The child can be guided through a healing process, but only HE can overcome it, there is room only for one.
Not entirely true. If the child can be programmed one way without his input (or, with only the input of his subconscious mind, and without the input of his conscious mind), then he can be programmed another way without his input (ditto as before, for subconscious and conscious inputs). Same thing with how a child who was programmed in a very wholesome manner could be reprogrammed to become absolutely fucked up. Even among those who take psychology courses and try to fix/change/better themselves, there will be many who just plain cannot learn how to completely become their own Self, and so social conditioning will remain a large part of their lives.
Yet we can observe that how this person acted out during his/her life was a symptom of these mental programs running in his psyche.
In case you were wondering about the tell-tale signs I mentioned, this is one of them. The denial of self-responsibility that comes from the belief that a child has no control over what to accept and what to disregard. Children actually can and do make partially-conscious-and-partially-subconscious decisions about what teachings to accept and which to only pretend to accept, based upon partially-conscious-and-partially-subconscious criteria that they are not fully aware of. For people who never learn the act of introversion, this partially-conscious-and-partially-subconscious effect continues on into adulthood, and can be discovered through a series of guided questions that would be dependent upon the subject matter of whichever thought processes you wanted to analyze in the other person.
Another tell-tale sign is the "us versus them" mentality that the words "their mind" create, along with all of the "us versus them" phrasing that you keep using. There is no "them" any more than you yourself are one of the "them", from the reference point of any other human being. To say it another way, to your own brother, you are a "them" because he is the only "me" of his existence.
Think about christian programming. Aren’t there mechanisms in place to make the person feel guilty and scared of questioning his values? let alone leave them behind. To use a metaphor: When “their” mind is threatened it will try to preserve itself.
Depends on the christian programming. I grew up going to church and there were a variety of voices; different people thought, believed, and preached slightly different things, and some people preached guilt while others preached love. Then I started reading the bible itself, and the bible says to study and question and learn: there is no guilt in these things because it is only by studying and learning and turning to God that a person can come to know the will of God, and can learn to discern truth from lies.
Don’t TPTB try to shape the world according to their image? to their mental schemas? aren’t they infecting the world with “their mind”? their pathological mind is what paves the way for wars, famines, ponzi schemes and all that, symptoms of their mind. You may be able to mitigate those symptoms, to patch things up for a few decades, but if the root is not dealt with, then those symptoms will resurface sooner or later… maybe they’ll just manifest in different ways.
Of course those with social/economic/political power will exert it: that's exactly the point of any of those kinds of power. Any single economic power, for instance, literally cannot exist by itself: it requires the presence of other economic powers in order to justify itself, and the fact that it is an economic power means that it influences other economic powers and factors. The same with politicians: if you took a politician and stuck them on an island where they couldn't interact with other people, they would just be another creature in the wilderness. But not all economic or political powerhouses are bad: many of them are the entire reason that we have such luxurious lives (in first world nations, at least) and such amazing freedoms (even if you claim those freedoms are not always freedom, or are only limited freedoms).
Secondly, the "root" of those problems is humanity itself. It's not just a "their mind" scenario: studies show that certain human behaviours and characteristics, such as a propensity for violence in certain situations, is a low-level biological effect that can at times preclude mental programming entirely, ie fight-or-flight response due to a huge adrenaline dump that the body performs all on its own when the subconscious mind recognizes danger regardless of what the conscious/programmed mind is thinking or aware of.
So again “their mind” is about identifying the psychological roots of this world’s ills.
Again, "their mind" is about recognizing the fundamental manner in which humans learn and develop. This can be shown to be true because we even learn from animals, who speak no human languages and who have few-if-any of the mental illnesses that humanity has. The learning process of humanity comes from the days of survival, when learning how to recognize and respond to threats was paramount alongside learning how to feed the belly; both learning processes were infinitely better off by learning by watching and mimicing others (monkey see, monkey do) rather than figuring out everything from scratch on your own.
Take the example of parents who actually believe that sending their children to school is actually beneficial for their children and if that wasn’t enought they also believe it makes them excellent parents. When you apply the skill of observation you can see that it may feel good, that people may believe it’s beneficial, but actually it is highly toxic.
Another tell-tale sign: "education is bad". Education is GREAT. Of course, it must be acknowledged that there are shitty schools out there, and there are shitty things that happen at school, but there are also good schools out there and there are awesome things that happen at school (which you won't find in a life outside of school).
The cons and the pros must be weighed against an individual school, as well as education itself: if a single school is a highly toxic place with a lack of desire on the part of teachers to teach, and lots of violence in the school, then absolutely it will be a bad place. My school was full of teachers who wanted their kids to learn (and even broke the "approved curriculum" a few times to make sure we did, because the approved curriculum tried to avoid certain "hot bed" topics), and there was little violence (I got picked on a lot, but that's not the fault of the school).
The pros of education are that people quickly
learn how to do things that other people have already figured out, and learning things that you can then apply within society in order to earn a living in order to maintain a standard of living according to what you earn (no, lifestyles are not "equal", but everyone in my country has the opportunity to try for whatever lifestyle they want, so long as they can overcome whatever personal hurdles are in their way), and being given the opportunity to become one of the leading people in a field such that you can push humanity forwards rather than merely maintaining the status quo. The cons of education are that indeed, you are taught "their mind" because "their mind" was what figured out all the amazing things that humanity can do today; "their mind" figured out how to create all of the different components of the computer that you are using to communicate with so that you and I, who would otherwise be complete strangers to one another who could never meet in person, can talk and exchange ideas. Through education, you have the opportunity to learn how to create computers too, for the benefit of others (or just for the benefit of yourself if all you want is money from a job).
In this example the cons outweight the pros. Yes, kids may learn to read, write and apply basic arithmetic, but along the way they exchange their potential for the “virtue” of absolute obedience. Of course their mind will seduce people and make them believe it is all for their own good.
Education is not absolute obedience. Bad educators will use obedience in the guise of teaching, but they are not synonymous. In exactly the same way, bad people will use their influence to spread badness, but that doesn't mean all forms of teaching are bad.
Sometimes I’ve found that I did “good deeds” because it was a mechanism to cope with my own anxiety, but “their mind” is clever so I was telling myself cute stories to avoid facing the underlying reasons for my “good deeds”. They had nothing to do with a response, but they had everything to do with a reaction to try to patch a psychological crack and thus their mind kept getting bigger and stronger.
That wasn't "their mind". That was your mind, trying to tell you THE TRUTH of why you did something. You listened, which is good. But then you believed that it was a negative event rather than realizing it was a good event. You demonized it by saying that it was "their mind kept getting bigger and stronger" when in reality "their mind" just got a little bit smaller when you recognized the true reason for doing what you did. Patching a psychological crack was not altruistic, but it was healthy and it was good.
That's another reason we do many of the things we do: internal impulses, desires, and needs. "Their mind" is another way of talking about external influences, but humans are beset upon by a multitude of both external and internal influences. Learning to tell each influence apart from one another, and categorize it correctly into internal or external, will help with your psychological patching process, which is the mind's way of attempting to heal itself from something. Keep being honest with yourself. It takes time, but you'll get there.
“their mind” really hates exposure and so it uses all sort of tactics to avoid being discovered and if it is discovered then the toxic mind will use a different set of tactics, this time to convince the host that it is in their best interests to keep “their mind” alive and well.
Not really. Only some forms of external teachings also attempt to imbed psychological tactics of avoidance. The majority are simply "we do this because we 'have' to, because this is what society wants us to do". Most "their minds" are not at all intelligent, and do not "care" about being exposed because they have no feelings to care with (to be more clear on this, "their mind" is not a living thing. I can't tell whether you honestly believe it is alive, or whether you are merely strongly anthropomorphizing it).
The way that you talk about "their mind", and give it such broad powers, you sound like everything in life, whether good or bad, should be considered bad because it supposedly comes from this "their mind", which you consider bad. You are basically subverting anything that might be good and happy in the world and trying to tell people to be paranoid of it, and thus your own teaching about "their mind" is stealing away any happiness that they would otherwise enjoy. Or, to ask a question of this: based upon your beliefs/teachings of "their mind", how is a person ever supposed to be able to be happy? Or are we just doomed to misery, by recognizing the existence of "their mind"? (as you said, "some others go on to live the life of saints and help everyone who looks like are in dire need and so they feed co-dependent relationships" and thus according to you, even a saint doing all the best things that a human could possibly do, is just a product of the evil of "their mind")
One of the main aims of “their mind” is make their programs “normal” and “familiar” so that the hosts don’t question them at all because they are supposed to be a natural component of humanity.
Too broad, again. What is "normal" then, if you claim any semblance of normal is "their mind". You are basically saying that in order to escape "their mind", I would have to adhere to abnormal thought processes, which ... why? Because you say so? Because it will supposedly make me happier, when happiness is also already a product of "their mind"?
Throughout the whole of your post, you don't tell people what we're supposed to do to escape "their mind", nor what the supposed benefits of escaping "their mind" is, nor what a life outside of "their mind" is supposed to look like. (This is, by the way, another tell-tale sign. You have formulated part of an idea of existence, but it is missing more than half of the idea that would be needed in order to be complete)
As it has been stated: “Their mind” takes over a person’s psyche and implants a behavioural simulacra. Based on my own experience with it, I’d say this psychological virus makes use of very subtle mechanisms to take over.
Based on my experiences with it, "their mind" is perfectly normal OH MY GOD I"M UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF THE THEIR MIND BECAUSE I THINK IT"S NORMAL D: (that was sarcasm, which yes, I know you already said is a cunning defense mechanism)
Some people can become extremely anxious in social situations, other people become anxious by being alone.
Both of those are actually the result of two things: 1) a lack of social experiences, and 2) a different psychological problem where a person constantly criticizes themself and thinks everyone else is also criticizing them, so they can hardly bring themself to talk to others. Both of those two things are sadly very common.
The permutations and degrees of severity of this phenomenon are too many to list.
Because those permutations and degrees of severity are the basic human condition. You are literally attempting to demonize the basic. human. condition.
Again, in no way is this “philosophy” telling people to become emotionless droids. Rather it is telling people to watch out for this virus so that it can be sterilized and the Authentic Psyche can unfold.
How do we sterilize it, and how do we tell an authentic psyche from an artificial one?
Oh and the interactions with “their mind” are far from being pretty.
Yeah, human interactions can often get ugly when people get emotional or just plain sarcastic or cynical or whatever other thing that humans become temporarily.
At some point, after talking with a lot of people, you should hopefully come to the realization that a lot of people who are under the influence of "their mind", are under that influence willingly, because they've seen or experienced some examples of what happens when they try to break free, and they've decided that it is in their best interest to do as they are told. Others, however, break free and do their own thing already, live their own lives, make their own mistakes, etc. It is entirely a personal choice, and everyone makes that decision whether they realize it or not.
PS. For the record, I am not trying to deprogram you "properly".