Bicameral Brilliance

How Bad News is Good News in the Mind War

For those of you who have been reading Burning Bright with any regularity, you have likely surmised by now that I’m quite partial to developing, analyzing and presenting something I refer to as Cognitive Cyphers. In fact, that very term is a cognitive cypher in and of itself.

Put simply, while I am not always the originator of the origins of these cyphers—narrative frameworks through which Micro events and situations can be rendered in more unifying, Macro premises—I try to put a useful spin on them before presenting them to this audience.

In the recent past, I have discussed concepts such as Narrative Whiplash and Narrative Acceleration, fusing the two into a discussion of how Game Theory is being applied to the current Fifth-Generation War we’re observing as we attempt to suss out who’s who and what’s what on the psychological battlefield.

For today’s Sunday Standalone, I’d like to present a developing concept I refer to as ‘Bicameral Thinking,’ which I hold as a separate, albeit complementary Cognitive Cypher to the aforementioned Narrative Whiplash.

But before we dive into the specifics of the concept, let’s touch on the ‘Game Theory’ of it all, which is a strategy you’ve no doubt been incessantly reminded of in many corners of the Alternative/New Media.

From Burning Bright to Just Human, many of us believe—with prompting from the infamous and useful ‘Q’ Drops—that patriots in both the east and west have trapped the Deep State Globalists in both a Potential and Actual Operation, using Game Theory to predict, anticipate, intercept and even prompt enemy deployments of both the narrative and tactical variety.

In this way, patriots have engineered a complex system of narrative, psychological and sometimes strategic (MAL Raid, anyone?) traps and triggers that they then guide enemy factions—from the acting ‘Admin’ to Globalist Leaders to the Media Industrial Complex—into, all with the intention of forcing said factions to expend both narrative and tactical ammunition while ‘waking up’ sovereign citizens around the world as to the corrupt ‘System of Systems’ we are trying to dismantle, as discussed at length in the most recent edition of Righteous Russia.

While most of you are aware of the basic tenets of Game Theory, it’s worth giving a general overview for those either new to the concept or confused by it.

Essentially, Game Theory involves two opposing sides engaged in an uncooperative, zero sum scenario wherein any wins incurred by one side come at the direct expense of the other. In Game Theory, one side seeks to trap the opposing side in a Finite Game, ie: a game wherein the enemy is force to react more than act, and make decisions based on situations they are thrust into rather than choose from a position of strength or free intent. This places the Finite side into a losing proposition, wherein attempts to break out of the Finite Game often accelerate the depletion of their own ‘moves’ as the aforementioned narrative and strategic traps are triggered one after another, leaving the Finite Player with fewer and fewer counters and directed actions.

The controlling—and eventually, winning—side in this scenario would be considered the Infinite Side, which is a fusion of temporal and strategic elements. In short, the side in the game that is acting rather than reacting, or putting the opponent in a situation where they are forced to act against their own self interests is the side that has an unlimited number of maneuvers left to play relative to the finite maneuvers they have left to their opposition. It is not necessary for an Infinite Player to have infinite moves; it is only necessary for him to have engineered a game board wherein he will always have the last move, or the responding move to the opponent’s forced move.

This is why chess analogies are most relevant to Fifth-Generation Warfare and military intelligence strategy. When the enemy is placed into check after check, their movable space on the game board continues to shrink, while the movable—and therefore, actionable—space on the board belonging to the Infinite Player expands.

Often, two sides engaged in Game Theory may seem to be playing in a nearly-limitless timeline, but as we often say around these parts, losses—and by extension—wins in Game Theory happen slowly, and then all at once, just as they do in chess.

Herein, one can see how a Narrative Deployment—something I refer to as a ‘Potential Event’—and even sometimes how ‘Actual Events’ can be negative and even damaging to the Finite Player, while affording positive long-term gains to the Infinite Player. This recalls the concept of destruction blocks in combat sports, wherein a fighter will accept partially-defended blows in order to both gauge the power of the opponent while draining his reserves. In the short-term, the blocking/defending fighter appears to be losing, but all one needs to do is extend the timeline to see the longer-term strategy at play, and why the losing fighter ‘landing’ strikes against a guarded opponent can eventually doom him when he runs out of ammunition—stamina, in this case—with which to attack his opponent or defend himself.

Does this tiring hypothetical boxer remind you of any side in particular in the current Shadow War?

Taken together in concert with the overarching Game Theory set dressing, the concepts I present on Burning Bright often result in a positive outlook, even if the short-term view is muddy, gray or even distinctly negative. This is not an attempt to spread hopium. This is merely an attempt to apply these cognitive cyphers to ongoing events—both Actual and Potential/Narrative—and to follow them to their logical conclusions, extending the hypothetical and strategic timeline until a tactical ‘end’ is reached.

It's not my fault that, as I often say, we have better storytellers and thus, Players than [they] do.

In short, I believe that the right perspective and the right cognitive tools, along with accompanying patience and resolve can lead one to form logic-based, positive conclusions in the face of negative premises.

The psychological tension that arises from this attempt in the minds of some stems from the inherent seeming-contradiction between a negative engagement or deployment—Actual or Potential—by the enemy and the positive reactions to its deployment argued by myself and others in the larger truth community.

To rewire your reaction to this contradiction, which is contradictory only in theory and not in practice, you need only agree on a unifying premise—that being the necessary public exposure of all of [their] many crimes with the reconciliation that such exposure requires short-term losses on both a narrative and sometimes strategic level. This is similar to the manner in which an army feigning retreat on the battlefield is not always ceding ground to survive, but rather to put itself in prime position to counter.

And if Donald J. Trump and his allies have proven themselves to be anything in the complex series of engagements we track in this community, surely it is patient, durable and powerful counter punchers.

Accepting this, we can come to an understanding that, while short-term damage may result in ‘allowing’ the enemy to action certain Potential and Actual Events, doing so will be worthwhile in order to get a needed majority of the population onboard with somewhat dramatic changes to the matrix of political, societal, cultural and economic systems we have been caged in for generations.

As Patrick Gunnels wisely points out, adopting this cognitive approach to an analysis of current events and narratives requires the development of heterodox thinking—that being thinking that rejects appeals to authority, majority and consensus. And today, I would add that, in order to peer through the fog of war and separate the wheat from the chaff in the emotional noise in the ether, it requires another type of thinking as well:

Bicameral Thinking.

The Bicameral Mentality concept that comes from neuroscience posits that the origins of human consciousness and the belief in higher powers originated in more rudimentary, simple brain chemistry our ancestors were cursed with. This, according to the theory, suggests that early humans essentially had two half-brains, one of which ‘speaks’ and the other which ‘obeys.’

While it’s an interesting concept, I flatly reject it.

That said, it doesn’t mean the concept of Bicameral Thoughts need be rejected, as I feel that thinking in hypothetical, if dichotomous parallels is highly useful not only for exploring narratives and events from multiple angles, but also in discovering whether or not said parallel ideas actually contradict one another, or if they BOTH make sense depending on the intent and perspective (and Game Theory timeline,) of the thinker.

This is an appeal to apply the Bicameral Mind to your analysis of both Micro and Macro narratives—a technique allowing one to follow seemingly-opposing and contradictory premises to their logical conclusions without succumbing to the psychological tension this creates.

To do this, as hinted above, one must first draw a line distinguishing Bicameral Thinking from contradictory thinking.

While Narrative Whiplash exposes the enemy’s unwise use of contradictory deployments—that being deployments that cannibalize or undo narratives emanating from the same sources, Bicameral Thinking does not reference logical contradictions, but rather perceptions.

In contradictory thinking, two dichotomous concepts are pushed regarding the same situation, resulting in psychological tension and, ultimately rejection, either consciously or unconsciously. In Bicameral Thinking, also known as multi-planar thinking, a single event, be it Potential or Actual, is considered from opposite premises and on both short and long-term timelines. The premise or plane from which the event is considered along with the timeline on which it is considered results in parallel, albeit opposite readings emerging from the same situation that are NOT ultimately contradictory.   

While this is a practically-useful tool for hypothetical thinking, something immensely important to the reading of events such as the MAL Raid and all its ensuing, spiderwebbed possibilities, it is also critical to understanding that sometimes, the negative fallout from a given Narrative Deployment is BOTH bad optically AND good in the long-term.

Some examples of narrative deployments that fall into this parallel dichotomy include:

1.     The recent Student Debt Forgiveness jubilee, from its initial shock public backlash to the  long-term, positive implications of its threat to the underlying Central Banking system we want to expose.

2.     The disastrous Kabul Withdrawal on the back of the Doha Agreement, the former of which likely exposed traitorous intel assets while destroying Biden’s public polling for the first time, and the latter of which has resulted in the first period of relative stability in the region in decades.

3.     The burgeoning European Energy Crisis, its initial ‘real’ damage to the economic and even security prospects of tens of millions of citizens in the EU and its ensuing exposure of the complementary corruption and sociopathy of Globalist leadership and the utterly absurd push to transition to a Green Energy economy.

4.     The current U.S. and international inflationary conditions, their impact on the day-to-day life of ordinary citizens and the bipartisan unification of said impact that points to a longer-term exposure of the fiat monetary system and the need for a return to sound money policies.

In each of the above examples, seemingly-contradictory concepts, when run through a Bicameral Cypher, expose the underlying brilliance of the Game patriots in the east and west have currently trapped the Deep State within, for even when they manage to fire off damaging Potential and Actual Events against sovereigns the world over, they are only accelerating their exposure and resultant demise in the Collective Mind that represents the ultimate prize in the war in the first place.

All of these scenarios involve allowing unpleasant things to occur. Consequences. And yet, all MUST occur if the underlying structures are to be exposed, granting the public mandate that will be necessary to action change when we publicly retake the levers of power.

This sort of thinking also clues one in as to the brilliance and strategic necessity of Devolution and other Continuity of Government plans, as patriots who will ultimately lead us into a New Restoration of Sovereign Society must be separated from public leadership positions while this traumatic, but necessary awakening process is underway.

While it may seem like ALL current events, both Potential and Actual can be viewed as positive under this framework, that is true only insofar as this reading of Game Theory is accurate. I said on the Power Hour that the very fact that the enemy faction is deploying new narratives/potential events with unprecedented rapidity is evidence that they are not in control of the narrative, and the narrative, as we discuss at Burning Bright IS the battlefield. It IS the war. It IS, for our purposes today, the Game all sides are playing.

And, put simply, in a game such as this, the side that is being forced to react, to deploy new narratives and to issue contradictory narratives all at once is NOT the side playing an Infinite Game.

So the next time you feel yourself getting incensed while attempting to read the intent on both sides in this Fifth-Generation War of Narratives, and even when real damage seems to be underway on any number of fronts in sovereign society, keep in mind that the enemy gets a vote and a counter, but also observe the continually-accelerating exposure of [their] plans to a waking populace, and salivate at the justice to come.

For justice is coming.

Donald Trump has described himself as a counter-puncher, and we appear to be entering the later rounds of the contest. The opponent is still throwing punches, but as the timeline is extended in Bicameral readings of their own narrative deployments, it is growing exceedingly difficult to conclude long-term gains for the paradigm they are trying to keep the Collective Mind trapped in.

You see, the fighter accepting punches is not sacrificing anything. He is merely doing what must be done, in his martial calculation to ensure a lasting victory, and the protection of the only thing he ultimately needs to win the contest—that being his mind. If patriots have ‘allowed’ damage to occur, they have only done so because they are not omniscient or all-powerful. And even then, any small, short-term ‘victory’ the other side takes in recent months—going all the way back to the ‘Acting Admin’s’ fraudulent inauguration and its preceding fraudulent election—seems to come pre-wrapped with a lit fuse.

As is the case in a championship fight when one overly-aggressive fighter ‘punches himself out,’ and runs out of stamina while the opponent remains fresh, guarded and opportunistic, the counter strike that will ultimately win the contest need not expend precious time or energy to be effective. It need only be delivered with proper timing.

What that timing is, we can only guess at. But what seems quite certain to me, based on the narrative chaos and discordance of their deployments and the increasing speed of narrative whiplash is the fact that we are already in the late rounds, and the counters should start coming soon, and with speed, conviction and finishing intent.

Now … go watch Fight Club.

Until next time, stay Positive, stay Based and most importantly … stay Bright.

---

Want to submit a one-time donation? You can do so by buying me a coffee!

Paid supporters allow me to devote the time and research necessary to make this publication unique. All members of the growing Bright Army are appreciated.

Be sure to leave a comment below to let me know your thoughts on this piece and to provide your own. I read every one!