This is super interesting and I think you're onto something. I wonder if one optimistic take is that decentralized swarms can absolutely be hacked via feminine energy for good. I think of the stewardship I've done with Doomer Optimism and it's fully a result of being a woman that I build community through identifying strengths. Certainly swarms don't necessarily have to be swarming for ill. Plenty of historical counter examples.

Expand full comment

Hi David. You raise some interesting questions. I agree wholeheartedly that Green is essentially feminine in nature and that the framing of the rise of Green consciousness has largely been through a rather masculine lens. In that regard, I do think a worthwhile conversation needs to happen with respect to how both feminine and masculine energies have laid themselves out up to this point -- contrasting the stark difference between "divine" and "diabolical" versions of each, as well as the gradient between these polarities -- and how they are impacting society as both thesis and antithesis. Speaking directly to your question, however, I think the beginnings of an answer lies in understanding the primary function of Green consciousness itself. As you no doubt know, Green is the pinnacle of Tier I consciousness as laid out in ID & SD and represents a ceiling for our ordinary conceptions of emotive-cognitive processing. As such, it's primary function is "greasing the wheels" for a move to Tier II consciousness, and this greasing by definition must loosen the mental and emotional stranglehold that Tier I structures impose on us (to a certain degree, anyway) in order to create space for the trans-rational, trans-emotive aspects of Tier II to present themselves. In this regard, Green can be seen as "destructive", and is often categorized as ONLY destructive by people who either are in the business of preserving Tier I structures or who don't fully understand the move Green is making. Green is inherently destabilizing, chaotic, decentralized, and diverse. Were this a mathematical system, I'd say it's a frenetic mess waiting for a Strange Attractor to emerge. And perhaps these egregores are just that, but it should be mentioned that these egregores don't appear to have the characteristics of Tier II awareness (at least at this point) and, thusly, make me very wary of them. Lastly, I can conceive of a divinely feminine articulation of Green, and I can see how its destabilizing effects could provide a bridge to unlocking Tier II awareness, but I can't conceive of Green ever manifesting a healthy society (not in the way Tier I would define "healthy"). Fifty or a hundred years from now, I think either Green will have propelled us to a mass awakening into a Teal society or will have regressed us back to Blue, Red, or even Magenta. Wilbur himself, in an interview you gave a few years ago, indicated that a tendency to rebound off the ceiling of Tier I rationality was being observed by certain elements of the progressive Left -- that though their values were Green, their methods for implementing those values had come to typify the tribalistic nature of lower levels and that those methods had come to be just as important to note as the values themselves. As it's been said, how you get there is where you arrive.

Expand full comment

I would like to throw something out there since I've had the time to do a few deep-dives into how modern behavioral science and Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP) have been applied to public messaging in recent times, especially in the last two years.

There are definitely common mass phenomena and behaviors which give the impression that things are coordinated, for people at a basic level have the same human needs and desires, but I think it would be a major mistake to overlook exactly how public opinion is shaped. Being familiar with the specific lexicon and linguistic models used by social psychologists and behavioral scientists, I can say that there's a lot more than just a hive mind of collective consciousness going on.

We can observe the use of specific techniques in messaging, from hypnotic suggestions, NLP ''framing'' techniques, and various tricks to induce heightened emotional states i.e. "trance-inductions," which are then used as the jump off point to introduce new suggestions. Cue to images of helpless women and children screaming in Ukraine (the initial message used to induce an altered-state) to the a sequence of "truisms" (to build agreement and consensus) like ''no one should have to go hungry and be afraid, and not know where they're going to sleep next'' followed by a new ''suggestion'' like ''closing the skies'' will help ensure we're doing everything possible to bring this to an end.''

Just those few simple phrases make use a several different hypnotic devices. One can find this kind of stuff in virtually all major public policy messaging. Because these things are very formulaic and methodical, they can be identified, but the specific nodes and centers involved in shaping those messages can also be identified. It's not random, it's a very small group with a very specific kind of expertise.

It would be wrong for me not to provide an example at this point, but I would preface that by saying just as the current mainstream narratives make use of certain basic terminologies and lexicons to ''frame'' their narratives, if we're to break out of those frames, we have to be able to use and develop our own language and wording to get across something more nuanced and specific, lest we just remain trapped in the linguistic models consistently fed to people in feedback loops via the mainstream media.

Key word I would put forward is "Psyops." We have something called the "Five Eyes"; the West has a Five Eyes intelligence network that covers most of the globe in terms of surveillance and counter-intelligence. Psyops are the basic activities run by these intelligence agencies... However, if people can't put a name on these things, they're going to have a hell of a lot of trouble identifying these operations in real time, even when they're right in front of their face.

Exhibit A: "Controlled Spontaneity"

The article below begins:

"The British government has prepared for terrorist incidents by pre-planning social media campaigns which are designed to appear to be a spontaneous public response to attacks, Middle East Eye has learned.

Hashtags are carefully tested before attacks happen, Instagram images selected, and “impromptu” street posters are printed.

In operations that contingency planners term “controlled spontaneity”, politicians’ statements, vigils and inter-faith events are also negotiated and planned in readiness for any terrorist attack."


The naive individual might say, "Oh yes, but this is just one example and it's for national security reasons, it's totally fine." However, fast-forward to the Ukraine narrative, the sudden ''westandwithukraine'' and various hashtags, the colors of the Ukrainian flag suddenly popping up and being flashed everywhere on social media. It's the same formula. ''Controlled-Spontaneity" is used all the time, it's very common, but the point is these kinds of operations are run by intel agencies. The point of a real psyop is to make it look organic, to make it look natural, to make it look like it's just the collective consciousness manifesting itself.

It's not.

The wise must be able to make the distinction between genuine mass phenomena and controlled spontaneity and psyops run by our Western intelligence agencies, whose greater targets are arguably their own domestic populations, rather than ''foreign threats.''

I'll close with a quote by Bertrand Russell:

“Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen."

Bertrand Russell – The Impact of Science on Society (1951)

How the covid-19 narrative was carefully constructed using carefully curated linguistic models is another example. Most people were not complying with measures because of some underlying scientific reason or argument, it was the structure and emotional nature of the messaging. More specifically, it was the very precise use of behavioral nudging and NLP framing techniques, along with devices like "cues" and "anchors" to steer people and introduce new layers of frames and suggestions.

Exhibit B: A deep dive into the British government-sponsored "MindSpace" document which details precisely how behavioral science, nudging, and NLP framing techniques will be used to change people's behavior without their conscious knowledge or consent...


To explain these things away as either trying to frame them as cartoonish Hollywood-style conspiracy thrillers (which is what most people have in their mind when they think about intelligence agencies and what they do) or to simply say these are the natural manifestations of the "hive mind" and "mass formation" psychosis because certain conditions have been met, whatever take one chooses, it overlooks the careful designs and linguistic models used to steer people's thinking and behavior, without their conscious knowledge of consent. Behavioral scientists and social psychologists refer to this as targeting "automatic motivations."

The quote by Russell was describing the early stages of the developments of these techniques. Now they are in full use, and we need to be able to at least put a name on them if we're going to make distinctions between collective conscious and mass behavior or group dynamics and genuine psyops and targeted behavior modification by government agencies...

One can choose whichever field they prefer, whether the environment, geopolitics, pandemics, finance, etc... the same techniques are applied to shape narratives, and it's very centralized. It's very small, but very organized around a few nodes across the Five Eyes structure. The effect, however, is very big.

Exhibit C: Implanting false memories into the collective psyche using, once again, hypnosis and behavioral science...


The question becomes how widespread is this, how many false memories and fake narratives have been implanted into people's psyches?

Expand full comment

Is the 'group mind' steering us towards disaster? Great analysis and insight David. Thank you. My concern is the degree to which the 'group mind' is shaped by the aspie/'adultist' approach to raising and educating children. The system of 'outcomes-based' standardized education (designed by political leaders and corporate heads with no significant input from the field itself - 'spiritual/ethical influencers (e.g. Dalai Lama), Montessori / Waldorf / Reggio, cognitive scientists, psychologists, schools of education, teachers, parents or students) appears designed to override its core constituency's primary need/orientation to learn through curiosity, attachment, and play. Are we actually 'training' our children to be 'evil' - for senselessness-making, competition-uber-alles, and self-commodification? Childhood is the real "great reset" / refreshment. Are we making them tired and old instead of letting them inspire us with their enthusiasm and love?

Expand full comment
May 3, 2022·edited May 3, 2022

We are essentially coalesced patterns of energy bound within a continuous energetic fabric of interlocking patterns out of which physical form arises. Wisdom teachings instruct that energy follows thought. Therefore to “hack” an energy pattern, an egregore or what have you, is simply the redirection of energy away from that pattern through a refocusing of thought that leads to a redirection of speech and action.

If your intention is to work against a destructive pattern, how productive is it to “gas-light” all those within your reach of impact with fear and anger that essentially pours more power into that which you assert you wish to work against?

What is all this talking for if it doesn't produce real-world action items for individuals within their own everyday spheres of influence that directs energy toward a positive outcome?

The solutions are not “out there” or in this manufactured reality, they do not come about through grandiose displays. The solutions are right in front of us, when we turn away from the screen. Thoughts, speech, and a house to put in order, family and friends to love and support, neighbors to greet and lend a helping hand to. All our work done with care, our duties fulfilled, and any excess allowed to freely radiate into charity.

Expand full comment

Woman here 🤚 I’m pondering your query in the paras following ‘The introduction question’. My sense is that women are as capable of galaxy brain thinking as men are, but perhaps more inclined to acknowledge the deep unknowability of so much of the terrain as to be less inclined to employ a ‘thought leadership’ stance in the public arena.

I wonder if a feminine take on the swarm might be something more akin to a highly sensitive, sensually intelligent collective consciousness, motivated by the instinct towards mutual alignment. In feminine thought/feeling spaces, the sense of inherent interconnection is so often palpable. We meet in circle - no sages, no stages. A reticence towards leaders or ‘names’ that might play on ego or sway the crowd. The power is in embodied and empowering facilitation, not individual point-making. We trust in what emerges, because it isn’t enforced, it grows between us.

Expand full comment

In my experience you need both genders to find solutions because lots of male approaches to problems are not going to work for 50% of the population and whatever you do if women at large are not on board is destined to fail. So it might be that women are A) Found their own solutions to the meaning crisis but are not organized or sharing them on spaces that can be recognized B) They are causing the meaning crisis and/or benefitting from it thus actively encourage it so why would they try to solve something that is working for them at least for the moment?

Expand full comment

I’ve swung back to this, because it’s been bothering me.

“In my view, there is something about the 'galaxy brain' tendency, the attempt to map reality cognitively and with these vast 'theories of everything', that seems to be a very masculine approach. It's something men do more than women. The best of the thinkers we have hosted have also integrated intuition, relationality, emergence and the more 'feminine' qualities, but even so, it's clear that the ecosystem we have been mapping skews heavily male.”

I want to offer two reflections. The first: there is nothing ‘inherently masculine’ about the galaxy brain tendency. Brain differences between men and women are increasingly attributed more to social conditioning than nature, and as such our brains capable of much the same genius and stupidity. These presumed differences in masc and fem thinking could just as easily be described as McGilchrist’s left and right brain thinking…when we all have both. But we accept left brain thinking more readily from men, and right brain intuition more readily from women. That’s not inherent; that’s conditioning. That’s how we succeed in a system that’s warped - for men and women.

And the second: that perhaps the fact that the leader of Rebel Wisdom thinks that this prized style of thinking IS inherently masculine, might be the very reason the community skews male. This statement has been bothering me for weeks, and the reason is simple - it’s sexist. It makes me as a woman feel that this is a space in which my own mega brain will always be deemed somehow inferior, overlooked or held with scepticism. Where my voice will carry less weight unless it plays to stereotypically feminine qualities. Something I inadvertently found myself doing in my first comment. I feel like this is a space I only offer value by playing to my embodied feminine side.

Why are the women not here? Because based on comments like the one above, they wouldn’t be fully seen here. They are already pigeon-holed. It’s worth saying that this is something that female thinkers KNOW already. We sense this space doesn’t assume our full capability, and so most would never join.

When there is nothing masculine about my insane IQ and particular genius. It just is. By any objective / blind tested measure, it is more original and capable than most - men and women. If I were in a male body, it would be obvious. Because I am in a woman’s, it is easily overlooked.

Finally, it’s a fair point to ask ‘where are the female equivalents of Vervaeke’. I would suggest they are sadly, frustratingly, finding themselves fighting the battle of sexism in gender studies departments in universities worldwide. Or in comment threads like this. For we know there is little point in genius if it can not be seen. Until the day that inherent bias towards women thinkers is eradicated, phenomenal women are resigned to fighting the cause of feminism, spending their precious time and brains on levelling the playing field rather than more important matters, like creating a new and better theory of everything. We can’t be recognised as the polymaths if those holding the power start from an unconscious position of assuming we’re incapable.

And so we spend our time shining a light on that sexism, so that the women who come after us might stand a better shot.

Expand full comment

David thankyou for sharing as a female who prides herself on being able to move between the rational (I'm an engineer) and the emotional (I now facilitate and coach for a living) I do wonder whether this feminine essence of green (as you say more relational and emotionally based) don't get lost in the micro communication mechanisms of the system. Writing, social media posts and even video are poor substitutes for relationships built on trust. These mechanisms equally do not handle ambiguity or complexity well, forcing us to choose a word, a title and even a channel within a channel through which to publish.

Expand full comment
May 6, 2022·edited May 6, 2022

Joel Kotkin is a moderate-conservative social scientist that exposed a massive error in the infantile version of left-progressive-greenie geopolitics:



Putin is a superb tactician that knows how to exploit the weakness and stupidities of the west (including the infantile form of feminism).

The "paradigm shift" to "green energy" energized short-term hysteria to shut down Germany's nuclear and coal energy sectors, thus requiring purchase of Russian gas/oil to make up the difference between the inadequate production of "sustainable" energy and ACTUAL NEED.

Putin used the profits from increased oil/gas sales to build up his military machine.

Putin used his leverage over energy supplies to the west for political purposes [EDIT: by making serious threats for YEARS].

The infantile/naive/utopian version of "greenie/feminist" thinking is incapable of dealing with the real geopolitical threats from "red" empires such as China/Russia and their anti-western allies, but:

the "good guys vs bad guys" thing is absurd.

The Ukraine war is classic "empire-on-empire" crime (all empires are evil).

Expand full comment

The "patterned nebulousity"* (David Chapman @ meaningness.com) of male-female is the result of evolution-adaptation-survival:

1. variation

2. selection

3. retention

A primary (but not exclusively) male behavior is predation/hunting. War is a variation of predation/hunting.

Mainstream feminism is confused (Wilber's MGM, etc.), and thus likely to be close to useless:

* https://meaningness.com/completing-countercultures

Expand full comment

Good piece of writing and great you're alighting on this theme. Yes, I think a lot does come down to how the "male" and "female" aspects of mind relate to life... the need for control, bringing the fantasy of surrender. The desire for flow bringing the fantasy of control.

Egregore/swarm terrifies the male side of the mind because it's like being taken over and losing control.

Expand full comment

That Stoa conversation sat heavily with me too since watching it a few weeks ago. This angle of yours, however, is a fascinating take that could well be shining light on a major blindspot of my own. Thanks for this contribution David.

Expand full comment

Appreciate your nuanced commentary David. After the dialogue at the Stoa I too was confused by the unanimous agreement that the "Egregore of The West" was on a one-way track to suicide. Granted, the West collectively threw an economic tantrum toward a ruthless dictator equipped with nukes. But the Egregore seems more complicated than that.

Like any swarm, nothing is absolutely determined. The slightest input from the fringe can shift the trajectory of the flock. My personal sense is that the Western Egregore is still in it's adolescent stage with some predilections towards throwing tantrums, but will evolve through a broad landscape of possible directions. The more we see how the swarm is developing, the more we become aware of it's goals and assumptions. As we understand it we can begin to explicitly interact with it and therefore reshape it, hopefully in the thoughtfully integrative ways mentioned in your essay. Thanks!

Expand full comment

BP, Shell etc. will back away from Russia because of social media. And moral intuitions. Greed will make them return secretly. Don't overestimate the power of social media in the west. Getting a t-shirt, mobile phone or litre of fuel can't really be done ethically even after 10 years of daily social media outrage


Expand full comment

Rationality is “masculine”? Do you have evidence for this claim? Personal intuition isn’t evidence.

Expand full comment