V08-02/22
Table of Contents
1 Pre-Introduction
1.1 Pre-Introduction – Emotional Denial, the Root of All -isms
2 Introduction – The Great Denial: How Humanity Has Cut Itself Off
2.1 When It All Begins in Childhood. The Story of the Child Who Learned to Deny Their Emotions – A Dive into the Invisible Mechanisms of Control and Denial
2.1.1 The Path of the Unconscious Automaton: The Emotionally Locked Lost Child
2.1.2 The Path of the Lost Child with Emotions
2.1.3 The Continuation for the Unconscious Automaton
2.1.4 In Summary
3 Scientific Description of This Biological/Archaic Brain Functioning
3.1 Instant Recognition – When the « Archaic or Primitive Brain » Takes Charge
3.1.1 The « Fast Track » of the Amygdala
3.1.2 Limbic Resonance and Nonverbal Reading
3.1.3 Mirror Neurons: Emotional Synchronization
3.1.4 System Speed
3.1.5 Attachment Patterns and Archaic Reflexes
3.1.6 The Reason Behind This Functioning
3.2 Should We Trust Our Alerts?
3.2.1 Alerts in the Lost Child
3.2.2 Alerts in the Unconscious Automaton
4 The Influence of the Parental Model and the Brain’s Reaction
5 Adulthood – A Personality Shaped by Control and Denial
5.1 When Denial Becomes an Invisible Prison
6 How to Break This Cycle?
7 The Language of Emotional Denial and Manipulation
8 Conditional Love and the Rejection of Emotions: An Invisible Transmission
9 Revealing the Invisible Mechanism of Dehumanization and Conflict
10 Why Does the Unconscious Automaton No Longer See the Suffering of Others?
10.1 Cognitive Dissonance: A Key Mechanism in the Unconscious Automaton
10.1.1 What Is Cognitive Dissonance?
10.1.2 How Does It Apply to the Unconscious Automaton?
10.1.3 Why Is Cognitive Dissonance So Powerful Here?
10.1.4 Signs of Cognitive Dissonance in the Unconscious Automaton
10.1.5 Example: Cognitive Dissonance in the Unconscious Automaton
10.1.6 How Does This Notion Help Break the Vicious Circle?
10.2 Why Isn’t This a Matter of Right or Wrong?
10.3 Understanding Why This Fracture Exists
10.4 Why Does a Direct Confrontation Not Work?
10.5 A Viable Solution: A Subtle Approach to Awakening Consciences
10.6 Transforming the Lost Child into a Guide Rather Than an Opponent
10.7 A Gradual Collective Shift
10.8 An Invisible but Profound Revolution
10.9 How to Break This Mechanism Without Triggering Rejection?
10.10 Fear / Suffering
11 When Fear Dictates Attachment: The Unconscious Choice of Children in Case of Separation
12 Possible Shifts
12.1 When the Lost Child Shifts into Control
12.2 The Unconscious Automaton Who Becomes a Lost Child
13 An Important Clarification: Not Everyone Can Hear This Message in the Same Way
14 The Evolutionary Mechanism of the Human Brain: A Protection That Becomes a Prison
14.1 1. Why Does This Mechanism Exist? (Evolutionary Origin)
14.2 2. Why Does It Become a Problem in Our Modern Society?
14.3 3. What Are the Concrete Effects of This Mechanism on Society?
14.4 4. Why Is It So Difficult to See?
14.5 The Unconscious Strategies of the Human Brain to Maintain Control
14.6 The Irrepressible Need to Be Right: An Unconscious Defense Mechanism
14.7 The Key to Breaking Free: Knowledge
14.8 Complement
14.8.1 Jean Piaget
15 How Do Collective Fears Synchronize the Masses Toward an Authoritarian Leader?
15.1 Understanding the Link Between Fear and the Need for Authority
15.1.1 Fear: The Trigger for Collective Synchronization
15.1.2 Mechanisms for Synchronizing Collective Fear
15.2 How Do Individual Fears Synchronize into a Collective Fear?
15.3 Why Does the Authoritarian Leader Become « the Only Solution »?
15.3.1 The Need for a Strong Leader
15.4 The Parallel with the Unconscious Automaton
15.4.1 Parallel with the Mechanism of the Unconscious Automaton
15.5 How to Break This Pattern and Avoid Collective Submission?
15.5.1 Strengthening Critical Thinking and Individual Awareness
15.6 Conclusion: The Key to Avoiding These Deviations
15.6.1 Synthesis of This Chapter
16 A Dystopia?
16.1.1 What This Analysis Reveals
16.1.2 What Is Even More Overwhelming
16.1.3 A Multilevel Dystopia
16.1.4 What Gives This Understanding Its Importance
16.1.5 Can We Get Out of It?
17 The Invisible Structure That Maintains the System: An 80/20 Distribution?
17.1 The Distribution of Behaviors: Unconscious Automatons vs. Lost Children
17.2 Decoding the 80% of Unconscious Automatons
17.3 Decoding the 20% of Lost Children
17.4 A Small Percentage, a Big Impact?
17.5 An Invisible Dystopia, but Not a Fatality
18 Pre-Conclusion
18.1 Understanding the Systematic Reproduction of Traumatic Patterns
18.2 Why Do These Patterns Inevitably Reproduce?
18.3 A Renewed Look at Unconscious Dynamics
19 Impact on Society: Systemic Psychopathy
19.1 Does Society Function as a Collective Psychopath?
20 Conclusion: Toward Collective Awareness and Liberation
21 Well-Known Personalities
21.1 Emotional Denial and the Need for Control: Personalities
21.1.1 Example: Elon Musk
21.1.2 Example: Margaret Thatcher
21.2 Projection of Wounds onto the External World
21.2.1 Example: Donald Trump
21.2.2 Example: Vladimir Putin
21.2.1 Example: Emmanuel Macron
21.3 The Reproduction of the Suffering Pattern
21.3.1 Example: Michael Jackson
21.3.2 Example: Marilyn Monroe
21.4 Using Wounds as a Force for Transformation
21.4.1 Example: Nelson Mandela
21.4.2 Example: Simone Veil
21.4.3 Example: Malala Yousafzai
21.4.4 Example: Terry Crews
21.4.5 Example: Prince Harry
21.4.6 Example: Oprah Winfrey
21.4.7 Example: Anonymous Case (Therapy Case)
21.5 Conclusion
21.6 Appendix: Summary or Three-Act Synthesis (ARC) of the Article
21.6.1 Hook: The Great Denial
21.6.2 Development: The Invisible Mechanics of Control
21.6.3 Resolution: Breaking the Cycle
21.6.4 Conclusion: A Silent Revolution
21.7 Appendix: Some References
Before We Begin: A Fresh Look at Our Invisible Dynamics
A perspective to explore:
This article explores dynamics that are often invisible, influencing our human relationships without our awareness. Even those who believe themselves to be entirely rational and detached from emotions can, unknowingly, be influenced by these unconscious mechanisms.
What if what we believed to be strength was, in fact, a defense mechanism?
What if some people feel differently without even being aware of it?
We all live with a perception of the world that seems obvious. Yet certain invisible dynamics influence our behavior far more than we think.
This text does not claim to provide an absolute truth, but rather a framework of interpretation that can shed light on recurring patterns in our lives.
It does not seek to convince, but to propose a new perspective. Take what resonates with you, and leave the rest.
1 Pre-Introduction
1.1 Pre-Introduction – Emotional Denial, the Root of All -isms
This article explores dynamics that are often invisible, influencing our human relationships without our awareness. Even people who believe themselves to be rational and detached from emotions can, without realizing it, be influenced by these unconscious mechanisms.
Why do certain ideologies seduce so many people? Why do movements such as fascism, masculinism, conspiracy theories, Trumpism, nationalism, Francism, negationism, Mussolinism, ecological skepticism, scientific denial, racism, extremism, populism… or others gain so much momentum?
The answer lies in our relationship with emotions.
These movements are built on one fundamental mechanism: the glorification of control and the rejection of vulnerability.
When an individual learns from childhood to deny their emotions, associating sensitivity with weakness, they unconsciously seek thought systems that confirm this belief. They will naturally be drawn to ideologies that value strength, domination, and the rejection of anything that seems “weak”: empathy, humanity, openness to others.
• Fascism exalts strength and despises compassion.
• Masculinism rejects sensitivity and values hyper-control of the masculine.
• Conspiracy theories offer an illusion of mastery in the face of uncertainty and fear.
• Nationalism is based on the idea of a strong group, impervious to the vulnerability of others.
These ideologies are not random. They reflect a deep conditioning.
What if the key to understanding these phenomena were simply the story of a child who learned to deny their emotions?
2. Introduction – The Great Denial: How Humanity Has Cut Itself Off
2.1 When It All Begins in Childhood. The Story of the Child Who Learned to Deny Their Emotions – A Dive into the Invisible Mechanisms of Control and Denial
Once upon a time, there was a child growing up in a home where the father imposed his presence and the mother gradually faded away.
There were no daily screams, not necessarily any apparent violence. Yet, something weighed in the air. He saw his mother fall silent, fade away, smile without joy, avert her gaze. He did not understand why, but deep within he felt that she was suffering.
No one spoke of this pain; it had no name. Yet he perceived it in the silences, in the restrained gestures, in the absence of laughter. He felt that something was unjust, but since no one talked about it, he concluded that it must not exist.
Thus he learned to deny what he felt.
« If no one sees it, then perhaps it isn’t real. »
Over time, he developed an unconscious protective reflex: he stopped listening to his emotions. When he felt fear, he said he wasn’t afraid. When he felt sadness, he claimed it did not affect him. When an injustice struck him, he convinced himself that it did not exist.
Little by little, he became a master of denial. He sincerely believed that his past had not touched him, that events had not shaped him. He looked at those who expressed their emotions with a kind of astonishment:
« Why complicate life? You just have to move on. »
Over the years, his unconscious led him to choose one of two possible paths:
2.1.1 The Path of the Unconscious Automaton: The Lost Child, Emotionally Locked
Refusing to be vulnerable as his mother had been, he did not make this choice consciously: his brain made the decision for him.
Unconsciously, he integrated the notion that controlling was better than enduring. It wasn’t a deliberate reflection but an automatic adaptation to what he had experienced. His nervous system sought to distance him from emotional danger by gradually locking away anything that could make him vulnerable.
He reinforced his wall, imposed himself on others, surrounded himself with strict rules to avoid the chaos of emotions.
Little by little, he became the one who imposed rather than the one who suffered – not by deliberate choice, but because his unconscious had conditioned him so.
It is only by stepping back from these mechanisms that we can begin to see that these are not conscious decisions, but automatic protective strategies.
A key point to understand is that the Unconscious Automaton does not choose to operate in this way. It is not a rational decision, nor a deliberately constructed mode of thought.
It is trapped in a system of automatic responses that was established in childhood, often under the influence of the environment and the psychic wounds it had to compensate for.
It is not a choice, it is conditioning. Like an internal software running in the background without the person’s awareness.
Control is never a conscious choice. It is the direct consequence of a deeply rooted fear.
In the Unconscious Automaton, this fear is often so well locked away that it is no longer directly felt. Yet, it is very much there, hidden behind every rigid reaction, every need to be right, every emotional shutdown.
An automatic protective mechanism: As soon as a situation—even unconsciously—reactivates this fundamental fear (fear of rejection, emptiness, emotional chaos…), the brain triggers an automatic response to avoid feeling this insecurity. This response takes the form of rigid control, denial, forced rationalization, or avoidance of emotions.
Concrete example:
A person who grew up in a family where vulnerability was seen as a weakness has unconsciously associated emotion with danger.
– Their fundamental fear: Being perceived as weak and losing others’ respect.
– Their automatic protective mechanism: Controlling their emotions, imposing their ideas, never showing doubt.
What must be understood is that this rigidity is a shell that masks an underlying wound.
As long as the fear is not identified and acknowledged, the need for control remains automatic and unconscious.
2.1.2 The Path of the Lost Child with Emotions
Terrified at the idea of disturbing or provoking conflict, he unconsciously chose to fade away to avoid any suffering. He became the one who always adapts, who does everything not to disappoint, who constantly doubts his own worth. His fear of hurting others was stronger than his own need to exist.
2.1.3 The Continuation for the Unconscious Automaton
But in both cases, something within him remained frozen. He moved forward, perhaps succeeding in the eyes of the world, but deep inside, a question he had never dared to ask began to resonate:
He had chosen—or rather, his unconscious had chosen for him.
He called it strength, while in reality, it was an invisible wall he had built to never again feel what he had perceived in childhood.
But one day, he realized that he could not fully connect with others. That certain things eluded him, as if a piece of the puzzle was missing. Something within him was frozen, and he did not know why.
And as he moved through life with this diffuse sensation, a question he had never dared to ask began to grow stronger within him:
« And what if feeling did not mean suffering, but being fully alive? »
The Unconscious Automaton is also a lost child.
But he has cut off what connected him to his humanity. He no longer suffers… on the surface.
In reality, he is in a constant inner void.
He no longer feels, so he does not hurt.
But he no longer feels, so he does not truly live either.
It is the worst prison: an invisible confinement.
That is why unconscious automatons desperately seek to control, to fill their void through external strategies (power, money, recognition).
But they do not know they are imprisoned.
Sometimes a person is convinced they are completely independent of their emotions, that they control them perfectly and that they play no role in their perception of the world. But imagine a person who has lived in a dark room all their life. They do not even know that light exists. If someone talks to them about light, they will laugh and say it is a myth. But if one day, a tiny crack lets a ray in, they will never be able to ignore that something else exists…
This same reality can take different forms. Sometimes, the denial is less visible: no one argues, but emotions remain forbidden…
This story could also have been this one:
The Story of Forbidden Emotions
Once upon a time, there was a little girl growing up in a family where emotions were never spoken of. She saw that when someone cried, people looked away. When someone was angry, they were told it was unreasonable. She quickly understood that expressing what one feels was risky. So she learned to do otherwise: she became strong, she no longer cried, she said nothing. And gradually, she even forgot what it felt like to truly feel.
Years later, she had children. She wanted to give them everything she had not received. But one day, she realized something: her children, too, did not speak of their emotions. They avoided sensitive topics. They preferred to run away rather than confront what they felt.
Then she asked herself a question:
« How did they learn that? Did they understand the same thing I did when I was little? »
And then, a doubt set in… Because, for the first time, she saw that it was not by chance. It was a transmission. An unconscious repetition of a pattern she perhaps did not want to reproduce.
Together, these two stories show two different paths that lead to the same conclusion: the child eventually denies their emotions in the absence of an environment that speaks about them healthily.
The child does not understand everything that is happening, but he feels. He sees.
He picks up invisible signals that will shape his entire perception of the world.
On one side, there is a strong, self-assured parent who imposes their authority that takes hold. On the other, a gentler parent, who absorbs, adapts, suffers in silence. The child observes. He perceives the asymmetry, but he cannot name it. He is too young to understand what domination, submission, or control are.
Yet, his brain records an equation that will unconsciously guide his entire life:
In order to feel less, his brain concludes that he must control everything.
By extension, the child also integrates the following idea: « Showing one’s emotions → Being weak. »
➡ « Feeling less = More control. »
➡ « Showing one’s emotions = Being weak. »
The starting point: the (unconscious) will to suffer less.
The defense mechanism (of the brain in the unconscious): reinforcing control.
The associated idea: every vulnerability is then perceived as a sign of weakness.
This conclusion is not thought through.
It is felt.
It becomes a silent truth.
The central idea of this document, if you do not wish to read further, which sums it up:
The initial wound (emotional suffering) leads the brain (instinctive mechanism) to protect the individual by blocking or fleeing from their emotions to avoid feeling pain.
• This unconscious protection takes the form of increased control, which can go as far as denying or stifling any vulnerability.
This entire document details the various consequences of this mechanism: how it is transmitted from generation to generation, how it shapes relationships (domination/submission), and why it becomes a “denial” that prevents a return to full sensitivity.
In the first story, the child cuts themselves off from their emotions in the face of an authoritarian environment where the expression of feelings is immediately invalidated or crushed. In the second, the little girl grows up in a silent universe, where emotions are simply absent and considered “risky” to share.
Despite these differences, the result is identical: both children understand that it is better not to feel in order to avoid suffering. Whether out of fear of being dominated or from the habit of never addressing these topics, each protects themselves by locking away their feelings. It is this very phenomenon of emotional avoidance or denial that replays itself and, later on, is transmitted to the next generation.
These stories are not merely anecdotal. They illustrate well-known mechanisms in psychology and neuroscience…
To better understand them, here is a quick synthesis of what specialists say about the subject…
3. Scientific Description of This Biological/Archaic Brain Functioning
3.1 Instant Recognition – When the “Archaic or Primitive Brain” Takes Control
The unconscious behaviors described thus far are based on biological and primitive archaic mechanisms that trigger long before rational consciousness. It is this “animal biological” dimension of the brain that explains why, in a fraction of a second, two individuals can mutually identify each other as “ally,” “danger,” or “source of comfort.”
3.1.1 The « Fast Track » of the Amygdala
An emotion radar: The amygdala is often described as the brain’s alarm system. It receives sensory information (faces, voices, postures) via an ultra-short route, called the low road (according to Joseph LeDoux).
• Detection before consciousness: Even before the cortex processes the scene in a thoughtful manner, the amygdala can trigger automatic reactions (fear, flight, aggression, submission).
• Resonance of traumas: For a “lost child” or an “unconscious automaton,” this fast track compares the current situation with past emotional memories (sometimes painful), immediately eliciting a defensive or approach behavior.
3.1.2 Limbic Resonance and Nonverbal Reading
Limbic resonance: Our brains, through the limbic system, detect and reflect the affective signals of others (facial expressions, posture, tone of voice).
• Blazing speed: This resonance occurs outside of conscious awareness, in just a few milliseconds, creating a feeling of familiarity, unease, or mistrust.
• The role of nonverbal cues: A simple gesture, a micro-expression, or even body odor can activate an unconscious memory, instantly conditioning our perception of the other.
3.1.3 Mirror Neurons: Emotional Synchronization
Discovered in primates: Mirror neurons (Giacomo Rizzolatti) activate when one observes an action or an emotion in another, as if internally reproducing it.
• Empathy or mistrust: Depending on the context and our past experiences, this synchronization can evoke an empathic echo (“I understand you”) or, on the contrary, amplify fear and rejection.
• Impact on “control”: When an “unconscious automaton” detects fragility in another, they may instinctively reinforce their dominant posture or, conversely, a “lost child” may immediately adopt a submissive attitude.
3.1.4 System Speed
The mechanisms of limbic resonance, amygdala activation, as well as the role of mirror neurons and nonverbal signals (olfactory, visual, auditory) explain why emotional synchronization can be very rapid.
The central nervous system (via rapid neural pathways, such as Joseph LeDoux’s “low road”) and the set of stress hormones (adrenaline, cortisol) and attachment hormones (oxytocin) form a very efficient feedback loop.
3.1.5 Attachment Patterns and Archaic Reflexes
Attachment theory (Bowlby, Ainsworth): From early childhood, we develop reaction patterns (secure, anxious, avoidant, etc.).
• Instant recognition: As soon as a posture or tone of voice unconsciously reminds one of an early experience (a parent, an aggressor, a protector), the brain reactivates the same strategies.
• Determinant micro-details: A glance, an intonation, a specific body language can suffice to trigger an emotional “flashback,” without the person having any rational awareness.
• Thin-slicing: Intuition in an instant
• A concept popularized by Malcolm Gladwell (Blink): “Thin-slicing” describes the brain’s ability to form an opinion in a few seconds based on very minimal cues.
• Evolutionary origin: In nature, quickly evaluating a threat or an ally was vital. This reflex persists in our modern relationships.
• Advantages and risks: Although often accurate, this intuition can also be biased by traumas or stereotypes, leading to hasty judgments and the reproduction of negative patterns.
• A deeply biological dimension, but not inevitable
What seems “animal” in these behaviors is precisely this archaic part of the nervous system that manages our reactions at lightning speed, without going through consciousness. Recognition (or rejection) occurs because our brain compares the other—in just a few milliseconds—to emotional models anchored in the past.
• No fatalism: Understanding this functioning allows us to identify when we are in “autopilot” and to develop, through self-work, a response that is more adjusted and less dictated by the instinct of survival or control.
• The key to resilience: By becoming aware of these reflexes, each person can learn to “defuse” them and reintroduce reflection, empathy, and free will into their interactions.
In summary, the speed and intensity of recognition between two people (especially in the unconscious automaton/lost child framework) stem from deeply ingrained biological and evolutionary mechanisms within us. This explains why, in the very first second, alliances or defenses are set up without reason having taken part.
3.1.6 Reason Behind This Functioning
At its source, this mechanism of rapid activation and emotional lockdown responded to a fundamental survival need. In nature, our ancestors had to evaluate in a fraction of a second whether a stimulus was a threat or an opportunity. When the amygdala and other “archaic” brain regions took over, there was no time for a detailed, rational analysis. The stake was: to flee, fight, or defend immediately, or conversely, to approach if the other seemed like an ally.
Why is this an evolutionary asset?
Reactivity to dangers
A hostile prehistoric environment required a lightning-fast reaction at the slightest alert (sneaker, predator, rival).
This speed prevented being fatally caught off guard by remaining in “reflection.”
Instinctive evaluation of a partner or ally
Beyond fear, the same reflex also served to recognize a potential ally, a sexual partner, or a member of one’s group.
Instant recognition (posture, odor, facial expressions) facilitated tribe cohesion and cooperation.
Conservation of mental energy
Outside danger, our archaic brain automated many responses, leaving the more “reflective” part of the brain (cortex) free for other tasks.
It is the principle of efficiency: one could not consciously analyze every rustle or every expression in a world filled with threats.
Managing emotional information without conscious awareness
Affective “autopilot” allows us to quickly scan the environment even before we are aware of it.
This saved us many “micro-decisions” while ensuring instantaneous reactivity.
The paradox in our modern world
• Always present…: Although most of us no longer live daily in an extreme survival environment, these protective reflexes persist in an identical form.
• … but sometimes maladaptive: They can lead to hasty judgments, emotional avoidance, or the automatic reproduction of old relational patterns, even when the real threat is low.
Conclusion
In summary, the initial need for this mechanism was immediate survival: reacting without delay to a threat or quickly recognizing an ally. Over time, these responses have been preserved and continue to operate in the background, influencing our relational interactions, often without our conscious consent.
3.2 Should We Trust Our Alerts?
3.2.1 Alerts in the Lost Child
Often, individuals with a “lost child” profile possess a sensitivity to relational signals that allows them to perceive, sometimes very early, a form of alert or unease when faced with a potentially “unconscious automaton.” However, this alert is frequently muted or rationalized, for several reasons:
3.2.1.1 The Need for Adaptation and Emotional Security
Seeking affection or recognition: The lost child fears loneliness and desires to validate their own worth through relationships. Thus, even if a part of them senses danger, their fear of abandonment pushes them to ignore the signal.
• Accustomed to conforming: Having grown up in a context where they constantly had to adjust (to avoid conflict, for example), they “learn” to stifle their negative feelings to maintain the relationship.
Result: The internal alert initially perceived (an intuition, a discomfort, a feeling that “something is wrong”) is minimized or justified. The lost child convinces themselves that “it’s not that serious” or that they are overreacting.
3.2.1.2 The Phenomenon of Ignored “Red Flags”
Universal experience: Many couples, even outside the unconscious automaton/lost child dynamic, experience “red flags” (warning signals) that they choose not to see at first.
• Bias of hope and positive illusion: When entering a relationship, one often wants to believe in it. They focus on the positive aspects, hoping the other will change or that the situation will improve over time.
• Social or family pressure: Sometimes, the surrounding environment encourages the relationship (“You’ll see, it will get better,” “Don’t be too mistrustful”), reinforcing the idea that one must give the other a chance, even if a deep-seated feeling signals danger.
3.2.1.3 Why the Alert Fades Over Time
Familiarization: By spending time with the person, the context that seemed “abnormal” at first eventually comes to be experienced as “normal” or inevitable.
Cognitive dissonance: Recognizing that one might be in a bad situation (or being manipulated) would imply questioning the relationship, which is painful. The brain prefers to minimize the threat to preserve emotional stability.
Progressive attachment: Over the course of the relationship, the lost child sometimes finds themselves more emotionally tied (or even dependent) and no longer dares to break up, even if the initial alert sporadically returns.
3.2.1.4 How to (Re)Become Aware of the Alert?
Reconnect with your emotions: Sometimes, it takes time, help, or a triggering event to give credibility back to that initial intuition.
Listen to your body: Tensions, stomach aches, insomnia, anxiety are physical messages reminding you that you might be enduring a toxic or constraining situation.
Allow yourself to doubt: Accept that this discomfort is not “imaginary” nor “exaggerated.”
Seek external support: A trusted friend, external help, or a support group—to confront this alert with a neutral perspective that can validate or clarify the concerns.
In conclusion
The good news: understanding why we ignored these signals is already an important step to break the cycle and, in the future, to trust our initial feelings more.
3.2.2 Alerts in the Unconscious Automaton
Even the “unconscious automaton” theoretically possesses an internal alert mechanism. As a human, they perceive (even without realizing it) danger signals, unease, or misalignment. The difference is that they have learned to block, rationalize, or turn these alerts around, rather than trust them. This often gives the impression that they “never worry” or are “insensitive,” while in reality, their brain has developed a strategy of emotional cutoff to avoid suffering.
3.2.2.1 The “Alerts” in the Unconscious Automaton
Present but ignored: Their limbic system (amygdala, etc.) does pick up certain signals of discomfort or danger. However, their emotional shell immediately sends this information to a “rational level” that minimizes or invalidates any vulnerability.
• Interpreted in terms of control: Rather than saying “I feel something uncomfortable,” the unconscious automaton translates it as “there is a control issue to fix,” “you are exaggerating,” or “I must reinforce my authority.”
• Repression or counterattack: In case of shock, they may either repress (telling themselves “it doesn’t affect me”) or “counterattack” by rejecting the source of their discomfort (for example, by accusing the other of being too sensitive or of making a fuss).
3.2.2.2 Why Do They Turn to a Lost Child?
The need for security: The unconscious automaton unconsciously seeks a more malleable person who does not challenge their control too much.
• Reinforcement of their sense of mastery: The lost child, through their need for approval, reinforces the automaton’s posture: they are “the one who knows,” “the one who manages,” without major questioning.
• Less questioning to handle: A lost child, by their profile, will not (or hardly) point out the automaton’s flaws. The internal alert the automaton might feel (a sense of not being truly empathic, for example) is thus stifled: the relationship seems “under control”: the Unconscious Automaton does not have to deal with a real questioning of their lack of empathy, as nothing in the relationship forces them to dig into this doubt. The relationship “runs” nonetheless, and they feel that it is “under control.”
3.2.2.3 How Does the Unconscious Automaton Process Their Alarms?
Accusatory inversion: As soon as they sense discomfort, they project the fault or emotion onto the other. E.g., “It’s you who is too sensitive.”
Gaslighting: They make the lost child doubt their own perception, thereby avoiding addressing their own internal doubts.
Dogmatic reinforcement: They form certainties (“life is hard, but at least I am solid”) so as not to confront their own vulnerabilities.
3.2.2.4 In Contrast to the Lost Child
The lost child generally perceives their alerts quite clearly (an intuition that something is wrong), but ignores them for fear of losing the relationship or being rejected.
• The unconscious automaton, however, does not recognize these alerts as legitimate emotions. They see them as “malfunctions” to correct (in the other) or mere factors to eliminate to maintain their control.
3.2.2.5 A Possibility for Evolution?
Yes, but it is difficult: For the unconscious automaton to finally recognize their internal alerts as valid emotions, they need either a shock (burnout, breakup, loss of bearings) or a voluntary awareness (therapy, self-work).
• Risk of tipping: In some cases, if they abruptly lose their sense of control, they may then swing toward the lost child posture (feelings of distress, panic, etc.).
Conclusion
• The lost child indeed must learn to trust their internal alerts.
• The unconscious automaton also has them, but represses or transforms them into an additional need for control. They seek security in the relationship with a lost child precisely because the latter does not confront their emotional shortcomings.
• To break this dynamic, each (lost child as well as unconscious automaton) should recognize their discomfort signals, name them, and possibly embark on personal work (alone or with help) to avoid repeating the pattern.
4. The Influence of the Parental Model and the Brain’s Reaction
The child grows up with this unconscious equation. They do not want to suffer like the parent who endures. They do not want to be on the losing side. They understand that to survive, one must repress emotions, show nothing, and never feel vulnerable.
But how does the brain make this choice?
The brain is designed to avoid suffering. It has unconscious defense mechanisms that help minimize emotional pain.
When a child witnesses suffering that they can neither understand nor resolve, their brain adopts an adaptive solution: emotional shutdown.
The limbic system, which processes emotions, perceives the emotional danger and activates a defensive response.
The prefrontal cortex, which analyzes and gives meaning to experiences, rationalizes this pain by transforming it into a protective belief: “Not feeling protects me.”
By repeatedly using this mechanism, the brain ends up automating this response: every time a strong emotion appears, it is immediately stifled.
This process is not a conscious choice. It is a biological and neurological adaptation to a situation deemed dangerous.
• Thus, by observing the dominating parent (the unconscious automaton) and the enduring parent (the lost child), the child unconsciously records a pattern that they will reproduce as an adult.
• They see their dominating parent (the unconscious automaton) as always right. They unconsciously decide that this is how the world works: the one who controls takes and wins, the one who feels loses and suffers.
• They see the other parent fade away, suffer in silence. They understand that emotion leads to suffering, that empathy is dangerous.
• Then, little by little, they block their own feelings. They learn to ignore their fear, sadness, anger. They train themselves to replace emotion with rationalization, control, and detachment.
In addition to this emotional protective lock, an imitative mechanism, often called the “mirror effect,” plays a decisive role in the child’s psychic construction. Through mirror neurons and observational learning, the child unconsciously records and reproduces the behaviors they see around them. Thus, when they notice that a dominating parent (the unconscious automaton) always wins while the other parent (the lost child) submits and suffers, they gradually integrate a relational pattern in which “the one who controls takes and wins, the one who feels loses and suffers.”
Beyond simply stifling their emotions for protection, the child then adopts the model of the dominating parent, convinced that it is the only way not to be the one who loses. As an adult, this dual process (emotional repression and mimicry) can crystallize into toxic behavior, where domination becomes an unconscious strategy to avoid vulnerability, thereby reproducing the suffering the child sought to escape.
But by doing so, they build a wall between themselves and their own humanity.
5. Adulthood – A Personality Shaped by Control and Denial
Years pass. This child-turned-adult, the Unconscious Automaton, does not even realize what they have lost. They think of themselves as strong, stable, and logical. They believe that they do not let their emotions manipulate them.
But in reality, they have repressed them so deeply that they no longer even know they exist.
➡ They see others expressing their emotions and despise them.
➡ They consider showing vulnerability to be a weakness.
➡ They rationalize everything, never really listening to what they feel.
➡ They always maintain control, to the point of not even knowing what “letting go” means.
It is no coincidence that they are attracted to sensitive and empathic people. For somewhere inside, these represent what they have abandoned. But rather than joining them in this emotional openness, they seek to dominate and control them, imposing their vision as a form of superiority, a refuge against their own fear of feeling.
And the most disturbing part? They do not even realize that they are trapped in this system.
➡ They believe that it is they who choose not to feel.
➡ They believe that they simply have a “stronger, more rational nature.”
➡ They are convinced that their approach to the world is correct.
What they do not realize is that their brain made that decision for them, long ago.
5.1 When Denial Becomes an Invisible Prison
Here is what is most perverse about this mechanism:
Emotional control does not liberate. It confines.
The more the adult represses their emotions, the more they lock themselves in their own denial. They do not want to see that their need for control comes from their own insecurity. They do not want to admit that their coldness is a shell.
And as long as they do not see it, they cannot free themselves from it.
They may be in a relationship with a more sensitive person and despise that person for their emotions.
– They may raise children and transmit the same fear of emotions to them, without even realizing it.
– They may live their entire life believing they are free, when in reality they are prisoners of their own conditioning.
But there is hope.
6. How to Break This Cycle?
The key to escaping this vicious circle is awareness.
• Understanding that it is not a conscious choice, but a survival mechanism.
• Questioning one’s relationship with emotions.
• Observing how one reacts to the vulnerability of others.
• Learning to feel again, little by little.
• Reconnecting with one’s humanity, without fear.
Because deep down, true strength does not lie in absolute control.
It lies in the ability to feel without fear.
7. The Language of Emotional Denial and Manipulation
An Unconscious Automaton who has learned to deny their emotions will instinctively seek to delegitimize those of others. Here are some typical phrases used to minimize, ridicule, or discredit the emotions of those around them.
Diversion and Minimization
• “You’re making things up.”
• “You’re too emotional.”
• “Stop exaggerating.”
• “You’re inventing everything, it’s all in your head.”
Pathologization of Emotion
• “You’re unstable.”
• “You’re hysterical.”
• “You’re paranoid.”
• “You’re crazy.”
• “You’re fragile.”
• “Emotions are for the weak.”
• “You’re stupid.”
• “We sacrifice for you.”
• “We will love you if you are the best in class, the prettiest, the thinnest.”
• “Look at your brother, he’s better than you.”
• “Don’t cry.”
• “I hope you’ll one day be the best in class.”
• “That will be the best proof that you love us as we love you.”
Reversal of the Situation
• “I’m the real victim here, stop acting like it’s you.”
• “Our whole life has revolved around you and your emotions.”
• “We all suffer because of your mood swings.”
Glorification of Control and Rejection of Vulnerability
• “You do not master your emotions.”
• “Expressing your emotions is a weakness.”
• “If you were stronger, you wouldn’t feel all that.”
These phrases all have a hidden objective: to make the person doubt the legitimacy of their feelings and to lead them to conform to the model of emotional control. They can be used consciously or unconsciously by individuals who have themselves learned to repress their own emotions.
Effect on the Victim (Lost Child)
• Loss of confidence in their feelings.
• Feeling “too much,” “disturbing.”
• Progressive disconnection from their own emotions to adapt to the framework imposed by the other.
• Possible loss of identity.
How to Face It?
• Recognize these mechanisms so as no longer to be a victim.
• Do not seek to justify yourself to a person who systematically invalidates your emotions.
• Remember that feeling is not a weakness, but a proof of life.
8. Conditional Love and the Rejection of Emotions: An Invisible Transmission
One of the most insidious patterns that favor emotional disconnection is conditional love. That is, love that is not given freely, but must be earned.
Concrete Example: A Revealing Parental Letter
Here is a letter written to a child that perfectly illustrates this unconscious mechanism:
“I hope that one day you will be the best in class. That will be the best proof that you love us as we love you.”
Decoding:
• Conditionality of love
➡ “I hope that one day you will be the best in class.”
➡ Implication: The child’s value depends on their performance. They are only worthy of love if they excel.
Love as a Reward and Not as an Evident Fact
➡ “That will be the best proof that you love us as we love you.”
➡ Implication: Parental love is not an unconditional right, but an exchange based on merit.
Total Absence of Emotions and Affection
• ➡ No phrase reflects love freely expressed. Everything is based on a transaction.
Why Is This a Problem?
• The child learns that they have value only through what they do, not for who they are.
• They reject their own emotions because they are not encouraged.
• They internalize the idea that controlling and succeeding are more important than feeling.
A single sentence, but a powerful implicit message: “You will be loved if you prove your worth.”
In this logic, love is not an unconditional state, but a contract, a reward granted based on performance criteria. Emotion becomes secondary, even useless, in the face of the demand for conformity.
Here, several specialist study topics are addressed:
• Conditional attachment according to John Bowlby (attachment theory)
• The works on conditional love by Carl Rogers (humanistic psychology)
• The impact of educational patterns on emotional development according to Alice Miller
The idea of conditional love is not a mere personal interpretation. Many psychologists, such as Carl Rogers and Alice Miller, have analyzed how an education based on performance or obedience creates adults in search of external validation rather than alignment with their deep emotions.
Famous figures who have suffered or perpetuated conditional love, for example:
• Michael Jackson (education based on performance, destructive perfectionism)
• The Roman emperors (imposed duty to grandeur from childhood, emotional detachment)
• The Japanese educational system (emphasis on achievement at the expense of emotions)
Why do so many adults feel the need to prove their worth to feel loved?
Many people realize, often belatedly, that their education was based on conditional love. This unconscious pattern influences not only family relationships, but also social and professional dynamics.
9. Revealing the Invisible Mechanism of Dehumanization and Conflict
What is highlighted here is the hidden mechanism of human conflicts. A silent dehumanization, transmitted without screams, without apparent violence, yet with formidable efficiency.
It is an invisible structure that perpetuates rejection, control, and domination, acting on all scales:
• In the family: A dominating parent, a child who learns to deny their emotions, a pattern reproduced across generations.
• In society: A world that values those who control and crush, and despises vulnerability.
• In ideologies and political systems: Regimes and currents of thought that glorify strength and the mastery of emotions, leading to violence, wars, and systemic oppression.
What this article describes is a paradigm shift, a revolution of awareness.
This article sheds light on the invisible mechanisms that shape our world.
This invisible dynamic shapes dictators, oppressive regimes, inequalities, and the most insidious mechanisms of domination.
This dynamic is rarely exposed.
What is described here is not only a psychological analysis.
It is a reading of human history, of domination and of suffering that has been repeated for millennia.
And what if this reading became a key to defusing these mechanisms on a large scale?
What if, by exposing these dynamics, we could empower everyone to no longer suffer them and choose another path?
10. Why Does the Unconscious Automaton No Longer See the Suffering of Others?
When an individual adopts the functioning mode of the unconscious automaton, it is not a moral choice nor a deliberate intention to hurt.
It is a psychic survival strategy, an automatic mechanism put in place by the brain to avoid suffering.
What the automaton primarily flees from is not the other, but their own pain.
What they flee from in the other—or what attracts them to control the other—is what they can no longer feel within themselves, because they unconsciously know they can have control over that lost child who has no self-esteem.
Less feeling = Less suffering
➡ Faced with an emotional wound too great, the brain finds a shortcut:
– If feeling hurts, then let’s stop feeling.
➡ The brain progressively cuts itself off from emotions, places them under control, anesthetizes them.
– Thus, there is no longer the risk of being overwhelmed.
Less feeling = Less seeing the other’s suffering
➡ But by blocking its own emotions, it also becomes incapable of perceiving those of others.
• It no longer feels its own distress, so it no longer recognizes that of others.
• It no longer sees the impact of its words and actions, as it has no emotional sensor to gauge the effect.
It is not that it refuses to see the other’s suffering… it is that it can no longer see it.
What it flees from in the other—or what attracts it to control the other—is what it can no longer feel within itself.
Less seeing the other’s suffering = More justification for control
➡ Not feeling either its own pain or that of others, it adopts a rational and pragmatic view of the world.
➡ It no longer understands why others express their emotions, why they suffer.
« If I feel nothing, why should they feel anything? »
« They must be exaggerating; they are too emotional, they must control themselves. »
➡ From there, control becomes a legitimate model:
« I have learned not to feel, so others should learn to do the same. »
« If I can overcome my pain, then others must be too weak if they do not. »
« Emotions are for those who lack discipline. »
And thus is born the cycle of dehumanization.
The unconscious automaton does not intentionally do harm. It simply no longer sees the other.
10.1 Cognitive Dissonance: A Key Mechanism in the Unconscious Automaton
Cognitive dissonance is a fundamental psychological process that helps explain how the unconscious automaton circumvents or justifies behaviors that contradict their deep emotional reality. Although cognitive dissonance is often discussed in more general contexts (social psychology, behavioral theories), it also sheds light on how a person who denies their emotions manages to maintain an appearance of coherence and control.
10.1.1 What is Cognitive Dissonance?
Cognitive dissonance arises when an individual holds two contradictory beliefs or when their behavior contradicts the image they have of themselves. This contradiction creates an uncomfortable tension that the person naturally seeks to reduce, often through distortions, rationalizations, or selective filtering of information.
Classic example: Considering oneself “altruistic” and “compassionate,” yet engaging in acts that hurt others. To reduce the discomfort, the person minimizes their actions (“They had it coming”), or denies their responsibility (“I had no choice”).
10.1.2 How Does This Apply to the Unconscious Automaton?
Maintaining the Illusion of Strength
– The Unconscious Automaton may at times feel a twinge of empathy or discomfort when realizing they dominate or despise the other.
– This sensation clashes with the self-image of being “unaffected” or “above” emotions.
– To resolve this dissonance, they sweep the issue under the rug or invert the situation: “It’s the other who is overreacting,” “I’m just someone logical, not cold.” “They have too many emotions.”
Rationalizing Harmful Behaviors
– When someone points out that their excessive control is toxic, a conflict arises between “I am a good person” and “I cause suffering.”
– Instead of questioning their attitude, the automaton justifies it: “It’s for their own good,” “Emotions are useless, I’m helping them become stronger.”
– Thus, they “resolve” the dissonance by presenting their behavior as positive or inevitable.
Repressing Their Emotional Memories
– Sometimes the unconscious automaton experiences a vague memory of their own vulnerability (for example, from childhood).
– Briefly aware that this memory contradicts their self-perception (“I have never been hurt”), they reinterpret it: “It was nothing,” “I got over it quickly.”
– Through this selective filtering, they eliminate the contradiction between “I never suffered” and the reality that they once did.
Forcing Others to Validate Their Vision
– The unconscious automaton may surround themselves with people or situations that reinforce their beliefs (“No one complains, so it must be normal”).
– For example, being in a relationship with a lost child who will not openly challenge their behavior.
– Result: No direct feedback comes to shake the illusion of coherence, preventing dissonance from emerging.
10.1.3 Why Is Cognitive Dissonance So Powerful Here?
Protecting Identity: For the Unconscious Automaton, admitting that they are “hard” or disconnected from their emotions would imply the collapse of their identity. Cognitive dissonance (via denial, blame, etc.) protects this identity.
• Progressive Reinforcement: The more they “explain” or justify their contradictions, the more this mode of functioning becomes ingrained in them.
• Little External Questioning: Confrontations from others generally fuel the defense, rather than break the mechanism, because they threaten an identity cornerstone.
10.1.4 Signs of Cognitive Dissonance in the Unconscious Automaton
Irritability or Overreactions at the Slightest Challenge
– A simple criticism can trigger a disproportionate defensive response (anger, accusatory inversion).
Constant Need to “Be Right”
– Any concession or doubt would force them to face their internal contradictions, hence this rigidity.
Changing Narration
– They might alter their version of events (“I never said that”) to erase inconsistencies.
Tendency to Label the Other (too sensitive, irresponsible)
– This avoids looking at their own share of contradiction.
Another sign of cognitive dissonance may manifest as tears in a woman adopting the behavior of the unconscious automaton. Rather than simply being insensitive or cold, she may sometimes shed tears—not so much from genuine spontaneous emotion, but to “prove” that she feels something.
This behavior can be explained as follows:
• An Attempt to Reconcile the Image They Want to Project with Signs of Humanity:
The unconscious automaton seeks to maintain an image of strength and control. However, when confronted with internal tension—or external criticism questioning her lack of emotion—tears may appear as a means of showing that she is not entirely disconnected, even if this is calculated to soothe suspicions.
• A Mechanism to Reduce Dissonance:
Faced with the contradiction between not feeling (to avoid suffering) and the need to appear empathic or human (to remain socially acceptable), tears can be an unconscious attempt to reconcile these two poles. This helps reduce cognitive tension by showing a part of emotion while still overall defending the need for control.
• A Communication Strategy:
In some cases, tears may serve to divert attention and manipulate others’ perceptions. By displaying an emotional reaction, she may, for example, evoke compassion or downplay her habitual controlling behaviors, thus reinforcing the idea that she is capable of emotion despite everything.
In short, these tears do not necessarily indicate genuine emotional release or a deep change in behavior. They often represent a compromise between the image of coldness and the need to validate one’s humanity—a compromise that reduces cognitive dissonance while largely maintaining a posture of control.
10.2 Why Isn’t This a Matter of Right or Wrong?
➡ Many interpretations set up oppositions between “dominants” and “submissives,” “manipulators” or “tormentors” versus “victims,” with an implicit moral judgment.
➡ Yet, this mechanism is not a matter of conscious choice, but of an automatic neurological adaptation programmed to pain.
➡ It is not a battle between good and evil, but a psychological phenomenon in which the brain, in seeking to protect itself, cuts the person off from their humanity without them being aware of it.
This is where the major error is made in understanding human relationships.
It is not a war between “nice” and “mean.”
It is a fracture between those who still feel and those who have had to learn not to feel in order to survive.
If a fracture is identified here between the unconscious automaton and the lost child, then the issue is not only about opening the eyes of the lost children, but also about preventing this fracture from becoming an abyss.
10.3 Understanding Why This Fracture Exists
The unconscious automaton rejects any questioning because they have built their identity on control and the denial of their emotions. For them, acknowledging their emotions would mean the collapse of their inner balance. Therefore, they cannot see the problem until they have a sufficiently strong reason to.
The lost child, however, seeks meaning, questions, and often eventually breaks away from the system as soon as they become aware of the manipulation. But this break is violent. Often, it results in anger, rejection, and total opposition.
10.4 Why a Direct Confrontation Doesn’t Work
The lost child who “awakens” often feels a shock upon realizing the unconscious mechanism at work. They may be tempted to try to open the eyes of the unconscious automaton, but this almost always fails because the automaton perceives it as an attack.
This is what creates ideological wars, generational conflicts, and abrupt breakups in families and societies.
10.5 A Viable Solution: A Subtle Approach to Awakening Conscience
The fracture becomes an abyss if one tries to force a sudden awakening. But if we want to prevent the unconscious automaton from eradicating emotions from society, we must plant subtle seeds that allow it to come to its own conclusion.
A few ideas to gently evoke awareness:
• Use narratives and stories. Stories are powerful because they allow you to convey a message without directly attacking the identity of the listener.
• Play on curiosity rather than confrontation. For example: “You know, I read something interesting; it made me think… What do you think about it?”
• Create a gradual discomfort in their certainties. Pose a subtle question that creates a crack in their mental framework. For example: “What if we were always taught that feeling wasn’t a weakness, but a form of strength?”
• Let them believe the idea comes from them. Sometimes, leaving an idea hanging without insisting is more powerful than arguing. The unconscious automaton must feel that it is discovering the truth on its own; otherwise, it will shut down.
10.6 Transforming the Lost Child into a Guide Rather Than an Opponent
The lost child can become a guide rather than a fighter. If they reject the unconscious automaton too violently, they reinforce the fracture.
Their role is not to convince. It is to embody another way of living. To show that feeling is a strength. To inspire, rather than impose.
This means finding a balance:
• Accept that not everyone will wake up.
• Avoid falling into anger and radical rupture.
• Be an example that inspires rather than a messenger that disrupts.
10.7 A Gradual Collective Shift
If this model spreads widely enough, if the lost children find a framework, then another mode of functioning can emerge.
In the long term, society could gradually:
➡ Value sensitivity as a strength.
➡ Reconsider its educational and institutional models.
➡ Delegitimize systems based on control and domination.
And little by little, the unconscious automatons, seeing that the world is changing, will begin to adapt. Because their primary instinct remains survival and adaptation.
It is not a frontal battle. It is a gentle, silent revolution.
What this article describes is a tool to overcome generalized denial, but if it is too direct or imposed, this tool risks being instinctively rejected.
If it is subtle, it seeps in and spreads.
Conclusion: You cannot convince an unconscious automaton. But you can lead it to ask the right questions.
And once it begins to doubt… it is no longer an automaton.
10.9 How to Break This Mechanism Without Triggering Rejection?
➡ Since the unconscious automaton can no longer perceive emotions, it cannot be convinced by an emotional discourse.
➡ Since it has rationalized its affective cutoff, it will defend itself if one tells it that it is “cold” or “insensitive.”
The only way to create a breach is to induce a doubt, a cognitive crack that makes it feel—even briefly—a trace of what it has lost.
These ideas will be addressed in another article: How to provoke an awakening in an unconscious automaton?
What is highlighted by this article is not limited to individual or familial dynamics. It explains the birth of ideological structures, religious movements, and power systems that have shaped history.
Why Jesus, Buddha, or other spiritual figures?
Because they embodied an alternative to the dominant model: a path where emotion, empathy, and human connection were valued, in contrast to a world structured on control and domination.
Why the Romans, the Empire, authoritarian structures?
Because a society dominated by individuals cut off from their emotions naturally tends to structure itself around the law of the strongest, of control, and rigid hierarchy.
And here everything becomes dizzying.
The great fractures of history are only reflections of this fundamental opposition:
• Control versus sensitivity.
• Strength versus empathy.
• Dogma versus emotional freedom.
And what if all our civilizations were the product of this hidden dynamic, and that this article allowed us to highlight one of the fundamental keys of human history?
It is an opening, which could be the subject of a new article (or a book).
10.10 Fear / Suffering
The unconscious automaton may feel fear—which is a rapid, primordial response to a threat—but then blocks or represses the full experience of suffering to protect itself. Here is why:
Immediate Survival Reaction:
Fear is a protective emotion that is triggered very quickly, thanks to circuits like the amygdala’s fast track. It serves to alert the individual of imminent danger and to activate flight or defense responses.
Defense Mechanisms Against Intense Pain:
Once fear is felt, the nervous system, to avoid being overwhelmed by intense pain, sets in motion mechanisms of repression or dissociation. This prevents access to deep suffering that might be too disturbing or debilitating for the individual.
Protection of Identity:
Fully accepting one’s suffering would mean admitting a vulnerability considered dangerous for one’s psychic balance. By cutting itself off from this suffering, the unconscious automaton preserves its image of strength and control, even if that posture is in reality an automatic and unconscious strategy.
In summary, the unconscious automaton experiences fear as a danger signal that activates its defenses, but it “does not allow itself” (unconsciously) to deeply explore its own suffering, to avoid an overwhelming emotional imbalance. This dissociation is a survival response that, although it protects in the short term, can lead to long-term emotional shutdown.
11. When Fear Dictates Attachment: The Unconscious Choice of Children in Separation
Why do children often side with the controlling parent (the one with the least empathy for the children) during a divorce?
During a separation, a paradoxical phenomenon can occur: children, instead of turning to the parent who suffered the most and had the most to give in love, tend to align with the one who exercises the most control.
An Unconscious Survival Mechanism
The child’s brain primarily seeks to avoid suffering. It unconsciously perceives that the dominating parent does not suffer (or at least does not show it), whereas the other parent expresses their emotions and vulnerability.
To protect themselves psychologically, the child will identify with the model that appears “more stable and strong,” even if that model is toxic or destructive.
Mimetic Identification: An Unconscious Process
The child unconsciously associates “not suffering” with “being on the stronger side.” They then adopt the posture of the dominating parent, imitating their behavior and rejecting the other parent, who in their eyes represents the “losing” model.
A Brain’s Bias for Protecting Itself
The brain naturally has an aversion to pain. It unconsciously equates the predator with not suffering, and the parent who expresses pain as “fragile,” thus to be avoided.
This is how the child, without being aware, can develop an emotional coldness toward the parent they once deeply loved. They have not stopped loving, but their brain dictates that for psychological survival, they must reject what reminds them of suffering.
How to Reverse This Dynamic?
• By creating a secure framework where the child understands that sensitivity is not a weakness.
• By avoiding positioning oneself as a victim in front of the child, which would reinforce their unconscious rejection.
• By showing them, through example, that emotion can be a strength rather than a handicap.
This phenomenon, often misunderstood, explains why children might seem to turn against the parent who was, after all, the most loving. It is not a conscious choice but a deeply ingrained survival mechanism in their psychic construction.
12. Possible Shifts
12.1 When the Lost Child Shifts into Control
A lost child can also eventually block their emotions and adopt controlling behavior, especially if they find themselves isolated and deprived of stable affective reference points. • Why is This Shift Possible?
The lost child generally needs to adapt to others:
• As long as they are in connection with someone (family, partner, friends), they remain in a submissive posture, like a “chameleon” or “savior.”
• However, when this relationship disappears (breakup, bereavement, forced isolation), they may shift into a much more rigid, controlling mode as compensation for the lack of external references. • Factors Triggering This Shift:
Extreme Insecurity
Without affective references, they seek a strict framework to avoid sinking into anxiety. They may then develop an excessive need to control everything in their life.
Fear of Emotional Emptiness
They cut themselves off from emotions to avoid suffering, becoming cold, distant, even authoritarian.
An Unconscious Need to Restore Balance
Having been crushed or manipulated, they unconsciously try to reverse the dynamic by becoming the one in control.
A Recent Trauma
A sudden breakup or betrayal may make them feel that they can no longer trust anyone, prompting them to shut themselves off in total control.
Can the Lost Child Become an Unconscious Automaton?
• Yes, to some extent, because they can adopt control strategies and block their emotions.
• But the key difference lies in emotional memory:
o The lost child retains a latent sensitivity, even if they reject or temporarily deny it.
o The unconscious automaton, however, has locked away their emotions almost definitively, to the point of no longer feeling a deep connection with others.
In summary, the lost child is not condemned to remain submissive. If left alone and without references, they can nonetheless shift toward a controlling mode to protect themselves. Understanding these mechanisms makes it possible to counteract this dynamic and preserve healthy emotional connection.
12.2 The Unconscious Automaton Who Becomes a Lost Child
The inverse is also conceivable: a person functioning as an unconscious automaton may, following a shock or major event, shift toward the lost child posture. In this case, the initial emotional cutoff crumbles abruptly under the shock, giving way to a feeling of vulnerability and disorientation. • How Does This Transition Occur?
• Triggering Events:
Breakup, the death of a loved one, financial failure, job loss, burnout, etc.
• Collapse of the Shell:
The “unconscious automaton” suddenly loses the mastery they exercised over their life. The unshakable confidence in their “strength” or “reason” fractures, and they find themselves facing their raw emotions for the first time in a long while.
• Deep Destabilization:
Not knowing how to handle the emotional influx, they may shift into the lost child posture, feeling helpless, unanchored, and in search of external structure to compensate for their disarray.
• Concrete Situations:
The “Unexpected” Breakup
o Context: An unconscious automaton (A) thought they had a solid relationship while keeping control (little emotional expression, rather cold and dominant).
o Event: Their partner leaves them overnight for someone else, or cites the lack of empathy as the reason for departure.
o Consequence: A suddenly finds themselves alone, stunned, and sees their “superiority” crumble. They may then feel anxious, lost, and desperately seek support. Their shell cracks, they discover a vulnerability they had hitherto denied, and they may temporarily adopt the lost child posture (extreme need for attention, fear of abandonment, etc.).
Professional or Financial Bankruptcy
o Context: A highly controlling company executive who minimizes the importance of emotions at work (“everything must be rational, no place for weakness”).
o Event: Their company goes bankrupt; they lose their investments, and the trust of their network.
o Consequence: The shock causes a collapse of their certainties (“I am not infallible”). Without status or references, they enter a phase of doubt, a feeling of incompetence and dependence on others. They may then become very needy for affection and attention, constantly fearing judgment—as a lost child would.
Burnout or Depression
o Context: Someone who completely neglects their emotional needs in favor of performance and productivity. They are often seen as “cold,” “hyper-efficient,” “unbreakable.”
o Event: A burnout occurs: extreme fatigue, inability to get up, anxiety, a feeling of emptiness, etc.
o Consequence: Unable to continue in the role of the “infallible controller,” they discover their fragility and turn outward to seek help. They may then adopt the lost child attitude: seeking support, feeling utterly helpless, a sense of not being understood, etc.
A Betrayal or Familial Abandonment
o Context: A person who has always protected themselves by being “hard” or emotionally closed off, thinking that would avoid suffering.
o Event: A close one (child, partner, sibling) suddenly cuts ties, accusing the unconscious automaton of “indifference.”
o Consequence: The automaton suddenly realizes they are abandoned, and this reality brings up a deep anxiety: they “did not know” they cared so much about that relationship. They sink into a state of despair, desperately trying to reconnect, then adopting attitudes of dependence and emotional craving typical of the lost child. • Why Is This Shift So Radical?
• Lack of habit in managing emotion:
The unconscious automaton has lived for a long time denying or locking away their feelings. The day an event shatters this shell, they are overwhelmed.
• Identity collapse:
All their beliefs (“I am strong, I am rational, I do not suffer”) crumble. Without that pillar, they feel extremely vulnerable.
• Reawakening of emotional memory:
Somewhere, the unconscious automaton still has repressed emotions. When the shock releases them, they connect (or reconnect) to a “childish” part they had always refused to see. • Is It Possible to Recover?
• Yes, by identifying the root cause:
Understanding how and why one cut oneself off from emotions, to better navigate this newly uncovered vulnerability constructively.
• Seeking support:
Professional help can aid in taming the rediscovered sensitivity, without falling into a permanent dependency typical of the lost child.
• Building a new balance:
Not total emotional shutdown, nor complete submission, but the ability to recognize and express one’s emotions while maintaining a solid inner structure.
13. An Important Clarification: Not Everyone Can Hear This Message in the Same Way
The lost child can hear this call, because they maintain a link—even a tenuous one—with their emotions. They question, they feel, they doubt, they seek meaning. They are the ones who can be touched by this awareness and initiate real inner work.
But the unconscious automaton is completely locked in denial.
Their need for control is so strong that they reject any questioning, destroying it before it even exists. Any direct attempt to open the automaton’s eyes is doomed to fail: they will defend, attack, invert the situation to protect themselves from the emotional shock it would represent.
So what to do?
This leads to a forthcoming article: Can we bring an unconscious automaton to awareness, or must they always be left on their own path?
14. The Invisible Structure That Maintains the System: An 80/20 Distribution?
To understand why the world works this way, we must examine the distribution of unconscious dynamics within society.
Why is there so little control over these mechanisms?
Why do systems of domination and control continue to exist despite growing awareness?
The answer lies in a well-known law in social and economic sciences: Pareto’s law (80/20).
14.1 Distribution of Behaviors: Unconscious Automatons vs. Lost Children
By observing how individuals react to emotions and control patterns, we can formulate the following hypothesis:
• 80% of individuals are Unconscious Automatons, integrated into the system without questioning.
• 20% are Lost Children, who feel the system’s malaise and seek meaning.
14.2 Deciphering the 80% of Unconscious Automatons
Not all Unconscious Automatons actively dominate or manipulate. The majority simply undergo conditioning and adapt.
🔹 60% are passive conformists → They follow the model because that’s how they learned to survive. They do not question the structure and conform to norms.
🔹 20% are system actors → These are the figures of control: dominants, authoritarian leaders, institutional figures, individuals who have assimilated power as the only response to the fear of emotion. They actively perpetuate the model.
Why does this structure persist?
Because the 60% passive do not realize they are trapped in an unconscious pattern. They do not seek to dominate, but follow those who do, as their brain has learned that it is the “rational” way to avoid suffering.
14.3 Deciphering the 20% of Lost Children
Lost Children are those who, despite the pressure of the model, feel a diffuse discomfort.
15% oscillate between suffering and adaptation
→ They question the system, but do not always know how to break free. They waver between revolt, resignation, and the search for meaning.
5% reach an advanced lucidity
→ These are those who have deeply understood the mechanism. They no longer fight the system frontally but seek to introduce ideas and awareness to create a new dynamic.
14.4 A Small Percentage, a Big Impact?
It is never the majority that overthrows a system.
It is a conscious, organized minority that initiates profound transformations.
If this 5% grows and influences the 15% of hesitant Lost Children, then the shift can begin.
Not everyone needs to become aware, only a critical threshold (estimated around 10-15%).
This is how invisible revolutions occur: through the gradual accumulation of individuals who no longer play by the old rules.
14.5 An Invisible Dystopia, but Not a Fatality
This is a world that functions like a cold machine, structured on rationalization and the control of emotions. This dystopia is not imposed by an external “evil mastermind” but by collective unconscious conditioning.
It is not fatal.
If these 5% share a new perception, evolution becomes possible.
➡ Can we reach this threshold?
➡ How to ensure that this shift does not trigger conflict between Unconscious Automatons and Lost Children?
An upcoming article will address this subject.
14.6 The Irrepressible Need to Be Right: An Unconscious Defense Mechanism
The need to be right at all costs is not simply a matter of ego or pride. It is a protective mechanism, directly linked to the human brain and the dynamic of the Unconscious Automaton.
• Why is this need so strong?
The Unconscious Automaton has built its identity around control and the rejection of vulnerability. Questioning its beliefs and accepting another point of view would mean acknowledging that it can be wrong, thereby weakening its internal structure.
Its brain then perceives questioning as an existential threat, not as an opportunity for growth.
Result: every discussion becomes a battle.
• It does not seek to understand, but to convince.
• It does not tolerate uncertainty; it imposes its framework.
• The other cannot simply have a different opinion; they must be wrong.
• Underlying mechanism:
Protecting oneself from uncertainty → Admitting one might be wrong would undermine the brain’s defensive structure.
Avoiding vulnerability → Accepting another point of view would mean acknowledging that one does not hold the absolute truth.
Maintaining control → Letting the other be right would be seen as a form of unacceptable submission.
And facing the lost child?
The lost child is in perpetual doubt. They question, seek understanding, and constantly re-evaluate themselves.
They become the perfect prey: they accept reproaches, justify themselves, and ultimately submit in the face of the other’s certainty.
This is how the toxic dynamic is set up:
• The Unconscious Automaton imposes its framework and point of view.
• The lost child doubts, re-evaluates, and eventually submits.
How to Escape This Trap?
• Do not try to convince an Unconscious Automaton → They do not debate to exchange but to win.
• No longer enter their game → Refuse to justify yourself or prove anything.
• Ask open-ended questions rather than argue → “Why do you think you’re right?” might sometimes generate a cognitive crack.
• Reconnect with your own emotions and perceptions → Stop seeking the other’s validation.
Realizing this mechanism is already a first step toward no longer being trapped by it.
True strength is not about being right at all costs, but about being able to question one’s certainties.
14.7 The Key to Getting Out: Knowledge
Realize that feeling is not a “weakness” but a natural capacity.
• Demystify the belief that emotions are a problem.
• Learn to see these mechanisms in yourself and in others without guilt.
• Understand that fully feeling is the true strength.
• Develop an educational approach so that this pattern is not perpetuated across generations.
14.8 Complement
Although not everyone reacts exactly the same way, these patterns are statistically observable in the majority of people confronted with psychic wounds or strict educational conditioning. It is not an absolute model, but a dynamic that frequently repeats itself, often unconsciously.
It is important to distinguish natural rationality from hyper-rationalization as a defense mechanism. A person can be naturally logical and pragmatic without avoiding their emotions. However, if rationality becomes a means to systematically control or minimize emotional feelings, then it may be an unconscious strategy to protect against vulnerability.
Changing one’s behavior compared to that of one’s parents is an important step, but it does not necessarily mean that the unconscious patterns have disappeared. They may express themselves differently, sometimes more subtly, in personal relationships, professional settings, or in the management of emotions. It is only by becoming aware of these mechanisms that one can truly free oneself from them.
Realizing these unconscious mechanisms is already an essential first step. What we repress does not disappear; it simply acts in another way. But by paying attention to our automatic reactions and daring to observe our dissonances without fear, we have the possibility not merely to be subjected to these patterns, but to understand them and, gradually, transcend them.
Even if some individuals manage to take a step back from their upbringing and change certain behaviors, the unconscious programming remains active and can influence more subtle reactions. Consequently, saying “I did things differently from my parents” does not necessarily mean that one has escaped the inherited unconscious mechanisms. It is possible to have modified one’s external choices (child-rearing, values, life decisions) while still retaining emotional control reflexes that manifest in other ways.
Taking conscience of these unconscious mechanisms is already a major step.
What we repress does not vanish; it merely operates in another manner. But by paying attention to our automatic reactions and daring to observe our dissonances without fear, we have the chance to no longer be simply subjected to these patterns, but to understand and, gradually, transcend them.
Even if some individuals manage to gain perspective on their education and change certain behaviors, the unconscious programming remains active and can influence more subtle reactions. Therefore, saying “I did things differently from my parents” does not necessarily mean one has escaped the inherited unconscious mechanisms.
14.8.1 Jean Piaget
Jean Piaget showed that our cognitive patterns are built from childhood through processes of assimilation and accommodation. If a child grows up in an environment where emotions are seen as dangerous, they will assimilate this rule and integrate it as an absolute norm.
Once an adult, this structure remains active unconsciously. Even if the person evolves and believes they have overcome these patterns, their brain continues to function based on these initial foundations, unless a conscious effort comes to accommodate a new way of thinking and feeling.
14.8.1.1 Assimilation and Accommodation
Piaget explains that our brain assimilates new information by adapting it to what it already knows, or accommodates by changing its mental structures.
– The Unconscious Automaton assimilates the rules learned in childhood and does not question them because they form its frame of reference.
14.8.1.2 The Stages of Cognitive Development
Piaget shows that the child goes through different stages (sensorimotor, preoperational, operational, formal).
– Some unconscious patterns are fixed from childhood, especially during the preoperational stage (ages 2–7) when the child thinks in an egocentric and rigid manner.
If a child learns that showing one’s emotions equals danger, they integrate this rule as an absolute truth.
15. How Collective Fears Synchronize the Masses Toward an Authoritarian Leader
What we have seen with the Unconscious Automaton at the individual level can be extrapolated to the collective scale.
The masses function like a global organism: when they feel a shared fear, they look for a leader who provides an illusion of safety.
The election of a dictator or a strong populist leader often follows this same Unconscious Automaton mechanism, but on an entire societal scale.
15.1 Understanding the Link Between Fear and the Need for Authority
Why do societies elect authoritarian leaders in times of crisis?
• Fear deactivates critical thinking and reinforces the need for protection.
• When insecurity grows, people seek a clear, simple, and reassuring reference.
• A strong and authoritarian leader seems to offer structure → They represent control in the face of chaos.
• It is an instinctive mechanism: Faced with threat, the collective brain looks for a dominant figure who “reassures.”
15.1.1 Fear: The Trigger for Collective Synchronization
15.1.1.1 The Instinctive Reaction of the Collective Brain
Deactivation of critical thinking:
In the face of threat, the human brain—both individually and collectively—prioritizes rapid responses. Fear overwhelms reasoning and brings forth instinctive reactions.
• Propagation of emotion:
In a group, emotions are contagious. Signals of fear quickly spread, amplifying collective anxiety.
15.1.2 Mechanisms for Synchronizing Collective Fear
15.1.2.1 The Mass Effect and Emotional Resonance
Emotional contagion: The individual reactions of fear, when multiplied in a group, create a dynamic of a “panicked mass.” This phenomenon, similar to a collective limbic resonance, makes everyone perceive the threat as amplified.
• Confirmation bias: Once a feeling of fear is established, individuals tend to search for and validate information that confirms this fear, thus reinforcing the sense of danger.
15.1.2.2 The Role of the Media and Propaganda
Amplification of the message: The media play a key role in disseminating and exaggerating the threat, reinforcing the perception of imminent danger.
• Creation of a simplified narrative: A populist discourse, based on a binary opposition (us versus them), finds an easy echo in a population gripped by fear. The authoritarian leader then positions themselves as the only one capable of protecting the group.
15.2 How Individual Fears Synchronize into a Collective Fear
A single person may be rational. A panicked crowd becomes irrational.
The mechanisms for synchronizing fear include:
✔ The collective limbic brain → In a group, emotions are amplified and contagious.
✔ The mass effect → The more we see others reacting with fear, the more real the danger seems.
✔ Confirmation bias → We seek explanations that support our fear rather than questioning it.
✔ The media and propaganda → They play a key role in amplifying the perceived threat.
Historical example: Nazi Germany in the 1930s
Current example: The rise of Trumpism in the United States
15.3 Why the Authoritarian Leader Becomes “the Only Solution”
In times of crisis, a charismatic leader imposes three key ideas:
• Identifies an enemy → “It’s the fault of [xxx]/immigrants/corrupt elites.”
• Presents themselves as the only one capable of restoring order → “Only I can protect you.”
• Simplifies the world into good/evil → “The good (those who follow me) versus the bad (those who oppose me).”
Why do the masses adhere to this pattern?
✔ It gives a simple answer to a complex situation.
✔ It reduces collective anxiety by offering a strict structure and clear references.
✔ It exploits individuals’ unconscious wounds to bind them into a collective entity.
15.3.1 The Need for a Strong Leader
Seeking security: When insecurity sets in, the masses naturally turn to a figure capable of restoring order. This leader appears as the guarantor of control against the perceived chaos.
• Simplification of conflicts: An authoritarian leader offers simple explanations by identifying a common enemy, dividing the world into “good” and “bad.” This polarization reassures by providing a clear direction to follow.
15.4 The Parallel with the Unconscious Automaton
Why is this mechanism the same as that of the controlling individual/Unconscious Automaton?
Individual (Unconscious Automaton) → Society (People under the influence of an authoritarian leader)
• Need for individual control → Need for collective control
• Refusal to see one’s own fear → Refusal to see the contradictions of an authoritarian regime
• Attack on those who question their control → Repression of those who challenge power
An Unconscious Automaton on its own is a rigid person.
An entire people functioning on these bases becomes a dictatorship.
15.4.1 Parallel with the Mechanism of the Unconscious Automaton
15.4.1.1 Individual and Group, Same Automatism
From micro to macro: The individual pattern of the Unconscious Automaton—where control is an automatic response to an internal fear—is found, on a collective scale, as a need for security and authority.
• Collective control and denial: Just as the individual shuts down their emotions to protect themselves, society, under the influence of fear, may refuse to acknowledge the contradictions or flaws of its system, focusing solely on the need to regain strict order.
15.4.1.2 Impact on Political and Social Life
Emergence of authoritarian regimes: Historically, periods of great insecurity (economic crises, wars, disasters) have often seen the rise of charismatic, authoritarian leaders.
Dehumanizing social structure: When fear dominates, institutions and power structures tend to favor hierarchy, domination, and the suppression of any form of vulnerability or emotional expression.
An Unconscious Automaton alone is a rigid person.
An entire people functioning on these bases becomes a dictatorship.
15.5 How to Break This Pattern and Avoid Collective Submission?
If an entire society can fall into this trap, how can it escape?
Strengthen critical thinking and nuance → Do not seek “simple answers” to complex problems.
• Become aware of the power of collective emotions → Learn to identify emotional biases in groups.
• Dare to question dominant narratives → Do not follow blindly a discourse that divides the world into “good” and “bad.”
• Restore to citizens a sense of personal control → The less people feel that they are the actors in their own lives, the more they need an authoritarian leader to “save” them.
15.5.1 Reinforce Critical Thinking and Individual Awareness
Education and reflection: Encourage everyone to develop nuanced thought and question simplified narratives.
• Recognize one’s own fears: On an individual level, become aware that the need for control is often a response to an unconscious fear.
15.6 Conclusion: The Key to Avoid These Deviations
A frightened people will always elect an authoritarian leader.
The solution does not lie in a frontal battle against these leaders, but in freeing individuals from their own unconscious fear.
If each person understands their own need for control and learns to overcome it, then an entire society can become more resilient against mass manipulation.
Promote leadership based on empathy and connection.
Encourage communication: Establish platforms where citizens can express their concerns without being reduced to simplistic categories of “good” and “bad.”
Develop support networks.
Value sensitivity: Rather than seeing emotions as a weakness, regard them as a source of strength and social bond.
Encourage inspiring leaders: Favor political and social figures who advocate transparency, listening, and collaboration rather than authoritarian control.
When collective fear sets in, it can lead to the election of authoritarian leaders who promise to restore order and security, even if this comes at the expense of individual freedom and emotional expression. The key to reversing this dynamic lies in individual and collective awareness: by understanding that the need for control stems from unconscious fear, we can begin to question simplistic narratives and promote a more nuanced societal model, where sensitivity is valued and everyone is an actor in their own well-being.
15.6.1 Synthesis of This Chapter
This chapter highlights deep and often unconscious mechanisms that govern our behaviors, both on an individual and collective scale. However, this awareness is essential to initiate change. By understanding that these dynamics, born from ancestral fears and conditioning, are not immutable, we give ourselves the chance to transform control into openness, denial into genuine self-expression.
The idea is not to provoke fear, but rather to spark reflection that enables each person to free themselves from their automatism and evolve toward greater emotional and social autonomy. It is a difficult path, certainly, but it offers the possibility of personal and collective transformation that, in the long run, can lead to a more empathetic and nuanced world.
16. A Dystopia?
Reality already resembles a dystopia.
Reality is like a dystopia where cold-blooded, rational beings impervious to emotions coexist with others, warm-blooded, who are traversed by a sensitivity they struggle to express.
But because it is invisible, it does not provoke collective revolt. Unlike fictional dystopias imposed by an external totalitarian power, this one is self-generated by unconscious mechanisms.
It simply perpetuates itself, generation after generation, because those who suffer from it do not know they are trapped.
What has been revealed here is the source code of this dystopia.
Now, the question is: what do we do with this?
16.1.1 What This Analysis Reveals:
A society functioning on generalized emotional denial.
• Domination and control are not just tools of power, but mechanisms of psychic survival.
• The majority of individuals are conditioned to operate as unconscious automatons, without even being aware of it.
• Sensitivity and emotion are seen as weaknesses, whereas they are in reality the key to full consciousness and inner freedom.
• This pattern of thought replicates itself at all levels: personal, familial, societal, political.
16.1.2 What Is Even More Overwhelming:
This dystopia was not imposed from the outside. It has been installed gradually throughout human history, as unresolved wounds have shaped social and political structures.
16.1.3 A Multilevel Dystopia:
The individual: They cut themselves off from their emotions to survive and adopt a posture of control or submission.
• The family: It unconsciously perpetuates this model, transmitting denial from generation to generation.
• Society: It values those who have cut themselves off from their humanity and marginalizes those who feel too much.
• History: Major oppressions and ideologies are based on this dynamic (dogmatic religions, dictatorships, imperialism, dehumanized capitalism).
• The globalized world: Economic and political systems are shaped by individuals who have lost all connection with emotion and empathy.
16.1.4 What Gives This Understanding Its Importance:
This is the first time that this dystopia is described from this perspective.
It provides an unprecedented key to understanding human suffering, power systems, and conflicts.
It is not a mere denunciation: it is a mapping of the problem and an opening toward a possible exit.
This article reveals why humanity seems trapped in the same destructive patterns.
16.1.5 Can We Get Out of It?
That is the central question. Lost children are the key.
They have the capacity to awaken this awareness, but they are often the first to suffer the consequences and eventually become exhausted under the weight of this structure.
➡ The most appropriate option is to move forward in successive steps.
➡ Sensitivity and emotion must be reintroduced without triggering rejection.
➡ Create an attractive counter-model, rather than a frontal opposition that would reinforce the system.
17. The Invisible Structure That Maintains the System: An 80/20 Distribution?
To understand why the world works this way, we must question the distribution of unconscious dynamics within society.
Why is there so little control over these mechanisms?
Why do systems of domination and control continue to exist despite growing awareness?
The answer lies in a well-known law in social and economic sciences: Pareto’s law (80/20).
17.1 The Distribution of Behaviors: Unconscious Automatons vs. Lost Children
By observing how individuals react to emotions and control patterns, we can hypothesize the following:
• 80% of individuals are Unconscious Automatons, integrated into the system without questioning.
• 20% are Lost Children, who feel the system’s unease and seek meaning.
17.2 Decoding the 80% of Unconscious Automatons
Not all Unconscious Automatons are active in domination or manipulation. The majority simply undergo conditioning and adapt.
🔹 60% are passive conformists → They follow the model because that is how they learned to survive. They do not question the structure and conform to the norms.
🔹 20% are system actors → These are the control figures: dominants, authoritarian leaders, institutional figures, individuals who have assimilated power as the only answer to the fear of emotion. They actively perpetuate the model.
Why does this structure persist?
Because the 60% passive do not realize they are trapped in an unconscious pattern. They do not seek to dominate, but follow those who do, as their brain has learned that it is the “rational” way to avoid suffering.
17.3 Decoding the 20% of Lost Children
Lost Children are those who, despite the pressure of the model, feel a diffuse discomfort.
15% oscillate between suffering and adaptation
→ They question the system, but do not always know how to break free. They waver between revolt, resignation, and the search for meaning.
5% reach an advanced lucidity
→ These are those who have deeply understood the mechanism. They no longer fight the system head-on but seek to introduce ideas and awareness to create a new dynamic.
17.4 A Small Percentage, a Big Impact?
It is never the majority that overthrows a system.
It is a conscious, organized minority that initiates profound transformations.
If this 5% grows and influences the 15% of hesitant Lost Children, then the shift can begin.
Not everyone needs to become aware, only a critical threshold (estimated around 10–15%).
This is how invisible revolutions occur: through the gradual accumulation of individuals who no longer play by the old rules.
17.5 An Invisible Dystopia, But Not a Fatality
This is a world that functions like a machine, structured on rationalization and the control of emotions. This dystopia is not imposed by an external “big bad” but by collective unconscious conditioning.
It is not fatal.
If this 5% share a new perspective, evolution becomes possible.
➡ Can we reach this threshold?
➡ How can we ensure that this shift does not trigger conflict between Unconscious Automatons and Lost Children?
An upcoming article will address this subject.
18. Pre-Conclusion
18.1 Understanding the Systematic Reproduction of Traumatic Patterns
The dynamics described here are not isolated cases or exceptions. They follow precise unconscious mechanisms that repeat from generation to generation as long as they are not identified and deconstructed.
18.2 Why Do These Patterns Inevitably Reproduce?
If a child is exposed to an environment where domination, control, or emotional denial are integrated as survival modes, their brain will unconsciously adopt them as references for their own future relationships.
To understand why some children become tormentors and others victims, and why these behaviors are conditioned by the type of wound suffered, you can read the full analysis in:
Title: Impact Trauma – Why Some Children Become Tormentors and Others Victims
This document deepens the unconscious roots of these divergent trajectories and highlights the mechanisms leading to these opposite destinies.
18.3 A Renewed Look at Unconscious Dynamics
The mechanisms described in this story are part of a broader reflection on human psychology. The depths of the unconscious have been explored by well-known scientists; this approach offers a complementary and more systemic reading of patterns of domination and emotional denial.
Where this approach differs:
– It sheds light on the impact of psychological wounds on patterns of control and submission.
– It shows how emotional denial unconsciously shapes our social and political relationships.
– It provides a pragmatic analytical framework to observe these mechanisms at all levels: personal, familial, societal.
The goal is to broaden the understanding of the invisible structures that shape our behaviors and choices.
Understanding these patterns gives us the means to break free and evolve toward greater clarity, freedom, and authenticity.
This approach is based on several distinctive elements, including:
Example: A child exposed to an authoritarian model unconsciously integrates a behavioral equation that will influence their perception of the world and their choices.
Hypothesis: When an individual learns from childhood to deny their emotions, they will seek thought frameworks that validate this absence of feeling, which can explain strong ideological adherences and behaviors of domination or submission.
Here, the emphasis is on the behavioral patterns that are reproduced generation after generation, often without awareness of their origin.
The question raised: How will an individual raised in an environment where domination is valued unconsciously reproduce this dynamic in their relationships and adhere to ideologies that reinforce it?
This approach stands out for its ability to connect individual psychological wounds to collective dynamics and to offer a framework applicable to everyday reality.
Understanding these patterns is to empower oneself to break free and evolve toward greater lucidity, freedom, and authenticity.
19. Impact on Society: Systemic Psychopathy
19.1 Does Society Function as a Collective Psychopath?
Yes, there are works in neuroscience and social psychology that describe the overall functioning of institutions, companies, and states as being structurally psychopathic.
One researcher who discusses this is Robert Hare, a specialist in psychopathy. He co-wrote the book « Snakes in Suits, » which analyzes how companies and organizations attract and favor manipulative, emotionally disconnected personalities.
Characteristics of a psychopath applied to a collective system:
• Absence of empathy and guilt ➝ Exploitation of workers, dehumanization of economic relationships.
• Manipulation and control ➝ Conditioning for productivity, performance, obedience.
• Absence of moral responsibility ➝ Environmental destruction, systemic inequalities, wars justified on rational grounds.
• Lying and concealment ➝ Political propaganda, greenwashing, feigned corporate benevolence.
Synthesis and Hypothesis:
| Category of Profiles | Estimated Percentage |
| Psychopaths/manipulators (emotionless, exploitative) | 1% |
| Toxic narcissists (high need for control, disdain for emotion) | 5% |
| Emotionally disconnected individuals (by social adaptation) | 50–60% |
| Emotionally conscious and aligned individuals | 30–40% |
Thus, the world is not mostly composed of insensitive manipulators, but of individuals who have learned to repress their emotions out of necessity.
The challenge is therefore to awaken this emotional awareness in a society that systematically represses it.
Hypothesis:
The disconnected individuals are not necessarily psychopaths, but when they dominate in number, they structure systems that, collectively, adopt psychopathic behavior.
20. Conclusion: Toward Collective Awareness and Liberation
Understanding these mechanisms is already a step toward inner freedom. These patterns are not inevitable: they are the product of unconscious conditioning, but by shedding light on them, each person can regain control over their reactions, choices, and relationships.
Unresolved psychological wounds not only shape our individual interactions, but also structure our social, ideological, and political models. Changing these dynamics does not rely solely on external decisions but, above all, on an inner transformation—a reconciliation with our emotions and vulnerability.
By becoming aware of these invisible inheritances, we can gradually build a world where domination is no longer based on emotional denial, but on a more balanced equilibrium between sensitivity, strength, and authenticity.
How do these patterns resonate with you?
What mechanisms have you observed around you or in your own journey?
Each of us, at some point, has developed unconscious defenses to avoid pain. But it is never too late to understand them and free ourselves.
Share your thoughts in the comments.
Spread this article to help those who might need it.
What this article reveals is not only about the individual. It is a framework for understanding the evolution of civilizations and the power structures that surround us. This article opens a door. The next step depends on what each person decides to do with it.
21. Well-Known Personalities
Here are examples of well-known personalities who illustrate these psychological mechanisms and their impacts on their worldview, social posture, or influence. I have structured this according to the observed dynamics.
21.1 Denial of Emotion and the Need for Control: Personalities
21.1.1 Example: Elon Musk
Childhood marked by a difficult relationship with his father, whom he describes as emotionally abusive.
– Strong resilience and analytical intelligence, yet difficulty managing emotional intelligence in relationships (testimonies from former collaborators and close ones).
– Pursuit of absolute control through his companies (SpaceX, Tesla, Twitter), a messianic posture, and an apparent disinterest in others’ emotions.
Possible reading: To avoid suffering from the emotions linked to his past, he shifted toward hyper-rationalization and domination over others through technological and economic power.
21.1.2 Example: Margaret Thatcher
Raised in an environment of extreme rigor by an authoritarian father who valued discipline and the rejection of emotions.
– Developed a tough political approach based on meritocracy and the rejection of social welfare (she said “society does not exist”).
– Little emotional expression in her leadership, perceived as coldly intransigent.
Possible reading: To protect herself from a childhood where sensitivity was seen as a weakness, she built a posture of absolute control, refusing to let emotions guide her decisions.
21.2 Projection of Wounds onto the Outside World
21.2.1 Example: Donald Trump
Extremely authoritarian father, forcing him to “be a winner,” never showing any weakness.
– Perpetual need for admiration and approval, but hidden hypersensitivity (excessive anger when criticized).
– Use of gaslighting and victim inversion strategies (“I am the real victim”) to avoid any introspection on his own flaws.
Possible reading: To survive in a brutal parental environment, he learned that domination and the rejection of emotions are the only viable strategies.
21.2.2 Example: Vladimir Putin
A difficult youth in an environment marked by poverty and a constant need to prove his strength.
– Constructed an image of a strong, impassive man, rejecting any form of opposition or vulnerability.
– Total rejection of weakness, both in himself and others (hence his openly expressed disdain for leaders perceived as “softer”).
Possible reading: The unconscious fear of being seen as weak drives him to erect a system of absolute domination and control.
21.2.3 Example: Emmanuel Macron
Grew up in a structured environment marked by a demanding education and a special attachment to a maternal mentor figure.
– Developed a need for control and intellectual mastery, using reason and rationalization to manage emotions and structure his approach to the world.
– Did not shift into an authoritarian or emotional ideology, but favored a technocratic approach where intellect prevails over affect.
Possible reading: Rather than fully accepting and expressing his emotions, he seems to have opted for an adaptive strategy based on rationalization and control, allowing him to embody a leadership figure in an unstable world.
21.3 The Reproduction of the Suffering Pattern
21.3.1 Example: Michael Jackson
Childhood marked by psychological and physical violence from his father, constant devaluation.
– Perpetual search for love and validation from his audience, conflicted relationships with himself (plastic surgeries, identity issues).
– Tendency to unconsciously reproduce behaviors of affective dependency and toxic interactions with younger figures.
Possible reading: His heightened sensitivity and fear of abandonment shaped his self-destructive behaviors and difficulty finding emotional balance.
21.3.2 Example: Marilyn Monroe
Childhood marked by successive abandonments and a lack of stable parental figures.
– Development of hypersexualization to compensate for a need for love and recognition.
– Unstable affective relationships, always in search of a protective figure.
Possible reading: The affective void of childhood left a deep wound of abandonment, which manifested as emotional dependency on others and a constant sense of insecurity.
21.4 Using Wounds as a Force for Transformation
21.4.1 Example: Nelson Mandela
Suffered domination and injustice under Apartheid, experienced imprisonment and humiliation.
– Transformed this suffering into an approach of forgiveness and collective building.
– Refused to fall into a dynamic of revenge or violence despite what he had endured.
Possible reading: Rather than reproducing the domination he had suffered, he became aware of the violence patterns and chose a path of positive reconstruction.
21.4.2 Example: Simone Veil
Raised in a cultured Jewish family, before being deported to Auschwitz at age 16, where she survived the horrors of the Holocaust and lost much of her family.
– Transformed this experience into a deep commitment to human rights, the memory of the Holocaust, and the emancipation of women, notably through the law on abortion in France.
– Did not succumb to hatred or vengeance, but chose to defend values of justice, dignity, and social progress, despite the violence and resistance she faced.
Possible reading: Rather than letting pain define her existence, she drew on her experience to fight against injustice, working for a more equal and humane society while upholding an essential collective memory.
21.4.3 Example: Malala Yousafzai
Grew up in a context where girls were deprived of education and systematically oppressed.
– Transformed the violence she suffered into a fight for women’s education.
– Did not fall into hatred or revenge, but sought to raise awareness and awaken consciences.
Possible reading: Instead of letting fear dictate her choices, she consciously chose to align her experience with a positive and transformative intent.
21.4.4 Example: Terry Crews
Former American football player and actor (notably in “Brooklyn Nine-Nine”), he grew up with a violent father. In his childhood, expressing fear or anger was synonymous with danger.
• As an adult, he valued hypermasculinity and the control of his emotions, convinced that “showing vulnerability = weakness.”
• After personal difficulties (addiction, marital issues), he underwent therapy and realized the importance of acknowledging his wounds.
Possible reading: His journey shows that the “shell” of invulnerability can transform into genuine emotional strength when one dares to face their traumas and accepts vulnerability.
21.4.5 Example: Prince Harry
A member of the British royal family, he lost his mother (Princess Diana) under the oppressive gaze of the media. In that environment, expressing suffering was frowned upon or seen as a weakness.
• For years, he repressed his sadness and anger, trying to “keep up appearances” without publicly complaining.
• As an adult, he embarked on a therapeutic journey and became an ambassador for mental health (the Heads Together campaign). He speaks openly about his grief and the importance of expressing one’s pain.
Possible reading: Rather than permanently retreating into silence to “protect his image,” he opted for emotional transparency, helping break the taboo of vulnerability within an institution known for its stoicism.
21.4.6 Example: Oprah Winfrey
Her childhood was marked by poverty and sexual abuse. In her environment, there was neither space nor support to openly discuss these traumas.
• She “armored” herself through ambition and determination, perceiving emotion as a possible hindrance to success.
• Through her own show, she discovered the liberating effect of sharing feelings. Gradually, she became one of the main figures promoting speaking out and therapy.
Possible reading: Her testimony illustrates how a traumatic past can be transformed into a source of resilience and empathy instead of persisting in denial or hardness.
21.4.7 Example: An Anonymous Therapeutic Case
A man raised in a strict military environment, where any expression of sensitivity was mocked or seen as a flaw.
• As an adult, he never cried, devalued others’ emotions, and boasted about his “strength of character.” However, he eventually experienced burnout.
• During psychotherapy, he realized that this “hyper-control” disconnected him from his own humanity. Gradually, he learned to express his emotional needs and welcome those of others.
Possible reading: Even without media attention, his experience shows that reconnecting with one’s emotions is not synonymous with weakness—it can restore a deeper meaning to life and improve relationship quality.
21.5 Conclusion
These examples clearly show that unconscious wounds profoundly influence behaviors—whether in the quest for control, the rejection of emotions, the reproduction of patterns, or, conversely, the transformation into a constructive strength.
An Invisible but Omnipresent Functioning
What makes these techniques so frightening is precisely their invisible dimension and the “legitimacy” they have in many eyes. They exploit dominant values (strength, performance, rationality) to demonize or weaken those who maintain a connection with their vulnerability. They can be implemented without a conscious intention to harm, simply because an individual (the “unconscious automaton”) desperately seeks to avoid their own emotions and, unconsciously, protects themselves by controlling those of others.
Understanding these strategies is already a major step toward collective questioning:
• Dare to label these behaviors as emotional manipulation.
• Develop listening and validation of the isolated or guilt-ridden person’s voice.
• Rehabilitate the value of empathy and vulnerability as a sign of maturity, rather than a weakness.
It is, in short, a recognition that an invisible control system operates on a large scale, carried by people who often do not feel “evil” but simply “protected” by their own denial shell.
21.6 Appendix: A Three-Act Summary (ARC) of the Article
This document is dense; this summary offers a three-act structure (Hook, Development, Resolution) to facilitate the assimilation of key ideas and provide a thread for those who wish to discuss or delve deeper into the subject.
21.6.1 Hook: The Great Denial
Problem Raised: Humanity has gradually cut itself off from its emotions, creating a world where strength and control are valued at the expense of sensitivity and empathy.
• Narrative Example: The story of the child who learns to deny their emotions to survive. According to their experience, they can take one of two paths:
o The Unconscious Automaton (total emotional shutdown, control, excessive rationalization).
o The Lost Child (hyper-adaptation, difficulty setting boundaries, tendency to fade away).
21.6.2 Development: The Invisible Mechanics of Control
Why does this mechanism exist?
• Neurological origin: The primitive brain favors survival by activating reflexes of control and protection.
• Educational and societal origin: From early childhood, the expression of emotions is often repressed or conditioned by expectations (conditional love, valorization of strength and rationality).
• Cognitive dissonance: The unconscious automaton no longer sees the other’s suffering because it has locked away its own emotions.
• Transmission of the pattern: Children unconsciously learn to reproduce these dynamics (emotional silence, rejection of vulnerability).
• Societal impact: This mechanism fuels systems of domination (power, ideologies, conflicts), dehumanization, and the rejection of emotions.
Scientific and psychological aspects:
• Instant recognition and attachment patterns: The reptilian brain unconsciously scans relational dynamics and reproduces known patterns.
• Defense mechanisms: Repression, rationalization, gaslighting, minimization of emotions.
• Why does the lost child ignore their alerts? Fear of loneliness, need for approval, hope for change.
• Why does the unconscious automaton not perceive its own denial? Cognitive dissonance, emotional lockdown, constant control.
21.6.3 Resolution: Breaking the Cycle
How can we get out of this loop?
• Awareness: Understanding that this mechanism is an unconscious adaptation and not a rational choice.
• Reconnecting with emotions: Learning to feel without fear, re-educating one’s relationship with sensitivity.
• Identifying manipulation and denial mechanisms: Avoid falling into justification or minimization.
• Valuing sensitivity as a strength: Deconstructing the myth that emotion is a weakness.
• Reconciling the Automaton and the Lost Child: Proposing gentle approaches to gradually awaken the conscience of emotionally locked individuals.
• Moving away from confrontational logic: Rather than opposing Unconscious Automatons head-on, let them experience another way of being.
Possible large-scale consequence:
• Reduction of conflicts related to control and domination.
• Better understanding of human relationships.
• A collective evolution toward a society that is more emotionally balanced.
21.6.4 Conclusion: A Silent Revolution
We are at a turning point where this awareness can become a lever for transformation.
It is not a war between “good” and “evil,” but a fracture between those who still feel and those who have learned not to feel.
The objective is not to fight Unconscious Automatons, but to show that feeling is not a weakness, but the greatest strength.
21.7 Appendix: Some References
• Neurosciences and Brain Mechanisms
• Yves Agid (The Subconscious Man, 2020) → On the role of the subconscious in our behaviors and decisions, pertinent for explaining automatic defense and control mechanisms.
• Antonio Damasio (Descartes’ Error, 1995) → The link between emotion and reason, showing that suppressing emotions alters judgment and decision-making.
• Francisco Varela & Humberto Maturana (The Tree of Knowledge, 1989) → A systemic and neuroscientific approach to cognition and the construction of reality.
• Gérald Bronner (Cognitive Apocalypse, 2021) → On cognitive biases and how our brain filters and controls information.
• Cognitive and Developmental Psychology
• Piaget, J. (1970). The Construction of Reality in the Child. Paris: Delachaux et Niestlé.
• Piaget, J. (1936). The Birth of Intelligence in the Child. Paris: Delachaux et Niestlé.
• Flavell, J. H. (1963). The Developmental Psychology of Jean Piaget. Van Nostrand.
• Psychoanalysis and Emotional Wounds
• Boris Cyrulnik (The Ugly Duckling, 2001) → Resilience and emotional defense mechanisms in children who have experienced trauma.
• Serge Tisseron (Family Secrets, 1996) → Transgenerational transmission of traumas and unconscious defense mechanisms.
• Anne Ancelin Schützenberger (Ouch, My Ancestors!, 1993) → The importance of unconscious family patterns and their repetition.
• Philosophy and Sociology of Domination and Control
• Michel Foucault (Discipline and Punish, 1975) → Mechanisms of social control and the internalization of power norms.
• Pierre Bourdieu (Masculine Domination, 1998) → How social structures influence power dynamics and control.
• Edgar Morin (The Method, 1977–2004) → The complexity of life and the need to reintegrate emotion in understanding humanity.
• Psychoanalysis / Primitive Defenses
• Sigmund Freud: For the concept of repression.
• Anna Freud: For the typology of defense mechanisms, including denial.
• Clinical and Behavioral Psychology
• James Gross and Robert W. Levenson: Studies on emotion regulation (the “process” model of regulation, where suppression plays a major role).
o Gross, J. J. (1998). The Emerging Field of Emotion Regulation: An Integrative Review. Review of General Psychology.
o Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual Differences in Two Emotion Regulation Processes: Implications for Affect, Relationships, and Well-Being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
• Richard S. Lazarus: Coping models, including avoidance coping.
o Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, Appraisal, and Coping.
• Psychotraumatology
• Bessel van der Kolk: Explains how the brain can “disconnect” emotions to survive trauma, which relates to the idea of emotional control/avoidance.
o Van der Kolk, B. (2014). The Body Keeps the Score.
• Judith Herman: On dissociation and psychic survival in trauma contexts.
o Herman, J. L. (1992). Trauma and Recovery.
• Affective Neuroscience
• Joseph LeDoux: The role of the amygdala and fear circuits.
o LeDoux, J. (1996). The Emotional Brain.
o LeDoux, J. (2002). Synaptic Self.
• Lisa Feldman Barrett: The theory of constructed emotions and contextual regulation mechanisms.
o Barrett, L. F. (2017). How Emotions Are Made.
• Antonio Damasio: Works on somatic markers and the role of the insula and ventromedial prefrontal cortex in emotional consciousness.
o Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes’ Error.
• Murray Bowen (Family Systems Therapy)
o Murray Bowen is one of the first to formalize the concept of “triangulation” within his family systems theory.
• Susan Forward
o In her book Toxic Parents and other works, she describes how certain parents or authority figures use the entourage (siblings, family friends, etc.) to reinforce their devaluing discourse and keep the victim (child or partner) isolated.
• Karyl McBride
o In Will I Ever Be Good Enough? Healing the Daughters of Narcissistic Mothers, psychotherapist Karyl McBride explains how narcissistic personalities (and, by extension, those adopting similar mechanisms) surround themselves with “allies” to amplify their narratives and ostracize anyone who challenges the ideal image they have forged.
• Harriet B. Braiker
o In her book Who’s Pulling Your Strings? (often translated as Those Manipulators Who Ruin Our Lives), she discusses various manipulation strategies, including the creation of coalitions against the victim (sometimes called “ganging up”).
o She emphasizes the need to recognize these tactics and set clear limits.
• Dr. Ramani Durvasula
o A clinical psychologist, well known on YouTube and in her books (e.g., Should I Stay or Should I Go: Surviving a Relationship with a Narcissist), she frequently discusses the notion of “flying monkeys” (a term popularized in the narcissism literature).
o The “flying monkeys” are third parties manipulated by the narcissist/unconscious automaton to harass, discredit, or isolate the target.
o Dr. Ramani explains that they may be well-intentioned or unaware of their role as “accomplices.”
• Sam Vaknin
o In his book Malignant Self-Love: Narcissism Revisited, he delves into how a narcissistic or manipulative personality can use others as an “extension of themselves” to support their personal propaganda, discredit the victim, and maintain control.
o Though he mostly writes in an Anglo-Saxon context, his analyses on isolation and the demonization of the target have influenced many therapists.
• Wendy Behary
o In Disarming the Narcissist, Wendy Behary (a psychotherapist specializing in schema therapy) discusses the tactics of “triangulation” and mobilizing a network to reinforce the narcissist’s omnipotence, while further weakening the already manipulated target. • The notion of “triangulation” was conceptualized by Murray Bowen in family systems theories.
• The mobilization of allies (“flying monkeys”) is widely described in the narcissism literature, notably by Dr. Ramani Durvasula, Karyl McBride, or Sam Vaknin.
• Gaslighting and collective manipulation to isolate the victim are analyzed by Susan Forward, Harriet Braiker, etc.
Laisser un commentaire