My daughter sent this article to me last night via Messenger. In the morning I sent it to my sister. Immediately after, Facebook crushed. Could this have been a coincidence? I think not! (Just kidding.) Whether or not "they" at FB headquarters realized I am spreading dangerous truth you speak, and are trying to stop it, truth will never be stopped. And it is dangerous. Excellent article. It helps to know that the Author is out there. Also, I am proud of my daughter for choosing to follow your work. My sister already read it, over in the UK, and she confirms: Some people are a mix of the types you recognize and name. We think that the four categories correspond with reality very well. But - says she - I am not a mix. I am the despicable pariah 100%. My joy at reading you calling them flying monkeys out, is equally intense. Your insights are not shared by many.

Expand full comment

I’m supposed to be finishing my own upcoming article, but I couldn’t stop reading yours. I really think you have the seeds of a book here. You have identified and articulated the four archetypes with exceeding clarity, and your perceptions are spot-on in every category.

I especially love the term “coincidence theorists” and think that is an ingenious way of inverting the framing. I will definitely be keeping that in my back pocket for future use.

Have you read Christopher Browning’s “Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland”? It is a fascinating analysis of how ordinary human beings (the Folk) can be contorted into psychopaths by the machinations of the Parasites and Flying Monkeys. Browning quotes the conclusion Philip Zimbardo drew from his Stanford prison experiment: “‘Most dramatic and distressing to us was the observation of the ease with which sadistic behavior could be elicited in individuals who were not “sadistic types”.’ The prison situation alone, Zimbardo concluded, was ‘a sufficient condition to produce aberrant, anti-social behavior.’”

By the same token, it is the Idealists/Dreamers—a tiny percentage, sadly—who possess the ability to see through the mass deception and resist the coercive efforts designed to manipulate them into committing atrocities. Browning cites Zygmunt Bauman’s explanation that “‘cruelty is social in its origin much more than it is characterological.’ Bauman argues that most people ’slip’ into the roles society provides them, and he is very critical of any implication that ‘faulty personalities’ are the cause of human cruelty. For him the exception—the real ‘sleeper’—is the rare individual who has the capacity to resist authority and assert moral autonomy but who is seldom aware of this hidden strength until put to the test.”

Thank you for being one of the Dreamers and for your gentle efforts in our joint mission to unmask tyranny and awaken the sleeping before tyranny triumphs.

Expand full comment

You are brilliant! Reading you is a treat! Thank you for what you do.

Expand full comment

Fantastic work.

Expand full comment

A powerful piece Tim, thank you.

Expand full comment

Thank you so much for this brilliant and thought provoking piece, Tim Foyle.

I found you through a link in one of Margaret Anne's pieces, and am so glad to be here!

Expand full comment

“The best political, social, and spiritual work we can do is to withdraw the projection of our shadow onto others.” - Carl Jung.

Bravo to you. Your writing is immensely enjoyable and affirming to Idealists everywhere.

Expand full comment

I've been considering labels / narratives to describe humanity's (obviously) unhealthy dynamic and this is a brilliant article, well framed 👍 Super helpful thanks 🙏🏻

Expand full comment

I've just read this article. It's funny, I recently came up with a similar theory. But I focused more on the Influential aspect. I tried to find a concept of turning the political tides in Europe - where I'm from - before it's to late.

I basically came up with the following groups of people:

The politicians -> Parasites (not every parasite has to be a politician - elites would be a better term because politicans today are mostly flying monkeys...)

The media (producing and consuming) -> Flying Monkeys

The people -> The folk & idealists

I divided "The people" into the following subgroups:

The unpolitical -> The folk

I don't see the unpolitical as a general problem. Not everybody has to be interested in politics or societal problems. most of them just have other interests or dreams. They can be manipulated by politicians or the media though.

The revolutionaries -> The idealists

These are the people that actually drive the change for the better. Don't confuse this with antidemocratic revolutionaries. I think you found the better term.

The dependent -> People from "the folk" that are in some form working for or being paid by the government. You can not expect any changes from these people.

I came up with some maxim for the Idealists to spread to the people in their circle:

1. Unconditional free speech and the right to bear arms. This should be in the constitution of every western country. Basically the first and second amendment.

2. The politicians and the media has to fear its people. First by having them armed. There also should be options for the people to impeach high ranking people from these positions at any time if they feel that they are not doing their job right.

3. Idealists should start to openly carry weapons. Since the Gun Laws in Europe are actually pretty strict, we should start with knives.

4. We should not resent the dependent. They just do their Job. If a dependent actually embraces this ideas (although unlikely) he actually has the best possibilities to start changes.

5. Everybody can become an idealist.

6. Jobs in media should be restricted to a certain number of years - similar to politicians.

7. To get a job in politics or media one has to be at a certain age and has to have worked a real job for a certain amount of years.

8. Your not allowed to accept any amount of cash except for a relatively small wage while working as a politician or in the media. If someone breaks this he should be excluded from immunity and be punished like a traitor. Media groups or politicians can not accept money from private persons or organizations.

I didn't explain most of the reasoning or ideas in detail, but maybe this will give you some new ideas on your theory. I think your article was brilliant. We actually came up with pretty good concepts for keeping the politics in check hundreds of years - if not thousands - ago, but these don't work as good as they did caused by the rapid advancement in technology and especially communication. These concepts should be applied to the media too, because they actually have more power today than politicians.

Expand full comment