439.  Whelms Happen!
 

The common connotation of 'whelming' is 'overwhelming'. Yet, the most practiced and the most effective form of 'whelming' is 'underwhelming'.

'Whelm' means 'to cover completely', like in 'the dust covered the caravan', according to Webster's Unabridged Dictionary.

The purpose of such an action is to take out the self-determination of someone by presenting either too much or too little data or effort.

Since this 'Little Purple Notebook' contains description of structures, it should, in theory, neither overwhelm nor underwhelm.

As things are, the presentation of structures takes place via the offering of data that describes these structures. This is a paradox that cannot be resolved and which inevitably opens the door to either an unintended indoctrination of the reader or a refusal of the same to attempt to recognize the presented structure because of the rejection of the data that was intended to describe the structure.

What to do? It seems that there is no other way than to put on the thinking cap on permanently. Tough choice, I know. Sorry!

It certainly helps to evaluate new data in this regard in the context of one's own existing framework. In other words: does the new data fit into one's reality level and increases one's understanding? For example, was it a total overwhelm? Or, was it a slight underwhelm?

The very same message can have any of the 'whelming' effects, depending on both on the reader and the message itself.

Interestingly, overwhelms are in a sense much less 'dangerous' than underwhelms. They are obvious, obviously, since they can be recognized easily, people complain about it, and they're
generally in the open.

In contrast, 'underwhelms' are in the tool chest of the hate mongers, the leaders of unions, churches, and political parties: all those who think they're the greatest and that the rest of us would be scum or worse. In short, that kind of people that is respected by brave and innocent citizens.

Again, the 'overwhelmers', the Dschingis Khans, Napoleons, Hitlers, Saddams, and Friday 13th's Freddies are the ones everyone readily identifies as the evil forces of their times .

Come to think of it, however, the 'real suppressives', as Hubbard put it, 'always work behind the scenes'. They can only be recognized indirectly: everyone in their vicinity gets weak and sick except the suppressives themselves - because this is the only way they think they can have the upper hand: by keeping everyonce else in the state of doom and despair.

Did I mention the mass media yet? Hmmm. Must have slipped through the cracks somehow...

In any case some basic characteristics of whelming shouldn't go unnoticed:

- overwhelming happens in very short timeframes and
   underwhelming works over longer period of times;

- overwhelming always has a clearly visible actor, the
   'bad boy', whereas in underwhelming the actor is hiding
   out and poses as the 'good guy';

- overwhelms are directed towards individuals - underwhelms
  are broadcasted (cp. media)

- overwhelming pretends to 'defend' and underwhelming
   pretends to 'help'.

- overwhelming smashes the opponent while underwhelming
  slowly rubs out the other party.

- an overwhelmed person is being stopped - an underwhelmed
  person stops short of its goals, thinking it would be there,

etc.pp.

It is an interesting question if it is possible to communicate _without_  any form of under- or overwhelming. After all, communication is about finding an agreement about different positions. Since, by definition, the positions are _always_  different for any given party in this Universe, avoiding any form of under- or overwhelm appears to be impossible.

Cleary, whelms happen!

It is part of the game of awakening to look through the various games and strategies of putting people to sleep, whether those were intentional or not.

To handle overwhelms, the incidents of overwhelm must be cleaned up. This means, _negative processing_ needs to be applied.

Underwhelms require boosting the power of a person towards a better understanding and attitude. This is characteristical of _positive processing_.

Since underwhelms and overwhelms are bungled up in a case, they have to be peeled of piece by piece (cp. 'The Onion Model').

Which shows, that this is yet another example of how important _both_ aspects of processing are and how they should be individually balanced for the fastest speed and no crashes on the superhighway to liberation.
 
 


Copyleft © 1998 by Maximilian J. Sandor