Sutton's Paradox: Inaction Unless There is Personal Pain
I came across another pearl of wisdom in Patrick Wood’s book: Technocracy: The Hard Road To World Order; it struck me as being able to explain why so many people still shrug their shoulders, roll their eyes, or say “so what?” when confronted with the endless onslaught of evil agendas and ideologies we are enduring.
Many have been mesmerised by the shadows dancing across Plato’s cave for a full four years now, and are only just beginning to emerge from unreality.
Wood wrote:
The dilemma is this: merely warning of the trouble to come was not enough to mount resistance to oppose it. I suggest that this phenomena be named “Sutton’s Paradox”, in honor of the world-class researcher who saw early-on what the consequences of globalization would be. It seems intuitive that such accurate warnings of this type would elicit a positive response. If a child reaches for a hot stove and the parent loudly proclaims “Don’t touch it. That will burn you!”, you expect the child to retract his hand. If you warn occupants of a burning house to get out, you expect that they will exit immediately. Thus, we might expect the Warning-Action dynamic to be universally true, but it is not! Sutton’s Paradox could be succinctly stated as, “The degree of personal response is inversely proportional to the length of time to personal pain.”
Many writers on Substack and I have written endlessly about the so called non player characters (NPCs), the brainwashed, the indoctrinated, the menticide, the mass psychosis, and mused over why some can see, some can see when shown, and some cannot see. Granted there are valid points to all these hypotheses, as well as one’s innate sense of spirituality and moral compass (or lack thereof), yet I find the premise of Sutton’s Paradox intriguing in adding a much more simplistic line of reasoning that ties every other theory together.
After reading about this, at first I cast my mind back to the constant pressure and beratement I sustained as an employee of a multinational company during the height of injection mania. Whenever I was asked about my non-vax-status in a one-to-one meeting, and after raising my concerns about the what and the why, the typical response was “Well I’ve had it (C19 vax) and I’m fine.” Conversation shutdown, ergo no personal pain suffered by this individual (yet), therefore no personal response.
As we moved through the calendar year(s), previously jab-happy-vax-card-antisocial-media-posters began to experience personal pain. Either weird new medical conditions arose for themselves, or their family members. They began to connect the dots. They mounted a personal response to inform others and began their journey in reframing their worldview.
I could go on with countless examples of how and why and when I noticed people taking their blinkers off, not just for the bioweapon democide, but extending to the climate delusion, gender ideology, transhumanism, ESG / CEI / DEI scoring, digital ID, social credit scores et cetera.
That’s not the main point I wish to make here, although it is pertinent.
What struck me the most with the concept of Sutton’s Paradox, was how it could explain why the uninjected mounted a personal response much more quickly and in a more active capacity, than the rest of the global populace. Why was this?
I believe it was because once the uninjected had resigned themselves to remain that way, they suffered a prolonged period of personal pain, which became inversely proportional to their personal response. Whilst 65% of the global population were cheering on the greater good ethos, or ignorantly blissful to be able to go on holiday with a vax-pass, or even just to enter restaurants and generally partake in society unhindered, the other 35% persona non-grata sure as hell were made to feel and realise that in their every single waking moment.
The paradox is paradoxically disheartening, because it makes me think that for all the other carnage we have coming down the pike with digital ID, CBDC, and the amendments to the international health regulations, we can document it, predict it, warn about it until we are blue in the face; yet people will remain blasé until, and unless they experience personal pain as a result of their lifestyles becoming directly affected, with their personal freedoms directly curtailed.
Inevitably, when these moments arise amongst those lost souls yet to find their path, rather than smugly telling them “I told you so, I tried to warn you, it’s too late now, we are all screwed,” we can instead choose to be patient and understanding enough to respond in a more positive light. “Great, I am so glad you are starting to see it now.” They may still be apathetic and overwhelmed, such is the initial disorientation upon discovering that literally everything you used to believe, is entirely false. They will ask you, naturally, “what can we do? Is it hopeless? Do we just have to go along with it anyway?”
This one has often stumped me. Sure, you can suggest they get involved in this movement and that, or if in a position to do so, think locally, as Jeff Childers so eloquently wrote about in a recent stack in terms of local governance, school boards, as making a difference in this way has been demonstrably proven to work:
However, the simplest response to the recently awoken looking for guidance on what to do next, is for them to go on to simply tell the truth.
Telling the truth whenever and wherever opportune, is the easiest and most effective tool we all have. Knowledge of the truth cannot be cognitively force-forgotten once it breaks through one’s own mental gymnastics in doublethink and official narrative belief systems. Greater awareness of the truth automatically leads to small, almost imperceptible changes made in people’s everyday behaviour, actions, spending habits, and future planning. This in turn leads to the central pillars of narrative control or story, crumbling more quickly and with a greater ferocity.
I think this recent post by
summed this up very aptly:
Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless.
Not to speak is to speak.
Not to act is to act.
-Dietrich Bonhoeffer
“Right is right even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it.”
-Saint Augustine
Nicholas Creed is a Bangkok based dissident blogger. All content is free for all readers, with nothing locked in archive that requires a paid subscription. Any support is greatly appreciated.
Bitcoin address:
bc1p0eujhumczzeh06t40fn9lz6n6z72c5zrcy0are25dhwk7kew8hwq2tmyqj
Monero address:
86nUmkrzChrCS4v5j6g3dtWy6RZAAazfCPsC8QLt7cEndNhMpouzabBXFvhTVFH3u3UsA1yTCkDvwRyGQNnK74Q2AoJs6Pt
Happy Loy Krathong! My laptop is finally fixed and I'm looking forward to round 3 or 4 or whatever I'm up to. In my experience young children never listen to a warning, because it is abstract, unless they have already experienced some hopefully lesser hurt. Perhaps an experience too close to a campfire gave them an unpleasant warning about hot stoves or some experience of falling made them careful about the stairs. With the Covid jabs it was so abstract and externalized that you are absolutely correct: the most common response by far to these unholy things which I seemed to encounter was indeed the "What's the big deal? I got it and I'm fine" statement. That still is the case I've had several people who do the whole "why can't your husband just get the jabs?" Thing. People don't care much until it affects them
One thing I've learned in my brief time here on earth: The majority of people only change when they've felt enough pain.
If you're really smart and/or 'evolved', you'll start noticing other's painful choices and make better choices for yourself.
To your question of "now that we know it was all bullshit, what do?!", there's a lot of things that can be done. The first is to unwind all of the fake phony bullshit that's been stuffed into your head from birth. The next is to figure out as best as you can, what *is* true. The second is to cement in your very being to be comfortable with *uncertainty* (most people are very uncomfortable with uncertainty, which is why they willingly adopt comforting bullshit as truth). This is because there's now a tremendous void where what you used to believe was true simply doesn't exist, and what is true must be discovered. The third is to take the most obvious rational actions based on your new realizations about all of that (seriously, don't overthink it, just take the first, most obvious action, then repeat). Do that enough times and you'll be much better off.
Paraphrasing Mark Passio (a self-reformed Satanist): "There's only one sin in all of physical existence, and that's to willfully turn from the truth and embrace the lie as such."