear may be quite pervasive. The orphan might even leave the other person first, in spite of the desire to stay in the relationship, just to avoid the repeated experience of being left. The orphan might, on the other hand, engage in lying, cheating, or withholding information (even from Self) if it, in any way, suggests the wisdom of a parting or separation. Participating in such a subterfuge is a betrayal of one’s Self as well as of the other person, and sacrifices important life values along the way.
The orphan then falls victim to the dark forces that he or she has attempted to conceal. Until the orphan becomes conscious of an overly dependent attitude and its eventual consequences, he or she may constellate this original fate of being left over and over
again. …
Having lived through the shared death experience and come to life again and survived, the orphan may feel especially favored by God. Since someone or something spared his or her life, the orphan assumes an inherent specialness to have deserved this special blessing. An inflation of no small proportion and symptoms of narcissism and egocentricity are often born out of the ego’s identification with the Self. Conversely, a negative inflation that takes the form of the “heroic sufferer” with an inferiority complex can just as easily develop. Feelings of guilt and unworthiness are basic ingredients in such an inferiority complex.’ …. Loads of this applies to Corey Rebhahn, a metaphorical orphan since his parents came to hate the weird little freak so much that they practically abandoned him.]
The article focuses more on the profound nature of the Orphan. However, there is also a more mundane nature: exclusion; loss of community; loss of parent figures; loss of overarching ideology. Orphans that are highly motivated become heroes. Orphans that are dependent or lack motivation become nothing at all.
The N**is began as an Orphan archetype community, but they attracted unique and powerful figures early on: first Dietrich Eckart, then Hitler, then Göring, Rohm, Himmler, Heydrich, etc.
“I can identify a few different demographics: Given the broad range of people interested in Hyperianism (just take a look at the variety in the group), I’d say the majority become interested in Hyperianism since it’s intuitively appealing. Intuitives are typically disillusioned with mainstream religion and are open to the idea of the metaphysical. I’ve seen this across the board. The second demographic is the LGBTQ community, for obvious reasons. Cross dressing, makeup, gender fluidity, etc. Having an ideology that answers the big questions and also openly supports, encourages, and is supported by a member of that community is very powerful to this demographic. The third demographic is the alternative community, also for obvious reasons. This community is into cults and anything obscure and taboo. And of course, you have those who come to Hyperianism because of Morgue’s androgynous sexuality and persona. So, in terms of the general population of Hyperians, it’s the intuitive aspects that are appealing across the board. About half of the most dedicated Hyperians (that don’t have an Illuminist background) are LGBTQ, gender fluid, etc. I think Hyperianism gives people the opportunity to feel comfortable with themselves and their bodies, to overcome fears and to stand up for themselves. To be honest, only a veerrrrryy small portion of Hyperians are there because they’re into rationalism. And if they are, it’s because they use it as an excuse to justify whatever garbage they believe in.”
As much as I like the LGBT community and all sorts of outcasts, these are often the types of people that are dependents, and not highly motivated. Even broader appeal is needed, and that will take more than just a suit. Having to rebuild oneself and one’s confidence and identity is not the formula for revolutionary change. Either you already know what’s within you and bring it out, or you take an entire life just to figure one’s self out.
To break out, he needs to go to other cultural niches, though that requires an even more radical change of his appearance and approach.
Everything now depends on Morgue, at least in this direction. Even if Morgue wins out now, what difference will he make? A few more people will know, but he is incapable of following up on that momentum or interest. My forecast is that he will exhaust himself and run himself down, becoming a psychologically weakened shell of himself. If he is to avoid this, he has to become greater, but Hyperianism will actually need to be there to help him. A one-man phenomenon cannot last for long, but an organization can be forever.
As it stands, the focus on just one person drives everyone else away. There are plenty of people who are talented and who would be motivated to gain something from Morgue, but he’s unwilling to play them and play into their interests and build off of them that way.
What is to be done? Where to go next?”
Much of NK’s message is spot on.
Morgue is of course Hyperianism’s central problem. Because Hyperianism is actually the Morgue fan club. It’s not a movement, it’s a vehicle, a very lucrative one, for a pathological narcissist receiving copious narcissistic supply from desperate simps and gimps. Hyperianism can never become anything because it is entirely self-limiting. BECAUSE OF MORGUE. Most people take one look at that guy and go: “WTF! What a fucking freak.” And move on. The small number that hang around are those that society also regards as total fucking freaks, i.e., they are looking for and have found a freak community, a leper colony. It’s all about IDENTITY POLITICS. Those that share Morgue’s identity obsessions like him. Everyone else hates him.
We said the following to NK in response to one of his messages:
Yes, that’s a great analysis.
In retrospect, it’s easy to see that Morgue was always going to be a figure appealing to the LGBTQ community, who would struggle to be accepted elsewhere. His image precludes him from being accepted as an intellectual. Right wingers loathe him, regular guys can’t identify with him, and so on.
He says 3/4 of his audience are intuitive women and he’s now trying to appeal to them even more. He thinks that’s his natural audience.
Morgue’s decisions are motivated by caution and fear. He’s not going for it. “Come back with your shield – or on it”, as the Spartans advocated.
“He has, unfortunately, cornered himself into a niche that’s hard to get out of without some grand spectacle to propel him into a new character type.” – That’s what he needs to do, but he’s certainly not heading in that direction at the moment. He’s keen to identify exactly who likes him and target that audience very specifically rather than make big changes and try to reach a much wider audience.
Because the N**is were power-obsessed, they attracted powerful people, and the more powerful people they had, the more powerful they became. A virtuous circle in those power terms. Hyperianism does not attract powerful people: practically the inverse! It’s much closer to a slave morality than a master morality.
“To break out, he needs to go to other cultural niches, though that requires an even more radical change of his appearance and approach.” – he’s now a prisoner of his image and approach. He’s becoming more and more shaped by the feedback he gets from his Patreon patrons, hence they are more and more loyal, while everyone else is more and more alienated.
Morgue’s new campaign – coming out next month – will provide a much clearer picture. He thinks it will be a big success. If not, he will have to radically rethink.
“As it stands, the focus on just one person drives everyone else away.” – yes. In an ideal world, we would have, say, ten different groups trying various strategies.
Hyperianism probably won’t advance the Illuminist cause much. Morgue’s image now seems enormously counterproductive. Ordinary people can’t get past it, and only troubled “orphans” seem attracted to it. These people have absolutely no influence on the world and are lacking in will power.
Jordan Peterson has created an industry. Morgue hasn’t. We hoped Morgue could get into the “Intellectual Dark Web”, but he simply won’t be taken seriously because of his image. Jordan Peterson would never have a debate with Morgue.
Morgue, if he were truly shocking, could grab a huge amount of attention, but he’s retreating rather than advancing.
Here’s another message from NK:
Morgue was (and is) doing A/B testing, ALL the time.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A/B_testing
Iterative A/B testing is a form of bisection, and a systematic A/B testing is isomorphic to how neural networks operate. Neural nets / Bayesianism is the most successful form of brute force empirical epistemology. Even on a small scale, as with Morgue, there is simply nothing to compare to when it comes to figuring out what to do next. It only gets hard when you have too many variables (like where Morgue is right now), and then you aren’t able to A/B test enough of them at a fast enough rate and with a low-enough risk. It’s good when you’re small, but eventually raw intuition has to come to the fore. I wonder if he can do that.
I have learned one main thing from Morgue and from JP, and that is that any new movement has to have a positive ethic. The truth is that people WANT to be told what to do, and having a clear, easy-to-follow positive ethic is what’s needed. I am nearly completed my monadology and hence my wish to systematize and shorten the delivery of ontological math, and I can begin focusing on building up a systematic ethic for… whatever we want to call ourselves next. But I have the general picture already: it’s a little bit of feel-good self-help, a little bit of aristocratic ethics, and a lot of everyman sort of stuff. I think people yearn for purpose, for laziness, and for leadership. A new ideology has to be optimized for that.
In order to achieve this, I have to first establish a positive system.
I realize that Morgue’s maneuver has alienated a lot of rationalists, and not just myself. I don’t want him to lose, however, so a bridge has to be made to shore up morale on the rationalist end. The value of rationalists is that they are highly committed, often highly skilled, and able to contribute in an organized way. Losing that core would be devastating, and so a more neutral and acceptable “third way” is needed to save that core and to expand from it. With the way Hyperianism is going, I fear that Illuminists will lose control of the narrative within Hyperianism. It’s a slow burn, so there’s plenty of time to adjust for this.
I think that the way forward is like so:
a) Provide a viewpoint continuous with the existing work
b) Do not negate the previous work
c) Build from the new viewpoint
This way there is little to no conflict and everything can be managed diplomatically. I don’t want Morgue to be undermined, or to feel undermined. He needs backup more than ever, but it has to come from places he can’t appeal to, and the rhetoric and politics needed to assure that takes some finesse.
Irene has been doing better than me lately, while I have been in a depression for the better part of this entire year. I am returning back to myself, as if from a spiritual coma. I have learned much and thought much in the meantime.
I wish to use this positive system as a springboard. My last two semesters at university are focusing deeply on Leibniz, Kant, and post-critical philosophy. This semester alone has taken up ten credit-hours of Kant per week, while earlier this year involved a deep and systematic focus on Hegel. I have read through the literature continuous between Leibniz and Kant, and now have a conceptual bridge from which I can see where to go. I have read Kant’s precritical works; I am reading the Critique of Pure Reason and the Metaphysical Foundations, and have even read a lot of the Opus Postumum. In the Opus, much of Hegel’s system was there already, and I can see the grand scope of the Kantian project: he wanted to provide a Newtonian-Swedenborgian philosophy, grounded in his transcendental aesthetic. While wrong, his heart was in the right place, as was much of his vision.
I will be organizing my next book like so:
1. Preparatory Remarks
These will be aimed at the layperson and the interested professional. They consist of four parts: the first justifies why, on the basis of physics and our understanding of science, should we have metaphysics. The second justifies why we should have a conception of mathematics that is materially and substantially different than the current one, and the reasons for this. The third introduces a transcendental argument to launch into the system proper. The transcendental argument effectively says that we have conditions that determine our perceptions and our cognitions, and that the most general of these conditions is, by necessity, continuous with reality itself. Hence we have genuine access to the real world just by thinking alone. The fourth consists of the cosmological and teleological arguments for the existence of a mathematical world.
2. Prophilosophy
This section will be on the monadology. I have pared down the monadology I was writing, to make it a much simpler document listing a series of first and second principles. The section gives a general outline of what monads are, how we know they exist, and a series of arguments for them. It is the beginning of the ontological argument, though its culmination comes later.
3. The System
The System is subdivided into three parts: a science of form, a science of content. The science of form subdivides into Substance, Relation, and Causation. These concern space and time, the in-depth properties of monads, how they operate, how they interact, etc.
The science of content subdivides into a mixed formal-contentual, and a pure contentual. They’re underpinned by a fundamental form-content relationship, and they concern physics, psychophysics, psychology, anthropology, etc.
4. Ethics
The positive ethics of the system is a reworking of the Critique of Practical Reason and of Fichte’s and Hegel’s contributions. The idea is that rational knowledge constrains our actions, and our experience supplies the “moral content” as it were. Taken together, we get a way to talk about what it is that a person should do in their lives and how they should interact with society.
In short, the foundation of the ethics supplies the “moral law” (the Law of Optimal Compossibles), and the content of the moral law arises when we consider our experience given the law. Ethics naturally changes over time, and it is up to an examination of our best empirical knowledge (evidence-based politics, etc.) to determine what’s optimally compossible at a given time.
The ethic is based on Responsibility (to self, to society, to nature), whose realization is in Informed Action (through place, purpose, and practice). Informed action is substantiated by Virtue, and Virtue is developed through Education. Education, further, is realized by Participation (in one’s own perfection, in their community’s, their locale’s, and society at large). This calls for meritocracy, and using this, I can ground much of what I’ve already established and written on meritocracy.
So we have a complete system, with an initiation / purification (The Preparatory Remarks), the kernel and system as a metaphysical ground for belief, and an ethic to guide everyone by. It is a complete way of life that can be universalized. It allows for radicalism, as well as Weishauptian pragmatic politics to cement its influence. It caters to the listless, to the downtrodden, to the professionals, and the willful. It’s meant to strategically couch our radicalism, and to make it more acceptable. People want clarity, they want a worldview, they want completeness, they want purpose, they want direction, so that is what I will give them.
The coming social media campaign between Irene and I will be to promote this system, but in a clever and acceptable fashion. I have learned that no cause, no leader — no matter how powerful or how infamous or feared — has ever succeeded without being personable, or becoming personable. People will follow an angel to the ends of the Earth and beyond, but never a devil. Psychological realism will define our coming approach. I know most people will not read my system, but they will assure themselves of its truth knowing that it’s there. They will feel confident knowing that experts can cast an eye on it and say little against it. They will feel empowered knowing that it gives them a way out by grounding a new narrative of peace, optimism, and enlightenment; and they will be emboldened to resist the enemies of this, whoever they may be. Most importantly, the experts and the professionals that I can win over to our side can go on and realize our presence in every institution.
What is needed is a meta-religion: an amateurishly-philosophical method for mass-consumption that allows people to easily take anything positive and good from every religion, and celebrate it in eccentric, dilettantish, and whimsical ways. Whatever is continuous with the “real ethic” can be taken and remade as such. Stories are means of self-empowerment for all people. Like toys, they’re meant to be played with, put down, and picked up again to engage with and learn a psychological truth, or something like it.
So this will be the plan going forward. I will be pouring all my energy into realizing it, and we’re going to work on making people love us, and love this system.
Regards,
N
We said to NK:
The world revolves around authority and dominance on the one hand, and suggestibility and submission on the other.
Morgue’s problem is that he is delivering a dominant message but isn’t regarded as a dominant because of his image.
As you said, Morgue cannot be an authority figure for anyone who associates his image with non-authority.
“Morgue cannot continue on with the harsh and edgy appearance he has right now if he expects to multiply the power of these effects on his fans.” – That’s interesting. We don’t see his appearance as harsh at all. We were going to suggest to him that he should wear a suit to enhance his authority, and maybe start using dominant props, and a dominant background.
“He needs to soften it to make people trust him more…” – only if he targets the same audience. We want him to attempt a break out. Otherwise, he’s finished.
“grey lab coat over white.” – grey was chosen to distinguish “psychological” authority from “medical authority”. If Morgue put on a lab coat, he would not thereby acquire authority … the rest of his image counts against it. The issue is to make his existing image capable of exuding authority by careful manipulation of all the components that surround his image. A suit, for example, is much better than a T-shirt. A “film noir” background would be better than a plain background.
“Right now he’s too threatening, he needs to be “nicer”, more human” – actually, we would like to see him go much more extreme … People react only to extremity. Everything else is bland and forgettable. Morgue’s main issue is that he seems hesitant to really push the boat out for fear of alienating what audience he has. But that becomes a prison. A leader must lead, not follow.
“it’s because he’s not giving his fans something that they NEED him for.” – Well, that’s the key to the whole thing. What do these people NEED? What gets them addicted to Morgue?
We actually need to cultivate highly goal-directed thinking since it cuts through all the crap. Or we have to imagine people as robots, or apes, or some such … obeying primitive programming.
“He wants to accumulate fans and THEN hoist the whole picture on them.” – correct. But having a big audience gives you authority. People become much more receptive to the message.
When we told NK that we thought Hyperianism was going nowhere and we had very little interest in it, he wrote:
Okay, I won’t be wasting my time any more.
I have developed a detailed knowledge of cyberwarfare and counterintelligence from my research. I was originally going to try to do a workshop for Hyperians, but if nothing’s happening then I won’t bother sharing that any more than needed, and will keep some of it for my critical thinking course. No point in giving people something for free that is easily abused and what they don’t know and won’t know how to use.
The Black Dragon Society, or “Kokuryukai”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Dragon_ Society were a far right Japanese secret society who had barely just a few dozen members, but they were all committed to the hilt. The Kokuryukai was instrumental in mapping China to provide intelligence to the Japanese Army prior to the outbreak of war, and had used their ties to split the Chinese government in critical places by helping to empower warlords and the like. Despite their small numbers, the Kokuryukai were able to vastly influence the war effort, and Imperial Japan would have been incapable of moving as swiftly as it did to conquer the entirety of China with ease. The Kokuryukai were successful because they had very specific strategic goals, a highly educated and highly trained force of fanatically loyal members, and the ability to quickly establish connections with key figures needed to realize the stated goals. Developing a group like the Kokuryukai would vastly improve the likelihood of success.
I watched the movie with Irene, and we deconstructed it and took notes. It’s really simple, actually. The trouble’s in the execution and having enough helping hands that know what they’re doing… something we’re always short of. However, the answer is quite “simple”: Morgue can simply command his fans to do his bidding to expand Hyperianism’s reach by:
1. Simplified instructions (single sentences involving actions that the subconscious can immediately interpret) will greatly amplify people’s ability to carry out the actions.
2. Regular, positive-reinforcing encouragement to continue those actions.
Morgue cannot communicate these abilities because that would produce the problematic “oh dearism” as even seen in that film.
Morgue cannot use these abilities to people who consider him an outsider. These techniques only work with implicitly trusted parties, such as a government, a doctor, a politician.
Morgue cannot continue on with the harsh and edgy appearance he has right now if he expects to multiply the power of these effects on his fans. He needs to soften it to make people trust him more, just like the choice of grey lab coat over white. Right now he’s too threatening, he needs to be “nicer”, more human, etc. Otherwise people will follow him out of just wanting to please him, rather than pleasing themselves. Self-interest is always a much more resilient direction to go when it comes to fan retention.
In addition to this, he will need something somewhat irrelevant but something that reinforces the power of his message: stupid, trite, inspirational, positive vibe stuff as often promoted by Oprah, David Avocado Wolfe, etc. He has problems with fan retention, and it’s because he’s not giving his fans something that they NEED him for. If he were a psychopath, he’d have figured that out by now. If only we had conscientious psychopaths (hah) on our side.
Finally, one more thing: I asked some Hyperians about Morgue’s plans with this whole new agey direction he’s going. He wants to accumulate fans and THEN hoist the whole picture on them. That doesn’t work. In video gaming, it’s called “castling”, and it only works in ideal scenarios (i.e. never). Bringing people in has to be done as you go along, not as a gigantic one-two punch.
Rushing: https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Rush_(video_gaming)
Camping: https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Camping_(gaming)
Turtling/castling: https://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtling_( gameplay)
Player types: https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Bartle_taxonomy_of_ player_types
Regards,
N
In retrospect, we totally misread Morgue. Back in 2018, we basically regarded him as pathetic and going nowhere. We were actually surprised that Hyperianism didn’t collapse. Of course, we came to realize that it wasn’t collapsing because it was morphing into a cult, and maybe always was – since it was primarily feeding on Morgue’s personal fan club.
It became obvious that he was a dark triad type – Machiavellian, narcissistic and psychopathic – but that’s too general a label. We must thank Artemis Maenad for giving us the definitive insight into this guy. She cited a paper by Professor Sam Vaknin about pathological narcissism, and said that it exactly described Rebhahn. We read the paper for ourselves, and … wow … Artemis Maenad was 100% right. In our daily posts, we then went through the paper section by section over about two weeks.
Rebhahn as a child became a pathological narcissist – because of his RTS and all that – and later added Machiavellianism and psychopathy. He has a FALSE SELF (constructed to protect his true self, which was destroyed by his unloving relationship with his Christian fundamentalist parents, whose only interest in him was to raise him as a perfect WASP, and who thus never raised him as normal little boy, and they turned him into the weird freak he is now) is totally grandiose and is addicted to narcissistic supply. He NEEDS people to tell him he is wonderful, because otherwise his False Self would collapse (undergo “mortification”) and he would become his terrified, pathetic true self again, unable to cope with the world.
Rebhahn’s game is to posture as someone amazing SO THAT PEOPLE TELL HIM HE IS AMAZING (narcissistic supply), and, to do that, he psychopathically stole our work concerning the answer to existence, and that fed his grandiosity and self-delusion to a simply enormous degree, allowing him to imagine himself GOD, and pose as GOD, and be accepted by his insane cultists as GOD.
In retrospect, nothing that Rebhahn did was surprising. Like a robot, he simply does what a malignant narcissist does. There’s no mystery. This is an incredibly seriously mentally ill person, and he has surrounded himself with around 250 other incredibly seriously mentally ill people. That’s exactly what a cult is: a mad cult leader and his mad cult codependents. This cult WILL end. Cults always do. The timing is all that’s at issue.
Diarmuid Russell said,
“The ‘Hyperian’ cult were treating her [Irene] very badly and Morgue was a meth head cult leader (although is it was suggested he could have been smoking DMT) with semitransparent teeth who couldn’t be trusted. Corey believed he was reaching some new level of awareness through his drug abuse. The whole scene had become sort of a sex club with lots of intermingling going on with a number of high level ‘Hyperians’. Corey had also been paying for click farm services to make it look like his following was growing exponentially, NK told me that 90% of Corey’s likes were farmed, everything about ‘Hyperianism’ was fake.”
There’s no question that NK and Irene developed an absolute hatred of Morgue and Hyperianism, and this had been growing for a very long time. We were no fans of Morgue and Hyperianism either and we were in fact starting to contemplate doing something about it, but then, ironically, had to take action against NK himself – since, it became clear, his loathing of Morgue and Hyperianism had actually been extended to us. He wanted to get us out of the way so that he could Mandarinize ontological mathematics and use it to become a star in the academic world of philosophy, and he had no intention of referring to the AC/PI since that would be suicide in academic terms where Mandarin ideology and conventionality is mandatory, and NK was desperate to be a successful Mandarin and had no compunction about fucking us over to accomplish it. He actually used to tell us that he felt he was evil and was prepared to do anything to succeed. Just like Morgy Porgy!
Here’s what NK said after visiting Rebhahn in LA at the end of 2018:
Morgue is, of course, very popular. His strength is his ability to talk to stupid people, but he doesn’t have much of an ability to actually talk to people on his level or above. In fact, when discussing strategy with Morgue, I think that either he doesn’t understand it and it goes over his head, or he always keeps his mouth shut to never respond to matters of strategy. Irene thinks it’s a little bit of both, and that he doesn’t know what he’s doing, that he decides things on a whim. That is fine so long as he remains effective and focused.
During our Dec 30th party together, Morgue did betray that he was hiding some problems previously unknown to us. First off, it appeared that he was neglecting to eat and that he visited the bathroom too many times, indicating possible bulimia. His teeth were so thin they were transparent, so there’s that. Secondly, after getting quite drunk and attempting to smoke an entheogenic substance provided at the party, he asked why we didn’t have meth pipes for them. We all jokingly played that down but he became agitated about that and said he had several at home. Two weeks later, when I got home I asked him about the above and told him I was concerned, but he denied all of the above and chalked it up to drunkenness. Okay, fair enough, but that remains a minor point of concern going forward. One way or another, this suggests self-destructive tendencies and a disregard for health and wellbeing. This sort of behaviour is also something that can be a problem for him if someone opposed to us were to blackmail him or seek to discredit him or undermine his fan base’s morale.
Morgue approached us all during that party and suggested we all band together under a single brand. Every one of us denied the need for this because it would diminish our general appeal. Unless it’s a strictly material difference (such as left or right), usually one does not go far by appearing as a single unit. Furthermore, we specified that we would have much more success by hitting different demographics by a varied approach. He did not seem to understand this and got flustered. I found the whole thing puzzling, frankly.
Morgue discussed working more closely with me. I accepted but only conditionally. I will see what it is that he has to offer, but otherwise I am more and more committed to building my own personal brand amongst an intellectual and social elite. I have a clear ten year plan now for building up my influence and control. Whatever we work on has to synergize with what I do, otherwise I will not take on the strategic risk.”
The narcissists assemble!
Apparently, when we quoted this passage on the AC site in the last few months, Rebhahn said he could now prove that we were liars … because he doesn’t have “transparent teeth”!!! That made us laugh so hard. What, have you invented “tooth paint” to conceal your drug-addled, transparent teeth, you fuckwit?! You fucking talk about drugs all the time, you maniac, and you are clearly bulimic, and your bladder is totally fucked … you need to go for a piss every hour. Why don’t you tell the truth for once, you mad cunt!
Anyway, it has certainly been confirmed that Hyperianism was all about sex and drugs at its highest levels – as always happens with cults! And it’s 100% certain Corey had also “been paying for click farm services to make it look like his following was growing exponentially”.
Hyperianism is indeed totally fake. It’s all smoke and mirrors. Hyperianism would perish without Morgue, and even without any of its three remaining mods. Foot soldier cultists cannot continue a cult. When the leadership of the cult ends, so does the cult. That’s why we need to ensure these four people are jailed for their crimes.
Let’s get it done.
Delenda est Hyperianism.
NO QUARTER.
DELETE HYPERIANISM