Skip to main content

Well, that was both nauseating and educational

Today, as I walked into a grocery store, I spotted a person whom I know (call them ‘Pan’ as a suitable acronym/handle) at the other end of an aisle.

They were dressed in a “power” colour and black, were (as always) so wrapped up in themselves that they were oblivious to everything outside their circle of interest, and were dominating a conversation with an older couple.

The husband was significantly taller than Pan, the wife significantly shorter. Pan hadn’t needed to assume an overbearing posture or anything like that, however the couple were reacting to Pan’s controlling actions as if they were puppets. The only important thing in the Universe to them at that that instant was obviously Pan.

This fits the character: to Pan, other people are only important in their appointed rôle (always, of which rôle they are completely unaware) of making Pan look good. That is all.

One of the (many) contradictions in Pan’s life is that they literally don’t care about others at all, other than that they appear to look good to said others. <shrug> I don’t know how this can be, and I very much wish that their actions had no effect on me or on those I care about.

Contra that, feelings like fear, love, anger or joy have no meaning at all for Pan beyond their use as methods for controlling others. Consequently, they have no conscience at all, and absolutely no sense of empathy.

Nausea? I remember having reacted like a puppet, in very much the same fashion.

Education? That massive disconnection from reality explains some of the apparently idiotic actions Pan has taken (legal documents applying only to premises outside their area of jurisdiction, false accusations of others having done the very things that Pan had already (and/or has since) done, painstakingly hammering false memories into the minds of innocents, that manner of thing).

As long as Pan can claim that they have taken certain actions, aspects of the situation like truth or integrity have no meaning; they are irrelevant to Pan, and so (by regal definition) irrelevant to all others. Pan can effectively get what they want, and hang the consequences, if any. The one-word term for this is bullying.’


Since angerhas no meaning for them, actions which are immediately potentially lethal (including to themselves) were not taken by Pan out of anger (although they willingly feign anger when it suits their purposes), they were taken in defence’ of a grandiose (and false) self-image.

Pan thinks that without said grandiose (and false) self-image, they have nothing and are nothing.

News Bulletin: as this self-image is a mirage (not real, not genuine at all) Pan has nothing and is nothing.

How someone who is (in emotional terms) completely heartless deals with this, I dont know. I strongly suspect that the answer is “not at all.”

Comments

Anonymous said…
Can I have my 2 mins of life back after reading that drivel?
austux said…
experience “Pan’s” actions in person for very long, and you’ll want a whole life back, O identity-free individual.

more than that, you’ll want to carefully erase every tiny fragment of her influence over you. this without spending any time doing so, or focussing on the damage itself nor the perpetrator.

Popular posts from this blog

An Open and Shut response to Darl McBride

Hi, Darl. I see you’re being dishonest again . It’d be really nice if you could shoot straight for a change, but I think Kerry’s Dad will be selling snowplows in Hell first. Three years ago, when I first joined The SCO Group, we focused the company on the area that was most profitable and provided the most benefit to customers, investors, resellers, developers and employees: UNIX No, you focused the company on suing people, which was most profitable to lawyers and provided some golden parachutes for your buddies. People thought we were crazy. They were right. But since SCO owns the UNIX operating system The SCO Group does not own UNIX® in any sense of the word. The Open Group owns the UNIX trademark, definition and other rights , The SCO Group does not. The SCO Group doesn’t even own the UnixWare® or OpenServer® code, the rights to those are held by Novell and TSG use them only by permission and under certain conditions — which they have violate...

5x7 text dot-matrix in five minutes...

This is a fairly primitive toy I threw together today for a specific purpose, published in case it’s any use to others... feed it a list of words as command arguments, which it will then display as a 5x7 ASCII dotmatrix with ‘#’ as a dot & ‘_’ as a blank. /* * display text using a 5x7 bitmap font in ASCII letters */ static unsigned char font [] [5] = { { 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00 }, // 0x20 32 { 0x00,0x00,0x6f,0x00,0x00 }, // ! 0x21 33 { 0x00,0x07,0x00,0x07,0x00 }, // " 0x22 34 { 0x14,0x7f,0x14,0x7f,0x14 }, // # 0x23 35 { 0x00,0x07,0x04,0x1e,0x00 }, // $ 0x24 36 { 0x23,0x13,0x08,0x64,0x62 }, // % 0x25 37 { 0x36,0x49,0x56,0x20,0x50 }, // & 0x26 38 { 0x00,0x00,0x07,0x00,0x00 }, // ' 0x27 39 { 0x00,0x1c,0x22,0x41,0x00 }, // ( 0x28 40 { 0x00,0x41,0x22,0x1c,0x00 }, // ) 0x29 41 { 0x14,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x14 }, // * 0x2a 42 { 0x08,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x08 }, ...

Citizens Augmenting Government Waste

So here we have Microsoft-funded “ Citizens Against Government Waste ” (CAGW) heavily criticising Massachusetts’s switch to an internationally accepted and open document standard (not open source, open standard — but I seem to remember a large monopolist who frequently confuses the two when it suits them). I remember CAGW, they were the organisation who had dead people writing in to support Microsoft in court a few years ago — thanks to sbergman27 for the link — is this “the dead hand of CAGW” at work again? Let’s follow the money and find out. Who stands to lose the most money and control if Massachusetts switches to an unencumbered document format? Big surprise, it’s CAGW sponsor Microsoft, through their dominant MS-Office suite. Why did CAGW list Microsoft’s suite last, after two other much-less-dominant examples which are waning anyway? If you’re inclined to wallow in additional irony, consider that at leas...