As an Economist born in Africa, and who lives in a modern century (technology, peace, human rights), I am marveled by complex phenomena, and I am puzzled by the incidence of the complex on wealth acquisition, and human happiness. Experiences of my childhood in Africa contribute to shaping how I understand complex issues and also contribute to shaping how I ultimately give meaning to them. I have (involuntarily) embraced the economic analysis of mobbing, have embraced issues associated with individual ownership of human capital, and the economics of human diversity in general.
As a token of my engagement in social responsibility, I apologize for the inconvenience that my analysis, and my reactions on Twitter, cause to those who continue to view growth as (a medieval conqueror's like) capture of value(houses, investment positions, social conveniences, and capture of opportunities) owned by socially weak, and socially isolated individuals(group aided theft, raids, mobbing). Seriously, why get an education or learn a trade if you can just join a group and use the physical ubiquity of a large group to target someone who's already done the work for all that you want? All it takes is to build a coalition that is large enough to believe it when you accuse your victim of something stereo-typically ridiculous, such as being "lazy", then trigger an investigation, which is just a ploy to isolate the victim (he is in trouble!) and to be able to observe and learn his habits, then insidiously sabotage or deconstruct the victim's most prized work routines( sabotage software, build schedule conflicts such as racing him on slots of vacation schedule, kick him out of committees where he is visible, overload him with work at the same time that you claim he is lazy...) enough sabotaging for the victim to have to pay attention, especially if you have invited others to come and see the damages. Then prompt the victim, the hard worker to put an application in for something he genuinely deserves, use the group to exclude the victim, and capture what the victim has worked for. Finally, be the whisperer who follows the victim around to attack his credibility, overpower and ridicule him everywhere he makes a public appearance. It only gets worse as the victim attempts to fight on. Seemingly educated but stupid, right? Dear dreamer, welcome to the zero-sum world :) It is your turn to build coalitions and target someone else to abuse...it is your turn to build coalitions and go after others... grow up! :). ..I, obviously, side with processes of growth that are powered by technically efficient procedures, technological innovations, or conscious and voluntary contractual exchanges. We are not all endowed with the same level of social capital. We are not all ready to do all it takes to turn the world against another person. Foster children and other people from vulnerable background easily find themselves targeted as adults exactly for that reason. To my opinion, most current social challenges (social inequality and most individual acts of domestic terror find their origins in ..) take origin in that our assets and opportunities have real options to them. Real options that we cannot always fully control when we are not a member of a group that internalizes the valuation of those options. We are likely to find ourselves in serious social difficulties if the options that we cannot fully control are made to be more valuable than our main activity, over which we relatively have more control (kinda like a country sitting on extremely valuable but difficult to process, minerals, but where the majority of the population is concerned about basic food and shelter :)). It appears that access to private information and access to an ability to collude are the two super-tools that get isolated individuals to be overpowered (turned into poor and angry people). Below are parts of my reflections, analysis, and story:
This academic year 2022, I was grateful to serve as visiting faculty at Wesleyan University in CT. This happened after a long mobbing-related involuntary break. Before this fall of 2022, I had not been teaching since February 2017. Mostly recovering from a sabotaged career, sabotaged reputation, sabotaged immigration, sabotaged finances, social status, and family status. The passing of my mother in Africa in 2021 crowned a process that seemed like getting my freedom and ability to travel taken away from me since my return to the US in 2011. Most people would not experience all these issues(mobbing, loss of job, social isolation, passing of a mother, the support of last resort) packed in a very small amount of time. Psychologists believe that we are wired to weather difficulties as temporary hurdles. Not as an increasing attempt to force or drive someone out of a location or a situation. Living through the experience, helped clarify my understanding of the mechanics of mobbing. Again as an Economist trained on monetary and banking issues of bank panics and runs my analysis would fetch logical sense in that theoretical direction. Mobbing occurs regularly in less industrialized societies, specifically in places where there's a practice of agriculture, with pressure on land ownership. I borrow a great deal of my application of the mechanics of mobbing from my childhood in Africa.
If you believed that you saw me, or you think that you saw me teaching at my former employer's location, you are probably witnessing a very fine scam. The guy certainly had a thicker accent and was certainly not as good-looking :). Which would be an appealing feature to the kind of mobbing that I was the subject of(I mentioned real options earlier...). In substance, the mechanism was to deny the normal redress in regular processes (protecting some other interests...there was another plan set out for me without me knowing of it :) in substance, leaving traces of me on the table, just getting rid of the physical me), then shifting the redress of the abuse to a different relatable person belonging to a larger group, who (I assume) did not have the ability to fetch for resources. I technically have to patiently wait for my turn. Well, basically be comfortable with being pushed over, and have the same thing done to me many times until redress becomes nearly impossible. In a sense, my demise created good for people relatable to me. It is a fine way to make a normal legal redress to be extremely difficult to achieve for someone who finds himself abused by members of large groups ( this for two reasons: 1)repeated denial to you creates the impression of the legitimacy of the denial, then some people relatable to you get to experience some very positive changes 2) because of repeated denial, a resolution has to be pushed to be an informal redress at best, such as like a lower position offered to you by popular demand. But you are already in minority, and relatable people are not even likely to support you, so even the alternate outcome would be practically hard to get because more relatable people would show up at the redress party). The practical process is that the victim gets deliberately abused, and is then represented as having a very vile character (despicable person), the representation is amplified by a large number of people to hamper any judgment that could be made in favor of the victim. Another path is to subject the victim to incriminating acts likely to result in jail time, or to subject the victim to tremendous harassment to leave town and never take the issue to court. This includes preventing social grounding (no girlfriend who cannot be made to leave, no connection with former students, Linkedin account duplicated and messages filtered, any innovative work stolen, abused, and represented as crazy). The victim would not be popular enough, even in his/her own family to garner support for informal redress (remember that minority status was the initial point of vulnerability. Check out that new song that sounds like that taunting "Anti hero" song: The problem is me, everybody agrees ).
An example of isolation is that whenever the victim would join a new group in town, a new person relatable to the victim would also join as an equally new member but would be better prepared to build an even bolder and stronger connection with members of the new group to actively annihilate any help or sympathy that the (despicable selfish) victim would have gotten from the group. In general, abusers garner their power from knowing everything about their victim, then having access to a large network of people that helps in disparaging their victim's reputation, help antagonize the victim with powerful social groups, help in hiring all likable people relatable to the victim, and help in isolating and populating friends and dating life of the victim with hired people who would contribute with further disparaging opinions of the victim. This requires having access to the victim’s house, or office, hacking the victim's phone, duplicating the victim's identity, then if no crime is found, paying a family member (even a debt-ridden brother or mother) to take the blame for privacy intrusion. This is something else than just academic tenure. It is an unregulated business that reflects, just as in the case of pollution, the use of some free unregulated resources (recycled private information), and the use of an unregulated ability to overwhelm the victim, perpetrated by some of us, to prevent competition from members of stereo-typically unfavorable groups. It is a situation where someone targets you, invades your privacy, then invites a group of people to exert precise pressure to move your assets in a way that is less risky and profitable for them to capture. This is the looting of human capital, or more clearly a run on human lives.
My objective here is to give some non-emotional insights into the dynamic of a regular mobbing process and to also (partially) advocate for myself by brushing aside stereotypical general believable reasons that mobbers use to keep their dynamic in action (disrespectful, despicable...). In the end, I hope to show that, rather than focusing on emotions, we should pay attention to the fact that the process displays an easy theft of an unprotected asset (human capital), with the use of two simple tools (isolation and intrusion). Hopefully, my description clarifies why victims of mobbing would be people that are initially socially vulnerable (people from modest backgrounds).
Mobbing epitomizes the power of the largest absolute number to cause some action, and to take advantage of the consequences of their actions, at the expense of an isolated individual. As long as the victim (or victims) is kept in an absolute minority (isolated and misrepresented), the initiators of mobbing are in the money. The fundamental reason for engaging in mobbing is simply the apparent vulnerability of a victim (think of someone visibly out of place) whose abuse would generate some value for the initiators. In other words, mobbing is a payment scheme whereby the interest of the majority is aligned against the stability of an isolated victim. Think for example of a life insurance policy against the life of the target with a large number of beneficiaries. The beneficiaries would include anyone who would likely get in contact with the victim. Each beneficiary would only have to perform a very small act for the victim to die after a predetermined amount of time. There is no need to describe the innocuous difficult conditions that anyone getting in contact with the victim can create (fart for example :)) to cause the victim to be miserable or to die fast. The same technology can be applied to academic achievements or accumulated wealth where multiple individuals chip away some endowment, some protective barrier, to the point that it gets dissipated. All the reasons that get publicized (victim is illegal, inappropriate, has sinned, or rides a unicorn at night) are usually not relevant. None is equal or even comparable in technology to what is in process. The potential majority camp is large and powerful enough (to fabricate reasons, to issue fake news, to update its reasons, to even populate the camp in the defense of their victim) and to know that their actions would go unpunished (for example make sure their victim does not get US citizenship or does not get into contact with someone with US citizenship or ability to claim redress). The use of the assets of the victim (including human capital) to remunerate new participants, keeps the process going in a binding way for all participants. You can imagine that a well-crafted mobbing can only result in a very confusing story from the victim ( if you want to rationalize it). After all, it is the version of the winners, the mobbers, the majority, that everyone else is ultimately getting. I am only an economist so, the dynamic of incentives, and the relatively easy access to free non-market community resources by some of us would characterize my description of the initiation of mobbing (I am referring to the kind of resources that a professional kidnapper or thief would dream of having access to). And again, the dynamic of identifying the potential subprime individual, the building of coalitions, the isolation, and the repeated harassment that leads victims of mobbing to ultimately resort to the only tool over which they would still have some control is the complete play of the action. You can see how we collectively pick a subprime individual or group of individuals (the suckers that would work for free, or would pay the highest price for our products, that we would collectively steal from...) are guided both by the needs of our current paradigm of value creation ( minimum cost or highest revenue), and by the availability of some non-regulated resources that exist (are not traced, not accounted for) and can be used to get the subprime to either accept unfairness, and sit in their lower place in our value creation scheme, or to commit atrocious acts to themselves and others (domestic terror). This page has been edited to remove my original reference to a run on humans, which I borrowed from my education in financial economics. It is worth noting that mobbers hate to see their victim with anything original.
Leaders of mobbing are generally very well-connected and socially respected people, visibly traditional, and are credible masters of the mechanisms of rewards and punishment. After all, they have access to some unregulated resources that they selectively distribute in their rewards and punishment schemes. The leaders would also have the ability to generate rumors(fake news) and to create and maintain an atmosphere of expectation and frenzy (about expected returns) that maintains the hired mobbers in action and expectation. Think of people hoping to be promoted when the victim goes down, or people hoping not to be persecuted in court if the victim (the troublemaker) is defeated. The machine of antagonization (the invitation ticket) and incentives (positive and negative) is the engine of the process.
This said I am clear that mobbing is the result of obvious imperfections in our current official valuation of human capital, and in some missing markets. Race, gender, or sexual orientation are only practical excuses for what would have happened in cannibalistic societies. For example, we fail to admit that people have commercial value ( there is value in selling them, transacting parts of them, liquidating them, and farming them). We fail to admit the existence of such value and the mobbers continue to be in business liquidating people in plain daylight... Evidence is multiple here. Track secretaries, and human service people changing jobs during or after the abuse of an individual (not very new: they misplace a vital document that leads to an unfair evaluation, and they get a golden parachute in a different company). Consider also the claiming of children on taxes...the claiming of social benefits… and the dreaded life insurance.
In my case, when mobbing started, I first avoided confrontations (I guess the sign that I was indeed a good victim :) I am a typical proud scientist who most of the time believes that brilliance would be self-evident :))) then when things did not get better, I fought back by writing complaints, and by trying not to look too disrespectful (too late, to the leader just breathing, dressing well, and walking in nice shoes was already very disrespectful :)). Writing complaints was a strategy to at least leave a trace of evidence, just in case one of those mobbers resorted to making me disappear :). Unfairness deliberately piled up because mobbing was already far underway. It would usually be articulated that you were expected to dispute every push-back while staying mentally sane :) but we can all agree that it is all B achelor of S cience. When you are in minority, and you are said to be disrespectful and even a tyrant, it would be suicidal to expect to get a positive outcome by confirming the very same description of your character. I simply mean, by actually being strict, combative, and threatening to anyone. I brought forward factually evidenced issues, but they were reconverted into various social justice forms, with alternative solutions, making it possible to always find a minor reason to align me with the wrong camp undeserving of justice (check out the black republican one day, and heterodox communist on another day) and to accuse me of being combative and replying. But to be fair, no one said I ate babies at breakfast... so we can say that it was not that bad. My attempts to politely seek help from people culminated in being asked to undergo a fitness of duty test (again I had facts, and evidence, and was isolated from any US citizen, including my children...but that doesn't matter, outliers are crazy people anyways! :)), which I opposed to, and was banned from campus. You get told, you were not forceful enough in your arguments, you did not have a lawyer who did not get intimidated and told the case was a lost cause... well, if we agree that the majority always wins, attempts to explain how the majority wins are rather trivial. Why then even attempt to explain how and why an isolated person would lose? (would be crazy to attempt to explain why the crazy adjective applies here regardless of the mental state of the victim).
I have applied to multiple faculty positions, but have experienced abnormal silence (mobbers belong to, and connect with large networks who abuse and switch the blame, so nothing is impossible for them). Only one Department known to be heterodox-leaning in Economics followed up with me as expected. I find the disappearance of applications, or the need to be only categorized in a thinking scheme historically attached to black people to be not normal (I am sure you would frown upon the idea that applications would disappear, that is not positive... let me change that to applications that were simply made unavailable. The person in charge of moving the documents would take the day off or change jobs afterward). The most demeaning aspect is being followed to conferences (and other public places) to populate the air with enough rumors, and ensure that I will be isolated from peers, or from anyone who would find my story at odds with the current drive for diversity. After all, I was just a black faculty member with a Ph.D. in economics teaching in a small state school. I was not running for the Senate. I have had a very good neo-classical education, and have been protecting my work with quality beyond stereotypical expectations. I worked hard for stability for myself and my children and paid my dues doing work for others, and lived (yes residing) in Africa with one of my sons (yes, a single dad in a patriarchal environment) for two years. Nevertheless, because the reasons for mobbing are not relevant, rationalizing why it happens would not help. The reality is that it happens to many people, and it may explain better why some people experience worse life conditions over time despite putting in a substantial amount of effort (let's just say many people enjoy playing a prank on their victims), and also explains why some countries never experience economic progress despite a significant amount of resource and years of hard work. It also seems logical to posit that you would need to be part of a vulnerable group for others to find you out of place when you fall far from the average. The incumbent powerful group simply encourages individuals relatable to you to place their happiness in a way that would overwhelm your achievements(...again the payment scheme is to simply have relatable people collectively feed on your corpse: remember cannibalism?). For example, reasons like you are selfish, you do not take care of them, your teaching is too hard... are only believable excuses to do what they would have wanted to do anyways. In my new line of work, the regular hypothesis is that the most obvious reason, the stereotype is a mathematical lie. This is very easy to prove: Only the uniform distribution would not be diverse. So call me if you hate stereotypes or any explanation based on averages! The only reason to use averages in finance is to be able to compare assets and get an indication of the value to extract from the assets that look to be diverse. Not an attempt to box in people. A well-organized group (and there are many) can divert any of your acquisitions, including your own identity over time(they do not want you to be visible because you fall away from their average explanation, so they simply hire less endowed members of your group, steal from you give it to them, and the average explanation remains believable. There is nothing you can do about this point of view. After all, you can only be at one location at a time, and you can only fight so much. Anyways, this is just to say that because these averaging adjustments operate during mobbing, mobbing becomes the most powerful anti-diversity tool. So any place that states openly its commitment to diversity should be able to stand behind fighting against mobbing. Think about it, if diversity means having a preference for minorities being visible, mobbing silently reverts any official move to positively achieve diversity, or achieves diversity yet maintaining the pre-diversity stratified power (think of hiring minorities but only at non-tenure track positions, or having at tenure track only those who contribute to the original racial stratification. The existence of electronic monitoring devices has made mobbing particularly cheap, there is already a network of cameras in the public, and mobbers only need you to be targeted (I guess repeated accusations that trigger repeated confidential investigations is one of the ways of doing the trick) and then, mobbers find a way to have a camera in your own house (good morning domestic, family, friends violence), office(the usual suspected slacker or cheater, has a sexual interest in children, steals other people work, risk management),... and to have on their side someone with supervisory abilities on your electronic work (so they can sneakily remove computer programs that you seem to use the most, shamelessly lie on your performance). Mobbing, just like manias and panics in the past has some aspect of animal instinct, yet it is privately initiated where the initial leaders hack into your privacy first, then progressively transform you into a commodity (invite others to abuse and feed on the corpse. the value of the potential gains or the risks related to your stability would have to be exaggerated). I guess I feel comfortable talking about mobbing because it seems to sound like a story from the “great mirror of folies”; just that this time it is about human lives. At the very beginning, an initiator would gather your electronic credentials then hire someone outside of the country to monitor you, then shift the blame to family, or boss. When a large number of your private information is gathered, a cover-up would be engaged by triggering a FISA violation, or any other official confidential investigation (yep shift the blame to those nicely dressed official guys who ridiculously respect boundaries too much :)). It has become so easy to engage in mobbing that multiple gangs now roam the world to take advantage of established stereotypes, and harvest the acquisitions of anyone who is perceived to be falling away from the average in their social group (all that is needed is a relatable person to feel offended enough for the breach the electronic and banking privacy gate to be justified).
Mobbers (including the victims' family members) get wealthier by redistributing the loot among themselves (something that the victim was reluctant to do :) if he/she had access to those resources at all). Let me be clear that it would be unproductive and wrong to put these mechanics on the back of a specific country. The blame-shifting ability of those who engage in mobbing allows them to simply remain in business, as they have been for thousands of years, operating at the margin of laws and regulations, and constantly shifting the blame on others and stereotypical considerations of society. The core of the problem is the ability of mobbers to form a compact group that can swiftly punish any isolated person who opposes them (Cartel formation ). Their overuse of conflict of interests as an invitation ticket makes their actions to be more often justified by their private benefits than whatever good they would be claiming to champion. Now, the ability to collectively punish an isolated person is a definitive power whose use should be regulated anywhere, because the overuse generates visibly negative effects for everyone else.
Typically mobbing leaders are masters of manipulation. They make sure to communicate to some people that the victim is already done(no need to help her/him), is abused for his/her good (would be made a hero, an icon), or that helping the victim would be illegal. Mobbers customize their communication to the expectation of their audience so they would say to some people that the victim rightfully deserves punishment because he or she wanted to change the world (is a threat to the working of things, to national security). The friends and relatives of the victim are easily taken over when they are compromised with money, or illegitimate sex(children, married women), or they are just provided with opportunities that the isolated victim cannot provide (takes a lot of skills right? this is certainly not a new line of work). Mobbing leaders ensure that the identity of the victim is replicated, and the life story duplicated enough for its originality to not be attached to the victim anymore. The excuses are millennia old. The mobbed person is said to be arrogant, or disrespectful, but because these excuses are not true, the dynamic of mobbing often includes mechanically building a large number of participants who get compromised when they realize that they have already abused the victim unknowingly. Compromised when they feed upon the acquisitions of the victim (have been induced to steal their work, replicate their paper), or upon any type of advantages that a colluded well organized large group can provide to an individual or a business(bring you many customers, bring many members to the church). Of course, the commitment to harm the victim, or to be neutral is a requirement for membership. In the end, Mobbing is more about one against many, than about the real existence of an original motive of moral inappropriateness. In a sense, mobbing is simply a business project for the leaders of informal power. The sustainability of a mobbing project is ensured by guaranteeing credible gains to the participants. The gains are the looting of the achievements of the victim (including the identity), the generation of some compensatory payments that can result from legal set-ups during the abuse( side payments for abuse at work, life insurance, using name as placeholder in financial transactions, insurance claims). The frenzy is not much different from a modern version of human sacrifice to benefit the community( the mobbed person referred to as an angel or gift of God, no guilt for abusing it was his or her destiny, just feeding on the carcass).
Many people who genuinely love the victim can unfortunately participate in mobbing. The leaders of mobbing, can get anyone confused and are often part of gangs for whom mobbing and insurance scams (yes, setting up many to benefit from the demise of one) is just normal business. These leaders are the problem in two ways. In their access to community resources that they use for private benefits, and in the permissiveness of being able to be in the position of illegitimately influencing others.
Sacrificing and trading humans has been on for too long. Please contact your elected officials to make mobbing illegal.
Parts of my own story:
The motives behind mobbing: The current perspective on mobbing (emotional or psychological) is symptomatic and fails to address its true origin, which, in my opinion, is economic. It stems from a remnant cannibalization model in which insiders or members of a large group thrive at the expense of an individual's career or life(a member of the large group has to single you out for abuse and share the keys of access to your privacy with other members of the group). For immigrants, there are factors that push targeted individuals back to Africa, pitting their stability against strong interests, as well as pull factors in Africa that lay the groundwork for shifting the redress of all the hardships they have endured onto someone else(of course a member of the large group, in the US your remaining friends would be told that you passed away, and you would be disconnected from them). In this light, victims must seriously consider their chances of survival upon returning to Africa. It paints a bleak picture for economic growth, but fortunately, we live in an era of progress—a century where we have achieved enough technological advancements not to rely on sacrificing human lives for growth. We simply need to remember to marginalize those who engage in such practices. The following are fabricated reasons concocted to maintain an emotional narrative.
Disrespectful: wrong
A few people (a few people with an interest in gender and racial stratification) were encouraged by the mobbing leaders to abuse me on a wrong basis, and I responded to the abuse, not to the individuals. I stressed the quality of my work and my qualifications. Before that, it was just sheer respect for those people (in many ways they have things that I may never have, only fake economists would not understand that values used in comparison would be relative). Disrespectful was made up by the absolutists in the build-up of mobbing. The absolutists gathered the tools for mobbing and just needed to build the reasons for an offense. The absolutists connected violence at home (the gender issue which was just an attempt to use the large number to revert a carefully negotiated situation at home, to the stereotypical expectations of a black male in a similar situation), to violence at work (racial stratification was too easy to pass on). Disrespectful because absolutists needed to fabricate some reasons at work to get things going. You would hear the same people say contradictory things like he was too quiet during meetings...!
Abusive to women: wrong
Abused by women (educated people from underprivileged backgrounds are the ones who stand most to lose in domestic fights). Women in my case would testify that they found themselves in a position of power many years afterward (the movement) and they took advantage of it. I believe they would argue that there were too many visibly powerful interests either comfortable or uncomfortable with the success of a male from an underprivileged background, and the women only helped fit stereotypical stories to help what they thought was a larger positive cause. The problem is that some women helped too easily in taking down many men in my situation, in the name of their fight, and this is becoming too visible in the news. The hope is that those women realize that progress (not chaos) is better for everyone. Some of us are still very vulnerable any well-crafted instability would easily take us down.
Factually, I only asked a woman to leave my house when I had invited her in to resolve her temporary situation (this was regardless of clearly knowing that she had connected with my colleagues in some unclear ways at that time, and thought it was not my responsibility to ponder about her love connections. Progress is better for everyone right?) Nevertheless, during her stay with me, she pushed the sabotage of co-parenting to the extreme over a long time, Not respecting any co-parenting agreement, not respecting even her commitment to doing her share in just the next 30 minutes, deliberately driving me physically exhausted, and making it obvious that not engaging her at all was way better than having to expect anything from her. I am not a psychologist and prefer not to venture precise explanations of the behavior of known individuals. I have done absolutely nothing wrong, and mobbers never take issues to any place where the victim can have a chance to defend himself or herself. Let me add that one of my colleagues that she (my co-parenting saboteur) would have logically gotten involved with (remember that nobody talks directly to a mobbed person, those who are kind enough to talk, and are found out get severely punished by the mob). Anyways, the colleague who would have logically been involved with her used to tease me about my internet use at home (would not respond because could not just assume a connection), have students close to him make disparaging remarks about my hygiene (nice set-up because deodorants and shower water were sabotaged at home). The colleague left for a different school sometime after that but the sabotage continued.
Do not help the family: Wrong.
Played the perfect scenario for family support until it became impossible to continue to do so. Adopted younger brother, guided and supported the education of a female lawyer and female communicator in my family (the only ones willing to stand the demands of higher education). Supported a young male but he left the country before completing his studies. Could not help those who had businesses needing thousands of dollars that I did not have, or those needing fancy clothes, or fancy cell phones. Nevertheless, I was present during holidays, sickness, or when any of my family members were bereaved. Mobbers connected multiple aspects of life, cutting my revenues (sabotaging extra sources of income, sabotaging trips), resetting all acquisitions disconnecting me from all potential resourceful people, and fabricating claims that I was not in the financial capacity to fulfill. Lo rallies others to the abuse. Not very different from psychological and financial torture in this case. Here is a funny example whenever I bout cheaply affordable, yet respectable cars, they have gotten sabotaged to almost drive me to ruin by costly repairs. When I leased luxury expensive cars they were used as a sign of ostentatious selfishness. That is what a large number of connected people can do. Plant items and use the planted items to torture you.
Always accuse others do not own to your actions:
I am talking about mobbing, there is nothing to be done against a mob that I have not done. There is no individual achievement that I have not already conquered. You need to own your responsibility of using the community, the group, to abuse and steal from others instead of facing your victims on a proportionate footing. People who need to show results and are mentally stable would not have the time to be mobbing others. Your actions to unfairly overwhelm and isolate individuals and buy your way with believable stereotypes of race, color, and gender generates a form of pollution visible in the many acts of domestic terror today. Feel free to check my work and check how I relate to individuals when you stay out of my way. You will see how I own my actions. Cannot possibly own what I do not cause.
Mentally unstable, dementia...: You wish! You should be prosecuted for fraud and torture of humans for even attempting to make that characterization fit a sane person that you had the possibility. When courts use credibility as a criterion for assessing someone's claims, they make it possible for imaginative fraudsters to sneak into houses, damage clothes and perfumes to make room for this kind of torture, and deliver unfair judgment when actual factual evidence is visible in the first place. It is not exactly the courts' fault because many of these issues end in side agreements. Hopefully, the rise of technology brings down that line of business.
Interested in female students: Typical stereotype, Before Framingham, I did some of my research work with very attractive female students, and never had an incident (when you have come so far, you do not cross certain lines so lightly, even if everyone else is. Some people consider that to be a weakness or unclear gender preference, that is their view, people of my condition always have too much to lose). What changed there, was a group of people willing to aggressively go to the extent of increasing domestic violence at home, then taking it to work as a way of achieving stability in their path. Nevertheless, even when it seemed like there was a prosecution-free semester for seemingly single faculty members, in a strange climate of changes, I never crossed the line of what would not be academically justifiable. If a student was that interested ( to the point of making it absurd that I maintain distance), then the person could wait until any conflict of interest was removed ( 2 semesters over, graduation...). I usually maintain communication with many of my students after they have left my classes, and I am available to help in many ways following that rule.
Midlife crisis...
A generic term that could explain everything right? I had family problems more than five years before (beyond emotional resolution). I was at the point of fixing what I could fix for the good of my children. I was on top of my job and developing new classes to achieve professional stability. So most people go through a midlife crisis, but only the particularly ill would think of deliberately fomenting domestic violence in the lives of others.
He is Psycho, Does not talk to him...
If you understand mobbing you would get that a mobbing victim is always painted as crazy, and is being actively isolated because it is part of the mobbing process. After all, if everyone is alienated to believe that someone is crazy, it would be very difficult for an isolated individual to prove otherwise. In the end, if nothing is done, mobbing victims are often left with the choice between committing a quiet suicide (that includes being poisoned) and killing themselves with others (terror). A mobbing victim would be crazy to elicit either option. So, being incorrectly painted as crazy is only an indicator of the interpretation of the choices that would be given to the mobbed individual. I request that whenever someone calls a person psycho and encourages you to isolate the person, you inform the authorities that there is a violation of the Americans with Disability Act (you are being invited to discriminate against an individual based on a medical condition that is protected by law), and also make sure the right authorities know that there is a murder in progress. The psycho-representation and the isolation cannot be a good combination. The real foreign-born American psycho is the human predator who tracks individuals (often foreign-born also but in vulnerable statuses) to the point of knowing every little detail of their lives, and using the details to abuse the victim, and encourage others to partake in the abuse.
In the end what do you mean? You seem to just being emotional talking about brother and such:
Incorrect. I am deliberately parsimonious because anyone initiating mobbing would make presenting the issue to be complex enough to create confusion when addressed anywhere, or very confusing to actually point to the originators of mobbing. Can you remember my story of two exces, each of them dating one of my friends who were brothers with the same last name? nothing prevents them to go to the same locations, and so forth...
In my most logical description of my abuse, I often say that I experienced difficulties since graduate school. Graduate school is hard and requires extra sacrifice in time and availability to be successful. At that time, I had no idea that I already was in serious trouble. A challenge that I only discovered late down the line.
I went to school with an employee of this project.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqduGx7lik4
After getting his hands on a large amount of money, he made loans to multiple people, including my family members and promised them more.
My partners, and my family members became embroiled in a vast money laundering scheme at the time of my first arrival in the United States for Graduate School. It is only amazing to see how the profession that I chose to be part of, easily bought into the mobbing idea, a sort of reassignment of my efforts to objectives or projects for which others individuals were already in line. Members of my community of origin, who needed identities for their multiple complex nefarious activities, including the laundering of vast sums of money, easily got the support of colleagues annoyed by my presence. I was supposed to be tossed over multiple times, and to become crazy, or to die somewhere in between two locations in 2017 when mobbers convinced my hierarchy to actually invite me to a meeting and to issue a practical ban from campus. This is a scientific story, yet a story of personal survival. The layer that does not exist in a bank run (besides of some people losing their lifetime savings) is that mobbers dynamically capitalize on the life, family and professional options of their victims. That can be quite negatively intimate. Mobbers can find themselves with a considerable amount of opportunities, to become able to impose their views, or to neutralize the environment of their victims wherever the victim goes. Simple question: would you rather believe my story, or take part to a colluded deal that is likely (regardless of whether that's true or false after the facts) to make you rich in the next coupe of days? I am waiting for your answer...you see why I do not blame my former students :). I can speak up for myself, how many people cannot do the same? How many people understand that a run on a human life is a powerful enough force, not to need to be sustained by an accusation that is substantially true? that is why victims tend to be socially different. That's also why accusations would have to be stereotypical. Is there value to effort in a society where working hard to be successful, makes you to be likely victim of takeovers (actually when you work hard, abusers conclude that you prefer to work hard, and pile up some more work on your path :) anyone ever imagined that the real crime of Sisyphus was to have reneged on the opportunity of being a god, to have reneged on the opportunity of abusing humans of his choice, that's a crime of "lese majeste" :), now my story is that of humans, not gods ), with tools that are illegal, yet become exceptionally justified against you, as multiple other interests pile up against your interests, regardless of what you did or do, regardless of how those interests get piled against you? (mind you, you would be reminded that you are just naïve, and that you need to stop the drama, and simply wait for your turn. Why did you not get the memo, and skipped many years of library to rush in line and wait for your turn?) When are we going to realize that once others have access your privacy (again, regardless of whether the motives of privacy invasion are ultimately substantiated), and you happen to be a different person, someone who would be seen as combative, you are very likely to become a victim of a run on your life. When are we going to go back and charge those of your peers who misused the force of intrusion for their own competitive gains, those who abused of the privately collected information or initiated the mobbing, of acts domestic terror? Because the expectation was for you to act in a chaotic way! That's why you get banned from locations without substantial motives. For immigrants, it is obvious to me that they count on everyone's indifference, they compromise whoever they can, so that they can act against their intellectuals without repercussions. Please do not be indifferent. Get the vast mobbing cartels to be broken down.
He is not good with faces
Guilty as charged! Remember that I make most people uncomfortable as I defend myself, but I shall keep the right to do so. Two reasons 1) I wore glasses late in life. I unconsciously learned to rely on contextual elements to remember most people. I realized that before the big wave of mobbing and shared it with people. 2)Those who know the type of insidious abuses that a victim of mobbing can be exposed to (in his own home, cars, hotel room, and offices) would never condemn me for shifting my focus away from remembering faces, to working to stay calm and weather the hurdles that were coming. It is not like the opposing camps were making things easier for me(did I mentioned disconnecting me from my children, the same goes for my closest friends and the students who were close to me, getting fired from basic jobs). I was certainly anxious most of the time about my resources that were quickly depleting, and my relationships from which I was being excluded against my will. I was also regularly excluded from spaces where I had regular historical contact with people, some of the spaces closed down long before Covid. I had to manage my issues by giving little concern to regular set-ups that privacy pirates put in place to check if I know someone or not. You cannot possibly test a vision-challenged person's ability to remember faces at the same time that your group has for more than a decade attempted to frame and abused the person for looking at attractive young women, being disrespectful to men accompanied by women... having mental issues. That's simply torture. I am a human I have the right to connect by mail email, phone, go to my appointments without interference and not have my life colonized.
ADHD
No such thing. Get mobbed for more than a decade and tell me if your abilities compare to mine. I typically do not drink (unless it is for a cold medication), I do not smoke and do not take drugs. I would not listen to people who do not pay me or compensate me when the most likely outcome of the course of action that they expect me to follow is an illegal act or zero revenue for me. I would give an ear when I have resources, just as a token of respect. Unfortunately, I have very limited resources. You may be referring to some more obedient better connected and probably deep-pocketed men associated with my exes. For whom my children had to be kidnapped to build a better resemblance of profile. For whom do I have to be disconnected from people every day so that easy substitution is possible? (see who cannot move on?) For whom my phone continues to be hacked, and functions and files get deleted to attack my credibility? The plan was to make my life miserable, send me to Africa (remember my former employer sabotaged my immigration and my professional reputation) and have them replace me for any redress from the abuse. Maybe ADHD refers to when they are unable to pick up where I left off :) instead of simply acknowledging that they are not me(I am still humble :)). Some of them used to be good friends of mine. It's a pity that they would join to mob for absolutely no other reason than greed and vanity. The Computer/Math guy, the Tax accountant, or the Biology or Mechanical Engineer. I am only an Economist and I only tell my story. I do not pretend to be any of them. I am not responsible for other people's choices. My opinion is that they have turned into criminals. Other men are associated with my exes but are simply privacy pirates ( The type that would organize a wake for my mother's death to raise money as if it were his mother, see how far identity theft can go, or claim my struggles "he is me", "I am Jesus" kinda lunatic right? If you think about it, the plan is still for them to rise as an apparent miracle after they have put me trough misery and despair). They need me to be mentally impaired to justify any form of commingling. No father ever approves of those he believes abused his children.