- Joined
- Jul 21, 2015
This was brilliantly postulated. The idea that he looks for universality, and when things aren't that simple, he gets furious at the complication, it's so very true.a huge part of Lucas' delusions is fixation on a statement (true or false is irrelevant) and then becoming enraged that there are either exceptions to the rule, or that the original statement is wrong. several other people have pointed this out as a clear illustration of autism in action, as well as the method used by Lucas to work himself into a frenzy over something.
"leftist in name only" is an often repeated phrase (among many others) that he is fixated on and he becomes angry that it isn't true in the sense that he wants it to be: that because he is perceptively low on both the social and economic scales, that his value as a person is lessened because of it, and his desirability to others is greatly lessened because of it.
he associated "left" with certain moral foundations like kindness and caring and empathy and selflessness, and he extends that association beyond what is reasonable: that he is entitled to these things - that others are required to oblige his demands. this angers him when reality shows that this is not true, and that his fixation is falsifiable, and is not a universal rule.
likewise this obligation extends into unreasonable demands that others must provide for his comfort or his sexual satisfaction not because of any intrinsic quality of himself (which i'm sure he realizes and actively denies is quite low) but because there is an obligation to do so based on his entitled and inflexible understanding of the associations and morals of "the left".
someone here said that if he associated "the right" with the same things, we would simply swap some words around. the delusion itself would be largely unchanged.
the incongruity, the inability to accept that his understanding of the world is wrong or deeply skewed is a core feature of his condition - a condition that causes him pain and anger.
this incongruity exists, to greater and lesser extent, in cultists or political extremists as well. holding two contradictory ideas as true at the same time, and being very angry over the inability to reconcile that contradiction when it's pointed out.
working as law enforcement, i didn't really see this sort of behavior in the vast majority of criminals like drug dealers, thieves, or murderers, et c.
i did see this sort of entitled attitude in some domestic violence offenders, neglectful parents, hoarders, kids that were violent enough to attack others in schools, rapists, sexual assaulters, and a few others. road rage people that were caught very shortly after their road rage incident as well. some things trigger a release of this anger caused by bizarre, fixated ideas that are not true, and they feel injured by that, looking for convenient targets for that anger.
all that being said, Lucas seems like the creepy rape-y sort, rather than someone genuinely violent that a good hard slap wouldn't cure.
Of course, it doesn't seem to bother him that he himself can't live up to the black and white morality that he presents, for example saying that only young horrible gen Z guys say the N word and call women bitches, and then going on rants where he quite literally uses the word bitch and the n-word more than any other human that I've ever heard. There was an exchange with Goldie in which, and I'm serious about this, he said the word b**** 20 times in less than a minute. He was discussing his bete noire du jour Walter Fate, but I wonder if Lucas himself understands that the biggest bitch in the world of Wernology, the biggest baby bitch boy in all of this, is none other than Lucas Colby Werner himself.
But people never hold Lucas to expectations vis-a-vis his OWN lack of consistency, and I'm not even sure if it would be possible to do so.
If there was ever another interview with Lucas, I would want someone to ask him in detail how he knows that people walking in public are in sexual relationships.
When Goldie tried to ask him about this, he started to explain that he saw the people and they were blushing, and unfortunately then the discussion deviated to something else after that.
I would have liked a more extensive thorough questioning about how blushing equals sexual activity, if Lucas thinks that everyone can tell that this blushing = sexual activity, is this some power that only he himself has, to divine sexual activity from the redness of someone's cheeks?
I wonder if any of the therapist who dealt with Lucas had ever really tried to prod at the foundations of some of his unreasonable thinking in this way, to reveal the lack of consistency to these Universal ideas.
I imagine he would just get furious and start screaming "move on!" But it would nonetheless be interesting to see it tried.