The Feminization of Mankind
The Feminization of Mankind
The Feminization of Mankind
Apostolakos, Constantinos
Montreal Quebec
Canada
I dedicate this to my son, Spyridon (Spyros) Apostolakos.
May he find some value in it or, if he does not, may he find forgiveness.
Author’s Note
“We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of
intelligent men.” – Orwell, George
I am not here to assuage, manipulate or comfort you. My only oath is that to
clarity and my only obligation is that towards reality.
This thesis is not based on hatred or some subconscious motive to excuse
myself or comfort myself through denial and slander.
Whomever is insulted or disturbed by what I say should not seek out the
reasons in my, hypothetical, intentions but in his or her own culturally
defined mind and emotional reactions to what is being said.
My motives are clear, precise and honest:
They are existential…a need to understand, to make sense of my self and of
the world I am a part of, to clarify, no matter how disturbing the insights
might be, so as to find ways of reacting efficiently and as a way of finding
some longer lasting level of contentment in an sincere and direct
confrontation with a universe that rejects any absolute form of it.
My views are not unique, by far. Many others have become aware of the
phenomena I will describe and attempt to decipher.
In fact the very concept of uniqueness is a human construct with no real
meaning.
Everything is based on the recombination of what pre-exists - flow.
All creativity, all innovation and invention, all forms of enlightenment are a
re-composition of what is already present and openly displayed before us.
The only thing that truly differs is the style of the expression.
Reality is accessible to all and it is only individual limitations that make it
confusing or duplicitous or find it incomprehensible and mystical.
Everything “new” is based on something(s) old, because the temporal
division of before and after is a flawed concept alluding to a gap that is not
there.
What has been is present in what is, as it is an extension of it, a continuation
of it.
Therefore, any similarity to someone else‟s opinions may be coincidental, as
truth can be reached by many routes and available to all possessing the mind
to perceive it and the courage to endure it.
--- * ---
I admit to being influenced by many mentors, for nobody can claim
otherwise and be considered sane, but I can also honestly admit that all my
opinions are the result of years of personal analysis, observation, struggle
infused with healthy amounts of scepticism and humility.
I can only say that I did not begin reading others until the age of thirty and
when I did I only found through them common labels for my awareness and
the inspiration to express myself fearlessly and with integrity.
What I‟ve learned from others I‟ve attempted to make my own and I have
tried to incorporate it all into my opinions.
Nevertheless, I wish to acknowledge the aid and the inspiration of my most
notable teachers, up to this point, and my most treasured kindred spirits:
Friedrich Nietzsche, Heraclitus of Ephesus, Arthur Schopenhauer, Socrates,
Martin Heidegger, Jean-Paul Sartre, Johann Kaspar Schmidt (Max Stirner),
Nikos Kazantzakis, Søren Aabye Kierkegaard, Immanuel Kant, Jean
Baudrillard, Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Plato, Karl Marx, Bertrand Russell,
Edward Bernays, Michel Foucault, Jesus of Nazareth, Guatama Buddha, Lao
Tzu, Confucius, Slavoj Žižek, Ludwig Wittgenstein, François-Marie Arouet
(Voltaire), Henry David Thoreau, Fyodor Mikhaylovich Dostoyevsky,
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, John Kenneth Galbraith, Neil Postman,
Hermann Hesse, Noam Chomsky, Baruch Spinoza, David Hume, and, most
notably, my mother and father, Vasiliki and Spyridon Apostolakos.
To them, and to all those to be added to the list, I owe my most heartfelt
gratitude and my most unwavering loyalties.
“The works of really capable minds differ from the rest in their character of decisiveness
and definiteness, together with the distinctness and clearness springing there from, since
they at all times clearly and definitely knew what they wanted to express; it may have
been in prose, verse, or tones. The rest lack this decisiveness and clearness; and in this
respect they can be at once recognized.
The characteristic sign of all first-rate minds is the directness of all their judgments and
opinions. All that they express and assert is the result of their own original thinking and
everywhere proclaims itself as such even by the style of delivery....Therefore every
genuine and original thinker is to this extent like a monarch; he is immediate and
perceives no one who is his superior. Like the decrees of a monarch, his judgments spring
from his own supreme power and come directly from himself.” – Arthur, Schopenhauer
Foundations
From the Metaphysical to the Physical
Existence/Exists: That which is (re)active, displaying a distinction in
relation to the observer, and so becoming apparent because of it.
Absolute: The imagined point meant to facilitate understanding and the
storage of information. A simplification/generalization of gathered and
interpreted sensual stimulations and their assimilation into coherent
harmonious mental models (abstractions), using pattern recognition.
In essence the absolute is a symbol in antithesis to the actual – a metaphor
attempting to understand and express the complexity of continuous change
by fabricating static models reliant on ambiguity and metaphorical
symbolism.
Need: A mental interpretation of the universal in flux (existence) and the
organism‟s resistance to it as a participating element.
As a product of reality the organism reflects the universal condition of flow
and resists it, rejects it, as a matter of survival (self-maintenance); it stands
in contradiction, opposition, to it.
This flow is translated into need and when need is unfulfilled or denied it
leads to suffering/pain – the state of extreme stress due to this resistance.
Multiplicity: The manifestation of temporal differentiation that can be then
interpreted as form, color, texture, odour, sounds etc. that exposes the
divergence of the observed (phenomenon - object) from the observer
(consciousness - subject).
Uniformity: The elimination of any distinction between observer and
observed making consciousness, itself, superfluous and life unnecessary –
the antithesis to multiplicity. The absence of differentiation which makes
awareness possible.
Intelligence: A measurement of analytical ability and the perception and
incorporating of as many patters into one single coherent mental model –
world view. Also dependent on sensual acuity.
The term “intelligence” can be used to describe the totality of human mental
functions, including imagination, perception, understanding and
conceptualization.
Imagination: The ability to take mental models, abstractions, and project
them into the unknown or, in temporal terms, into the future. The degree of
the projection determines the quality of the imagination, and the accuracy of
the models are determined by the intelligence and sensual acuity of the
organism using these abilities.
The accuracy of these projections is also determined by the motives and the
reference points used.
If the abstractions are based on the collection and abstraction of sensual
stimuli then they increase their probability for accuracy, whereas if they
reference an abstraction that has no basis on sensual stimuli or it references
an abstraction which cannot be referred back to a sensually perceived
phenomenon, then its probability for error increases – the latter is called
fantasy.
Strength/Weakness: These, like all, value judgments are based on a
comparison of observer to observed – a relationship.
Strength is the measurement of weakness (dependence), in relation to
another or the other.
Male/Female: The terms refer to a biologically determined sexual type that
has evolved for specific biological functions.
Each type will exhibit the characteristics essential for carrying out this
biological function, to varying degrees, and so will also display the thinking
and demeanour that will help in carrying out its primary reason for evolving
as a identification marker.
Masculine and feminine attitudes are definitely not limited to any one sex, as
there are many biological males that exhibit very feminine dispositions and
biological females that display masculine ones, but the original intent for the
evolution of sex, as a reproductive method, predisposes each sexual type
towards the attitudes indicative of their biological type.
Any divergence must be explained by seeking the reasons within the
particular circumstances of each individual and how the environment has
affected it and allowed it to flourish.
The subsequent evolution of secondary sexual functions and the mutations
this depends upon are one way of explaining sexual diversity as it is
produced in our modern times.
Natural/Artificial: The designation is an, admittedly, precarious one, as the
delineation between natural and artificial effects can never be precisely
defined.
For the purposes of this thesis, however, the difference between natural and
artificial behaviour, phenomena and environments will be that of
establishing a point where human interventions dominate by usurping or
replacing previous conditions.
It is the differentiation point between pre-existing environments where
man‟s will had no, or little, affect, as opposed to environments which are
predominately the product of human wilful interference.
This distinction is an important one. It will be used to determine how human
meddling affects the subsequent conditions that determine his own future
evolution and to establish the collateral effects of this process of
effect/counter-effect.
No doubt all that exists or that can exist can only be called “natural”, but for
the amplification of how man‟s activities eventually result in a self-affecting,
unintentional sometimes, influence on his own evolution, the term
“artificial” will be used to attempt to delineate between pre-existing factors
and manmade collateral effects.
Prologue
“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” -
George Orwell
The levelling of mankind continues.
Centuries of social engineering and civilization have resulted in a type of
human being unlike our distant ancestors and, still to this day, socialization
persists to filter out all culturally and socially “unwanted” human
characteristics, altering, in this way, human nature, restructuring it in
accordance with human ideals, and often degenerating the human spirit into
oblivion.
The result has been growing uniformity, producing a desirable, to the
system, behavioural predictability - a desirable dependability that is then
marketed as a virtue or taught as an enlightened state of mind…and called
civility or normality or health.
Mediocrity is the outcome.
This annihilating tendency flattens mankind, making any distinction, not
connected to social utility, an unwanted manifestation of individuation, then
referred to as “prejudice” or as the residue of a “primitive” past.
This is, in fact, a method of slandering all previous natural sources of
identification, so as to replace them with the more culturally desirable
manmade ones.
Whereas multiplicity and diversity benefited natural selection in the past, it
proves to be disadvantageous to cultural cohesion and social harmony in the
present; it is, therefore, inhibited when it confronts systemic stability, while,
particularly in the west, it is insincerely marketed as the very essence of the
system‟s intent.
Social and cultural selection.
--- * ---
“The very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. Lies will pass into
history.” – Orwell, George
The fact that State Authority has now replaced Religious Authority should
not distract us from their common practices of repressing and degrading
anything destabilizing to their ostentatious calmness.
These two institutions have proven to be loyal allies with common goals,
throughout history, and it is not until recent times that their congruent
powers have been forced to become more inconspicuous and indirect.
The façade is meant to make their products and common methods more
attractive to those whom are meant to consume and adorn themselves with
their symbolisms, as part of their social personas and of their personal merit.
The very idea of individuality has been depreciated, the ego, that belongs to
it, ripped to shreds and condemned as a shameful artifice and then replaced
by an external one…a God or, as an adaptive progression of the previous,
Humanitarianism.
A man‟s sense of self will only be allowed to be found outside himself…in
an act of self-contradicting absurdity.
The break between Church and State is in this: a split from spiritual more
discriminating identifications and towards a more secular, inclusive, global
cultural identity.
Therein lies the conflict between the liberal and conservative political
camps.
--- * ---
Conversely in the eastern traditions the same process has taken an alternate
route but has achieved the same outcome: The annihilation of self and ego
has been replaced with nothing at all…an Emptiness.
Truly, a more sincere expression of the underlying nihilistic tendencies
present in all of these philosophical trends towards stable uniformity.
For what is to be obliterated and shamed, but the very idea of ego and
distinction itself, and how will this be accomplished other than by
denigrating its reality…by demeaning reality altogether?
The individual is, now, being stripped of all identity and left bare and void, a
“venerable” tabula rasa awaiting fulfilment, awaiting “the word” from
without; an “individual” in name only, made more vulnerable to
exploitation, shivering for a new coat…for a new skin, for a name and
worshiping the first thing that offers him one.
To accomplish this daunting task of erasure, the very idea of a self is
redefined, from an activity (temporality), a metaphysical process with
potential and possibilities (spatial dimensions), into a thing with a static
ethereal substance – an eternal soul or a communal core or an absolute
absence with no distinction whatsoever.
Then the previous conception of self is belittled as illusionary and the ego is
remade from an expression of this self’s will, its self-fullness and
selfishness, into a reprehensible artifice that is responsible for a suffering
that can be avoided – self-less.
This separation of life from suffering is paramount. Upon this false dualism
the constructs of promised bliss and eternal salvation are built by simple
brains and sinister priests.
This progressive annihilation has then been named spiritual
“enlightenment”, just as it has been named “progress” in many parts of the
post-modern west.
--- * ---
There is no conspiracy here, no invisible entity or secret group directing
things from the shadows.
We might even say that the process is natural, given the circumstances - the
consequence of a normal succession that started as a tribal unit and has
resulted in the emergence of huge socioeconomic military machines, with
their own logic and interests - assimilating, levelling and eradicating
everything that stands in their path.
A superorganism contained within a shrinking world with others of its kind.
Globalization is this battle over this small Earth – a battle for survival as all
are.
From an evolutionary standpoint we might even say that this natural
progression from the simple to the intricate has its roots in human physical
disadvantages as it confronts an unknown and threatening world.
The survival benefits of cooperation compels this requisite self-repression,
eventually resulting in state and/or religious dominance.
If we wish to follow this intangible thread further back, then we may find it
rooted in the existential reactivity of life, an ephemeral ordering and a
resistance to entropy.
The unification of a single cell with another is based on the advantages
offered by this cooperative compromise.
The rewards of synergy come into play. The sum being superior to its parts,
when the more efficient focus of energies results in a combined increase of
power.
In the process the parts are degraded so as to better integrate them and
organize them within the whole, as disciplined automatons and mindless,
will-less, members of the community.
Only by a force of Will can those process be resisted.
A Will firmly founded on ego and an emerging sense of discriminating self –
self-consciousness.
A Will fully lucid and able to accept the consequences of this unilateral
rejection.
This degradation of mankind - besides being a typical consequence of
interdependence – has, also, been exacerbated by the infiltration of slavish
moral systems into the human psyche. A human psyche that has already
been demoralized and undermined by the culture of extreme scepticism
producing mental fatigue – particularly amongst local intellectual elites.
Perspectivism, or the delusion of intellectual integrity, which denies the very
existence of reality and implies that all opinions are equally valid, given that
we are all equally ignorant, is based on this modern-day worship of humility
and the denouncement of self.
Interbreeding between a growing subclass of mediocrity and a continuously
watered-down intellectual minority, does not help.
The rare, Plato‟s Philosopher Kings, find themselves incapable of resisting
peer pressures and socioeconomic prerequisites.
Social and religious ideals, demand no discrimination and so impose a lapse
in reason and a numbness of consciousness – they become a forced
compromise when sexual activities are directed and the cultural dogma
teaches obedience to the idea that man is spirit and human life is sacred.
Life lost value when it was consecrated, just as love lost all significance
when it was cast as an abstraction of the ideal absolute and called God.
Holiness is another aspect of this equalization that tends to eliminate any
distinction and/or individual value judgments that categorize using socially
unacceptable standards.
By positing an idea(l) that is protected from criticism due to its privileged
position of sanctity the idea places itself beyond reproach and so avoids
being exposed as a sham.
The sacred labels itself untouchable and as the judgment that takes
precedence over all others; and it makes of unquestioning belief its more
noble quality.
None shall be judgemental except it.
A conveniently and paradoxically self-supporting set-up, playing upon
human frailties.
--- * ---
Unchecked copulation, brought on by the requirements of a growing State,
brings about increased genetic mutations requiring the, ensuing, mitigating
effects of enforced temperance and contrived modesty.
Population pressures, resource deficiencies and the increased replication of
unfit genetic mutations make doctrines and socioeconomic ideals that
advocate docility, equality, tolerance, deference to authority and the self-
deprecating denial of self, a systemic tool of governance.
The collateral consequences of this increased procreation, combined with the
modern trend of postponing reproduction, because of changing female and
male socioeconomic roles, must then be dealt with by using further human
interventions. These increasing numbers of men and, primarily, women who
postpone reproduction, while they pursue career, wealth, prestige or merely
because they have been paralyzed by too many options and have become too
spoiled, suffering from exaggerated expectations, results in lowered fertility
rates and increased chances for birth defects.
Genetic needs, most often, take second place to social and survival needs in
a consciousness that struggles to deal with both simultaneously.
In the wild the sacrificing of a brood is commonplace when more austere
conditions demand it, and/or when social circumstances make it prudent.
Once more, innovation is called in to correct the products of earlier
meddling and the cycle continues into progressive human interference.
We have come to a point where in vitro fertilization and cloning
breakthroughs make the insemination by a father a matter of little
importance.
If you have access to the funds – evidence of your social suitability – what
does it matter what your genetic robustness is and what failed mutations you
pass on to the foetus?
Not even the mentally retarded and those suffering from some genetic flaw
are denied the “right” to bear children.
Like all modern manmade “rights” this one is acquired by simply being
born.
It is clear that where conservatism and many popular religious dogmas posit
no restriction on having babies, but only a check on sexual choices and
expressions, liberalism merely abolishes this last restriction and makes of
reproduction a universal human “right”. Even when nature places an
obstacle, by making the unfit incapable of replicating themselves on their
own, either because of aesthetic or biological reasons, liberal humanism
steps in to “correct” this natural denunciation, basing the intervention on the
mythology of justice.
In recent years couples unable to have children are aided using many
different methods of insemination and even though the female‟s body may
reject the embryo, repeatedly, ways are found to trick it into carrying
through its obligation.
These practices are having undisclosed or unexamined genetic effects on the
overall fitness of the human species.
Perhaps the full costs of this modern praxis will only be felt in the long-term
or they may manifest themselves immediately as subtle alterations in
potential mental and physical ailments.
--- * ---
It is now clear that nothing which discriminates between individuals, based
on natural standards, is to be accepted.
Beauty, itself, is redefined and biology cleansed from its cruel verdict.
Fashion trends impose their own ideals, as they are governed by social
necessities.
The birth of the anorexic, stick-model, more masculine in form, and the
hairless boyish look, becomes a testimony to this blurring between sexual
identities and the propagation of genetically unfit physical and mental traits.
Only the system, the meme, is allowed to pass judgments and be vicious and
violent.
“Conservatism makes no poetry, breathes no prayer, has no invention; it is all memory.
Reform has no gratitude, no prudence, no husbandry.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson
In both cases, all must be helped to have children because only then is the
individual fully invested in the community, and so only then can (s)he be
counted upon to “do the right thing” and be a “good citizen”.
Shared investments creates shared concerns and ensures reciprocal loyalties
- the Golden Rule, also called Karma in the eastern world - rules of binding
one will to the judgments of a communal Will.
The vengeance of the many upon the one.
“The meme for blind faith secures its own perpetuation by the simple unconscious
expedient of discouraging rational inquiry” - Richard Dawkins
No free-radicals tolerated.
The true radical is not only disruptive but, also, dangerous to the illusion of
idealized conformity and the peace of total acceptance.
Best way to deal with them is to humiliate the very idea of rebelliousness, or
to integrate it into the system itself and then sell it as another commodity
with no actual importance - a castrated symbol of resistance worn as a t-shirt
or expressed as underground music or countercultural attitudes.
Then it can be mocked as immature where no alterative but conformity is
available as the only acceptable mature option.
The very idea of “maturity” is this capitulation to the inevitable; the fatigued
giving-in to need.
Anything contrary is madness…and health is redefined along with
everything else.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe
it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from
the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal
enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” -
Joseph Goebbels
Is not psychotherapy the practice of trying to return a man back to a
semblance of normality – normal being a code word for uniform?
Where nature did away with all failed mutations or divergences which could
not offer an advantage, human environments attempt to correct the problem,
rehabilitate the mind, and reintegrate it back within uniform normality.
If the system fails to do so, it then quarantines or eliminates the resistant
element and ignores it as inconsequential.
Psychology and psychotherapy is this branch of the medical field, a
theoretical and more philosophical branch, that seeks to reintegrate minds
back into the common – “healing” the mind of its resistance to normality,
erasing or surpassing any disturbing differentiation and correcting the effects
of unrestrained and uncontrolled replication in accordance not with natural
ideals but with social ones.
“We have lost the art of living, and in the most important science of all, the science of
daily life, the science of behavior, we are complete ignoramuses. We have psychology
instead.” - D.H. Lawrence
--- * ---
“While civilization has been improving our houses, it has not equally improved the men
who are to inhabit them. It has created palaces, but it was not so easy to create noblemen
and kings.” - Henry David Thoreau
Growing populations coexisting within shrinking spaces, in turn, necessitate
organizing them by severely repressing them, through coercion or
instruction, to endure each other‟s proximity. Like all other resources this
human one must be made malleable and disciplined to centralized
management.
Husbandry turns into social engineering – eugenics made moral.
The human herd must not only be educated to follow instruction but must
also be moulded into being productive and impressionable enough, so as to
be dependable in both its output and consumption of communal goods.
Whether these produced goods are material or spiritual or ideological makes
little difference.
What matters more is that each member not only generates and/or passes-on
these cultural goods but also finds self-esteem and identity in consuming
them – cycle of dependence.
No surprise then that moral systems and religious dogmas, which
accomplish and promote just that, suddenly appear, as if by chance or divine
intervention, in places and in times experiencing increased demographic
pressures.
They, then, spread amongst the masses like wildfire, when and if the
circumstances are idyllically suited for their necessity.
Just as for fire to burn and spread the ideal fodder is dried, dying,
biomaterial, so for religion despair, impoverishment and misery are the best
conditions for its violent swell. Lushness, health, virility are inhibiting to its
expansion.
Messiahs were, presumably, abundant during those times when men lived in
“civilized savagery”. That these same messages, which had failed so many
times before, then suddenly became popular, was more a result of finding
the right socioeconomic and psychological soils to grow in, rather than a
result of their transcendental wisdoms.
It was their utility that made them “reasonable”, even if their dogmas were
often founded on childish absurdities and selective thinking.
Democracy, for one, was established not because it was just and noble and
good, but because it was necessary in a City-State that had outgrown its
agrarian foundations – a method of integrating growing urbanite populations
into the political process, rendering them harmless to the stability of the
whole.
A compromise.
Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism and then Christianity did not inspire the
world with their commonsense and profoundly, holy, “truths”, but with their
needed reinterpretations of reality, within particular environmental
conditions.
Civilizations, having reached a certain level, required a dogma that would
override, or sublimate, human impulses and then direct them into useful
activities.
Where ego became detrimental to peaceful cohabitation and human
instinctual drives, such as greed, lust, envy, dominance, became disruptive,
the dogmas that preached self-denial and the denouncement of reality and of
self as illusions or as innately sinful, became inevitable. They were an
essential ingredient that would make it possible for millions upon millions
of, otherwise, egotistical, self-conscious, self-centered, human beings to
coexist and to cooperate as passive, thoughtless, humble followers of a
common cause.
There was nothing more insightful about them than that.
Ambiguity, poetics, lies, mysticism, ceremonial pretentiousness - tactics of
the Oracle of Delphi - all combined to offer a much needed escape to those
that faced the uncertain cruelty of a world that cared not for individual
aspirations.
“Every people have gods to suit their circumstances.” - Henry David Thoreau
Later on, the emergence of secular humanism was the continuation of this
essential component, adapting itself to mounting human scientific
knowledge and the added need to integrate individuals from more diverse,
and often confrontational, cultural and religious backgrounds.
Globalization and population sizes, unimagined in earlier times, brought
about the need to find new, more sophisticated, methods of population
control.
The least common denominator had to be promoted as the core ingredient
that bound all human beings to one another like brothers and sisters.
All other identification markers had to be belittled, and all other sources of
self-consciousness had to be forsaken.
Unavoidably the least-common-denominator in this case was the
identification with a common ancestor, species, or, if one pushed it further,
life itself.
Ergo, humanism emerged as a secular social movement and life was
sanctified.
--- * ---
“Conservative: a statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the
Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.” - Ambrose Bierce
Only in this were the conservative and liberal viewpoints antagonistic:
The traditionalists, with their desire to preserve the doctrine they had
adopted and, subsequently, invested in with time and money – now receiving
multiple dividends - and the progressives with their idealistic doctrine to
change the social dynamics so as to, then, invest in what they hoped had
more promise of a return, for them.
The difference between immediate concerns and gratification and the
postponement of it for the promise of greater future gratification. In essence
the division of liberal and conservative is one of short-term and long-term
self-interests.
Under the guise of altruism, selfishness still reigns supreme and forever will
as long as life is made possible.
Particularly in the U.S. the division between the liberal and conservative
political camps consists, merely, in fighting over how much direct
governmental control will be tolerated and how much free-market will be
allowed, whereas the system itself is never, ever, in question.
By focusing on the particular the general is made invisible, even if in plain
sight, and so it is taken as the unquestionable.
“55- Struggle between forces, all of which have been established for the purpose of
running the same socioeconomic system, are thus officially passed off as real
antagonisms. In actuality these struggles partake of a real unity, and this on the world
stage as well as within each nation.
56- This is not to say that the spectacle‟s sham battles between competing versions of
alienated power are not also real; they do express the system‟s uneven and conflict-ridden
development, as well as the relatively contradictory interests of those classes or fractions
of classes that recognize the system and strive in this way to carve out a role for
themselves in it. Just as the development for the most advanced economies involves
clashes between different agendas, so totalitarian economic management by a state
bureaucracy and the condition of those countries living under colonialism or semi-
colonialism are likewise highly differentiated with respect to modes of production and
power. By pointing up these great differences, while appealing to criteria of quite a
different order, the spectacle is able to portray them as markers of radically distinct social
systems. But from the standpoint of their actual reality as mere sectors, it is clear that the
specificity of each is subsumed under a universal system as function of a single tendency
that has taken the planet for its field of operations. That tendency is capitalism.” – Guy
Debord {The Society of the Spectacle}
--- * ---
The, so called, “free-press”, once a, theoretically, regulatory cap on political
power, has now been blatantly integrated within the institutional whole as
just another subsidiary to authority.
What better way to hide the truth than in plain sight?
Then it is twisted and sold, ironically (particularly in the U.S.), as being too
antagonistic to conservative power, as being part of the “liberal” branch of
political discourse when no such entity actually exists.
In this way the conserving collusion of centralized power – as all power
seeks to preserve itself and is by nature conserving (conservative) - was
hidden behind trivial conflicts over policies of maintaining social stability -
theatrical conflicts offering a release for repressed energies by
manufacturing the illusion of hypothetical change.
A method of defusing discontent and then carrying on with the status quo.
Revolution was made impotent by being reduced to a few punditry talking-
points, delivered by “unaffiliated experts”, or to angry protests on the streets
that were then quickly forgotten and the issues ignored.
Staged elections, meant to reinforce this façade of choice - when all options
are controlled and all opinions manufactured, simplified and directed - are
part of this complicity of institutionalized, abstracted, power that exposes its
deceit in times of extreme systemic stress.
But who sees it?
“Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media.” - Noam
Chomsky
In many ways modern liberal ideals are nothing more than modern
adaptations, of pre-existing social engineering methods – more sophisticated
adjustments to the mechanics of indoctrination, in a forever changing world.
What it all comes down to is a political battle between preserving past
homogeneous societies and the need to adapt social canons to the newly
emerging heterogeneous ones – the old world resisting the new world order
of post-modern Globalization.
Kacszynski, Theodore, one of the “insane ones”, describes the liberal
psychology this way, in his Unabomber Manifesto:
“…9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of
inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern
leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of
modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.
FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY
10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strictest sense
but a whole spectrum of related traits: low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness,
depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists
tend to have such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are
decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.
14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong as capable as
men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable
as men.
18. Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, and objective reality and
to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions
about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of
objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftist philosophers are not
simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge.
They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack
these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an
outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power.
More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain
beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior).
The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of
some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also
underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility
of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior
because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to
others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack
of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been
brought up properly.
19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a
braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person
has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth,
but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to
make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. [1] But the leftist is too far gone
for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as
individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong
only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies
himself.
OVERSOCIALIZATION
24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children
are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if
he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning
part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are over-socialized,
since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many
leftists are not such rebels as they seem.
25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a
completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost
everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not.
Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally
imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually
have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for
feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use the term
"oversocialized" to describe such people. [2]
29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real
attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion
against it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-
prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools;
the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to
integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a
scientist just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last
thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want
to preserve African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African
American culture consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style
food, listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-
style church or mosque. In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In
all ESSENTIAL respects more leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black
man conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical
subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to
prove that black people are as good as white. They want to make black fathers
"responsible." they want black gangs to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the
values of the industrial-technological system. The system couldn't care less what kind of
music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what religion he believes in as
long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a
"responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it,
the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him
adopt its values. “
Then he alludes to the conservative type…
“34. Consider the hypothetical case of a man who can have anything he wants just by
wishing for it. Such a man has power, but he will develop serious psychological
problems. At first he will have a lot of fun, but by and by he will become acutely bored
and demoralized. Eventually he may become clinically depressed. History shows that
leisured aristocracies tend to become decadent. This is not true of fighting aristocracies
that have to struggle to maintain their power. But leisured, secure aristocracies that have
no need to exert themselves usually become bored, hedonistic and demoralized, even
though they have power. This shows that power is not enough. One must have goals
toward which to exercise one's power.
35. Everyone has goals; if nothing else, to obtain the physical necessities of life: food,
water and whatever clothing and shelter are made necessary by the climate. But the
leisured aristocrat obtains these things without effort. Hence his boredom and
demoralization. “
He then goes on to make this statement, which pertains to the subject of this
essay:
“4. (Paragraph 28) There are many individuals of the middle and upper classes who resist
some of these values, but usually their resistance is more or less covert. Such resistance
appears in the mass media only to a very limited extent. The main thrust of propaganda in
our society is in favor of the stated values. The main reasons why these values have
become, so to speak, the official values of our society are that they are useful to the
industrial system. Violence is discouraged because it disrupts the functioning of the
system. Racism is discouraged because ethnic conflicts also disrupt the system, and
discrimination wastes the talent of minority-group members who could be useful to the
system. Poverty must be "cured" because the underclass causes problems for the system
and contact with the underclass lowers the moral of the other classes. Women are
encouraged to have careers because their talents are useful to the system and, more
importantly because by having regular jobs women become better integrated into the
system and tied directly to it rather than to their families. This helps to weaken family
solidarity. (The leaders of the system say they want to strengthen the family, but they
really mean is that they want the family to serve as an effective tool for socializing
children in accord with the needs of the system. We argue in that the system cannot
afford to let the family or other small-scale social groups be strong or autonomous.)”
Was this man “ill” because of what he said or because of what he did,
despite the potential costs?
“In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.” -
Friedrich Nietzsche
Amongst so much disease, the healthy ones are offered the scarlet lettering
of disapproval and then they are publicly ostracized as undesirables, by
those experiencing the inebriated state of numbing ease.
--- * ---
Natural selection implies the emotionless elimination of any substandard
organisms, and the characteristics that make them up, so that the few can
then pass on their more fit traits to the coming generations.
Superior genetic attributes, for a given environment, are selected and then
passed on as more advantageous and so as more desirable to the ones that
wish to further their existence.
The main advantage to sexual reproduction, in particular, is that it more
quickly passes on these more desirable, superior, genes in a universe where
even the environment is in constant flux.
It‟s an efficient way of keeping up with constant changes and so more
appropriate for a universe characterized by this constant change.
Change and time, as its measurement, being the very definition of the term
“exists”.
Once the process of evolution is diverted, or when nature is “corrected” by
human intervention, and when man intrudes upon natural processes
producing many more unforeseen side-effects, then the very unfit traits that
were supposed to be eliminated, under natural conditions, are allowed to
thrive, if they exhibit a social fitness.
We can call man an agent of environmental evolution. An agent that creates
such deep impacts that he then begins to affect his own evolution directly,
through technologies, eugenics and ideas, and indirectly, through the
collateral effects of the previous – a human will trying to impose itself upon
what determines it and also upon what makes it possible.
The consequence of this interference is what this thesis is all about. It is the
line where the difference between natural and artificial is drawn.
The definitions for the concepts of natural/artificial, in the context of this
analysis, are in reference to the indefinite point where mankind ceases to be
a product of what pre-existed his emergence and becomes a product of his
own activities.
--- * ---
Human meddling increases exponentially as the collateral effects of previous
activities must then be dealt with in turn – setting in motion an endless
sequence of events whose consequences snowball into an avalanche
threatening to bury mankind in its own artifices.
Many such side-effects are the result of protecting inadequacy, guided by
some flawed human ideal based on some primal anxiety, and of man‟s
blatant intrusion into the normal processes of culling, guided by purely
emotional, self-serving, reactions to a reality that isn‟t always pleasant and
rarely fair.
That it is then justified, after the fact, by using some sanctimonious pretence
or by invoking the pragmatism of reciprocity, does not deny the fact that it
also, conveniently, satisfies social and cultural interests.
Neither does it negate the fact that it intercedes in practices that have existed
since the dawn of time.
As a consequence of all this, weakness is propagated and many enfeebling
mutations, which would have been weeded out of the gene pool under
normal circumstances, are passed on, infecting future generations with their
symptoms.
The herd is thusly made weak and human ingenuity is further burdened with
having to find solutions to problems it brought about on its own.
The Butterfly Effect causes this ballooning of issues, as small actions can
produce huge consequences, that forces the dedication of more and more
resources towards their solution and away from actual progress.
This, in turn, continues the process, as more resources require more human
beings, which then, require more population controls which in turn…and so
on and so forth, until a tipping point is reached and it all comes tumbling
down.
--- * ---
Mankind‟s sense of disconnection and disillusionment can be traced back to
the incongruity between evolutionary speeds of adaptation and human social
and cultural speeds of transformation.
Much of what is called “progress” today is nothing more than a perpetual
self-correcting mechanism in an endless struggle against time; a self-
correcting mechanism that slowly grinds to a halt and spins on its own axis.
“It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.” -
Albert Einstein
This escalates into a peak of decadence…before the long slide down begins.
Nature is, after all, unavoidably self-correcting, and no amount of denial and
ignorance can prevent her unyielding powers.
The process repeats as part of the normal course of civilizations, and history
repeats itself, again and again.
From the past we see the future.
Like any other organism, a superorganism, ages, withers and dies, its parts
then consumed by another superorganism and the cycle of life and death
continues on a larger scale.
--- * ---
Weakness, as a concept, is a value judgment that describes a relationship or
a comparison.
Its fundamental characteristic is that of need, as need is the term used to
describe this relationship or used as a standard for comparing - a
dependence.
Weakness is an evaluation of a unity‟s relationship to another or to the
environment (otherness) altogether.
If the unity exhibits a relative independence, in comparison to another, then
we call this unity strong.
Strength/Weakness, therefore, are terms used to describe a unity‟s, or an
organism‟s ability to cope independently.
A measurement of indifference, so to speak.
This ubiquitous need, unavoidably, results in a willingness to risk and
sacrifice a part of self to save the self – a forced compromise.
If the unity does not manage to become stronger on its own, as an adaptive
reaction to its environment, it becomes a victim of it and fodder for the
survival of another.
This unity is deemed inadequate or inferior.
This inferior unity can then be absorbed, completely or partially, by what is
more powerful than it, either through consumption or through assimilation.
In the first case the organism is destroyed, its parts fragmented and
integrated within a new unity.
In the second case the organism is dominated, repressed, assimilated and
reshaped so as to remain mostly intact but completely integrated into a
larger, more powerful, unity.
Any existing unwanted or unusable parts are then defecated or left to
atrophy.
Such is the reality of existence.
It is this principle that is primarily responsible for the constant state of flux
and fluidity, we experience as change and we measure with time, and it is
this which characterizes our state of becoming and so our human condition.
--- * ---
Man, as an individual organism, is certainly weak, when compared to other
animals, making the cooperation with others, preferably of his own kind, a
matter of grave importance.
Despite man‟s physical inadequacies he possesses the gift of intelligence
which, ironically, is nurtured into fruition through this cooperative
assimilation.
A gift that enables him to collect sensual stimulations, interpret them, form
these interpretations into mental models and then use them to perceive
patterns, projecting them, using the imagination, as possibilities – spatial
awareness (event horizon).
It is this tool of survival that benefits mankind the most and it is this
intelligence that differentiates the homo sapient from other species – a
defining trait.
This basic mental ability can lead to an alteration of environmental
conditions by the activities of a single organism, unprecedented in history.
Only the beaver has a similar, even if far lesser, impact on its environment –
much of the impact in the beaver‟s case, just as with mankind, is
unintentional.
The powerful effect of intelligence upon the environment is what, then,
creates the premises for its own obsolescence.
In addition to this, human psychological insecurity and physical frailty has
imposed the need to armour man‟s fragility with technologies. Development
– particularly certain types of it - places an additional wall between man and
the world; distancing mankind further away from his heritage and from
nature.
“Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious
things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end.” -Henry David Thoreau,
Walden
This artificial wall, we‟ve engulfed ourselves within, is the source of man‟s
current sense of uneasiness – his disillusionment.
It is presently expressed, through the arts and through ludite ideals, as the
demonization of technology and the machines we‟ve created to serve us but
that now we‟ve come to serve – a metaphor for the system itself that has
taken on a life of its own (superorganism).
Through this expression of intuited anxiety the pressure of resistance is
released, in the same way as repressed sexuality is offered a release through
porn, and repressed aggression is released through action films, computer
games, and sporting events allowing controlled violence.
Man is enslaved by the very inventions that were supposed to liberate him,
and the awareness, that made him dominate, is now damaging to the
structures he‟s constructed and is now accustomed to.
The dominator submits to the consequences of his dominion and to the tools
that make it possible – the master/slave dynamic founded upon need.
Expressions of resistance are dealt with through redirection and ingenious
mollification.
“Men have become the tools of their tools.” - Henry David Thoreau
This self-referential construct slowly eliminates all contact with the actual
and it forms a protective perimeter around human consciousness. Art, itself,
becomes self-referential – a sampling of previous creations to support
current ones.
Is not language an art form?
Recycled thinking for recycled minds.
Art, no longer imitating reality, but art imitating art… imitating art…
imitating…somewhere in the remote past or on the peripheries, behind
fences and screens: Reality awaits.
A slow estrangement where all sense of realism is lost in a haze of warping
mirrors.
A codified world constructing a bubble of contrived existence around a
increasingly fragile and inexperienced with discomfort and danger,
populace.
“Welcome to the desert of the Real.” - Zizek
We are engulfed in this protective cocoon; in this invisible matrix of
mendaciousness and superficiality.
We are now mere gears in the machines we‟ve invented.
We are owned by what we, supposedly, own.
We accept all this, consciously or not, because it alleviates our existential
angst and offers us an escape out of deterministic injustice – the unavoidable
effects of the past upon our presence.
Just like adolescent minds, we both despise our parents and we cling onto
them – resenting the fact that without them we feel lost.
When and if we ever manage to finally free ourselves from our biological
parents we then attach ourselves to new protective, authoritarian, entities,
and in our juvenile fantasies we call ourselves adults.
God being the biggest proxy-parent of all.
By undermining our individuality, our essence and our uniqueness (our
distinction), we are made more vulnerable to alternative sources of identity
and we submit to the judgments of others so as to find our self-worth and our
purpose where no other alternative is available.
All the while, in true Orwellian newspeak, the system claims to do the exact
opposite of what it actually does, retaining the comforting illusion of
romantic idealism. As this engine of civilization grows, its parts lose value
by becoming expendable and disposable components{numbers and
statistics} and man becomes an insignificant cog in a huge apparatus
{alienation}.
“Like dreams, statistics are a form of wish fulfillment.” - Jean Baudrillard
A distinctly anti-individualistic course that, ironically, sells itself as the
epitome of individuality; increasing dependence and calling itself “liberty”.
What we try to free ourselves from is need and suffering, and we are willing
to give up self, as a will towards independence, in the process.
Social engineering, in the west, has reached a level of sophistication
unparalleled in history.
The individual‟s consciousness becomes so reliant on otherness that it
cannot even conceive of itself outside it, and if it can, it is seized by a deep
anxiety at the prospect.
“…“hell is other people” has always been misunderstood. It has been thought that what I
meant by that was that our relations with other people are always poisoned, that they are
invariably hellish relations. But what I really mean is something totally different. I mean
that if relations with someone else are twisted, vitiated, then that other person can only be
hell. Why? Because…when we think about ourselves, when we try to know ourselves, …
we use the knowledge of us which other people already have. We judge ourselves with
the means other people have and have given us for judging ourselves. Into whatever I say
about myself someone else‟s judgment always enters. Into whatever I feel within myself
someone else‟s judgment enters. … But that does not at all mean that one cannot have
relations with other people. It simply brings out the capital importance of all other people
for each one of us. - Jean-Paul Sartre
Nature/Nurture
The intellectual battle over the significance of nature versus nurture
continues.
It is a battle between self-determination versus determinism.
Some would have nature be the dominant factor in determining a person‟s
potential and personality, while others will emphasize nurture as being more
decisive, thusly rescuing free-will from the jaws of fate.
The entire debate is often the result of a misunderstanding, for nature is
nothing more than the combined effects of all past nurturing and so a
tautology differentiated by time.
How these natural pasts find fruition and develop or atrophy within a
particular organism is what is referred to as nurturing.
The self can be considered the immediate materialization of a long historical
Becoming in relation to the immediate.
It is the direct culmination, the presence, of this historical inheritance,
interpreted by a conscious mind as form, color, sound, taste, etc.
It is notably, from a psychological standpoint, more optimistic and therefore
more desirable to focus upon the nurturing, upon the present, because nature,
the past, is a foregone conclusion which cannot be altered and so can only be
accepted, denied or controlled.
This is a normal existential bias we must consider present in all human
understanding.
{On a side note: This is not a thesis on free-will. What will suffice is to
merely mention it in passing, as it pertains to this subject, as a possibility, as
all conceptions of the absolute are.
If the Will is the focus of energies upon an object/objective, then its focus
upon its liberation from dependence, its freedom, is the movement towards
the ideal, the perfect, and away from the norm or the imperfect.
Freedom, therefore, is another term for the, sometimes, desirable absent
absolute – a metaphorical cutting-away as the gaining of independence – and
only possible in degree and in increments of resistance.
The Will‟s emancipation from the determined becomes a struggle to distance
itself from its past, from what is…in other words from time itself or the flux.
A struggle resulting in an exponential increase of suffering.
A far easier path is that of simple denial or an adjustment of perspective that
casually does away with reality by selectively and conveniently interpreting
it.
The system provides the framework for this new, more desirable,
perspective, because outside its protective umbrella the perspective faces the
normal fate of all erroneous interpretations.
For this reason the idea of Perspectivism or that all perspectives are equally
valid can only survive as a social phenomenon of intellectual levelling
within the protective shielding of a social unity which mitigates the effects
of inferior thinking.}
--- * ---
“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.” - George Orwell
Focusing on nurturing is definitely more appealing to the needy heart
because this convenient and easy denial offers the opportunity for self-
reinvention, free-will, and overcoming as a birthright, rather than as a
product of successful struggle and tireless work.
It also offers the opportunity for social control and institutionalization, by
manipulating the very factors that are denied, and by using the very nature
which is rejected as being influential.
In the bid to ignore what has been, the modern day system refocuses the
awareness of its citizenry upon the immediate, so as to sell its preferred ideal
as a replacement for what is denied.
It does so by playing upon the ever-present resentment concerning this
unalterable past, this nature, and the desire to escape it, as a matter of self-
empowerment – Will to Power.
It is a manipulation of hope, as an antidote to anxiety.
This unsubstantiated effortless hopefulness promotes the illusion that each
individual is by design a master of his/her own destiny and that the choices
available to it are the result of rational, unaffected, thinking.
It also promotes the illusion of rebirth, as the system demands an adaptation
to its premises often in conflict with pre-existing natural drives.
The Christian notion of being “born again” is a testament to this focus on
nurturing, and the ceremony of baptism is a symbolic cleansing away of the
past, the “original sin”…the sin of being born an imperfect, mortal, ignorant,
human being.
This is done using abstraction…
The individual entity, man, is of no importance. The only thing that really
matters is the ideal Man, the platonic Idea of Man, the sacred symbol, the
abstracted Man – the Holy.
“To this day the revolutionary principle has gone no further than to assail only one or
another particular establishment, to be reformatory. Much as may be improved, strongly
as „discreet progress‟ may be adhered to, always there is only a new master set in the old
one‟s place, and the overturning is a – building up. We are still at the distinction of the
young Philistine from the old one. The Revolution began in bourgeois fashion with the
uprising of the third estate, the middle class; in bourgeois fashion it dries away. It was not
individual man – and he alone man, who for that very reason is not Man but a specimen
of the species of human species, and more particularly a specimen of the species Citizen,
a free citizen.” – Stirner, Max
Under this context the elimination of all inherited, natural, distinctions, such
as sex or race or of all lingering previous cultural identities, are incorporated
as variations of the abstracted Man – the idea of man - the humanitarian –
and so they are made insignificant or quaint variables of little importance.
And this Idea of Man, of course, is defined by the particular system that
holds sway over the will of men.
Nothing can be allowed to corrupt the perfection of the sacred Man and all
will be judged in comparison to His idealized perfection.
--- * ---
All cultures may use familiar methods for parallel reasons but each has a
noticeably different motivation leading to diverging human ideals, guided by
each culture‟s value systems, as they were inherited, in time, from biological
and racial ancestry, historical experiences, climatic and geographical
conditions as well as from external philosophical/ideological influences.
This is what I refer to as essence.
The essence of each man, for example, is the sum of each and every
previous environmental effect on him, and of how his ancestors, as well as
he himself, reacted to them.
All this culminating in an appearance– phenomenon (υαινομενον), the
apparent.
Each organism represents this apex of temporality which is never completed
because it is no thing but a process in perpetual flow, interacting, changing
moving through spatial possibilities. A process held together by the storage
and inheritance of information (genetic/experiential), or patterned
behaviours established through selection and passed on as a legacy.
Biology, behaviour, needs, character, aesthetics are the end result of an
unavoidable precedent.
“Anatomy is destiny.” - Sigmund Freud
--- * ---
Social circumstance are caused, paradoxically, by the very natural
tendencies that eventually become dangerous and unwanted.
They represent the persistent drive towards self-completion, coming forth as
competitive ruthlessness.
The paradox is caused by the fact that the attributes that resulted in
dominance then make themselves obsolete by altering the environments they
dominate and by attempting to eradicate all challenges and challengers.
It is also caused by the fact that the endless cycles of ascent and decent from
power creates far too many destabilizing stresses, and so the tendency
towards arresting this sequence or towards prolonging the length of its
phases of ascent and descent, is part of a natural inclination towards finding
the most stable form within given environmental conditions.
The desire to maintain power, for instance, pushes minds to innovate
methods of control and dominance. As a result the mind, unintentionally,
invents its own obsolescence by making these innovations accessible to his
adversaries.
“The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high
to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.” - Friedrich Nietzsche
--- * ---
Unleashed upon the world, by the unburdening of mental energies from
matters of immediate survival, through affluence, and from craven religious
myths and superstitions, through knowledge, the human spirit created its
dominion.
It is, exactly, this ascendancy which eventually resulted in exponentially
increased populations, and the accompanying need for resources, that then
made it necessary to suppress these very same instinctive drives in order to
maintain stability and social harmony.
When no more accessible frontiers exist - this dominion turned to
suppression and then to ennui.
Then consciousness turns in upon itself and finds nothing there but the
desire to be and no reason for it.
The very absence of meaning and purpose, that offers some possibility for
the free creativity of a lucid Will, was considered by the average mind, the
growing masses of mediocrity and sheltered weakness, as one more reason
to hate existence, as it is, driving them in droves into the comforting arms of
an external authority, offering both a purpose and a meaning for their craven
minds.
In this turning inward nihilism is sparked.
--- * ---
As challenges abate the mind loses purpose and seeks it elsewhere, or it
succumbs to despair.
“The war between being and nothingness is the underlying illness of the twentieth
century. Boredom slays more of existence than war.” - Norman Mailer
The onion is slowly peeled and no core can be found – the Buddhist resolves
to call this emptiness his truth – the essence of all existence is activity, not
static substance, and so nothing stable can ever be found because it is the
antithesis of what is experienced as existing.
The abstraction is meant to fill in the void - abstracted work, abstracted self,
abstracted resources, abstracted love, abstracted identity – Abstract Man –
Spiritual Man - God.
Man clamouring for contrived certainty in a universe that offers none.
The desired is given a form, an anthropomorphic caricature, so as to cover
up the gaps; an ambiguous destination offered as the perfect, the meta-life:
Utopia, Nirvana, Paradise.
All kinds of paranormal conceptualizations emerge as optimistic
probabilities of hope. Ignorance is used to argue the probability for the
absurd and scepticism is drafted to seed the benefit of the doubt as an
alternative to rational thought and argument.
The real is defamed further. It is now deemed insufficient to heal the human
condition.
The otherworldliness of the imagined, underlying, hidden, unseen, intra-
dimensional is presented as the only way towards deliverance.
As always man turns the fear of the unknown into the realm of his
hopefulness – a coping mechanism.
The very human condition is now deficient – Nihilism.
The world is reinterpreted into a charade, a farce, a testing phase towards
something better, deeper, more substantive - the thing-in-itself, the soul, the
core, the spirit, the –thingness of no- and/or some-, the empty, the beyond
and the universal consciousness cut away from the corporeal form, mind
bade other than active brain.
--- * ---
The trend towards larger, heterogeneous and more malleable populations has
made equalitarian, servile moralities vital.
Christianity, Islam, Judaism like Buddhism, and such political movements as
Democracy and Communism, were the direct product of environmental
circumstances that made selflessness and the slandering of ego a matter of
group health.
No εγω would be allowed except the communal one – the abstracted one –
the One.
All others would be forsaken or demoted as signs of human fallibility – sin.
The conceptualization of multiplicity was made destitute and an illusion
only an unthinking mind could oversee, and find solace in the oversight.
As populations grew further, resources became more precious and personal
space a luxury few could afford - the modern day palace and mansion a
temple of lavish privilege.
Human behaviour had to be adapted, moulded by injecting it with specific
ideas concerning ethics and etiquette.
Men had to be made more tolerant and passive to endure the proximity and
the invasion of others into their personal space.
The normal instinctive tendencies of exclusion and discrimination had to be
redefined as an anathema and as remnants of a primitive past that had to be
overcome – the civilized ethos.
It‟s modern-day manifestation is what is referred to as Globalization. A
secular movement towards global uniformity, void not only of natural
identifications but also of all previous cultural ones – the culture of no
culture.
The end of all earthly distinctions except the few that display degrees of
submission.
An ongoing war, is underway, on anything and everything that challenges
the monopolizing control of the one cultureless culture; a war against all that
dares to stand up and stand out before it.
A war of survival.
Natural selection on a grander scale - one superorganism pitting itself
against another.
--- * ---
The slow discrediting of all previous authorities was not meant to free the
mind, as it is claimed, but to prepare it for impregnation with more current
sources of “truth”.
A deconstruction as a preparatory step to reconstruction.
Scepticism and the cleansing effects of Perspectivism were employed to
eradicate any intellectual resistance to community.
Humility was made into a dogma that forced respect and love; it humbled
the mind before the unknown.
Then it was relabelled into integrity and the mind was, again, rendered
uncertain and defenceless to external wills – Authorities, Experts,
Leaders…Ideals.
All perspectives now deserved respect, as all of them were interpretations of
a non-existent reality.
Equalization achieved.
Stupidity given a free hand and defended against the realization of its own
quality.
In the aftermath of this deconstruction all is confused: lies become truths and
truths lies - all is but a matter of perspective one Wills into existence, and
the mindless mind believes it is free when it has simply lost all sense and
now considers its delusions real…while the system protects it from its own
bemused ignorance.
The inane mind takes its own survival as evidence that its bewildering
opinions are sufficient, without considering the fact that it is kept safe and
defended against its own simplicity by a system that feeds off it.
In such circumstances what does it matter what is real and what is not, when
all is rendered unreal and a matter of interpretation with no actual
repercussions? A simulation within a simulation.
The brainless are cocooned within their delusions and allowed to think as
they will, just as long as these thoughts do not turn into anything actually
dangerous to the System that protects them.
--- * ---
“It is impossible to overlook the extent to which civilization is built upon a renunciation
of instinct.” - Sigmund Freud
When all the “onion peels” of identity are stripped away and discarded as
“primitive” or as having been “overcome”, new ones are manufactured to
take their place. Man as an ideal is born: Man as producer and consumer, in
the west, or man as void of all identity, finding identity in the negated, in the
east, or man as pious servant of the Absolute Authority, as in Islam and
Judeo-Christianity and as in all totalitarian regimes.
This reconstruction of self is tantamount to stripping a man bare, telling him
that even his skin is a meaningless garment, letting him feel the cold
harshness of this, for a time, and then offering him new clothes as a “gift”,
for which he should be grateful for…and is.
Master/Slave dynamic.
Gratitude is the desired response to being given a replacement for what has
been stolen from you.
A slave‟s gratefulness for his master‟s benevolence.
It is how immigrants react to being welcomed into nations that have built
their affluence on the exploitation of their homelands.
The man is now reborn into whatever you offer him to replace what you‟ve
torn away using pretext, misrepresentation and psychological manipulation.
Truth be told, few are able to resist this assault, because few have a strong
enough sense of themselves, a strong enough character, to do so.
Those that are more masculine and more resistant, are either broken, using
multiple methods, or are incarcerated or forced into insincere capitulation
and/or isolation.
The male spirit is driven inwards and underground.
“The savior who wants to turn men into angels is as much a hater of human nature as the
totalitarian despot who wants to turn them into puppets.” - Hoffer, Eric
The basic modus operandi armies, throughout history, have used are
employed. The recruit is stressed and fatigued until his resistance wanes. He
is now prepared to be injected with this new structure‟s authority and a
common identity is proposed to replace the one that has been overthrown or
forced into hiding.
At this point the soldier is able to give his life for his unit, and following
orders precisely is his main concern – an automaton is born.
Amongst these ranks no masculine resistance to external limitations or holy
authorities is tolerated, but only the semblance of hyper-masculine
ceremonial displays of machismo that are supposed to hide emasculation.
An over-compensation.
The only true masculine power here is the institution, on whose behalf the
mindless soldiers act as representations of its force.
Only it can use violence and kill and rape and pillage. The soldiers only
represent its Will – its arms and legs.
A projection of the only Self allowed. The greater Self.
Social structures depend on such feminine dispositions.
Ants, termites, bees as well as many mammalian social groups, depend on
the same controlled elimination of masculinity, and/or partial emasculation,
of its members.
In wolf packs the inferior males are subordinated, experiencing a drop in
testosterone, in lion prides, they are expelled to the peripheries of unclaimed
territories where they await their turn.
--- * ---
Evidently, the more complacent, unaware and gullible a population is the
more governable and controllable it becomes.
Many leaders throughout history understood this basic political truism.
“What luck for rulers, that men do not think.” - Adolf Hitler
It is, therefore, understandable why unsettling ideas have to be quarantined
and/or eradicated, why free thought must be restricted, why information has
to be strictly monitored and dispensed from specific sources and why
defiance and discrimination must be quelled or punished as an example to be
avoided before it becomes one to be emulated.
Being politically-correct and only challenging the status quo within
permissible boundaries becomes ingrained within each mind, as a de facto
approach. An approach where the illusion of rebelliousness is ensured as a
“healthy” expression of “free-thinking” or youthful exuberance, even though
no core ideas are ever threatened.
The entire act is superficial. Just as superficial as the adolescent “rebel”
displaying his uncompromising differentiation with counter-cultural
garments and musical symbolisms. Symbols he has purchased from the
system itself.
An inert rejection of signs. A masked conformity, where principles are
submitted to whereas the common codes are cast off as passé - modernity.
“Every generation laughs at the old fashions, but follows religiously the new.” - Henry
David Thoreau
All information is monitored by promoting certain fountainheads of
information as more reliable and by reinforcing a dependence on
regurgitated beliefs and surrogate thinking.
The academic is mistaken for a thinker, because all “truths” must pass the
inquisition of the ordained experts before they are allowed public airing or,
more importantly, before they allowed to be taught to the young.
Difference is turned into a emblem with no actual relevance and dissenting
ideas are defused through harmless methods of rhetorical rejection.
“All leaders strive to turn their followers into children.” - Hoffer, Eric
Philosophy, itself, has been institutionalized, in our modern times. The very
discipline of thinking and engaging the world directly, is now defined as
“stringent” or more respectable when it acts as a constant analysis of another
mind‟s ideas. The reliability and respectability of this external authority,
decided by career academicians, and then taught to others accordingly.
Modern institutions of education are really factories that manufacture minds
of blind deference - their own consciousness of the world taking a secondary
position to the consciousness of another or others - reality engaged through
proxy and philosophy institutionalized and practiced via surrogate
specialists.
Bertrand Russell says this:
“In these days under the influence of democracy, the virtue of co-operation has taken the
place formerly held by obedience. The old-fashioned schoolmaster would say of a boy
that he was disobedient; the modern schoolmistress says of an infant that he is non-co-
operative. It means the same thing: the child, in either case, fails to do what the teacher
wishes, but in the first case the teacher acts as the government and in the second as the
representative of the People, i.e. of the other children. The result of the new language, as
of the old, is to encourage docility, suggestibility, herd-instinct and conventionality,
thereby necessarily discouraging originality, initiative and unusual intelligence. Adults
who achieve anything of value have seldom been “co-operative” children. As a rule, they
have liked solitude: they have tried to slink into a corner with a book and been happiest
when they could escape the notice of their barbarian contemporaries. Almost all men who
have been distinguished as artists, writers or men of science have in boyhood been
objects of derision and contempt to their schoolfellows; and only too often the teachers
have sided with the herd, because it annoyed them that the boy should be odd.”
Dummying-down of individuals has fashioned populations that, despite their
relative affluence and access to information, display the apathy, ignorance
and naïveté of children - they have been retarded in their development.
Nothing matters unless it directly and immediately affects their well-being,
which is held within a comfortable state of inebriated hedonism and
unsettling uncertainty. A controlled mixture of stress and ennui.
“Necessity is the constant scourge of the lower classes, ennui of the higher ones.”-
Arthur Schopenhauer
The most important goal is to be just like everyone else, to never speak
contrary to public opinion and to never confront common beliefs or insult
common sentiment.
No honesty is allowed, unless it pretends or mirrors commonly held
standards.
If you speak the truth make sure it agrees with the popular one or hold your
tongue and swallow your words.
Social graciousness prohibits anything beyond formalities and pretentious
boastfulness, meant to compensate for hidden inadequacies and
unacknowledged personal compromises.
What often passes as intimacy is but the play of fools, repeating their
commonly held ideals, as if to convince themselves of them, and offering
comfort for failures and dissatisfied appetites.
--- * ---
To be mediocre, in the end, entails a great degree of exaggeration.
Hyper-affectations for a hyper-real world.
Core beliefs, ingrained within the average human being from birth, remain
self-evident and unquestioned certainties. Intellectual exploration consists in
mental masturbation where ideas are sterilized, injected with enhancing
flamboyance and then packaged and sold, just like vegetables and meats at
the market, all pristine and lush, with not a speck of rot to blemish the
perfect skins.
All hints of reality, cleansed away. Nature perfected, according to human
preferences.
Philosophy, also, has turned into a game of imagination with no
consequence and so void of passion and purpose.
A game played by teenagers with no notion of the severity of what they
casually utter, as a means of socializing.
Has not political discourse, as well, been made dispassionate and
ineffectual?
Nothing changes because nothing is allowed to, unless it adheres to some
systemic interest.
The danger inherit in competition is eliminated.
“Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a
mimicry, their passions a quotation.” - Oscar Wilde
The emergence of the aloof sophist, that presents his anaesthetized
disassociation as evidence of his cool reasoning, comes to usher in the
degradation of thinking.
The thought is made infertile and no mind is impregnated with its
pragmatism.
The idea becomes just that: an idea not applicable in a world that has already
decided its philosophical stance - it has inherited it - and defiance is only for
show and a momentary display of adolescent bravado before the cold hard
practical needs burry the man under mature concessions.
Realpolitik for the already empty of all principles, including dignity, except
for the principle of instant gratification – the animalistic immediacy.
--- * ---
Social selection has taken over from where natural selection ends.
In the west socialization/institutionalization/domestication has taken a more
insidious approach, to maintain the illusion of freedom and individuality.
Edward Bernays puts it this way:
“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the
[public] is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate the unseen
mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power
of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas
suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in
which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must
cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. In
almost every act of our lives whether in the sphere of politics or business in our social
conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of
persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they
who pull the wires that control the public mind.”
Unlike the more direct and obvious controlling practices of other
civilizations, past and present, it is more difficult to always perceive where
and how we, in the west, have been manipulated into thinking and behaving
in prescribed ways. For many the current state of affairs is taken to be the
epitome of human achievement, the height of human development and the
worthy successor of an intellectual revolution that began on the rocky
Aegean shores of ancient Greece and has reached, after a brief
disappearance and re-emergence during the Renaissance, for the distant
Martian plateaus.
They neglect to consider the true spirit of this ancient stance towards life and
only judge it from its crumbling monuments and our modern conceited
perspectives on it.
“The governing idea of Hellenism is spontaneity of consciousness; that of Hebraism,
strictness of conscience.” - Matthew Arnold
This Hellenic legacy is a western one – a distinctly masculine approach –
which is now all but gone, except for this dying, diseased, caricature,
infected by grovelling Judeo-Christian nihilistic sentimentalities, and eastern
world-denouncements, promising relief from suffering.
Evidence of how western ideals have been subverted can be found in how
we, at present, perceive the world around us and from where we accept our
personal self-worth and meanings.
Jewish servility has brought eastern nihilism, as a cancerous tumour, to the
western heart and we, like them, consider this world a travesty; hiding a self-
deprecating core or a betrothed paradise, we expect our escape, after offering
our very soul to the unknown as a bribe, and we plead beneath absurdity,
asking only to retain our infantile hopes.
Some few, driven by an abundance of undisciplined ego, opt for the more
distracting hedonistic escapes.
That which pleases, is true. It must be made to be, as if the universe gives a
damn about human felicity.
Need/Suffering, the very consciousness of existence, has been made into a
disease avoidance can cure; better worlds are imagined as hiding behind the
façade of appearances; death being made into life‟s glorification.
What can be more damaging to the human spirit than to despise existence so
much as to seek to never be born again?
What can be more awkward than to preach that death is a doorway into a
“better” existence because this one disappoints us?
What can be more limiting and self-contradicting than to preach unthinking
as the way towards a deeper awareness?
“The craving to change the world is perhaps a reflection of the craving to change
ourselves.” - Hoffer, Eric
When this occurs the individual is made vulnerable to anything that
promises denial. Determinism is dismissed and the products of sheltering
human environments are protected from the awareness that they are allowed
to exist because they are useful and not because they have earned their
existence or possess some intrinsic value.
--- * ---
In the absence of self-esteem the mind finds it through substitutes;
representational trinkets of social viability.
Many of us in the west, influenced by marketing practices from childhood,
find it obvious that certain product name-brands are associated with
particular feelings and thoughts. The acquisition of certain products and the
image constructed to go along with them, or the mere consumption of
products and services, is of the utmost importance. Their relevance is found
in the means by which we express our own self-worth and quality to the
world.
They become indicative of our usefulness and so of our loyalty to the system
- our goodness.
Owning a BMW or a Mercedes or a Versace or a Rolex, for example, is how
we exhibit our social status, as accomplished consumers, and it is how we
try to attract others to our genetic potency dictated, in this case, not by
natural markers but by socioeconomic and cultural symbols evoking
emotions that have been trained into us.
“Advertising is the rattling of a stick inside a swill bucket.” - George Orwell
Guided by an idea, imposed upon us at birth, we buy into the scheme and we
accept whatever identity it offers us as recompense for the one we‟ve given
up.
It is our offering of faith.
The quality of the products we own and consume must, supposedly, signify
our personal quality, whether it is actually present or not. Objects become
our standards and we bury our appearances behind constructs and purchased
regalia.
How can we not when our very existence is owed to the system that defends
us from our own decrepitude, and then offers us “rights” to replace our lost
independence?
Would we even be alive without its dominion over man‟s actions?
But why these particular products of human ingenuity, no different than
many others, are associated with a specific image, is for most of us
unrecognizable and just a matter of common sense.
We lose our ability to follow back the strands of our references.
The system denies us access to anything outside its simulations and we find
ourselves sampling older cultural creations in an endless game of smoke and
mirrors.
Meanwhile nature sits on the outside unaffected by our contrivances,
exacting a price, no matter how much we try to avoid it.
Reality cannot be evaded, it can only be ignored, and suffering can only be
postponed.
“If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to
control and regiment the masses according to our will without them knowing it.” -
Edward Bernays
We have been manipulated – and not without our own participation - into
believing that mercantile quality is equal or a fair substitute for substantive
quality.
We have been manipulated into believing that external objects can fill in for
an inner void or, at least, hide it behind the glitter.
The current popularity of mysticism and the rediscovery of past spiritualism,
particularly amongst urban populations where the distance between man and
nature is the greatest, the symptoms of spiritual decay are more evident.
One indication of this systematic, capitalistic redefinition through
abstraction of value and self-worth is this intuited feeling that something is
missing, that something is wrong; like a splinter in the mind‟s eye.
This is what fuels the ovens of modern economies, and maintains a constant
state of tentative hopefulness for material wealth.
Most of us do not question the ideals of our chosen values but only
discipline ourselves to their premises and, in true feminine fashion, we
become simple mirrors of the world around us, analyzing only as a way of
integrating ourselves within it mellifluously; rarely questioning it, rarely
denying it, rarely challenging it.
Material wealth, that was meant to epitomize the quality of an individual by
his access to resources, has now come to display the total obedience and
compliance of said individual to a dominating Will – an external masculine
power abstracted into an institution.
An individual is rewarded, with material riches, for his/her submission – for
his absence of individuality; this becoming the new definition for
independence and identity.
An “independence” to choose between different methods of capitulation, or
to choose your own demise as the only other alternative.
--- * ---
In a world where materialism prevails, consumerism reigns and where the
preservation of already acquired status is desired, wealth and privilege is
most often inherited than earned.
The State abhors change and only allows it as a means of ensuring further
stability. It is human kind‟s consciousness that makes this systemic
compromise necessary. An unnecessary compromise when dealing with less
sophisticated social organisms.
Awareness is the problem.
The compromise presents itself as permissible ambition and social climbing,
maintaining this hope as a counterweight to stress and ennui.
In the rare occasions when wealth and privileged is earned {self-made},
rather than inherited, it is frequently at the price of an entire lifetime‟s toil,
making the enjoyment of the consequent privileges, once again, a matter of
inheritance.
As is often the case inheritance produces generations that can never fully
appreciate what they themselves have not earned and therefore do not
deserve – the irony of unwarranted expectation that breeds further
expectation.
Capitalism fails in this regard.
“A gambler is nothing but a man who makes his living out of hope.” - William Bolitho
Sometimes affluence comes at the price of great risk to the individual, who
must surrender all future possibilities to this one opportunity…knocking.
Either play by the rules and roll the dice or suffer the consequences.
--- * ---
“Enlightened people seldom or never possess a sense of responsibility.” - George
Orwell
Nihilism is more than a product of this process of re-education, but it is also
a result of unjustifiable safety, leisure and the ensuing ennui this leads to.
Life loses substance when all have a “right” to it, just as love loses value
when all “deserve” it.
Modern man has lost all pride in himself and in his true nature. He is made
to feel ashamed of being fully human.
He is told to try to be the socially prescribed Man – the good man, the
selfless man, the spiritual man with no ego.
Now, he substitutes the cavernous barrenness in his soul with ideals of
dubious certainty.
Even the personal names man associates himself with become a generic
stamp shared by many; a label of belonging with no other, more intimate,
significance.
“In bourgeois society capital is independent and has individuality, while the living person
is dependent and has no individuality.” - Karl Marx
The methods by which man is shaped and sculpted within social
environments contain natural instinctive drives and manmade imaginative
institutional inventions that either take advantage of aforesaid drives or
totally subvert and suppress them.
One of these human inclinations is the sexual instinct.
The evolution of sex has one and only one purpose: The replication of genes,
based on their fitness, and their recombination into a new form.
In time sexual activity takes on additional roles, within social organisms.
The fundamental human compulsion is to mate. This biological standard of
personal success is still in man, despite his self-asserted progress beyond
primitiveness, the major intuitive source of acquiring self-esteem and
purpose.
It is also the means by which nature has shaped our behaviours in the past
and still maintains a dominant grip on our psyche in the present, no matter
how much social manipulations strive to subvert it.
That a man exists and a woman exists, constitutes evidence that they carry
the necessity of their biological past, as a sexual designation. This biological
imperative may have manifested itself to varying degrees within each
individual or may have been warped along its progression, but this does not
negate the sexual identity it is in reference to.
Sexuality is a method of reproduction and the sexual types it makes
necessary are indispensable elements of its original primary function. Any
further adaptations of this primary function occurred when interceding
conditions gradually diverted it with new functions.
With mankind these additional function were mainly social ones.
Because of this, sexuality is the major motivating factor behind all human
actions and creations. We may say that mankind is obsessed with sex
because the human species is a social one and because it, like all life, is
constantly preoccupied with its own mortality, making life merely a constant
struggle against death - a resistance to it.
Sexuality is the central focus of all individual thought and the activities this
thought brings about, whether we know it or not. It plays an important part
in how mankind is guided and moulded, not only by nature, but by cultures
and civilizations that now use and manipulate it to their advantage.
Because this method of reproduction evolves as a more efficient way for
more complicated organisms to arise, its need is not immediate or a matter
of individual survival, such as the need for food, for water, or for oxygen,
for instance.
The need for sex is of a secondary nature.
A secondary need that relies on hormonal effects to force particular, often,
counterintuitive behaviours, by inhibiting primordial instinctive reactions,
such as fight/flight responses.
Overcoming these pre-existing primal reactions is achieved with the aid of a
naturally induced chemical inebriation that facilitates the endurance of the
hazards involved in copulation. This intoxication is described, most often, as
love or lust: The obstinate compulsion towards sexual gratification.
In this game of sexuality, played by mortal beings, the basic participants of
male and female archetypes are rudimentary and worth analysing further, for
it is through this interrelation and “dance” of seduction that man comes to be
and his quality and nature is determined.
Sex
The significant position sex holds in the human psyche can only be
attributed to its role as a reaction to mortality, the natural limitations to
cellular replication and to the adaptive superiority genetic diversity offers.
Its added significance is also due to its consequent development as a social
lubricant and as a source of self-identification.
The two sexual types emerge, distinctly, only in reference to the need for
reproduction, and then merge to replicate themselves in unison. Any ensuing
functions they serve, as was already mentioned, must be considered as a
later development of this basic obligation.
Death, and life as a resistance to it, is the metaphysical foundation of sexual
intercourse.
We can say that underneath this reigning compulsion to procreate lies the
spectre of oblivion.
Heterosexual reproduction‟s primary role is to replicate, in part, the
individual‟s participating in it and through this amalgamation of genetic
materials into new combinations, to ensure the ongoing adaptation of life, by
nurturing or inhibiting mutations, in reaction to constantly altering
conditions.
It‟s success as a replicating and adaptive mechanism eventually results in its
own alteration, as sex then takes on the additional objectives of establishing
individual cooperative relationships, maintaining personal ties with others in
its group and of reinforcing hierarchies through displays.
The original biological imperative evolves along with the organisms using it,
but the primary traits it originally produced as essential to the primary intent
remain and are passed on from parent to offspring - a genetic code that
imposes upon individual organisms limitations and decides their overall
qualities.
These particular codified traits manifest themselves in physiological and
psychological tendencies which imbue the particular individual, belonging to
a sexual type, with varying intensities of predispositions. Variations result in
the individual‟s potency as a representation of that particular type‟s nature,
and it determines, in unison with environmental factors, its successes and its
failures.
This thesis attempts to deal with how these sexual types become integrated
and are translated into social functions, and how human interventions, upon
natural processes, affect these sexual varieties and cause them to mutate, by
socially selecting certain traits and allowing them to flourish, while
repressing others, causing them to wither.
--- * ---
The act of heterosexual copulation can be thought of as a later improvement
to simple cellular division.
The latter being the original reproductive method, with many limitations.
As a later evolutionary development heterosexual replication had to
overcome many already established survival mechanisms, and it had to
override their effect on the more primitive parts of the organism‟s nervous
system.
For instance, the response of fight/flight, imposed a hindrance on copulation
that had to be dealt with in order to make sexual intercourse possible.
The fundamental instincts of the organism, as entrenched modes of efficient
reactivity, had to be subdued so as to make possible the proximity necessary
for intercourse and so as to then make it possible for the organism, the
female in this case, to endure the invasion of an alien organism within its
physical space.
This intrusion is not a trivial one, since it demands the overcoming of a
deep-seated instinctive impulse for self-preservation and the fear of the
unknown other.
The immune system is geared to combat alien invasions and repel what
threatens an organism‟s cohesive unity.
As a reflection of this the basic instinctive concern of the organism is to
maintain its stability by preventing external properties from infecting it with
their disruptive presence.
What has not been reshaped and integrated within the whole is expelled as
unwanted.
Fertilization, itself, consists in the acceptance of an alien particle, the male
sperm, within a unity‟s domain and its subsequent protection from the
body‟s natural defence mechanisms.
The genetically foreign sperm and the subsequent semi-alien foetus it
produces, had to be protected against the body‟s immune system.
There are instances where the genetic combination is so alien to the body
that it rejects it, causing miscarriages.
With human medical intervention the foetus can eventually be made
acceptable, but this also exposes how human meddling imposes an outcome,
that nature denies, with unforeseeable long-term repercussions.
As an evolutionary progression this represents a considerable adaptation
without which heterosexual reproduction would be unlikely and larger
brained organisms would be improbable.
The mechanism employed to facilitate this tolerance and this resistance to
the intuitive drive to flee or fight, was a chemical one.
Lust, as a self-numbing coercion, not only provided the intoxicating effect
necessary to repress primal reactions, but eventually developed into what we
call love, as the essential ingredient that made social interactions possible.
Lust/Love
“Of all the worldly passions, lust is the most intense. All other worldly passions seem to
follow in its train.” – Buddha
Lust can be linked to the intrinsic act of feeding or assimilating the other
within one‟s own wilful control – a powerful drive that resembles hunger not
by chance.
The one lusting feels like devouring the object of his desires; wanting to
absorb it within its very being.
This is how the sensation of oneness, the sexual act often produces, comes
about.
Lusting and consuming stem from a common need to assimilate, through the
act of feeding, and so they often imply a destructive, violent component that
may manifest itself in various ways when the sexual drive is thwarted and
repressed for too long.
Lovers are involved in a push/pull struggle - literally and figuratively - a
desire and repulsion, consummated in a moment of furious aggression; a
desire to unite with the other, to lose one‟s self within this foreign unity, but
also a rejection of this unity, as a desire to preserve one‟s self.
This is the madness of instinct overriding reason, or another instinct, and
becoming palatable when passion reaches a climax of revulsion coupled,
simultaneously, with attraction.
The organisms imitate the cellular amalgamation as two alien beings are
combined into something other than, as a desperate reaffirmation of life.
“Lust is to the other passions what the nervous fluid is to life; it supports them all, lends
strength to them all ambition, cruelty, avarice, revenge, are all founded on lust.” -
Marquis De Sade
Love, then, becomes a modality of lust, as it has already consumed the other,
or has been consumed by the other, by associating the other with self and so
integrating, assimilating, this otherness within the conception of self – a
broadening of the sensation, of the idea of self, felt as a relief from the
burden of solitary responsibility and the isolation its discrimination enforces.
The mother-child relationship is based on no more than this.
The metaphysical vantage point of it all is that of an emerging unity,
resisting and desiring the flux all at once; wanting to return back to its
original state of unconsciousness and its reunification with the endless flow
of time while still clinging onto the unity that makes this option possible; a
paroxysm of self-denial wishing to disintegrate into mindlessness, all the
while clinging to the very thing that makes consciousness possible.
--- * ---
Love can take on two forms: One by finding in the other what one most
lacks and, therefore, what is most unlike it – a method of self-completion –
commonly produced in a mind that feels insecure with its own conception of
“I”.
The second by finding in the other what is most alike with one‟s own
conceptions of self - a recognition of self in the other – commonly produced
in those who feel more secure and possess more self-esteem and so love
themselves, even more, through this otherness – altruism and compassion of
self redirected/reflected through the otherness.
Both, of course, determined by the level of self-awareness each mind has
reached.
"To be in love is merely to be in a state of perceptual anesthesia." - H.L. Mencken
For this reason a confusion between lust and love still remains, and the
sexual undertones of even the parent/child relationship, are neglected as
being too disturbing to be considered.
Disturbing in a world where love has acquired a position of reverence and of
mystical, sacred importance, purified from any other influences.
Freud knew of this all too well.
The aversion to incest can only be traced back to a natural disinclination
towards reproducing genetic copies that can prove to be maladjusted for a
continuously changing environment; a rejection of uniformity.
It contains a high risk and a superfluous one, considering that heterosexual
reproduction was meant to facilitate the production of variety.
Here, too, the natural aversion to oneness, to sameness, and a striving for
diversity and multiplicity is made clear.
Only mankind‟s Will, guided by fear and immature delusions, can even hope
for the inversion of reality.
--- * ---
“One is very crazy when in love.” - Sigmund Freud
The description of love, and lust, as a kind of madness is not far from the
truth. The loss of reason and self-control is part of its technique, as no
thinking mind would willingly subjugate itself to the risks and the penalties
it entails, if it were not driven by a sort of irrational frenzy.
Moreover sexual penetration has a distinctly domineering significance that
cannot be denied. The one penetrating is literally invading the other‟s
boundaries and imposing its essence within another‟s private domain.
The one being penetrated is left in a vulnerable position and is literally
accepting, either wilfully or not, the intrusion.
Just this factor alone explains a lot about the psychological types that
consequently evolve out of this basic sexual dynamic.
Hence, in a feminized world, it is normal to find love holding such a place of
veneration. It has turned from a description of God, Himself, into an idea
defining the very spiritual core of humanism.
The progression from religious nihilism to political and ideological nihilism
is inevitable.
Love, in fact, is not in the possession of the individual, not an expression of
self…The individual must offer it indiscriminately to one and all, because it
is the glue that holds the system‟s fragile pretexts together and the masks in
place.
As an expression of self, of selfishness, love is no longer acceptable…it
must be cleansed of all sense of self and made selfless; void of any
connection to the individual, to the ego; a mere “right” the system bestows
upon its members as an endowment.
Choice, once again, is eliminated and only maintained as an chimera.
As such, love‟s emotional antagonist hatred, must be made into a pariah…an
undesirable expression of rejection, of discrimination…and so an unwanted
emotion.
Only love must permeate the inner workings of the superorganism and
hatred directed towards what is outside its precincts, as a description of the
alien.
Where love is sacred then hatred is the profane – a cancer in the body
politic.
In fact, all emotions that confront social stability must be demonized or
twisted into motives for production.
Greed must be productive or else vile; envy turned into a social motivator;
hatred slandered unless it is directed towards the foreign; lust only accepted
if it produces viable “healthy” reproductions of the desired.
--- * ---
Without the lubricant of love the patience and deference required to tolerate
otherness would be problematic.
As populations swell the domesticating requirement becomes more and more
pressing, forcing a more and more docile demeanour and making the elation
of love a divine sentiment only Dionysus would ascribe as a remedy for the
“dis-ease” of consciousness…other than death itself, s Silenus urges.
Humanitarianism was but a slight adjustment to earlier spiritual dogmas,
because globalization made it unavoidable that heterogeneous populations
would find themselves mingling and coexisting.
Previous religious dogmas and political ideologies, preaching a more
discerning sense of identification within a more homogenous grouping,
quickly became obstructing, ineffective and then obsolete – then considered
primitive.
Environmental conditions had to adapt ideals and ideas to include diversity
and harmonize it within a whole. Conformity and uniformity were relabelled
and sold as religious and humanitarian values, making surrender more
palatable to the average mind that had less to lose and more to gain from this
surrender.
The concepts of liberty and individuality were then redefined so as to
accommodate these newly emerging social requirements.
This meant a more basic identification had to be found that would be more
inclusive and less resistant to the alien.
Humanitarianism has turned out to be such a value system in our modern
world.
It‟s ease of inclusion is made possible by teaching a counter-intuitive
identification with the term “human”, and then reaching for the more basic
identification with life or thought.
“I am alive and then I am human; ergo I am one with all that is alive and/or
human.”
A statement that does not explain the necessity for multiplicity, as a real
phenomenon.
All designations that challenged this basic identity with a whole are now
considered detrimental to cohesion and so “evil” or consequences of
dysfunction.
Multiplicity is easily denied reality or ignored as a natural necessity, and the
road towards uniformity is made all the more flat.
--- * ---
The modern man, the current man, is in harmony with geographical and
historical trends.
He is “normal”, if my “normal” we mean common, given that it has no other
real meaning.
The discriminating function of consciousness must now be turned into an
insult, redefined as prejudice, and blindness.
Less refined tastes are, now, marketed as states of spiritual illumination.
The tongue, like the mind, must be made numb so as to be unable to discern
between flavours.
The idea of discriminating between wines, for example, must
be…uncivilized.
The idea of judging wine by the grapes they come from, from their smell and
color and texture, is…wrong.
The modern civilized man is highly unrefined – a tasteless, block of wood,
that only does what it is made to do and no more.
In Buddhism the state of meditative thoughtlessness, producing a relief from
the awareness of existence, was sold as a way…a way out of mind and out
of body. The epitome of the death wish where a person is obliterated, while
still clinging, ironically, onto existence, and where the escape from suffering
is considered a good enough return for sacrificing the world to illusion, and
the “I” to emptiness.
“For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?”
- King James Bible
The answer to the previous rhetorical question:
It shall profit a man that he shall gain the WORLD!!!! The real world, rather
than some imagined “soul”.
The concrete over the ethereal – the actual over the hypothetical.
For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the hypothetical, imagined,
ambiguity of an eternal soul, and lose the real world?!!
--- * ---
Resistance is futile or, at least evidence of illness – usually called anti-social
behaviour.
The natural masculine rejection of all this mythology is called a disease, to
which femininity stands as a “healthy” alternative…an ease.
The path-of-least-resistance.
What else would a mind be that rejected the absurd idea that life was not
worth living and not worth suffering for, as a natural part of the awareness of
existence, and that could be avoided through self-induced hypnosis?
What else would a mind be that rejected mythological rhetoric and accepted
existence as it is, rather than how it can, hypothetically, be, in some
imagined perfect dimension?
“Ill”, of course.
Ill, as a designation of what is contrary to popularity, to the norm.
Ill, as what is different than the commonly labelled “healthy”.
Where stupidity is ubiquitous and preferable, what else could intelligence
and awareness be but a dis-ease?
Better to sleep than to be awake in this world; better to die, before one‟s
death, rather than endure this sensation of life; better to get drunk on the
nectar of the gods than remain lucid; better to deny reality than live in
accordance with its vicious, uncaring ways.
No, a new way had to be found…The Way.
A Way that, coincidentally, also produced docile, manageable, thoughtless,
retarded attitudes.
Nihilism became a salve to heal the wound of existence, in a world where
weakness flourished and had to be protected against the vulgarity of natural
selection.
What else, but unwell, would a mind be that does not willingly surrender to
this comforting idealization of humanity and life, even if nature contradicts
its premises as delusional?
What else, but driven by an ulterior motive, would a mind be that rejects the
helping hand of self-denial and the replacement of ego with the abstraction
of a universal ego, with God or Humanity, or made shameful through
Buddhist Emptiness?
Nature suggests a world where life feeds upon life and multiplicity rejects
otherness as an aspect of its essence.
Once again the commonality between love and feeding comes to light as one
loves humanity, as an abstraction, and is consumed by it - torn to pieces.
The system farms you, feeds on your energies, sucks you dry and then
discards you as done with. Then you must be grateful for what it offered you
in return.
What small compromises were eventually made to old age and to more
dignified living conditions came as a modern deception of husbandry.
Modern-day farming practices with cattle are well-informed by the insight
that even cows produce more when they are kept happy.
Whether this “ideal Man” is given the conservative characteristics of
productive, consuming automaton, his offspring being just another one of
those useful, to the system, products, or whether this ideal man is given new
characteristics, more liberal, secular, and so more inclusive, traits, that adapt
him to newer conditions, is of minimal importance. What remains constant is
the idealization of the concept of Man – the worship of Man as a
replacement for the worship of an absent God – the worldly veneration of
the concept of Man.
Individual man does not matter, all are but imperfect representations of the
ideal and so they are expendable facsimiles. The good citizen, the pious one,
the useful, productive one is the only thing that matters.
Service to the sacred is all that matters.
Service to the ideal.
Service to the One.
Paradise is knocked off its heavenly pedestal and placed squarely within the
empirical world, as a desirable possibility.
It is brought back down to Earth, so to speak.
Individuation is obliterated into a ghost; a “spook”, as Stirner called it.
More precisely he says:
“Look out near and far, a ghostly world surrounds you everywhere; you are always
having „apparitions‟ or visions. Everything that appears to you is only a phantasm of an
indwelling spirit, is a ghostly „apparition‟; the world is to you only a „world of
appearances‟ behind which the spirit walks. You see spirits.”
…and…
“But to you the whole world is spiritualized, and has become an enigmatical ghost;
therefore don to wonder if you likewise find in yourself nothing but a spook. Is not your
body haunted by your spirit, and is not the latter alone the true and real, the former only
the „transitory, naught‟ or a „semblance‟? Are we not all ghosts, uncanny beings that wait
for „deliverance‟ – to wit, „spirits‟”?
--- * ---
Has not sex lost all relevance?
Is it not now but a trivial characteristic within a world that only desires
discipline and harmony?
Under these circumstances the designations of male and female has become
secondary ones. Mutations, once unfit and serving a supportive role, now
enter the mainstream as just another acceptable life-style.
They are acceptable, as alternatives, because they do not challenge the status
quo – they, in fact, support it.
The elimination of the male/female designations as relevant, has also to do
with the technological alterations to natural processes.
Human interventions upon natural processes pushes nature back to the
margins of importance and man constructs artificial environments, sanitized
and sterilized against any natural infections that stain the preferred human
ideals.
Our supermarkets are full of produce that exhibits a flawless perfection that
does not correspond to anything in the natural world…to anything real.
Our meats come parceled and packaged with no blood in sight; our fruits
spotless and…seedless - our pets spade and neutered.
Nothing must confront our westernized sensibilities.
All is an illusion that gives off the wrong impression: The misapprehension
that we exist in some pristine, disinfected world and that we are but
innocent, childlike organisms whose existence does not rely on the
exploitation and death of other organisms…including other human beings.
In such an environment it is easy to remain an adolescent, forever surprised
by the sudden cruelty that slips through the pristine façade of civilization,
forever disappointed by its inability to have reality meet its expectations eye-
to-eye.
In time nature is forgotten or only accessible through protective mediums,
and man‟s “reality” becomes a self-referential simulation with little left of
the authentic.
"[I]t is impossible to overlook the extent to which civilization is built upon a renunciation
of instinct, how much it presupposes precisely the non-satisfaction of powerful instincts.
This 'cultural frustration' dominates the large field of social relationships between human
beings."- Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), Civilization and Its Discontents
Human environments change at a fast pace. Faster than any organism can
adapt to them through natural processes.
The discrepancy between social change and evolutionary adaptation is
another source of stress and confusion.
It is what produces neurosis.
Attraction
The game of sexual attraction is an intricate dance of flirtation and
insinuation that hides a deeper practical motivation.
Steven W. Gangstad PhD said on the matter:
“Flirting is a negotiation process that takes place after there has been initial attraction.”
And just like in all negotiations a fair amount of lies and posturing is
involved.
For women the “game” of sexual attraction has additional considerations.
For her the implications and consequences of a sexual relationship will have
far reaching results for her and her progeny. This makes her decision a more
complicated affair.
All this is relevant, of course, only if she wishes to have children, because in
this day and age this is not always the case. In an era of pseudo-
individuality, the reproductive ambition is secondary to the primary one of
serving the system and through that service find purpose, a sense of self and
the wealth this servitude is rewarded with.
A redirected libido.
Innovations in birth-control facilitate this practice.
--- * ---
A heterosexual female‟s instinctive inclinations attract her to the primal
heterosexual male, since the instinct has evolved within primordial
environments as a pre-programmed reaction to stimuli, inducing particular
behaviours.
In comparison modern environments are a recent development and are only
now beginning to affect behaviour on a visceral level.
The physical and mental strengths, the male possesses and that will be
inherited by the child through her and in combination with her own, makes
these natural male attributes precious and irresistible.
Despite thousands of years of civilization a female‟s, as well as a male‟s,
sexual desires are still dictated my more primeval considerations, as they
have evolved through millions of years.
A further consideration, of being impregnated by a male with access to
material resources, is also at play here. A consideration that will increase the
probabilities that her long gestation will be safe and comfortable and the
following years of caring for a helpless infant will turn out to be successful.
This added concern is a remnant of ages with more austere and demanding
conditions, that still exact their charge upon the human psyche.
Contrary to the previous, in modern times genetic prowess does not
necessarily automatically translate into access to resources, as the alteration
of environmental conditions has not allowed enough time for a genetic
adaptation to take place in response to it.
The balancing act between finding a male that possesses the, still, attractive
markers of fitness, and of finding a mate that possesses the appropriate
cultural markers of social robustness, as well, , as well as one that is willing
to remain a loyal supportive element in the child‟s upbringing, results in a
female torn amid conflicting ideals, because one does not necessarily
presuppose the other.
In fact we might say that social fitness can be the result of compensating for
genetic inferiority, and that many masculine traits, can inhibit social success.
This results in a contradiction between genetic ideals and mimetic ones, as
the previous are mostly denied expression within average social situations.
The intelligent male will find it difficult to accept the norms on principle and
not on facts.
In opposition the docile, dull male will accept whatever norms are present
and reap the rewards for his readiness to accept them.
--- * ---
In more natural environments the physical and mental prowess of a male
went hand-in-hand with his access to survival‟s essentials, whereas in our
modern world this is not always the case.
Within artificial environments it is the masculine abstraction of the State, or
of the system, that controls all resources.
Access to them is disseminated amongst those that show the proper amounts
of deference and loyalty to it, as wealth and property or as status and title.
Currently, resources represent this submission to systemic power which,
often, contradicts masculine character traits, such a rejection of all authority
and a challenging spirit.
Material wealth is mostly given to the ones with a more conforming, more
docile, predisposition; those that have been easily assimilated within the
cultural frameworks and that have adopted the ideals and beliefs of their
society, even if this is, sometimes, a hypocritical submission.
Nevertheless, whether actual or faked, the demanded submission to systemic
rule confronts the normal masculine disposition, and it forcefully coerces
men, or it seduces them, to conform to its power and to adopt more feminine
attitudes and behaviours.
This, often faked, female demeanour has enabled many males to pay the
precious price, of both time and effort, so as to reach goals, often imposed
upon them by the same external sources that restrict the tactics to be used to
achieve them.
Not only are the goals set, but the rules governing how one realizes these
goals is also set.
“After all, every murderer when he kills runs the risk of the most dreadful of deaths,
whereas those who kill him risk nothing except promotion.” - Albert Camus
This is more evident in crucial positions of social status, such as political
posts or positions through which information and therefore systemic
propaganda is disseminated, such as the media and the entertainment
industry.
Within these organizations we can find the promotion of individuals that
more closely reflect the ideologies of the governing elite or the morality and
value systems of the powers that be. Using the mechanism of promotion,
“bad apples” are weeded out of the whole and prevented from reaching
positions where they may cause a disturbance.
Those promoted, having proven their agreeable conformity, are then the
ones that will promote the next generation of bureaucrats and technocrats
and will be the ones that will be asked to support the ascendancy of those
that will serve as representatives of State and institutional power.
The political process is a case in point. By the time the vote is given to the
people - a people already imbued with common beliefs and values, from
birth - the candidate has gone through many stages of endorsements and
confirmations.
Then, and only then, is the candidate allowed to run for office, by
convincing the citizenry, this time, that he is like them, that he shares their
values and will defend them when in power, and that he will not abuse or
overstep the boundaries of the institutions responsibilities.
What little dissent is allowed, is condoned as a way of defusing stresses and
as a way of depressurizing repressed instincts.
{I shall delve deeper into this in the ongoing analysis, and particularly in the
Entertaining Ramification segment.}
Tested and approved of individuals then acquire access to symbolic
positions of power and influence and are rewarded with affluence and
privilege as a compensation for their sacrifices, whereas those diverging
from the acceptable norm or exhibiting any free-thought and opposition to
the norms, or a mere resistance to prescribed authority, are conspicuously
left behind, eradicated, defamed and/or ignored.
Censorship and discrimination takes on a increasingly subtle form, and
control need not use force, except in response to exceptional circumstances.
Nothing is ever overtly demonstrated and the one ascending to
representative power prefers to believe that his success is exclusively the
result of his or her credentials, hard work, ambition, and unique talents,
rather than anything else.
In the media the reporter is never openly told to conceal the truth or to slant
his reports in one way or another. Having been placed/promoted into a
position where (s)he can influence a vast, and mostly naïve and
impressionable, audience, and having previously proven that (s)he shares in
the common national beliefs, has been adequately indoctrinated within
cultural norms, posing no observable threat to the system itself, (s)he is
expected to do nothing more than express this shared conformity and parrot
the prevailing socioeconomic truisms and cultural myths.
These are instances where censorship occurs before the fact, rather than after
it.
“Be careful in dealing with a man who cares nothing for comfort or promotion, but is
simply determined to do what he believes to be right. He is a dangerous uncomfortable
enemy, because his body, which you can always conquer, gives you little purchase upon
his soul.” - Gilbert Murray
Furthermore, the demands of social progression exact such a high price on
the individual - the male in particular - as to make any dedication to physical
and mental development, impossible or rare. Men and women are so stressed
and occupied with daily concerns with economic survival, consumerism and
social ascension that the self, the only thing that truly matters, is profusely
neglected.
Man begins associating himself with the group, and in so doing finds
comfort in the loss of responsibility and the absence of free-will.
His life has become a dedication to service, with momentary breaks to
replenish his energies, before he returns to his job rejuvenated and more
productive.
His production is his value; his consumption is his reward; his identity is his
work.
He or she would rather discuss trifling things that to confront this reality.
A dedication to specifics, as they are fed to them from “reliable sources”
become preferable to any form of free-thinking.
Such practices can lead to discomforts…and discomfort is one thing the
pampered mind will not, and can not, deal with.
In modern societies, where physicality and intellectual power is not as
relevant to survival and where, inversely, it is a weak and impressionable
mind that enables success, the sexual selection, demanded from women, is
made even more perplexing.
Her femininity is still fascinated by masculinity and all the attributes that go
along with it, but from a practical point of view she must take into
consideration her mate‟s social status, wealth and conventionality, so as to
ensure the well-being of her future offspring.
Her “maturation” or “awakening”, as was noted, is simply her growing
acceptance of all the concessions she must make to the powers that bind her.
Female
“Man is defined as a human being and a woman as a female - whenever she behaves as a
human being she is said to imitate the male” - Simone de Beauvoir
To say that women are the weaker sex is to not do justice to their actual
sexual potency. Such a simplistic perspective ignores the true power women
possess within social groups and the decisive effect, upon human destiny,
her sexual choices and activities have.
In fact a woman‟s place within a social group is a privileged one, as we will
see further on, and it has been man‟s intervention and imposition of
authoritarian, paternalistic socio-political systems that has stripped women
of the full extent of their innate power - Paternalism.
A power fully expressed through female sexual selection and the feminine
ease with the unobtrusive mirroring of cultural norms. By subjugating them
to cultural and religious dogmas males sought to control this power and
direct it towards socially useful goals, just as males sought to control all
aspects of nature.
In many ways females became representations of unbridled instincts and
unreasoned actions; a personification of nature – because nature is
symbolized as a feminine concept – the metaphorical mother nature that
male reason and masculine will had to dominate and direct in order to
create…order.
This male/female dichotomy became a figurative way of expressing the
often contradictory forces that pulled mankind in, sometimes, opposite
directions: instinct/intellect, rationality/irrationality, emotion/reason,
order/disorder.
The Apollonian/Dionysian conceptualization of the human condition.
--- * ---
Left to her natural devises, a woman plays the part of genetic “gatekeeper”
and memetic filter that propagates the ideals and values of a group, and
weeds out undesirable physical, mental, social, cultural, religious and/or
psychological traits.
This feminine role is a direct continuation of natural processes.
In natural environments a woman‟s sexual choices are guided by genetic,
subconsciously rooted, instinctive motivations, whereas in cultural
(social/economic/cultural/religious) environments a woman‟s sexual choice
is further complicated by diverging considerations that battle with the pre-
existing natural ones for domination over her conscious and unconscious
deliberations.
It is the ease with which a female is integrated within any social and cultural
unity and the ease with which she accepts and adopts ideas and ideals, that
make her such a precious natural resource and such a perfect representation
of unconscious natural processes.
Through a woman‟s choices, and how these choices are focused and
determined by natural inclinations and social upbringings, a woman acts as
an instrument of selectivity that dictates the future of mankind.
For this reason, alone, a woman‟s options had to be curbed and directed.
She had to be tamed and domesticated.
Control this female sexual power and you control mankind.
Social Dependence
“Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and
prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.” - Thomas Jefferson
A woman is nothing outside a group. Her entire self-worth and value is
derived through her participation and her status within a collective. Her self-
esteem and self-worth is determined by how desirable and appealing she
becomes to the other and, as a consequence, by how she becomes a willing
and capable social and cultural agent.
Her will is completely dedicated to satisfying and adapting to the will of
another…preferably a superior other.
She finds purpose in how effectively she can be used as an implement, an
object, and a means to an end.
She willingly offers herself to this task and enthusiastically performs her
duties in its name.
She evolves to be this way by her role as the crucial reproductive entity of a
species with demanding genetic requirements.
As such, her power is achieved by how well she understands, manipulates,
conforms and reflects the morals, values and beliefs of the group she
participates in, and in how close to the popular physical aesthetic ideal she
reaches; an ideal that exposes her fertility and genetic history but also her
adherence to common practices.
She completely and willingly makes of herself an tool of power and, through
this, finds value through association.
She follows fashion trends, political movements, ideologies, social direction,
as she is exposed to them, with ease and with little doubt, and she remains
loyal only as long as they appear to be more powerful than any other
alternative.
She is attracted to abstracted, theoretical, ideological memetic power in the
same way she is attracted to the appearance of physical, mental genetic
power…and she is just as quickly disillusioned by its authenticity, if ever
she becomes aware of it.
Her devotions, on average, like her understanding is shallow and quick to
change, because it is rarely based on a deeper appreciation of actuality and
so her intellectual event horizon, and her reflection upon it, is short and
fleeting.
In this the effete, feminized, adolescent, retarded male is no different.
A woman, in fact, has a weak sense of individuality - a product of self-
consciousness - but plays any part she deems is attractive and necessary to
achieve her goal of belonging and reproducing. Her highest reward is being
appreciated by the other(s).
It is for this reason that women are often at the forefront of social trends and
tend to look down upon males who often resist or exhibit a more timeless
sensitivity, a longer event horizon, which challenges contemporary
convictions.
She judges these males as being inadequate for the times at hand – a woman
is always practical in her considerations - even if she may find herself
attracted to their indifferent power, despite herself; a power she wishes she
can pass onto her offspring.
The memetic/genetic conflict on a subconscious level.
Any male that possesses a character out of sync with existing trends will be
considered undesirable or too great a risk to even consider as a potential
mate.
A male‟s appeal, for a woman, is in the immediate.
--- * ---
The natural propensity of females to grab upon new leadership is based,
primarily, on their biology and, subsequent, sexual roles.
Resistance to new authority would be detrimental to their biological
function, therefore they accept new things, new fashions and cultural trends,
more easily as their main interest is to belong to the one‟s promising the
most potential for dominance.
Her judgments are always based on potentials.
This makes females natural followers…but not very dependable ones.
They quickly change allegiance when new powers inspire their confidences,
and their loyalties and loves are about as profound and dependable as their
comprehension.
Their intelligence is dedicated, primarily, in determining who or what is
more promising, and on how they can integrate themselves within a group,
and increase the communal esteem directed their way.
This does, necessarily, have to be conscious but can be intuited as an innate
reaction to specific sensual stimulations, they need not be entirely aware of.
For this reason women are often at a loss to explain how or why they acted
as they did or they think as they do. They, simply, feel the “truth”, many
times with surprising accuracy, but can rarely explain it.
--- * ---
Feminine power is one founded on association(s) and so they seek out to
associate with the many and/or the most powerful – quantity/quality.
Her Will-to-Power is indirect and so her tactics are, often, insidious and
cunning - plausible deniability is how a female maintains the air of open-
minded reasoning and knowledge, accompanied with accolades and
diplomas, are her proof that she is a free-thinker, equal to any man.
Her best tool is her innate ability to read others, perceive their needs, their
strengths, and, primarily, their weaknesses, and then use this insight to her
advantage.
You cannot successfully integrate into a group without the ability to read
others and adapt to their personalities.
“How can a woman be expected to be happy with a man who insists on treating her as if
she were a perfectly normal human being.” - Oscar Wilde
Sexual Selection
“It is with our passions, as it is with fire and water, they are good servants but bad
masters.” - Aesop
A female possesses the most valuable part of an ephemeral human existence;
she produces and controls the human ovum which ensures and directs the
propagation of the species.
Where men can produce billions of sperm in a lifetime and impregnate
thousands of women, women produce, in comparison, a scant amount of
eggs and can only gestate a minimal amount of offspring in the course of a
lifetime.
A female‟s “window of fertility” is a small one in comparison to a male‟s.
This forces women to be more selective with whom they have intercourse
with, under normal circumstances, and makes them more anxious about the
issues dealing with children and family.
In species where there is a specific season when females are fertile, this is
not so much an issue, but in the human species, where a female‟s fertility
ebbs and flows along a monthly cycle throughout the year, sexual selectivity
becomes fundamental.
Through her sexual selectivity she ensures the continuance of specific traits
and characteristics while she condemns others to eventual extinction. In her
mind a woman believes she is making a logical, free-willed choice, based on
well thought out reasons and/or personal tastes, when she chooses a mate.
In fact, she is merely following her genetic drive, her intuitive instinctive
motivations and her culture‟s prejudiced beliefs.
She only becomes disconcerted when previous, evolved, sexual preferences,
contradict current socially established man-made ones. Then she finds
herself thinking one way while behaving in a manner which contradicts it.
Herein lies the source of male confusion when dealing with modern-day
females.
The average male is perplexed by the fact that women can say one thing, in
accordance with a civilization‟s norms, and then act in antithesis to it, in
accordance with primordial norms.
The meme/gene conflict, produced by the fact that human environmental
conditions change faster than humans can adapt to them. Instinctive
inclinations linger well after they have been labelled obsolete and/or
undesirable and this, in turn, results in social and mental problems, caused
by the stress these inner conflicts and confusions cause.
In most cases it isn‟t that women are purposefully trying to be duplicitous
but that they, themselves, cannot conceptually harmonize their instincts with
their ideals.
The former is a result of millions of yeas of natural selection whereas the
latter is the result of a few thousand years of social selection.
--- * ---
“There's a little bit of hooker in every woman. A little bit of hooker and a little bit of
God.” - Sarah Miles
This much is obvious to even the most idealistic feminist.
It is this female ovum that males fight to control and to inseminate and
through this control to ensure their own legacy.
This is one of the fundamental principles of evolutionary mechanics.
It is, therefore, a woman‟s aesthetic appeal that reveals her physical health,
her fertility and her mental faculties to bear and raise capable offspring. It is
this physical appeal that men find irresistible and makes their devotion and,
often extravagant sacrifices towards women, possible. It is also through this
physical appeal and the ends to which men will go to acquire access to a
healthy, fertile ovum, where women find their greatest source of
empowerment and how they construct the tactics with which they manage to
control men of often higher mental and physical strength than themselves.
Hip to waist ratios, skin and hair textures and a variety of other sensual cues
give off the signals of healthy fertility, known as beauty.
Nothing “inner” about it; nothing mystical.
Simple mathematics instinctively perceived and evaluated.
But in this western world, where even beauty must be eliminated as a
distinguishing marker, women, as well as men, can claim that it is all skin-
deep or in the eye of the beholder and then clamour to possess it and agree
on its attraction.
Billions of dollars are spent yearly on the beauty industry, while men and
women pay lip-service to the cultural mythology that beauty, and appearance
in general, is irrelevant.
We can see it clearly, in this case, how action often contradicts ideology and
how genes still dominate over memes.
--- * ---
The female propensity to willingly and completely adopt the value systems
she finds herself in, and in her overall control over who she will be
impregnated by, makes her a “custodian” of social conformity and a tool of
genetic manipulation.
In the exceptions to this rule one must seek out sexual dysfunction or an
infection by alternative ideals which she has had contact with, in the course
of her early life and has been seduced by.
"Marriage is for women the commonest mode of livelihood, and the total amount of
undesired sex endured by women is probably greater in marriage than in prostitution." -
Bertrand Russell
But a woman‟s choice isn‟t as easy as it first may appear. If she isn‟t a part
of a culture where her choice is taken away, taken for granted or restricted
by male dominance, she is further troubled by two forces battling over her
attentions:
1} Intellectually, and if sufficiently indoctrinated within a cultural
framework, she is pulled to the socially acceptable and upwardly mobile
male who, like her, has adopted and completely conformed to the
social/cultural/religious norm and, by doing so, has ensured his social
success and his access to some portion of the resources available.
These resources are essential for women that are forced to endure a long
gestation and weaning period, making them more helpless than they would
normally be.
2} Physically and instinctually she is still bound to her genetic
predispositions and still instinctually attracted to the natural male ideal. An
ideal which, due to his natural inclinations, may appear violent, vulgar,
arrogant, proud, confrontational, and unyielding when judged according to
our modern standards and when compared to the more effeminate, docile,
socially indoctrinated, tolerant and passive “modern” male.
In this mix we must include the distinctive differences in sexual selection
between older and younger females. This is often attributed to an increase in
awareness; the older female that now “knows what she wants”.
In fact the truth lies elsewhere: The younger female is not inhibited, as
much, by social and economic conventions and so her behaviour is all the
more authentic, whereas an older female must balance her instinctive natural
desires with increasingly vital, to her, practical considerations.
This practicality has been romanticized so as to make it more virtuous and
less of the concession, that it is – less of a settling down and a settling for.
What is often meant by maturity is a gradual acceptance of limitations that
cannot be avoided and the conscious acceptance of what is probable, rather
than what is not, given the circumstances and one‟s growing awareness of
one‟s self, in relation to the world and its workings.
“We are finally driven to monogamy not by morality but by exhaustion.” - Erica Jong
By all means the cultural ideal of the monogamous relationship must be
sheltered against reality, even when it inevitably turns into forbearance
based on dwindling personal potentials and comfortable habituation.
It must be sheltered against it not only because of the, aforementioned,
forced compromises brought about by maturity, but also because of the
unavoidable disparity between naïve overestimated expectations and a
maturing cynical awareness of reality.
As is often the case, the imagination exceeds the world‟s premises,
influenced by ignorance as well, and the mind is surprised and, often,
disappointed by a universe that remains indifferent to human hopes and
romantic ideals.
This is progressively more the case when a mind is never allowed to grow
up, and is stunted into a perpetual state of adolescence, by remaining
protected by parental and/or institutional powers.
This form of mental and psychological retardation can be useful to the
system when it promotes a constant, irrational, struggle to find an ideal, as it
has been marketed by the system itself. An ideal which is nowhere to be
found, simply because it has no reference to reality and only exists as an
icon – a spectacular star.
“60- Media stars are spectacular representations of living human beings, distilling the
essence of the spectacle‟s banality into images of possible roles. Stardom is a
diversification in the semblance of life – the object of an identification with mere
appearance which is intended to compensate for the crumbling of directly experienced
diversifications of productive activity. Celebrities figure various styles of life and various
views of society which anyone is supposedly free to embrace and pursue in a global
manner. Themselves incarnations of the inaccessible results of social labour, they mimic
by-products of that labour, and project these above labour so that they appear as its goal.
The by-products in question are power and leisure – the power to decide and the leisure
to consume which are the alpha and the omega of a process that is never questioned.
In the former case, government power assumes the personified form of the pseudo-star; in
the second, stars of consumption canvas for votes as pseudo-power over life lived. But,
just as none of these celestial activities are truly global, neither do they offer any real
choices.” – Guy Debord {The Society of the Spectacle}
This discontentment enhances the already present state of dissatisfaction,
which is inherit in existence, and maintains a steady level of anxious
frustration which makes the individual even more vulnerable to
psychological manipulation.
--- * ---
The previously mentioned female sexual considerations are what play a part
in the misunderstanding and incomprehensibility of women to the average
male that cannot reconcile what women say and what they often do in
contradiction to what they have said.
It is this that is the cause of this supposed female “mystique”.
A woman‟s mental superiority can be found only in how she establishes and
maintains relationships and in her practical application of knowledge and
experiences.
She is a master at this.
A male mind is less practical in that it concerns itself less with the
immediate and more with the universal.
For this reason the constant analysis of males is a matter of greater
importance to females than the constant analysis of females is to males.
It isn‟t, so much, that women are smarter than men when it comes to
psychology and social relationships but that they devote more of their
brainpower and time to these concerns. It is for this reason that females
develop faster, in a general social context, and acquire better communication
skills early on. The quickness by which a female reaches child-bearing
maturity makes her precious, as a commodity, and her skill in linguistic
expression and understanding allows her to evaluate the underlying social
currents and the methods of adapting to them which establishes her social
positioning.
But the total devotion of a female mind to the immediately perceptible and
practical gives them an added advantage in social matters. A woman is
subconsciously adept in understanding body language and in interpreting
psychological states through the perception of external details and
subliminal messages.
They call this “woman‟s intuition”.
Because a female‟s consciousness is engaged far less than a male‟s, it clouds
her subconscious evaluations to a lesser degree than it does in male thinking.
She is unburdened by having to explain it, but only has to trust in her
intuitions and put them to instant use.
Subsequently, the average female is always a step ahead of males in picking-
up and interpreting the minutiae of physical information, freely given off by
all of us, as a manifestation of our essence. Her total commitment to
appearances also makes her adept in reading and deducing the historical and
experiential influences found within all appearances.
Her world is immediate and simple.
Her event horizon broad, but shallow.
Her awareness is contained within the particular geographical and temporal
spheres she is born within.
Her thinking is rarely timeless; she exists more in the moment, than the
average man does, because her imagination is rarely engaged in projecting
into the distance the assessments of her immanent presence.
In order for men to fully comprehend females they must have the propensity
to think as they do.
They must possess the gift of empathy, a direct result of imagination.
This discrepancy between man‟s longer but more narrowly focused
conscious horizon, and a woman‟s more broader, thinly spread, but
shallower one, can explain the many differences between male and female
perceptions and intellectual, psychological tendencies. It may also serve as
an explanation for divergent male/female performances in the arts, in the
sciences, in philosophy and in all other human mental and physical
disciplines.
A myriad of excuses have been offered to account for the fact that women
perform so poorly, with some notable exceptions, in certain areas of human
interest, such as philosophy and science… and in art, for that matter…but
none of them can account for the centuries that have past and for the billions,
upon billions, of women that have come and gone with not as much as a hint
of intellectual contribution that goes beyond the exceptional norm and into
the extraordinary, and with not so much as a single thought outside the
social cultural box or past pre-established, prescribed methods and theories.
Not a single revolutionary thinker from that sex, when their numbers as
graduating students are increasing and they consistently produce
contributions to already established theories and enhancements to already
present disciplines.
Women are ideally suited for being contributors and supporters, but not for
challenging the “self-evident” and leading the way towards ground-breaking
perspectives.
The idea that females have been held back by paternalism or that they were
thwarted from their full creative potentials by childrearing does not explain
why men, under similar circumstances of slavery, totalitarian regimes and
also burdened with the responsibilities of providing for the very children
women, supposedly, reared on their own, often excelled in all of these areas.
At best, women have proven to be respectable supportive elements and
capable enhancers and promoters of established methodologies and ideas,
but not one of them can be compared to some of the greatest and most
influential minds in human history.
Minds who just happen to be all male.
If there are one or two exceptions to the rule then this only serves to prove a
pattern does exist. A pattern which should not be dismissed by invoking
some flattering justification that is rooted in the mythology of equal
potentials and humanitarian ideals.
Nature herself, shows us that her methods are based on a division of labour
and on unequal potentials competing their way into gene pools. Nature is
frugal and does not create diversity, as a superficial aesthetic marker with no
actual importance.
Multiplicity, as a universal phenomenon, is not a triviality, a grand practical
joke or some method of testing our faculties. If it is, then one must ask:
Why and for what purpose are we so fooled?
Whom has cast this veil of illusion over us?
How and why have our senses evolved if they only serve to trick us and
divert us from reality?
That which appears is not other than what is, unless one wishes to fall back
on duality to support failed reasoning. Our awareness and interpretations of
what appears may be partial and/or flawed but the appearance itself is not
hiding from us a deeper immutable core.
To think that it does is to only hypothesize based on nothing that exists; it is
the to base a deduction on the inversion of the existent.
It takes multiplicity and imagined the opposite, uniformity or oneness, in
classic dualistic thinking.
It takes change and imagines the static absolute.
It takes inequality and imagines equality.
It takes mortality and imagines immortality.
In essence it takes what exists and imagines the opposite, that which does
not exist.
The notion that the senses evolve to fool us, rather than aid us, is ludicrous,
and based on a self-serving presupposition. It is man trying to integrate
reality into his utopian ideals and comfort himself.
That there are differentiations, not only between men and women, but
between men and men and, most obviously, between one species and
another, is not only a superficial aesthetic phenomenon. The differentiation
signifies a divergence in general potentials.
Granted the differences between a male and a female of the same species are
slight and, many times, a female may display a superiority in what is
considered a male attribute, but this does not negate the fact that divergence
exists, and it exists for a reason.
A chimpanzees genetic makeup may be slightly different than a human
beings, but this slight difference creates an undisputed great effect.
Furthermore the idea that there are discrepancies in individual potentials,
determined by climatic and geographical influences, genetic isolations,
mutations, and sexual roles, does not mean that the environmental conditions
will always nurture these potentials to their fullest fruition.
The interplay between nurture and nature is a subtle one, best clarified when
one keeps in mind that nature is really the sum of all past nurturing.
Male
“I have a hammer! I can put things together! I can knock things apart! I can alter my
environment at will and make an incredible din all the while! Ah, it's great to be male!” -
Bill Watterson
A man‟s role within a social group is a more precarious one.
He is both expendable and an intrinsic part of the health of the whole; he can
be a definer of what it means to be human or be a mere failed attempt at it;
he can be the epitome of greatness or a symbol of degradation; he can be a
leader and teacher of a group or relegated to a peripheral role or excluded
altogether; he can be the personification of the ideal or of the error.
The demands upon the male intellect, because of the aforementioned, are
greater than in females. He must be flexible and stringent, disciplined and
free-willed, strong and compassionate, proud and humble, in a delicate
balance dictated by the structure of the group he wishes to become a
successful, respected member and/or leader of, and dictated, as well, by the
environment he is forced to exist within - he must prove himself worthy,
when his value is yet to be determined, when a female‟s is intrinsically
linked to her nature.
A man‟s mind is divided between the necessary perception of appearances
and the need to find advantage by evaluating and perceiving the non-
perceptible, through the abstract.
A socially successful male must, in fact, possess a perfect combination of
masculine and feminine traits.
If the balance tips either way then he either turns too effete or too disturbing
to social stability to be acceptable.
--- * ---
If intelligence is the defining characteristic of a homo sapient and the one
attribute that sets mankind apart from all other animals, then the male is the
highest representation of it.
His potential, in this regard, being the epitome of what it means to be a
human being, or what it means to be a failed human being.
We can say that a woman is the purchaser of genetic potential, and so her
awareness is geared towards determining value, in relation to existing
standards, and a man is inevitably the vendor and as such possesses the
creativity, imagination, and mental flexibility of one that must consistently
prove his value to the whole, and/or retain his control over it, in order to
ensure his relevance and importance.
That, in this regard, a male has also proven to be a creator of the standards of
evaluation, is one more testimony to his innovating potential – standards
that, ironically, females then use to evaluate his kind.
These necessary characteristics of a successful male, of masculinity as a
psychological type, are also the source of mankind‟s domination.
A more precise definition of what intelligence is follows. It sheds some light
on how it functions and why it has become so effective as a survival tool. It
also exposes the differences between female and male intellectual qualities.
Intelligence:
The innate, inherited and cultivated or allowed to atrophy, ability to perceive
patterns, integrating them into cohesive mental models (abstractions) - the
quality of the models determined by the amount of details successfully
integrated within them - and their projection, using the imagination, into the
unknown {Temporality (Time) <> Possibility (Space)} so as to preempt
future occurrences, phenomena, prepare for them and/or more efficiently
focus energies (Will) upon them.
In the process these mental projections must adhere to perceptible
phenomena, by gathering sensual stimulations and translating them into
models (empiricism) of type and category, as determined by the patterns
perceived.
The mind must take care not to be distorted into error, by emotional and self-
interested influences – subjectivity – so as to produce successful strategies
using them.
The success and failure of this process, towards any purpose and driven by
any motivation, ambition and need, determines the intelligence of the mind
utilizing it.
Given the aforementioned, the breadth and depth of the event horizon of a
mind, its timelessness or its thinking beyond the immediate cultural and/or
social and environmental conditions, determines its intelligence.
In a sense intelligence is the ability to perceive possibilities (space),
accurately evaluate the cost/benefit probabilities and then formulate and
carry out a strategy of accomplishing a desirable outcome, by adjusting it to
any subsequent unforeseeable variables (flexibility).
In this regard females have proven to be wanting in that they display an
ability to successfully integrate their thinking within the established, and to
effectively play the role of a helpful, enhancing element, but reveal a relative
inadequacy to think beyond the immediate, or outside the social and cultural
norms and/or popular beliefs.
To use the same metaphor I‟ve been using…Their event horizon is wide but
not long, therefore, they cannot produce anything that usurps conventional
human understanding and power balances; they can only offer sustenance to
what has already been established as a common "truth", working within the
frameworks she is born within and which she accepts with little resistance.
She is a nurturer of what already exists; a metaphorical acceptor of the past
with little desire to alter it, but only a desire to enhance its already present
condition.
She is reluctant to challenge authority or what dominates, choosing only to
contribute to its completion and stability.
She thrives as a contributing member or as a team player, for this is her
natural milieu and is unable to stand apart from the group, on her own.
The male psyche, on the other hand, is one of dispute and rejection. For a
masculine psychology the past is to be destroyed for the sake of a
diametrically different tomorrow.
This is what produces the scientific and philosophical mind.
Not to bow to reality, evoking some omnipotent authority, but to confront it,
know it and overcome it – to challenge the norms, usurp power, destroy and
rebuild according to his own whims…to want to know himself not so as to
accept and settle for what is but so as to reinvent it anew, by recombining its
pieces.
His event horizon may be less wide, than a female‟s, but is far greater in
length....deeper...more timeless, and so, often, less immediately practical.
Reflecting the sexual act, a man, in reference to the world, is penetrating,
domineering, rejecting, resisting, aggressive, arrogant, rebellious, intrusive,
where a female is accepting, tolerating, humble, slavish, convenient,
conventional, submissive.
The average woman - allowing for variations on the rule and/or exceptions
to it - perceives more spatially...more possibilities within her shorter event
horizon.
She does not perceive as much depth, but more breadth.
Her thinking is more superficial but multifarious.
The male mind is more focused and more interested in timeless ideas, rather
than the immediate ones, because it competes to outmaneuver its
competitors by foreseeing what others fail to see at all.
This is how the male seeks an advantage and it is this, very, advantage that
mankind has over other species.
Of course, as was noted, the masculine and feminine temperament is found
in both biological males and females, to varying degrees, and it is only the
sexual function, the reason why the sexual differentiation evolves, at all,
which establishes a higher or lower potential for either or.
It is, consequently, not a rarity, particularly in this world of unchecked
reproduction and increasing unfit mutations that are never culled out of the
gene pool, to find biological females who are far more masculine in thinking
and demeanor than the average biological male.
But, again, this masculine temperament is tempered by all the
aforementioned social and cultural factors, and oftentimes are only symbolic
and superficial compensations for a disappearing masculine type.
Within a world of feminized populations the difference between the
common male and the common female is becoming more and more difficult
to discern.
Uniformity at work.
--- * ---
The male must be an outsider so as to hope to dominate.
You cannot expect to control what you are controlled by, and you cannot
expect to govern what you have submitted to.
Just as consciousness is a part of a whole observing itself, separating and
distancing, so as to perceive and clarify by discriminating, so too is man a
resisting entity towards what is – a rejection so as to see, know and then,
hopefully, rule over.
From a metaphysical perspective what is being rejected and denied authority
is entropy, to which life, and especially the male type, stands in opposition,
as the negating of negation – ordering within disordering.
The movement may appear to be away from nothingness, the absolute nil
(emptiness, nihilism), and towards somethingness, the absolute thing(God,
Man, Ideal), but this is a mistake. When both the concepts of nothing and
something are but variation of the concept of an Absolute, or that which does
not exist, the absent and the, oftentimes, desirable inert state of completion,
then the masculine rejection is of this non-existent ideal state.
It is a resistance to non-existence (death, stagnation) and a life-affirming
preference for the turmoil and uncertainty of a universe in flux – the very
essence of existence.
The masculine mind opposes the One, uniformity, the return to the
proverbial core, and chooses multiplicity as what makes consciousness and
life possible and necessary; he embraces need/suffering as the inevitable
price of awareness.
The tautology of power with indifference is here elucidated, and the true
nature of consciousness, as a discriminating tool of choice, is here made
most obvious.
From the previous definition of consciousness we may say that self-
consciousness, is a piece of consciousness separating from the whole so as to
observe or become aware of the rest.
As such, self-consciousness, like consciousness, is never completed.
This incompleteness makes it mysterious and it offers the opportunity for
ignorance and emotionalism to allow for the mystical to enter as an
explanation – a mystical explanation offering existential relief.
--- * ---
A man‟s natural inclination is, undoubtedly, to inseminate as many females
as he possibly can and then guide them, and his offspring, with his strength
and wisdom.
His genes urge him to leave behind as many copies of them as he possibly
can, even if he may not be consciously aware of it and, possibly, averse to
the very idea.
Much of the mechanics of nature occur on an unconscious level where a
mind can be totally unaware of them and, oftentimes, totally surprised by
them. It is possible to think in one way and act in a manner that contradicts
it, just as it is possible to be shocked by your own actions when they
confront conscious moral and social values and beliefs and what your self-
awareness.
Very few minds are fully aware of their own authenticity and actually know
themselves with any degree of accuracy.
Self-consciousness may be a universal human trait but not all possess equal
measures of it and fewer, still, have the courage to explore themselves fully
and honestly.
But more will be said about this compartmentalization later on.
Modern day practices, redefining a male as a caretaker and homemaker, are
the direct result of man‟s feminization where he has submitted to authorities
more powerful than himself and accepted a certain, contemporary, mode of
behaviour. A behaviour that is expected of him, even though it may go
against his very nature.
Males, in our modern era, have been urged to become mere variations of the
feminine type.
He must nurture his feminine attributes so as to become acceptable within an
environment that does not tolerate masculine antagonists to systemic power.
The earlier role as head of the family or as leader of the tribe has steadily
been made obsolete - proportionally to how the significance of brute strength
has slowly been replaced with technologies.
--- * ---
“MALE, n. A member of the unconsidered, or negligible sex. The male of the human
race is commonly known (to the female) as Mere Man. The genus has two varieties: good
providers and bad providers.” - Ambrose Bierce
The male type is obsessed by his need to control, to possess, and to be
independent and self-reliant; he is a natural sceptic and adversary of all that
binds him, restricts him or attempts to dominate him. It is this unyielding,
bold, male attitude that has lead to human dominion over nature and to
mankind‟s unquestionable successes throughout history.
With war and competitive struggle man has risen above the mud and
pronounced himself king of his world.
It is this spirit that has opened up frontiers for human exploitation and has
resulted in philosophical and scientific insight. Ironically it is also this
success that has made maleness expendable and unwanted within growing
social systems where a more disciplinable, humble, demure, malleable type
is more desirable.
The absence of accessible frontiers has exacerbated the process.
Contained environments lead to contained instincts.
Where there are uncharted, unconquered worlds, men become vital, but
where there is an absence of inquisitiveness and a presence of limitations,
imposed upon human action and thought, men become dangerous and
garish; primitive remnants of a bygone era – insufferable.
Unlike females, males are not just born into value and importance, by just
being a member of their sex, they must earn any respect and privilege they
enjoy or perish in the effort.
Sperm is so abundant that the male is more expendable.
It is this that drives men to higher and higher levels of mental and physical
perfection, and it is this drive that has stretched human existence to such a
breadth that it now threatens to separate him from his roots and through this
proliferation has thinned out his spirit.
Man, alone, is responsible for the condition of his species, since women will
go along with any moral or spiritual decision that dominates the minds of
men.
Because of this he becomes the creator of his own demise.
Feminization is, paradoxically, of a masculine design.
Nihilism is a male issue.
Extinction is a male challenge.
Is the male type a primitive expression of the human condition destined to be
lost or marginalized?
That remains to be seen.
One thing is for certain, where masculinity is extinguished so is the spark of
individuality, creativity, personality and un-harnessed curiosity.
In many species the male has been completely eradicated from the social
group and only plays a provisional role of seasonal inseminator. Afterwards
the males are destroyed and/or expelled, from the hive or the colony, to
preserve the more controllable, usable, malleable, submissive, female,
maternal, socially stable environment [Ants, bees, termites, wasps etc.].
Interesting also that where female dominance reigns, such as in the before
mentioned species, an absence of individuality and an instinctive
mindlessness, a lower grade consciousness, is the prevailing characteristic.
In all social species the males are either eradicated, emasculated, to some
degree or another, or expelled from the group.
Only one dominant masculine entity monopolizes the group‟s tolerance.
In this respect masculinity is always solitary and cannot openly coexist,
within the same vicinity, with one of his own kind.
Bad-Boy Factor
“I want a bad boy in public, and a pussy cat at home!” - Christina Aguilera
It is well known that confidence is a very attractive attribute, especially in
males, but few really comprehend why this is so.
The foundation of confidence is indifference to particulars and a poise
derived by the, relative, certainty that eventual success is attainable.
For example, when attempting to find a job confidence is founded in the
sense of self-assurance that a job, if not this particular one, will be found
eventually, despite any ensuing failures.
Confidence is dashed, when and if it already exists, when repeated failures
make one begin to doubt this hypothetical certainty of success.
When confidence has not been produced, at all, it is usually due to a lack of
experiences that would nurture the sense of certainty.
The young are almost always lacking in self-confidence.
As a rule anxiety is the preliminary sensation of a mind confronting an
uncertain world with no experiences to lean on for support.
Fear is the primary emotion, because it is the first sensation of a conscious
mind when awakening to its reality, and all the unknown uncertainties it
entails.
Emotion, as a survival tool, can be considered the nexus where mind/body
awareness connect and are made compatible and integrated within a unity of
consciousness.
When we also take into account the fact that sensuality is outwardly focused,
we must come to the conclusion that an organism reaching a certain level of
sophistication, first is made aware of otherness, the unknown, before the
level is reached where self is made conscious by this reflection upon
otherness.
This can only mean that anxiety and fear is the primary sensation, since it is
the one immediately linked to the awareness of the alien unknown, and a
first emotion that offers the most direct primary survival benefits…such as
the fight/flight reaction.
Based on this, we can only assume that confidence or the overcoming of this
primitive reaction to the unknown and uncertain, is a development
dependent on the individual itself.
This confidence, in turn, is translated into physical composure, mental focus
and efficiency of movement, which desperation and anxiety lacks.
Self-confidence can also come across as grace, poise or elegance in
movement or in words.
In fact it is power exhibiting itself through indifference and control.
This self-assurance is, in fact, a degree of empowerment based on
experiential data or a self-conscious evaluation of one‟s own value in
relation to the other. It may be, and often is, distorted by an overestimation
or underestimation of personal potential which may not correspond to
actuality but, nevertheless, it still produces, whether accurate or not, the
same air of self-reliant, fearlessness.
This distinction between false or correct estimation of possibilities, that
breeds certainty or uncertainty, is no different than the distinction between
bravery based on ignorance as opposed to bravery based on gnosis – the
former being a similitude dependent on the observer‟s ignorance concerning
the actor‟s awareness of the dangers involved, and the latter being actual
courage based on a deeper awareness of the dangers, whether this is
recognized, by an observer, or not.
For instance, reservations may be a product of a cognition while unreserved
gregariousness may be a product of crassness and an absence of self-
consciousness, coming forth as gallant extroversion.
Within a social context shyness is, most often, a result of self-consciousness
- the propensity to perceive one‟s self as if through the eyes of another, and
be affected by it as an unknown factor, an alien judgment, upon one‟s well-
being.
An uncertain factor that stresses the mind.
In this case confidence can either be a result of being indifferent to this
perspective, through understanding, or, as is most often the case, a result of
being totally oblivious to it, lacking the imagination to project one‟s self to
this extent or being totally ignorant of all the possible repercussions of the
other‟s judgment upon one‟s own well-being.
If reticence can be interpreted as a kind of fear of the other‟s judgment then
the unabashed can be explained as being too uninformed to even consider
another judgment or, in the best case scenario, a consequence of having
overcome caring about it – being independent from it.
The two should not be mistaken as being alike, even if their outward
manifestations may appear similar.
--- * ---
That confidence relies on indifference may be a difficult concept to accept,
for some, especially in matters of sexual intimacy where love, compassion,
trust, respect and interdependence are considered to be the romantic ideal,
but nevertheless I believe evidence abounds as to its veracity.
The “bad-boy” factor is a case in point.
It is evident, to all that understand the sexual and social connotations of the
“bad-boy” and his seductive appeal. The brash, swaggering and often
abusive confidence, that makes these males irresistible to females, is rooted
in a general apathy caused by an overabundance of sexual options. For
certain men, that can have their pick of women, the specific woman becomes
irrelevant, making them confident and arrogant enough to display their
uninhibited character and individual personality with little regard as to the
consequences.
In this category we must also include the male that is indifferent to sex,
altogether, with similar results.
For females, that are genetically predisposed to seek out resources and
genetic health, this aspect of maleness becomes magnetic, because it also
reveals a male‟s marketability and desirability. When a male has multiple
sexual options then he must be an asset worth considering; whereas when he
has limited choices then his obsession with a particular female, far from
remaining flattering, becomes unattractive and even repulsive.
His need repels as anything that reaches displays a need that contradicts its
power – the master/slave relationship.
True power is detached from those that are drawn to it.
This will also explain a peculiar aspect of adultery where males, that are
married or attached somehow, become more attractive to females just
because they are taken.
The attraction of weakness to strength is, often, incomprehensible when one
studies it from the objective distance of a non-involved bystander.
It is ironic that women find men attractive who are, relatively, uninterested
in them as individuals, and find men unappealing that are infatuated with
them - the “nice guy” they want to remain friends with but have no actual
sexual interest in.
The “nice guy” makes himself constantly available as an alterative, a second
choice, a settling, or as a device.
His utility stems from his reliability.
He is a woman‟s last option, her compromise, and he consciously, or not,
accepts this as his only hope.
It is no different than the role subordinate males play within other
mammalian social groups.
The primary strategy of these inferior males is to offer themselves up as
useful allies or supporting elements in exchange for sexual favours.
The function of intercourse is given an additional dimension within this
social context.
This confuses the difference between intercourse as a result of sexual
attraction, based on genetic predispositions, and that of intercourse that is
necessitated by social dynamics and represents a necessary compromise –
practicality.
It is also noteworthy to mention that in a more general application of the
indifference rule, our success is inversely proportional to our need.
The absence of anxiety, concerning the outcome, offers the benefit of
increasing one‟s focus on the action itself.
It is also called, in reference to sporting performances, the zone.
A state of heightened concentration.
Life itself, when the matter of death is overcome and a general indifference
to mortality is achieved, becomes more enjoyable and rewarding. When we
frantically deny death and find clever ways to ensure immortality through
religion, for example, we display the desperation and uneasy strain that
restricts life and limits our existence.
“Happiness belongs to the self-sufficient.” - Aristotle
To “not care” does not mean to “not value” but it does mean to be
“independent from” all evaluations but your own. This independence
displays itself in confidence, pride, self-reliance and an overall contentment
that others will perceive intuitively and, wishing to share in it, be drawn to
its alluring power.
Nice Guys Last
“Win any way as long as you can get away with it. Nice guys finish last.”- Durocher
From the start we must admit that the idea of “nice” is a subjective term.
Its definition reliant on personal tastes and interests.
But because social unities and cultures, in particular, formulate and mould
both interests {interests being inter-relations based on mutual benefit and
within the context of learned value systems} and perspectives {perspective
also being taught and promoted within the context of particular ideals and
ideas} then we can conclude that “nice” can be a culturally and socially
defined term which can then be shared, like a communal truism, by all those
indoctrinated within the ideals and ideas of the social system and of the
culture.
We must conclude, then, that all individuals will tend to become, whether
willingly and consciously or not, a valued and “normal” member of a group,
by submitting to the group's rules and value systems.
Those that cannot or will not, suffer the consequences of group ostracizing,
expulsion and/or quarantine.
Isolation and peer pressure play their part.
For the purposes of this thesis the concept of “niceness” will be taken as a
socially imposed ideal of conformity and assimilation. Conformity to a
common ideal and to a shared evaluation of what is communally beneficial
and based on an assimilation of the individual within shared value judgments
and prejudices as they are produced by the sheltering effect of unification.
--- * ---
It is evident that not all men are created equal, meaning that in each
individual there can be found similar drives, talents, characteristics and
dispositions, commonly found within a particular species, but always in
unequal degrees and with a dissimilar intensity.
The intensity is determined by genetic backgrounds (nature - potential) and
environmental conditions that decide how much of this genetic potential is
allowed or manages to flourish (nurture – possibility).
This delineation creates the multiplicity of individual personalities we often
associate with individuality.
From this we can assume that each individual will react differently, in scale,
to a given social/cultural environment, and in association with his/her own
predispositions.
Consequently we are lead to the proposition that one male, a hypothetical
one, will exhibit a more pronounced or less controlled resistance or
willingness to submit to an authority and/or to an environmental limitation
than another.
This degree of resistance will establish how harmonious or troublesome his
incorporation within the environment will be, but also on what level he will
understand and become conscious of it, because curiosity is a form of
resistance to what is not known.
If he is gifted by nature, exhibiting the “correct” attributes for the particular
environment, and has the good fortune to develop these gifts adequately,
then his adaptation will be easy and the environment will reward him
without restraint.
In the area of sex, particularly, (s)he will need very little effort to become
successful and to remain satisfied. This ease will make him/her positively
inclined towards the environment and not too deeply involved in it or
interested in the mechanics underlying it.
Necessity being the mother of all invention.
Because sex, as was stated, is an integral part of the human condition, it is
obvious that sex, and all its connecting mutations, becomes a very important
part of what humans call “happiness”.
But let us turn now to the less fortunate and less genetically endowed.
Here things become more complicating because the individual must not only
deal with and overcome his own deficiencies but do this within the
limitations, restrictions and rules the environment places in front of him.
In this area intelligence becomes decisive.
Adaptation to the social/cultural environments is benefited by understanding
and a conscious strategy, if it is coupled with self-awareness and self-
discipline that can result in success.
Duplicity and imitation being tactics most favored by self-consciousness that
finds itself unable to fully express itself.
An individual may express an agreement with the status quo as a method of
reaching its goals when this agreement may not be actual or honest, and
merely selective and incomplete.
If very little intelligence is present in the individual, either due to a genetic
past or the absence of an environment to produce and cultivate it, the
individual is forced to completely submit to the environmental conditions by
adopting its premises intuitively and by accepting a subordinate role without
question and even less resistance.
There is no resistance because there is no awareness of an alternative
derived either through imagination projecting into the future the probabilities
of personal preferences or by discovering and projecting into the future an
idealized past or inherited principles.
The absence of imagination - intelligence - becomes crucial.
In this case an agreement with the norm will be complete, and not
duplicitous, and the individual will use it as evidence of its social fitness and
desirability as a full participant in the group, then called “health” or
functionality or normality.
Submission will often act upon the psyche as a self-regulating force which
requires no observer to keep the mind disciplined to established premises.
The individual will act in accordance to its adopted ideals and will remain
loyal to them even when there is nobody there to witness unfaithfulness.
This is an autonomous social mechanism.
When the individual mind is totally taken over by social and cultural
conventions very little regulatory control is necessary.
The mind becomes its own judge and jury and will, often, suffer from pangs
of guilt or shame, if it ever submits to the repressed instincts that linger on
the background.
In the area of feminism, especially in modern western cultures, such males
will display a total agreement with the egalitarian values represented through
them and which mirror general systemic morals. Men will consider these
principles self-evident and they may become an even more fervent defender
of them than women who benefit from them more directly.
In a way this fervor will become a display of memetic fitness and a personal
agreement with popular beliefs which may benefit his chances of
reproductive success.
How all this plays out and how a male finds his place within an environment
that restricts and controls his natural male character traits and how this
produces the culturally defined “nice guy” follows from the before
mentioned.
Few males will have access or gain access to female sexual acquiescence in
a world where females regain their natural sexual powers. Males will either
be fortunate enough to display the markers of genetic quality, which, despite
false piety, few women can ignore, or they will try to develop what fitness
markers they already possess to their fullest.
The vast majority, lacking these genetic markers to any noteworthy degree,
will opt, instead, to develop social/cultural markers of memetic fitness to
compensate.
A very few will try to combine both tactics to increase their odds.
If wealth is such a compensating marker of memetic fitness, then the pursuit
of money becomes a self-identifying, surrogate method of attaining sexual
desirability. The male will, either consciously or subconsciously, exhibit his
social value through displays of prosperity that represent his access to
resources. This access to resources becomes attractive to women concerned
with their offspring‟s health and viability within a given environment.
This is more evident in more mature females who must place their
immediate sexual preferences in the background and focus more on practical
considerations that entail an element of compromise.
Here we can witness the female conflict between instinctive attraction to a
natural ideal and her realistic considerations added to her total assimilation
within manmade social/cultural environments; a conflict that often confuses
males.
Most females, of course, remain oblivious to the nature of their own inner
conflict, simply feeling it and, perhaps, only intuitively understanding it.
Under these conditions the less fortunate, genetically inferior male is forced
by circumstance to become more accessible, more understanding, more
polite and moral and tolerant and politically-correct and… nice.
Nice being an expression of a non-threatening and easy-going pleasant
demeanor.
We consider positively what most benefits us within a given context and we,
accordingly, label it.
--- * ---
Just as civility is forced upon the individual through the threat/reward and
indoctrination/education mechanisms of culture and society, so do inferior
males avoid conflict with those they cannot compete against by repressing
the parts in them that will result in such conflicts and inevitable defeats.
This happens usually by conveniently redefining such raw competitions as
“uncivilized” or as being beneath the morays of a modern man.
The inferior will adopt more indirect, insidious and duplicitous strategies –
in other words, more feminine ones.
If the repression is total and consistent over a long period of time then his
more passive demeanor becomes part of his identity and is passed onto his
offspring as an example to be imitated.
Here the inferior attempts to survive by becoming useful, or seemingly so, to
those who dominate and are in positions of authority or from whom he needs
something in return.
The well-adapted, submissive, more tolerant, “nice guy” becomes the
example of complete surrender to systemic authority and so he gains socially
what he lacks naturally.
Society and all its supportive elements become, for this reason, of paramount
importance to him. He wants to retain the premises and circumstances that
offer him a chance for reproductive success and for genetic fulfillment, and
so he will become a staunch supported of his nation, his culture, his religion
or any institution participating in the maintenance of his environment.
His stability and dependability – both being social virtues for obvious
reasons – make him attractive to more mature females who having sewn
their instinctive seeds in youth and experiencing a hormonal decline and an
energy decrease in their later years, are more prone to now consider practical
considerations rather than instinctive ones.
Sexual animal attraction and lust is replaced by thankfulness or appreciation
– which is subsequently translated into agape – and the “nice guy” male
becomes like a friend the woman shares sexual intimacy and comfort with,
as a secondary concern which can result in additional offspring - this being
the reward to the subservient male for all his efforts.
And so genetic weakness is propagated.
All this is obviously based on how particular social systems develop.
In current western cultures the decline of the extensive family has made the
dependence on friends and sexual mates all the more important.
In more natural environments the female's offspring were guaranteed some
protection by the group, the tribe as a whole, and so she was less reliant on
her mate‟s direct involvement.
The group became a protective umbrella against the other or against nature,
but who will defend her and her children against the members of the group
itself?
Natural threats, such as predators and climate, have become less relevant and
only the threat imposed by the others of one‟s own group are all the more
immediately pertinent.
--- * ---
Interrelationships and group dynamics produce alliances and sub-groupings
within the social group and with the exclusion of nature and otherness from
immediate consideration the otherness of the alien unknown is replaced by
the otherness of the known.
This results in social fragmentation where as group sizes increase and no
external threat forces community loyalties there occurs an internal
splintering.
With the fragmentation of social and, sometimes, institutionalized
relationships - such as the extended family - the female becomes more
dependent on close relatives and a mate for support, if she lacks other
supportive relationships.
Thusly in cultural environments where extended families are in decline - not
to mention nuclear ones - and where grandparents and parents are often
excluded from the circle of intimate supportive elements, the individual
female, wanting children, becomes more reliant on the male mate who also
serves as a second mother and friend. If and when this relationship falls
apart she quickly seeks to replace him with a surrogate, “good enough”
alternative - a nice guy that will provide both sustenance and a stable, safe,
consistent environment for her children.
The divorce rates can be attributed to the female's instinctual attraction to
males that are the least able to conform to social and cultural ideals -
especially in youth with its pure naïve, instinctive thoughtlessness. This
because egalitarianism produces a type of female more demanding and, due
to the sheltering effect of institutional power, more confident and less
respectful.
She expects a type of socially and culturally ideal male that goes against
masculine instincts and primordial predispositions and the system supports
her in this because it also satisfies its needs.
Combined families are a result of this. As divorce rates increase, and due to
the systemic pressure to consume and to produce, the individual seeks a
mutually beneficial compromise - a partnership based on practical economic
considerations.
Homosexuality
“Every male that sniffed a female was reported as sex, while anal intercourse with
orgasm between males was only „revolving around‟ dominance, competition or
greetings.” - Bagemihl, Bruce
As a social phenomenon, homosexuality can only be considered a naturally
occurring mutation adapted into social behaviour and hierarchical sexual
dynamics – a genetic alteration that finds a place within human groups, and
so manages to survive, as a supportive ingredient to heterosexual
reproduction.
Hormonal imbalances may account for a tendency that is then nurtured into
fruition by the right conditions; a consequence of pre-existing factors
activated by existing factors.
One additional existing factor, besides the ones described in this thesis, is
the increase of hormones in food and water supplies, such as the ones being
measured in our modern world.
We can define the attraction to one‟s own sexual type and the, subsequent,
copulation of same-sex couples as a parasitic sexual mutation, because it
relies on heterosexuality, and the subsequent unfit mutations this may
produce, to come into being. It has no way of replicating itself
independently. In fact, its very essence is a contradiction to the very purpose
of sexual reproduction – a genetic dead-end.
Some have taken the existence of homosexual displays in other social
species as an indication of its viability and respectability.
They neglect to consider the fact that in these displays no penetration
actually occurs, as it does in many homosexual encounters between human
males and, with the usage of devices, amongst homosexual females. These
homosexual simulations of heterosexual intercourse, amongst other species,
are mostly stress relieving activities meant to diffuse conflicts within the
group by reasserting communal balances through harmless power
exhibitions.
It is a rarity that these symbolic homosexual couplings, between members of
other social organisms, are exclusive. At the very most we can only say that
there is a bisexuality observed. A bisexuality which appears to be part of the
normal rituals of social encounters and group dynamics.
But beyond these points the most obvious is that when we discuss social
behaviours, we are not excluding other species from our analysis and we
must include all social behaviour in our conclusions.
The same demands placed upon a member of a human group must be
considered to hold true for any other social creature, even though the
complexity of the human mind and, subsequently, the relationships created
with human interactions are of a different quality and so are much more
elaborate.
Nevertheless, we can safely say that there is no “alternative life style”
present, when we are talking about homosexuality in other species or in most
similar human encounters; the act itself is not really an expression of sexual
attraction.
It is an expression of dominance and submission, and a reassuring
demonstration that continuously reappraises group dynamics, thusly
avoiding more costly physical conflicts.
When the previous does not hold true, then the exception must be explained
as being the consequence of hormonal imbalances and genetic mutations
triggered by particular environmental conditions, such as the ones being
discussed.
--- * ---
“History shows that male homosexuality, which like prostitution flourishes with
urbanization and soon becomes predictably ritualized, always tends toward decadence.” -
Camille Paglia
It is scientifically verified that males dominated by another male suffer a
decrease in testosterone levels and that otherwise monogamous species are
made to abandon their mates if injected with this potent hormone.
We can only imagine what this means within male populations that are
pressured to submit to the dominion of institutional authorities, often
projected through representatives with uniforms, the appropriate, socially
sanctioned, credentials and mountains of bureaucratic paperwork.
The consequences of a prolonged emasculation, and sense of helplessness
have not been appropriately or thoroughly investigated.
The possible reasons for this oversight or the incomplete analysis concerning
all the factors involved, are not difficult to comprehend.
Any exploration of anything that confronts common mythologies or
contradicts systemic norms, risking peace and stability – not to mention the
careers of anyone who dares to challenge political-correct mythology and
existing power brokers - would be highly unlikely to be anything anyone
would bother with, or would gain any attention or any funding, if (s)he so
chose to accept the costs.
Particularly in an age of pseudo-individuality, the chances of any such
occurrence diminish.
Science, becoming more and more dependent on grants and on external
sources of funding, loses its free-thinking edge, and only focuses on socially
useful money-making innovations, and on insights that steer clear of
anything that contradicts communal cohesion and the superstitions and
prejudices that glue a nation-state together.
--- * ---
Feminization begins at an early age when boys, as well as girls, are taught,
beginning with preschool, that certain types of innate behaviours are
undesirable and punishable.
Classes are not segregated giving off the impression that these two different
biological types do not require dissimilar handling due to dissimilar energies
and attitudes.
Reversely, the social myth that it is femininity and masculinity which is
taught in schools and by parents, and that these behaviours are learned rather
than innate, comes to be the communal tale that reinforces the absurdity that
sexuality and gender roles are something which must be trained into a mind,
when the opposite is true.
By fabricating this error and then promoting it through pop-culture and
constant repetition, the idea that all of nature, all of the past, can be
overcome by denying it, becomes a way of erasing all sense of identity
which is not directly connected to systemic utility.
And so, natural occurring behaviours, unable to be repressed totally, are
redirected into alternatives where some forms of it are allowed, within
strictly controlled conditions.
In this way the child awakens to the fact that its will is not totally free and
that some of its natural tendencies will result in a reprimand or, if allowed
some expression, will be watched over by referees that will make sure a
certain “line” of culturally established acceptability is never crossed – no
taste of blood is offered to a domesticated dog used to protect the herd.
In systems using more refined methods of population control and guided by
an equalization agenda, such as modern day western ones, the
training/education of young boys and girls becomes increasingly
desegregated, thusly constructing a more uniform behavioural standard
which further blurs the natural sexual behavioural distinctions and potentials
under mounds of compulsory standards of etiquette and political-correctness.
When, in the past, sexual roles were directed towards different, from the
present, social symbolisms and activities that benefited the system of that
time, today the symbolisms alter and any differentiation, along those lines
are curbed as not useful and so “primitive”.
Uniformity is the goal here, and so the underlying premise is that nurturing
brings out the “authentic” self, whereas nature represents the artificially
produced element.
A dualistic fabrication concluding in the error that nurture is other than
nature and that nature can be “corrected” within one lifespan and by simply
denying its effect upon the mind.
When the effects seeped through the culturally fabricated defences, they are
called “disease” and/or dysfunction.
The premise, purposefully, promoted is that a mind comes into being as a
clean slate, Locke‟s erroneous tabula rasa, void of all pre-existing
determinations and of all functions. A premise that satisfies the systemic
need for self-repression, where any divergence has to be made into
something one must feel ashamed about.
Generations of children being raised to feel guilty for being human and for
being as they are and as their heritage made them to be.
Hebrew shame that is supposed to make man bow to some “perfect”
idealized Man-God, before which they are motivated to feel like nothing and
to try to make amends for it, as their way into the promised land.
As a result males begin acting and thinking as females and females as males,
as these roles are prescribed and defined in accordance with cultural ideals.
Then the culturally enforced commonalities in behaviour and performances
are presented as evidence of the non-existence of naturally occurring sexual
discrepancies and these commonalities are called “moral” and/or
“civilized”.
Here is how this trick works:
Gender roles are defined by cultural needs, giving them symbolisms and
limitations….then altering morays point to these past repressed fabrications
and symbolisms as artificial – which they partially are - and present
replacement symbols and roles as pure….conveniently neglecting to explain
how the original social gender roles came to be and implying that anything
that places a limit on individual potential is a cultural fabrication.
This is a memetic self-referential process which tries to exclude, once again,
nature and/or prehistory from the analysis.
The goal here is to produce the illusion of self-determination which can then
be exploited to create the ideal citizen.
For most, the vast majority in fact, this is an attractive notion, since nature is
never just and natural selection is not c concerned with individual feelings
and hopes.
In a world where weakness flourishes, it is logical, that anything that offers a
relief from the awareness of this unavoidable weakness would serve as a
way of placating the masses and relieving their existential anxieties.
--- * ---
In later years the sufficiently indoctrinated male is forced to whine and
complain, when he is insulted or even challenged by a mere child, just as
any other child or female would.
The eradication of all his inherited advantages is made complete, as he is
forced, by the rule of law or some moral imperative or some ethical
standard, to behave within acceptable social norms…the illusion of
uniformity is established as options are limited to a few and then presented
as proof of equal potentials.
A male‟s only option is to go through the “correct” procedures, use the
“right” authorities to find justice, to protect his self-esteem, self-interests,
and/or his pride - an emasculating affair to say the least.
His status within the group is one of equal standing and so his particular
traits and strengths and talents do not matter – unless they can be put into
use for the benefit of the whole and so garner acknowledgments and the,
subsequent, benefits this entails.
His distinction is only possible in reference to and in deference of the system
he belongs to as a member.
“The end of the human race will be that it will eventually die of civilization.” - Ralph
Waldo Emerson
The civilized man is man with no distinction. His greatest attribute is that he
remains tolerable to his fellow human beings and keeps within his
community‟s customs and comfort zones.
Under these strictly enforced conditions the male becomes a proxy female
and so homosexuality turns into another exhibition of this sexual uniformity
where the differences between a male and a female, as produced by natural
necessity, are denied relevance and full expression.
This emasculation may account for the hormonal effects that increase
homosexual inclinations.
--- * ---
“What's the point of being a lesbian if a woman is going to look and act like an imitation
man?” - Rita Mae Brown
The phenomenon of female homosexuality is no different than that of male
homosexuality, only here any display of increased masculinity is never
consummated or allowed to exceed, again, a certain limit.
The imitation is superficial and only allowed a sexually ineffective role – a
symbolic role – as in the case of heterosexual adult males.
A female homosexual may dress, walk, talk, and behave as a male, but she
will not, necessarily, think like one. The same restrictions apply to her, as
they do for heterosexual males.
Her surrender to the dominant male entity is never in doubt.
Her “masculinity” is trivial, even if she may be attracted and may engage in
sexual activities with members of her own sex, and exaggerated, at times.
The sex act, as was noted, has lost its severity and original purpose, and so
how it is used is of little consequence to the system.
As such, a homosexual female will be similar to an emasculated
heterosexual male in many ways – in other words she will be no different
than the vast majority of effeminate males - uniformity.
They are all, similarly, superficially male.
Their masculinity will be pretentious, a play using imagery and carefully
maintained masks, while the actor remains unseen, oppressed, covered up
and lost in the role (s)he has been taught to play; directed and given lines to
mouth as his own; a shallow manhood based on the simple assumption that a
male is only in reference to whom he is attracted to sexually, just as a negro
is assumed to be a simple reference to skin coloration.
Masculinity is reduced to a facsimile. Engorged muscles and swollen penises
used as allegorical references to what is no longer there or not allowed to
express itself fully.
This simplification of a concept, besides serving as a way of demeaning it, is
meant to reduce it to its most base elements so as to make it easily
reproducible.
Thusly the idea of race is reduced to its most obvious marker, that of skin
color, and/or external appearance, which is easily reproducible.
It is then demeaned, as unimportant, even if it does constitute a component
exposing a heritage where genetic isolation had occurred, and is indicative
of a period where one‟s ancestors experienced a variance in environmental
conditioning.
Similarly the concept of masculinity is reduced down to its base external
manifestations which can be replicated and imitated by just about anyone.
The hereditary, biological elements are discarded as social constructs, and
repressed, and so the entire process of avoidance depends on dualistic
thinking, selective reasoning and the overemphasis of nurturing effects.
A conscious will imposes itself upon the authenticity and directness of an
appearance, the apparent, and it paints it over with layers of fabricated
symbolisms, training it into consistent and continuous imitation – a
caricature.
Then to add insult to harm, it calls the original appearance, the one painted
over and suppressed, the “inauthentic” self, the primitive self, and all the
man-made additives, the modern inventions it labels the “purest”
representation of identity…and a Brave New World is constructed.
--- * ---
In a world where reproduction does not face the same natural limitations of
fitness, but is guaranteed as a “right” and as a reward for remaining loyal to
the idea and the ideal of the institution, genetic mutations increase
proportionally to population growth and as the consequences of genetic
unfitness being sheltered and helped to flourish.
It is logical to assume that along with all other kinds of harmless, to the
system, mutations, homosexuality or the genetic predispositions to it, would
increase exponentially and would find fertile ground to take root in an
environment where sexuality becomes an unwanted identification trait from
a past which is to be replaced with modern human ideals – the primal man
being replaced by the civilized man…the idea of man.
Since the sexual roles have become relatively unimportant and are now only
allowed symbolic significance within a world that demands ubiquitous
submission to its newly formed values, it is evident that the biological sex of
the individual is secondary to what part (s)he chooses to play, as the only
thing mandatory is that the System‟s stability is never at risk.
Consequently the sexual activities of an individual are insignificant to the
system, as long as its premises remain unchallenged.
It is, actually, more beneficial to the cohesion of the System that this
biological category be done away with, as the only source of distinction
allowed comes through the System‟s necessities.
--- * ---
Feminization does not only affect male behaviours.
The modern day female has been similarly feminized, in that pampering and
over-protective environments, coupled with social preferences for the ideal
feminine type, have produced in her an exaggerated prissiness and inflated
delicacy; her helplessness becomes her mating call and her spoiled
demanding expectations become her price.
A female‟s obsession with her look is cultivated as her only avenue towards
empowerment.
Sex, for her, becomes a tool for social ascension, because it has lost all
gravity.
“Romance is the glamour which turns the dust of everyday life into a golden haze.” -
Eleanor Glyn
The finicky genteelness of hyper-femininity is a symptom of this social
process, an exaggerated remnant of a Romantic Age, just as Metrosexuality
and Hyper-Masculinity is in men a product of this Modern Age.
Metrosexuality confuses things further. Males living in urban settings lose
all contact with nature, particularly their own nature, and pressured by
changing female preferences – themselves the product of social conditioning
– adopt the adolescent, self-indulgent personas of urbanites.
Beauty becomes important when all you have left of your masculinity is the
look; all the outer regalia with none of the inner qualities.
In aesthetics a gradual shift is occurring.
The ideal male appearance is one of clear adolescence, almost girlish, form –
a man-child.
An ideal worshiped by fashion gurus and marketed as the perfect
hermaphroditic figure.
All indications of a primitive past are deemed passé and uncouth. Too
noticeable to be tolerated.
Chest hair gives way to the clean boyish look of a smooth, immature
teenager…just as produce at the market is cleansed and shined to take on
this pristine look of unblemished, by reality, perfection.
The semblance of uniformity is established.
“Myths which are believed in tend to become true.” - George Orwell
Mediocrity increases when certain thoughts are forbidden or never allowed
to intrude upon the peaceful duplicity of social graces.
This is levelling at its best.
When behaviours and thoughts are rebuked when they exceed a social limit,
the individual walks a tight-rope between social conventions and personal
drives.
The contrived behaviour is often mistaken as genuine, even by the individual
who has played the part for so long, has been thoroughly indoctrinated
within the culture, has forgotten or repressed himself to such a degree, that
the act itself, his social persona, becomes his “authentic” identity – the only
identity (s)he knows and is permitted to play.
The environment has shaped the mind, by nurturing certain attributes and
allowing others to atrophy from neglect. But these withering traits are not,
yet, gone; they come forth in many subtle, and not so subtle ways.
In dreams, gestures, tones, and various psychosomatic effects, the inner
turmoil bubbles to the surface and many a man begin to wonder what it‟s all
about.
“The state calls its own violence law, but that of the individual crime.” - Max Stirner
Males having been turned into a substitute females, in all ways but one, must
now also play the part convincingly.
--- * ---
“The homosexual subculture based on brief, barren assignations is, in part, a dark mirror
of the sex-obsessed majority culture.” - George F. Will
Homosexuality becomes much more understandable when one takes the
previous into consideration. The social utility of this representational action
can be witnessed amongst such social species as the Bonobo ape.
Even though penetration may not occur, as it does not in any other species
expect for man, the symbolic mounting of another establishes a power
relationship where one states his position over another and the one being
mounted either accepts this statement of intent or resists it.
The stress relieving benefits of these mock acts of intercourse are produced
as an after-effect of this reassertion of power balances and power alliances
within a troop or a tribe, thusly avoiding the more dangerous and socially
unsettling actions of physical violence, and moderating the anxiety
generating uncertainty which all interactions bring about.
“It's about time we all faced up to the truth. If we accept the radical homosexual agenda,
be it in the military or in marriage or in other areas of our lives, we are utterly destroying
the concept of family.” - Alan Keyes
As in Bonobo social structures the role of sex, as an allegorical reference
point, becomes so important that individuals become obsessed with it.
The society becomes fixated with sex and sexuality.
When sex becomes paramount matriarchy takes over, as sex is the only
source of power a female has.
Make love not war.
A recipe for blissful stagnation.
When patriarchy is abstracted and removed from the internal workings of the
whole, femininity takes over.
No conflict will be tolerated.
All are consigned to female demeanours and activities and so all become
female in behaviour and thinking and only remain male in biology…in
appearance…in the external symbolisms.
The connection between appearance and essence becomes warped through
human intervention when memes enforce an aesthetic artificiality and the
gene lags behind in trying to adapt to the altering circumstances.
Given enough time and with undisturbed consistency and the pretence, the
repression, begins altering genetics to fit into memetic effects – feminization
is this slow adaptation of genes to memes that depend on feminine attitudes.
--- * ---
The homosexual agenda pushes the normality angle, trying to acquire the
same institutional support of marriage so as to garner the same benefits of
enforced respectability, normalcy and equal “rights”.
This “alternative lifestyle” is no alternative at all. It is an attempt to
harmonize a genetic sexual mutation within social uniformity.
Evidence of this is that the homosexual community does not try to present
itself as an “other than” but pushes the agenda that they too are just as
“normal”, just as average, as everyone else and not different in essence from
anybody else.
Mediocrity turns into an ideal to be emulated.
The goal is not differentiation but uniformity; standardization where sex is
made out to be a result of a particular taste, such as a preference of apples
over oranges, with nothing more to it than that.
Sex is made into nothing more than a product the masses have divergent
tastes for – one more commodity to be bought and sold.
System
“System (from Latin systēma, in turn from Greek σύστημα systēma) is a set of interacting
or interdependent entities, real or abstract, forming an integrated whole.
The concept of an "integrated whole" can also be stated in terms of a system embodying a
set of relationships which are differentiated from relationships of the set to other
elements, and from relationships between an element of the set and elements not a part of
the relational regime.” – Wikepedia
A system is a self-organizing emerging unity, attempting to stabilize and
complete itself within a universe in constant flow; a resistance to attrition,
the endless flow of temporality (change), establishing porous boundaries and
attempting to close them off (discriminate and isolate) so as to stabilize itself
against what threatens its cohesion and internal harmony.
An organism is but an example of such a system…and a superorganism, the
State or a Nation, is a continuance of the same founded on the assimilation
of the failed previous.
In the first case information stored and passed on as a genetic code, that then
establishes an inherited mode of self-organizing and of acting, represents the
essence of what an organism is.
In the second case information stored and passed on as memetic code, as
language and ideas, morays and ideals, represent the essence of what a
superorganism is.
The organism known as homo sapient is its fodder.
Like with all systems, a social system has its own habits by which it meets
its needs and creates the suitable, for it, participants that will ensure its
health.
An organization of this kind creates its own logic and has its own language,
its own interests, its own values and its own methods, which it shields
against external infections by creating the aforementioned porous boundaries
- its proverbial skin.
In doing so each union, organic or not, replaces or mutates past structures
and refocuses and redefines their premises, integrating them into its own or
dismissing them altogether – feeding/excreting: such is the cycle of life.
A superorganism, like any organism, distinguishes itself from the other, or
what is outside its wilful control through this restructuring of what is
available to it (resources) into preferred types; it discriminates between what
is and what is not useful to its primary goal of self-preservation, and then to
its secondary goal of self-growth, empowerment, self-expansion, as a
product of its excess energies.
This, too, mirrors the natural process of consumption and assimilation -
creation/destruction - dominance/submission.
--- * ---
“The economy‟s triumph as an independent power inevitably spells its doom, for it has
unleashed forces that must eventually destroy the economic necessity that was the
unchanging basis of earlier societies. Replacing that necessity by the necessity of
boundless economic development can only mean replacing the satisfaction of primary
human needs, now met in the most summary manner, by a ceaseless manufacture of
pseudo-needs, all of which come down in the end to just one – namely, the pseudo-need
for the reign of an autonomous economy to continue. Such an economy irrevocably
breaks all ties with authentic needs to the precise degree that it emerges from a social
unconscious that was dependent on it without knowing it.
„Whatever is conscious wears out. Once freed, however, surely this too must fall into
ruins?‟ (Freud)” - Guy Debord {The society of the Spectacle}
All systems have as their primary concern their own survival.
It is the reason why a centralized nervous system, a mind, evolves, and why
its abstracted counterpart, the institution, comes to be.
Everything outside this original primary need to preserve self, is of a
secondary concern and so is a derivative of an excess of energies directed
towards an object/objective which promises an indirect or eventual survival
benefit.
For example, once survival is ensured, for a period, the system, the emerging
unity, attempts to grow, to increase its power the dominion of its wilful
control, by focusing the energies in excess of what is required for its primary
concern.
These secondary concerns offer a long-term potential benefit and so can be
thought of as investments in possibilities, as these possibilities are dictated
by the present conditions and as they are perceived and understood by the
mind involved.
We can say that the only difference between primary and secondary interests
is one of immediacy and the compromises forced upon the unity‟s presence,
as dictated by its temporal character.
The awareness of the organism need not be engaged since many drives are
ingrained within the organism, or superorganism, as innate qualities based
on their previous success, and they are then passed on as instinctive
behaviours that do not have to be rationalized or understood.
Therefore, the motherly instinct, can be a formidable drive that overcomes a
powerful survival instinct, because it has a longer event-horizon as its
motivation. A mother may sacrifice herself for her child as a result of this
instinctual inebriation, overcoming, in this way, the immediate self-
preservation instinct; a metaphysical compromise due to the inevitability of
death and the shortcomings of cellular replication and cloning.
She is, in essence, increasing her partial long-term survivability by
sacrificing her immediate survival, and becomes an agent of life, by giving it
up.
This is made possible, on a conscious level, by broadening the sense of self.
The mother associates the child with her self and it represents, for her, an
extension of her identity, and a continuance after death – her partial rebirth
into new possibilities.
This sense of broadening self-identification also makes the association of
self with God or with a Nation State or with a Race or with an Idea/Ideal.
It is the premise by which humanism comes to be, replacing the more
stringent previous sources of identifying with a larger Self.
The mind is trained to overcome the original sense of identity with the
immediate self, the ego, the physical mental process of individuality, and is
taught to associate itself with a broader abstraction of Self, that does not face
the same immediate limitations.
The sensation is one of relief and casually referred to as “enlightenment”, as
it brightens the personal prospects by integrating it into a more long-lasting
and less critical concept.
The responsibilities, the costs and the risks associated with individual
survival are decreased in this shared identity where the death of the one does
not necessarily entail the death of the greater Self.
A sense of immortality is induced, and the absence of self-responsibility, as
the abstractions takes on all critical responsibilities, imbues the mind with a
feeling of well-being.
In this case fear, thinking and sensing is deferred to the community of
individuals and the one becomes childlike under the supervision of the
parental entity of the Otherness.
The parent, the father/mother, in this case the State or God or the Ideal Man,
lives vicariously through its offspring; its multifarious, expendable,
representations of its Identity.
Here we see the parallel but differing methods of self-preservation.
The parent, genetically, survives through the child, as the System,
mimetically, survives through its uniform individuations.
The replacement of genetic identifications, natural ones, with memetic
identifications, artificial ones, is finalized and made possible through this
degradation of all previous markers of fitness or of biological identification.
The sensation of relief is accompanied with a sense of enhanced possibilities
as the mind, using the denial offered, perceives itself as being unaffected by
what was, feeling like it has “overcome” it, and now feels free to choose on
its own.
Granted that the choices are offered by the very system that takes them away
and circumscribes them, in accordance with its own self-serving needs.
The sensation is a false one, as nothing can be overcome by simply ignoring
its determining effects upon us, and the “choices” available are unavoidably
connected to social utility.
The practice consists in using psychology to produce self-repression and
eliminate the more inefficient external repression, or force, to control the
minds of a very unruly species, such as the human one.
Once the past has been sufficiently slandered, degraded, ridiculed, sold as
primitive and debunked, and once the psychological sensation of relief has
been adequately exploited and directed, as is also done through many
religious dogmas, the mind is opened up to suggestion.
It‟s instinctive sense of “I” has been nullified and the void left behind begs
for certainty, fulfilment and guidance.
It has, now, been primed for reprogramming.
Specialization
“Much literary criticism comes from people for whom extreme specialization is a cover
for either grave cerebral inadequacy or terminal laziness, the latter being a much
cherished aspect of academic freedom.” - John Kenneth Galbraith
By trying to replace or restrict the influence of past natural environmental
affects upon man each system reshapes its parts into particular types,
experts, surrogate authorities, credentials and all, perfect for the given
group‟s fitness.
In many ways the expert can be considered the mouthpiece of established
ideals and “truths”, based on commonly accepted practices and sources of
“reliable” information and direction.
By positing the products of its own values as authorities on all and
everything, the system, in fact, redirects intellectual exploration back upon
itself and makes itself the reference point upon which all perspectives must
be measured.
This is what can be called specialization, or domestication when it comes to
alien organisms.
It is the end product of indoctrination, institutionalization and the
compartmentalization of thinking.
As domestication is the science of breeding species to produce more
efficiently and effectively a particular product necessary to the farmer, so
too is specialization a breeding of a particularly dedicated kind of mind to
more efficiently and effectively carry out a specific task or produce a
particular product, necessary to the system.
The individual is taught to contain and to deny certain impulses while
enhancing selective knowledge and awareness.
The mind is trained to be completely dedicated to carrying out a specific
task, and it is made to be interested in little else that does not add to the
carrying out of its duties.
It only cares about whatever promotes it in the eyes of others and what
offers it the opportunity to advance in importance and usefulness to the
group – the group being the totality of individuals completely dedicated to
serving the system in accordance to the system‟s values.
Because the individual now acquires its self-worth and identity from the
system directly its utility becomes a matter of great importance, as
dependence grows and survival becomes inexorably linked to the whole.
This devoted occupation is then rewarded according to market demand, and
market demand is directed by systemic forces and established institutional
requirements.
The job becomes a replacement for the self that has been lost or degraded
and shamed.
The association between the individual‟s productivity or service to the whole
and his sense of self is completed.
The personality of the individual is now linked to its service, and access to
resources is its ultimate compensation for work and unbending discipline.
“The general fact is that the most effective way of utilizing human energy is through an
organized rivalry, which by specialization and social control is, at the same time,
organized co-operation.” - Charles Horton Cooley
As systems grow their parts are forced into increasingly dedicated functions
and are, in this way, made even more dispensable.
Efficiency demands a cap on redundancy.
The value of the particular individual decreases when its only importance is
in how well it can perform one single task and make itself useful to the
organization.
“The scientist rigorously defends his right to be ignorant of almost everything except his
specialty.” – Marshall McLuhan
This focus entails a certain degree of favoured ignorance concerning the
general or whatever does not contribute to the mind‟s usefulness.
In many ways a greater awareness, a longer and broader event-horizon,
would inhibit its single-minded dedication and may lower the individual‟s
productivity.
The immediate must be held as paramount, so as to ensure quick reaction
times and predictable loyalties. The mind is made animalistic in its concerns,
materialistic and hedonistic, with no thought of a postponed gratification or
an investment on possibilities that may demand some immediate suffering.
The specialists mind must be held firm by work and not be allowed to stray
outside the boundaries that make him useful.
Leisure time is kept at a minimum, as “Idle hands are the Devil‟s tools”, and
the fires of ambition, especially the socioeconomic kind, are stoked,
motivating the individual into a constant state of activity and social
participation.
Resistance to this evenness is chastised using such epithets as: lazy or anti-
social or dysfunctional.
Peer pressure is utilized, as well as many other psychological means, to
force socially beneficial activities in individuals that are uninspired by
conventions.
Because the individual is now dependent on the system to acquire his/her
sense of self and self-worth, any detachment from communal goals and
ideals is accompanied with a sense of worthlessness and/or the horror and
solitude of self-realization and independence.
“For no continuity of social act is possible without a corresponding social status and the
many different kinds of act required in an industrial state, with its high degree of
specialization, make for corresponding classification of status.” - Kenneth Burke
Institutionalization
“There is no greater crime than to stand between a man and his development; to take any
law or institution and put it around him like a collar, and fasten it there, so that as he
grows and enlarges, he presses against it till he suffocates and dies.” - Henry Ward
Beecher
Institutionalization consists in the centralized regimentation of life and of the
organisms that participate in an association.
Individuality is lowered to the concept of a number, and time, another
division based on numerical values, is given a standard and a symbol.
Under these conditions temporality, the very essence of existence, is strictly
organized and given a value by the institution evaluating and measuring it
using the standard Good/Bad survival dualism.
The institutionalized mind is being trained to stick to timetables and
schedules and quotas.
The natural circadian rhythms are displaced and the equinox positioned
within an economic grid work of human “daylight savings time”.
Leisure is restricted and only begrudgingly allowed as a compromise to
biological limitations the flesh has yet to surmount.
The institutionalized mind is given a language, a code, a standard by which
it is expected to judge its progress and its significance.
The outside world is fenced-off, pushed to the perimeters, and made out to
be a source of anxiety and depravity.
Every aspect of the living experience is now dominated by the usual
institutional structures.
Every surface, every symbol, every stimulation and every reference point is
fabricated, painted over, redefined and redirected.
Anyone who has first-hand experience of the more obvious institutionalizing
formats of prison and/or the armed forces, different only in subtlety, will
find an even more faint difference between all kinds of similar
organizations, and their methods.
The only difference between a prison, let‟s say, and a social system is that in
the former the dominion of the Systemic Will over the individual will is
direct and it is, purposefully, made overt, whereas in society the illusion of
liberty is cultivated as a way of maintaining intractable discipline and the
control is concealed beneath pretences.
“But certainly for the present age, which prefers the sign to the thing signified, the copy
to the original, representation to reality, the appearance to the essence…illusion is only
sacred, truth profane. Nay, sacredness is held to be enhanced in proportion as truth
decreases and illusion increases, so that the highest degree of illusion comes to be the
highest degree of sacredness. – Feuerbach, Preface to the second edition of The Essence
of Christianity
Just as with all institutionalized minds, its habituation to the comforting
safety of a controlled environment makes them reluctant, in time, to leave its
premises and venture out into the uncertainty of a world that follows no
manmade rules and knows of no justice.
Ownership
This obsession with materialism, particularly in the west, has come at the
expense of all other human endeavours and, serving the demands of a
particular system, has resulted in a loss of human distinctiveness, spirituality
and natural interconnectedness.
No longer do men relate to each other as honest, thinking, feeling human
beings, connected with all of creation intimately, they relate to each other
more as indistinguishable consuming gluttons, protective maintainers of that
which is owned, and as duplicitous misers.
In this world of affluent superfluity human beings relate to each other as
mere numbers, graphs, statistics. They respect their neighbours or “love”
them, not because they know them or care to do so, but because they are told
that this is the “right” thing to do and that this will guarantee the other‟s
reciprocity.
Nature and our direct engagement with it falls further back.
“Land: A part of the earth's surface, considered as property. The theory that land is
property subject to private ownership and control is the foundation of modern society,
and is eminently worthy of the superstructure.” - Ambrose Bierce
The very concept of possession, that results in this prosperous worthlessness,
is based upon an exploitation that produces these hierarchies of exclusivity.
Monogamy, itself, is an extension of this mythology of “exclusive rights”
that is founded upon the exploitation of human sexual energies.
All “rights” being ensured by the system itself and having no relevance
outside it.
This guarantee of “exclusive rights”, over a properties, resources and/or over
other human being, is provided by the organization that uses it to bind
individuals to its power.
Only with these assured “rights” can power be pooled and then passed on, as
a birthright.
In nature there is no such thing as guaranteed possession. Not even life is
truly owned by an individual but is only “leased”, metaphorically speaking,
and temporarily experienced.
In the end all must be returned to the primordial soup from which new
creations will spring forth and new unions will take place. Reality is a work
in progress with no final destination, making the very idea of tenure a
ridiculous farce only the very simple and needy would buy into.
The reward to the faithful.
Life, as we know it, is an aggressive act of will, an active process, that reacts
and maintains itself tenuously and consistently over a brief period before it
fragments into parts and is reabsorbed back into the endless flow.
No reassurances or guarantees. The progeny may inherit the material and
characteristics that proves effective, but are not granted as a birthright that
automatically ensures its well-being and power.
Like all manmade concepts, tenure and the delusion of entitlement suffer
from the desire to usurp universal rules, for practical and psychological
reasons, and so require a redefinition of reality.
This is where control over resources turns vital.
By controlling resources the system makes of itself a monopoly the
individual must surrender to before (s)he can be rewarded with the
necessities for life.
Resources and access to them is, for this reason, strictly controlled.
Possession is turned into a method of rule by proxy.
The Biblical Ten Commandments are, basically, a reinforcement of the rules
concerning ownership and of the rules concerning respect towards the
authority that defends these rules.
“ 1) Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2) Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.
3) Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
4) Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5) Honor thy father and thy mother.
6) Thou shalt not kill.
7) Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8) Thou shalt not steal.
9) Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
10) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house,.....nor anything that is thy neighbor's. “ -
Exodus 20:1- 17
No resource is allowed to be freely accessible.
Nature is blocked off and parceled.
Using this technique, of allotting privileges and accessibility to resources,
the individual is bonded within the dominance of the system that controls
and offers these resources as a compensation for good behaviour and
desirable contribution.
The individual is now unable to eat or drink without the permission of the
state, which offers titles of value only to those that submit to its dominion
and its monopolizing masculinity.
The resources can be available and the individual may need them, but (s)he
is prohibited, by a moral and state law or by a principle, to partake of them,
unless the proper conduct and procedures are followed.
All procedures being rituals of compliance and loyalty.
The innate desire to survive makes every mind easily swayed by anything
that promises its own continuance, either in the short term or, as in religious
promises for eternal life, in the long term.
Thusly, the training of the mind, which is already of questionable value, due
to rampant reproduction, becomes an easy affair.
--- * ---
The irony of it being that it is, today, possible to be amongst so much and
still be at risk of perishing from need.
From this sense of disconnection from the available, the political forces of
revolution and social upheaval cry out for “justice” and the liberal screams
for compassion.
But the system, as was said, has its own logic and giving in to the needs of
one would entail risking the needs of the system itself, upon which so many
are dependent and have already surrendered to.
Their sacrifice of free-will would be insulted if anything were to be given
away for free or without the prerequisite of some form of recompense, such
as grovelling.
Pretences must be maintained and the illusion of liberty demands that all
play along with the rules of the game that makes liberty a farce.
All, that is, except the institutions the system is founded upon. For them
special consideration must me provided, in the eventuality of failure,
because all are dependent on their successes, despite the fact that the system,
the capitalist one in particular, pretends to be founded upon free-markets and
friendly competitiveness.
The welfare state has not died, it has merely been denied to the expendable
monad, and freely offered to an ailing corporation or a failed association.
Compartmentalization
Using different standards within different contexts satisfies a psychology
that is driven by fear and wishes to believe in what offers it the greatest
relief.
Compartmentalization is the self-serving mechanism by which a mind
refuses to incorporate abstractions into one single logical whole, instead
choosing to use one set of rules in some instances while retaining the
possibility of using an entirely different set of rules in another - in
accordance with its changing self-interests.
It is another coping mechanism.
“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind
simultaneously, and accepting both of them.” - George Orwell
Compartmentalization is a necessary part of institutionalization, as a mind is
often asked to hold onto cultural beliefs and social ideals that contradict
natural inclinations.
For instance, the modern need to eliminate all designations that do not stem
from systemic sources and that results in some form of unwanted
discrimination teaches human beings that beauty, amongst other things, is
superficial and that appearances, in general, are not related, in any way, to
quality or to essence, whereas instinctively the mind is attracted to beauty
and uses appearances daily to evaluate others and phenomena as a method of
evaluating them.
The implication of the self-serving idea that all appearances are superficial
and not connected, in any way, to quality or essence or heritage, is that the
senses evolve for no other reason than to trick us away from reality, rather
than aid us in deciphering it.
This, in turn, implies a wilful, external motive or a reason which is never
clarified, except by constructing the concept of God or Spinoza‟s Deus.
This psychological phenomenon of rational selectivity is also obvious in the
Christian ability to exhibit reasoning and scepticism in all areas but the one
where it would prove disastrous to mental health.
Faith in a God, no matter how absurdly it is defended, promising eternity
and offering the feeling of empowerment through association, remains intact
no matter how many arguments are confronting it and exposing its
simplicity, whereas the slightest hint of doubt in all other contexts, is good
enough to dissuade the average Christian from investing too much credit on
its validity.
In one instance logic and reason is applied effectively in evaluating
probability, and in another it is completely discarded as inapplicable, when
the probabilities it exposes do not support an attractive belief in a premise
that provides so much unwarranted hope.
The sheer arrogance underlying the conviction that one, somehow, deserves
eternal life or is worthy of special consideration, just for being born and for
submitting to an irrational dogma, is only partially masked by the deception
of humility. Even a seemingly selfless act hides a selfish motive, and in this
case the selfishness beneath this faked selflessness is crystal clear to all but
the ones comforted by the idea that selfless acts are possible at all.
The anxiety connected to otherness, and the need to turn this unpredictable,
unknowable, consciousness into a benevolent force or, at least, into an
unthreatening ally, is what makes these convenient religious tricks so
acceptable to minds that suffer from an inability to cope with reality, as it is,
and that feel vulnerable because of this.
The notion that an alien consciousness, caring for its own well-being above
all else, would be automatically and positively inclined towards us and our
own well-being, is blatantly contradicted by natural selection and the
experience of existence.
All things considered, we can only conclude, beyond the benefit of the
doubt, that consciousness evolves to aid the organism, and all actions are
manifestations of self, and so selfish by definition.
Any self-sacrificing activities have already been given an explanation and
how and why they occur must be dealt with using reason and a courageous,
objective spirit, unconcerned with the outcome or with the implications of its
honest investigations.
A difficult thing to do, given that all actions, including thinking, are selfish
and motivated by what the mind finds advantageous within the contexts it is
aware of and within the horizons of awareness it is capable to perceive.
As such the simple mind, driven by a short-sightedness, will opt for the
solution that offers it the most immediate gratification and thus will choose
to remain delusional when it suits it.
This is the easy solution.
To be objective a mind must be capable of perceiving more long-sighted
ramifications and choose truth, no matter how immediately distressing and
unflattering it may be, so as to retain the potential of being able to use this
insight to gain a more long-lasting and profound contentment.
A more demanding solution.
Of course, to distract awareness away from the underlying anxiety driving
many popular absurdities forward, as “common truths”, anyone challenging
their self-serving childishness is accused of being motivated by fear and
anxiety, or just of being hateful and ill. The height of irony, intending to
defend the indefensible with a pre-emptive accusation.
We can witness this affect on human behaviour by studying the specific
systemic types created within different cultures throughout history. How
each directs sexuality, human nature and psychology defines the particular
characteristics of each culture‟s ideal man.
The idea that no ideology can be judged by its failures is like claiming that
no man can be judged by his. In fact, when we consider that the ideal is
unattainable, then the only way to judge a man and an ideal is by the
products of its principles.
--- * ---
The usage of direct threats and force, a staple in the days of old, has given
way, in modern times, to more subtle methods of population control. The
maintenance of a subtle, yet constant, state of psychological unease and the
method of indoctrinating the mind, from an early age, are part of this
strategy.
A nervous mind is an unthinking mind.
The Christian tradition goes as far as to baptize a child shortly after birth –
well before it has any choice in the matter and any ability to reason on its
own – imbuing it with the ideas of shame and sin that will burden it for the
rest of its life; modern day education consists in utilizing authoritarianism,
consistent repetition and peer pressures to infect young impressionable
minds with common prejudices and cultural mythologies that are meant to
keep it in step, for the rest of its life, with communal interests.
Free thinking is discouraged, unless it is dedicated towards a better
assimilation or towards something innocuous.
How can science then claim to be completely objective and void of any
social and cultural considerations, when even how one posits a question, or
that one asks at all the particular question, influences the answers one
receives or implies that an answer is required?
How can science claim to be completely objective when science has become
completely dependent on funding, when research is controlled by external
sources with their own motives, and when the personal repercussions to
anyone that dares ignore convention often result in self-censorship?
Where the theoretical separation of Church from State, those old allies in
power, is considered a modern day accomplishment, the separation of
Science from State is not yet considered problematic.
--- * ---
Using insights into primal human desires and how they are affected by
cultural conditions, modern methods of mass control have made the usage of
overt force a thing of the past, and a last resort.
Making the slave believe he is the master, or that he can be the master, is
just the current way authority imposes itself on the feebleminded.
Social mobility is but a compromise to human nature and it often demands a
higher cost than what it promises as a return.
Many, in due course, find the goals they were told were the highest to be less
fulfilling than they had imagined, and their aspirations but fabrications
meant to drive them into action, as a mule is driven by a whip, a carrot and a
whistle.
Sexual Revolution
“We must not allow ourselves to be deflected by the feminists who are anxious to force
us to regard the two sexes as completely equal in position and worth” - Sigmund Freud
The emancipation of women from the need for a male intermediary has had,
when one adds to it all the technological advances in reproductive controls,
some interesting social effects.
Males are now forced to compete, as they once did, for sexual satisfaction
and reproductive access, whereas they were guaranteed it, to an extent, with
the establishment of exclusive sexual partnerships.
The institution has gradually withdrawn its support until men find
themselves in a vacuum of uncertainty.
If we take into account all that has been said thus far then we are lead to the
realization that when the position of alpha-male is taken over by the
institution, whether this is the King or Government or Church, then all males
become, de facto, subordinate(d) males. Subordinate males that vie for
female attention and compete for female sexual favors, as they once did, by
making themselves as useful, to them, as possible or as close to the cultural
ideal as possible.
Controlled competition between loyal subjects is what produces progress
within the system, and so rivalry over the female‟s ovum becomes one more
human inclination to be exploited.
Modern methods of population control have made the old techniques of
integrating males into the fold and disrupting their normal sexual
competitions, a thing of the past. No such unrefined methods of forceful
domination are required when the same results can be produced with more
subtle manipulations of the human psyche.
The “old ways” are surpassed, not because they are regressive, but because
they are less shrewd and more disruptive.
What is overcome is the methodology of crowd control, not the necessity of
it.
Edward Bernays, the father of modern day marketing and propaganda puts it
this way:
"Ours must be a leadership democracy administered by the intelligent minority who
know how to regiment and guide the masses. Is this government by propaganda? Call it,
if you prefer, government by education. But education, in the academic sense of the
word, is not sufficient. It must be enlightened expert propaganda through the creation of
circumstances, through the high-spotting of significant events, and the dramatization of
important issues. The statesman of the future will thus be enabled to focus the public
mind on crucial points of policy and regiment a vast, heterogeneous mass of voters to
clear understanding and intelligent action."
…and…
"Our invisible governors are, in many cases, unaware of the identity of their fellow
members in the inner cabinet. They govern us by their qualities of natural leadership,
their ability to supply needed ideas and by their key position in the social structure.
Whatever attitude one chooses to take toward this condition, it remains a fact that in
almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our
social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number
of persons - a trifling fraction of our hundred and twenty million [USA 1920s] - who
understand the mental processes and mental patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the
wires which control the public mind, who harness old social forces and contrive new
ways to bind and guide the world."
--- * ---
Taking it all for granted is now at an end as females, released from their
previous sexual bonds, like any domesticated creature is released from its
harness, unleash the full force of their subdued instincts, necessitating an
equal adaptation in males who wish to win their favors.
The cruelty of genetic and social selection ensues and the female becomes
the instrument that best represents nature‟s ways.
Dionysian madness is reborn, but this kind is harnessed to Apollo‟s chariot.
Once more the few, gifted ones, will be chosen, as the many will wait their
turn, patiently trying to make themselves useful or valuable allies within any
social dynamic, and so procure some sexual access in this manner;
compensation is the logical alternative for those that fail to immediately
succeed, and sacrifices are part of the price.
This return to past sexual dynamics will be referred to as “progress”
amongst the socially libertarian sects. “Progress” being a liberal expression
describing anything that confronts the conservative status quo but that never
really threatens its fundamental principles.
“Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to
abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he
could ever be.” – Marshall, McLuhan
The foundational power structures of the system remain unaffected by this
conflict between preservation and innovation. All challenges are made under
the auspices of self-evident “truths” that cannot, and will not, be questioned
because both challenger and challenged benefit from them - holy “truths”
that should never be questioned.
Every four years, or so, the personification of power is replaced, offering the
illusion of change, when the powers that be are never confronted or even
known. The system wears a new face, takes on a slightly different demeanor,
pretending that corrections have been made to earlier mismanagements and
carries on as it was and will be, until it implodes under the strains of its own
decadence.
The distinction between liberal and conservative is that of champion and
contender.
The process itself is never denied, and anyone that dares to do so is labeled a
dysfunctional, sycophant, an infidel that cannot really hope to compete and
so excuses himself from the arena, or an eccentric spewing out conspiracy
theories and making a fool of himself.
It is a taunt that is meant to dismiss or to entice participation by using shame
and peer pressures.
Max Stirner comments on it thusly:
“Political liberty means that the polis, the State, is free; freedom of religion that religion
is free, as freedom of conscience signifies that conscience is free; not, therefore, that I am
free from the State, from religion, from conscience, or that I am a power that rules and
subjugates me; it means that one of my despots, like State, religion, conscience, is free.
State, religion, conscience, these despots, make me a slave, and their liberty is my
slavery. That in this they necessarily follow principle, „the end hallows the means,‟ is
self-evident. If the welfare of the State is the end, war is a hallowed means; if justice is
the sacred name, „execution‟; the sacred State hallows everything that is serviceable to
it.”
…and thusly…
“But, if the deserving count as the free (for what does the comfortable commoner, the
faithful office-holder, lack of that freedom that his heart desires?), then the „servants‟ are
the – free. The obedient servant is the free man!!! What glaring nonsense!”
--- * ---
Most will fail in this sexual game where women stand as judge and jurors, as
they have since time immemorial.
The compensation for failure may take on an overstated gaudiness that will
clarify the original inadequacies and come across as desperation. The needy
man will make of himself a fool or a servile imbecile, dancing about to draw
attention and prostrating himself before the object of his sexual desires to be
stepped upon.
His composure may not be attractive to a female but she will adjust her
preferences to meet her newfound wants.
Some few will succeed, using this overcompensation, as the caricature will
reflect a hyper-masculine cultural ideal, with all the requisite symbolic
paraphernalia of social resourcefulness and privileged accessibility.
The effeminate male becomes a useful alternative when no other is
permitted.
A practical concession.
In the absence of actual male role models, young males will imitate the
cartoon idols of pop-art and marketing schemes.
Muscles and penises will be inflated, chests and wallets puffed out, as the
effeminate nurture the symbols of their lost manhood with parodies of what
is not there.
The female regains her relevance, as her sexual compliance is no longer
guaranteed, and so the male is forced to devote much more time and effort in
seducing her.
He does so by meeting her culturally determined expectations and her muted
genetically determined desires. He makes of himself her puppet, and she but
the unconscious hand of systemic supremacy.
The househusband is born. A miasma of incongruent components, wearing
different guises, and threading a fine line of deceitful ludicrousness.
Buying her consent is the best way, when resources are the best indication of
fitness within any environment and, in particular, in a capitalistic system
where wealth becomes an indicator of loyalty to the State and so a reward
that proffers access to the best resource of all: female sexuality.
--- * ---
Culture has now become more and more sexually obsessed, and all aspects
of human interest are taken over by seduction and copulation.
The act, itself, is partially made irrelevant, as its consummation does not,
necessarily, result in a product.
It is now, mostly, a psychological pacifier; a method of stress relief and of
reaffirming self-worth and social status.
The masculine ideal is partially preserved by simplifying it into the act of
penetration.
The masculine character is abolished as controversial and disturbing and
men become uniform actors following a social script, directed by female
sexual promise.
Social usefulness takes over; more symbolic that practical.
Its fruitfulness is emotional, more than it is actual.
It is a promise that may or may not be kept.
One must work to maintain the hope it offers.
Work being the main concept.
“Work spares us from three evils: boredom, vice, and need.” - Voltaire
The chains are forged, and the work ethic turns into a desirable quality.
If nothing else the male must be productive and so must be ambitious, within
the parameters of the cultural milieu.
His sexual desirability is defined by it.
Masculinity has, now, become entirely devoted to the feminine. Intercourse
having lost all consequences for the female - for even the social stigma
concerning promiscuity is diminishing under new progressive ethical rules -
sex now turns into another device to be used and abused.
All males are judged by her standards, and his measurements and
performances become her playthings; tidbits gossiped over coffee –
manhood is now a numerical value; a score given by the social tastes of
submissiveness, from females who have become State property and, in this
way, systemic mouthpieces.
She intuits her power and relishes it.
The consequence is an increasing pugnacious feminine sexual attitude.
Males cower under its crudity.
Having no significant repercussions, even her promiscuity slowly turning
into a display of her newfound power, she wields her sexuality relentlessly
and every man, who is dependent upon her ruling, is exonerated or
condemned by her decree.
His “fitness”, in this case both his genetic and, most importantly, his social
fitness, is decided by her.
She is the bearer of social judgment, as a willing instrument of power.
--- * ---
Feminization is reaching its apex when men‟s minds are no longer free to
explore reality, but must be increasingly devoted to satisfying their primal
needs, by competing, with each other, for prized resources.
Technology and civilization was supposed to free mankind from the constant
preoccupation with basic survival – this was heralded as the coming of a
Rational Age.
It, partially, has.
The increased leisure time birthed science and philosophy, but it also
eventually resulted in ennui and nihilistic despair, as all those freed did not
possess the intellectual sensitivities to focus this excess energy upon higher
tasks and more noble creations.
Instead they turned back into primal concerns and distracted themselves
from life using hedonism or escapism.
These many emancipated beasts had to be restrained from unleashing all that
contained, unfocused, energy, upon the group.
They required guidance and a moral leash because they lacked all substance
and all backbone, and would crumble at the slightest weight without it.
They needed a productive distraction: work.
“Work is the refuge of people who have nothing better to do.” - Oscar Wilde
Entertainment was devised, no less, for this reason, and labor was made into
an asset so as to keep these idle minds preoccupied, weary, stressed, and,
thusly, harmless.
The concept of labor, like marriage, was another one of those technological
innovations that controlled, repressed, and carefully managed, these growing
masses of humanity, so as to turn them from destructive into constructive
forces and from free into servile entities.
Both depended upon the promotion of their importance as unavoidable – the
unavoidable cost of civilization.
Adultery and laziness, became synonymous with indecency and idleness
another profanity.
Man‟s aspirations could now be turned into a social advantage. The average
mind was inculcated with goals and manufactured volitions that directed his
natural instincts, when they could not be silenced.
The human was made upwardly mobile and ambition was made into a sacred
value, most prized amongst the group who found identity through its
direction.
Appetite had to be industrious; productivity was its measurement and
consumption was its justice.
Like all domesticated animals, humankind had to be managed and this
brought about innovations in herd management.
Husbandry turned into a political science; propaganda became its apparatus.
“By avarice and selfishness, and a groveling habit, from which none of us is free, of
regarding the soil as property, or the means of acquiring property chiefly, the landscape is
deformed, husbandry is degraded with us, and the farmer leads the meanest of lives. He
knows Nature but as a robber.” - Henry David Thoreau
--- * ---
Fertilization is not as crucial or dependent on copulation, as it used to be.
The number of technical fertilizations are on the rise, as environmental
conditions are making infertility another consequence of human degradation.
Female hormones are not only infecting our thoughts but are in the water
supply and in our foods, as well.
We are inundated with femininity.
Mankind‟s activities are now becoming decisive. He is beginning to affect
his own destiny through his own actions, and the collateral effects this is
provoking.
This is artificiality.
The self referencing simulation turns into a fantastic construct of human
imagination, with a life of its own.
“The very definition of the real becomes: that of which it is possible to give an equivalent
reproduction. The real is not only what can be reproduced, but that which is always
already reproduced. The hyper real.” - Jean Baudrillard
What better way to reduce resistance into compliance than by social
selection, guided by an ideal, and the slow deterioration of guaranteed
fecundity?
Here is where a female becomes vital, not only as an instrument of culling
but as an example of the ideal to be emulated.
She is now the sole role model.
A man must now use her as a proxy towards institutional power.
Adapt or perish.
“The liberated man is not the one who is freed in his ideal reality, his inner truth, or his
transparency; he is the man who changes spaces, who circulates, who changes sex,
clothes, and habits according to fashion, rather than morality, and who changes opinions
not as his conscience dictates but in response to opinion polls.” - Jean Baudrillard
This observable increase in promiscuity, in our time, as well as the
deterioration of the traditional family as a social institution, is to account for
the amplification of sexual imagery in our daily lives.
Every aspect of our surroundings is dominated by some form of sexual
innuendo, as unleashed libidos and frustrated sexual appetites are
manipulated to buy and to sell, to work, as a means of attainment, to
continuously be preoccupied with fucking.
Sex as a consumer product.
“At the heart of pornography is sexuality haunted by its own disappearance.” - Jean
Baudrillard
This world is a female‟s playground, where even a plain Jane is raised to the
height Aphrodite – a woman‟s world.
Only the childish find their meaning here.
It all becomes about copulation and about the currently avoidable products
of copulation.
Children, so increasingly rare as to be considered sacred, precious
commodities that must be given “rights”.
The environment of the teenage schoolyard.
Art, no less, is taken over by these themes and the entire social structure is
kept running on the fevered pitches of hormones seeking satiation.
Mankind is abstracted along with everything else, and loses significance as a
specificity.
Max Stirner says:
“Dropping out of personal concern, one gets into philanthropism, friendliness to man,
which is usually misunderstood as if it was a love to men, to each individual, while it is
nothing but a love of Man, the unreal concept, the spook. It is not τοσς ανθρωποσς, man,
but τον ανθρωπον, Man, that the philanthropist carries in his heart. To be sure, he cares
for each individual, but only because he wants to see his beloved ideal realized
everywhere.
So there is nothing said here of care for me, you, us; that would be personal interest, and
belongs under the head of „worldly love.‟ Philanthropism is heavenly, spiritual, a –
priestly love. Man must be restored in us, even if thereby we poor devils should come to
grief. It is the same priestly principle as that famous fiat justitia, pereat mundus; man and
justice are ideas, ghosts, for love of which everything is sacrificed; therefore, the priestly
spirits are the „self-sacrificing‟ ones.
He who is infatuated with Man leaves persons out of account so far as the infatuation
extends, and floats in an ideal, a spook.”
…and…
“Because revolutionary priests or schoolmasters served Man, they cut off the heads of
men. The revolutionary laymen, those outside the sacred circle, did not feel any greater
horror of cutting off heads, but were less anxious about the rights of Man than their own.”
The self-annihilating alliance of the secular progressive libertarian and the
Christian conservative is exposed.
On the altar of controlling the individual man, all his distinguishing
attributes are cut off and he is castrated.
--- * ---
To what depths will men not stoop to worship this holiest of holly grails?
To what self-abasing, depravity will not males lower themselves to taste
that restricted fruit?
Still a forbidden fruit, but not by law or by moral judgment, anymore, but by
the woman herself, an unconscious agent of institutional control.
The “right” is returned to her and her sexual power is restored.
She is now the voice of God…or State; she the priestess of Dionysus –
hysterics follow.
Females bask in all the attention, taking it all as evidence of their
unappreciated value and as proof of their never openly admitted sexual
dominance over males.
Insecurity often compensates in that way.
If they are innately humble they take it all as evidence of their equality; an
equality under the auspices of state dominion. They are no longer second
rate citizens but fully integrated productive members of society.
Their submissions and total acceptance of authorities is, now, rewarded
directly. She has achieved parity with the emasculated male…and is
unremarkably disappointed by it.
She refuses to admit it, openly, even if she becomes aware of it.
And for good reason.
When a man hungers he may lose all sense of dignity and self-control in
pursuit of fulfillment. He may even feed on excrement or on the flesh of his
loved ones. So too, the basic average male will slither in the dirt if there is
the slightest hope of satisfying his sexual appetites…especially when all
others are taken care of.
Who wouldn‟t take advantage of such decrepit, needy, creatures when they
offer themselves up as willing victims to be exploited?
When, in the not to distant cultural past, most males did not have to exhibit
their vulgar nature to gratify their wanton primitive desires, having a
guaranteed mate available to them, now they come forth as byproducts of
unregulated reproduction and show themselves as what they truly are:
weaklings.
Generations of human filth replicating itself and passing on their
inferiorities, finally crashes upon a denial of entrance.
The shock is devastating.
A reality check. The dream is over.
“The most dangerous man, to any government, is the man who Is able to think things out
for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost invariably
he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and
intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And if he is not romantic
personally, he is apt to spread discontent among those who are.” - Henry Louis
Mencken
Where men once placed females on a pedestal, to keep them away from the
groping hands of barbarians and swine, and to ensure that their favors were
far more costly to be given away for trivial gains and momentary pleasures,
now sex has returned to being, candidly, a tool of feminine manipulation.
She gives herself openly to the highest bidder, and calls this her liberation
from paternalism.
It‟s all about pay equity, after all.
The secret liaison of the deprived instinct finding release away from the
prying eyes of cultural control, is now unmasked as another human farce.
The lovers are uncovered and their shocking activities revealed.
Romanticism is dead, as is God, and behind both the notions of vulgarity and
shame follow the end of sin and guilt, towards the gallows of depravity.
So much for the mystique.
Mankind is given back his shamelessness.
--- * ---
The emancipation of females, became more advantageous than disruptive to
social harmony.
Another untapped resource – fifty percent of the population, in fact - to be
put into production.
Female emancipation was, of course, not actual but only symbolic.
What was freed was female sexual choice from surrogate authority figures.
She was freed from having to settle for sub-standard males and from the
constraints of monogamous concessions, that had produced the notion of
sexual shame, and the distinction between slut, whore and lady.
Finally a woman is unveiled as no lady at all.
She no longer had to play the virgin or submit to the controls of lesser males
she found beneath her and not worthy of her surrender. Her pretence was
made proudly obvious and her choice was her pitiless verdict.
In this New Age, the full power of feminine utility is untied from its male
cart and it is made the direct apparatus of the structure – the State.
Her value is precisely her femininity and so, even in her quest to abolish
gender roles, she holds onto the identity they sprang from, tooth and nail.
She reinvents the social adaptation of her sexuality and calls it “authentic”.
Who needs a man in such times, when even his physicality is impotent and
he is but a sketch of ancient history?
A living joke representing a dead age of archaic ideals.
He is laughed at on T.V. sit-coms. The dumbfounded, misguided, garish,
dolt, with a heart of gold, still clinging onto outdated artifacts of a dead age,
and playing with his boyish toys.
He is rehabilitated weekly in half-hour installments while sitting in his
favorite sofa.
He is given his “purity” back; his boyish charm; his harmlessness.
Cue in the laugh-track.
His denigration is finalized.
The outcome of this charade leaves even a woman with a nagging sensation
of dissatisfaction.
Her attraction is diminished by the resulting adolescent product. She ascribes
it to “chemistry” or “falling out of love” – meaning “falling out of lust”
because she cannot explain it otherwise.
In juxtaposition to this lovable dolt stands the liberated modern woman.
Clever, capable, stern and forever patient with her mate‟s immaturity. She is
the image of a coming age…a better age; modern, current and adult in her
pragmatic reasoning.
Her sexual aggression springs out of this, trying to fill in a gap.
The role reversal is complete.
When “real men” are absent, it is she who takes on the caricatured role,
reinforcing the illusion of equalization or masculinization.
A female‟s sexual promise, and her socially determined judgment, has now
become the instrument by which men are assimilated and kept in line.
No force required, just gentle chastising, frequent treats and a calm
assertiveness.
The same methods used in training dogs.
Submit or be excluded, ostracized and humiliated as not being adequate
enough to be appreciated by the whole; a loser, a failure, a lost cause…ill as
in “ill at ease”…diseased.
If he is adaptive enough, he, through the females he has managed to
convince {seduce} is appreciated as a worthy specimen.
He is a “good man”.
Welcome to servility.
Feminism
"Feminism is a recognition of the domination of men over women and attempts by
women to end male privilege.... It is a theory, a method, and a practice which seeks to
transform human relations." - Cynthia Orozco
The very idea of feminism isn‟t an original one.
It is a direct consequence of male innovation that produced the Judeo-
Christian, Democratic and then Humanitarian flattening ideals that sought to
annihilate all preexisting identifications so as to replace them with new ones
- an evolution of religious and previous political ideals.
Heterogeneous social unities, as has been already mentioned, make the more
discriminating past methods less effective in retaining social stability.
When populations come from diverse backgrounds, worshiping different
gods and following dissimilar traditions, the least common denominator for
all is their humanity – their identification with the organic category of
species.
All other designations are swept under the proverbial carpet and taught to be
ignored, as a matter of fact.
The usefulness of this practice should not be underestimated. Proof can be
ascertained by the fact that the current major religious and political dogmas
that permeate our New World Order make use of some form of this method
of indoctrination.
The underlying methodology is to selectively degrade the apparent, by
limiting the natural discriminating function of consciousness, and by
suggesting that immediate nurturing conditions override all previous ones.
Consciousness, denied its full breadth, the mind cleansed of all previous
determinations, is taught to believe that it too can find its “authenticity” by
denying the past and repressing all aspects of the human condition that are
derivatives of it.
And so all natural manifestations, such as sex, race, beauty, height, weight,
form, materiality, multiplicity are taught to be considered superficial, where
an implied, yet invisible, core remains unvarying and unaffected by
historical and genetic effects.
The dualistic positioning is obvious. The human embryo must be taken as a
tabula rasa, possessing no preexisting limitations or dispositions. A clean
slate awaiting cultural programming.
What can be more leveling than the idea of emptiness?
--- * ---
Contrary to popular opinion feminism was not invented by women but
adopted by them, as they adopt any social trend, no matter how degrading or
absurd it might be, that offers them an advantage or that is taught as part of
the prevailing standard.
The idea that all men are created equal is now directing itself towards a
regularity that includes all life under its sanctimonious premises.
It is now reaching the extreme pinnacle of foolishness, where the concept of
speciesm is presented as the logical continuance of an ideal that uses the
emotionally laden labels of racism and/or sexism as a means of dismissing
an antithetical perspective and enforcing silence upon those that hold it to be
true. By using cultural stigma and by associating ideas with other more
ludicrous ones, in an attempt to equate them and ridicule them through
association, arguments are replaced by psychological tricks and certain
ideals are presented as “self-evident”, not requiring rational justification.
Some over exuberant representatives of this trend towards self-deprecating
leveling are now convinced that feeding upon another organism‟s flesh is
wrong and that animals deserve, simply for having been born, equal rights
and considerations as any human being does – a very moralistic assumption
based on nothing more than emotional criteria.
Life is consecrated so as to automatically characterize all who dare to step
upon its hallowed premises as blasphemous and evil, deserving only pity and
contempt, but no attention.
--- * ---
The leveling process continues as all designations that are not directly in
reference to cultural and social utility are eradicated and denigrated as being
remnants of primitive thinking, that have been dealt with, “overcome” and
then dismissed.
Ego is the primary obstacle to total submission and so its vilification is a
matter of faith in this coming age of enlightenment; this “better” age, where
suffering is lessened by eliminating its sources.
When the “sanctity of life” is deemed self-evident, possessing the additional
benefit of being self-serving, and all are offered “rights”, then there isn‟t a
long way to go from there towards its logical conclusion that all life is holy
and that the reliance of life on other life – depicted by the serpent eating its
own tail - is evidence of man‟s sinfulness and his fall from grace, for which
he must make amends.
We are all sinners and should feel ashamed, simply for being born, carrying,
as we are, the burden of the inherited sins of our fathers and the
embarrassment of our own existence.
Man must be returned to his “purity”, his civilized “authenticity”, which
comes miraculously after thousands of years of natural selection, after he has
repented for being born into such a state of moral and physical decrepitude.
Nihilism is planted as a seed of self-hatred.
The fundamental frameworks of nihilistic humanism and religious
dogmatism are installed as “obvious” and the denigration of man is set in
motion.
All faiths that teach a denigration of reality, illusion or as a testing phase,
and that then promise a “better” one, a deliverance from its baseness, are
exposed as being nihilistic to the core of their duplicitous self-righteousness
and faked enlightened piety.
Self-hatred and the denial of existence, seeps through their perfumed frocks,
like the smell of rot…wearing the sanctimonious smile and numb calmness
of the obliviously blissful.
The congruence between conservative and liberal ideologies is most evident
here, in this cesspool of self-annihilation donning the masks of altruism, and
their collusion uncovers the insincerity behind their, supposed, enmity.
Mankind‟s past will be denied, must be, as nurture will take precedence over
nature and the individual will be asked to receive his identity, as a
sacrament, directly from the system that protects him and offers him rights.
The State did not separate from Church…but the two merged into one…and
God was reborn as an Ideal Man which the system holds up as a holy grail
and an idol to be emulated, worshiped and never attained.
Under these circumstances feminism isn‟t so difficult to accept as one of the
repercussions of environmental necessity.
Females, as an untapped social resource, are offered access, and the rewards
that go along with it, for their total capitulation and usefulness to the system.
Their “justice” is their direct attainment of symbolic power; once reserved
only for males, due to their superior usefulness in times of technological
inadequacy.
They become the preferred priestesses for this coming age.
Marriage
“Marriage as an institution developed from rape as a practice. Rape, originally defined as
abduction, became marriage by capture. Marriage meant the taking was to extend in time,
to be not only use of but possession of, or ownership.” - Andrea Dworkin
The institution of marriage was a fundamental necessity in the emergence of
cultures.
The integration of males within a group makes it crucial that the natural
feminine sexual predispositions be curtailed and controlled so as to prevent
male strife and stop the marginalization of masses of unfit males, and
females, who would then become disruptive to social cohesion.
The promotion of monogamy, using tradition and morality, has been a
fundamental facet of social unity.
Polygamy is but a variation of the basic principle by which a male and a
female are prohibited from unleashing their natural sexual promiscuity,
placing a cap, so to speak, upon the amounts of sexual relationship one can
indulge in.
Lust must be curbed no less than greed and aggression, and regulations have
to be put in place to force self-discipline where none exists.
"Men marry women with the hope they will never change. Women marry men with the
hope they will change. Invariably they are both disappointed." - Albert Einstein
The man, with his traditional leadership over a family unit, also becomes an
integral part in spreading his culture‟s ideals and is held (or was held)
accountable for his family‟s welfare and conduct.
He is forcefully harnessed, through responsibility, to the products of his
deeds.
Along with a woman‟s, a man‟s libido is blocked and then guided, like one
dams a river and then releases it along select paths, utilizing its pressurized
force.
In homogeneous societies a male becomes a representative of the
monopolizing male authority, which the institution symbolizes. He is the
surrogate embodiment of the King/Queen or of God or of government and
state, and he passes on to his offspring his own heritage as it reflects the
common one.
But this function becomes damaging to social unity within heterogeneous
societies.
As societies grow into global systems they must integrate populations with
diverse backgrounds and with often incompatible ideals and beliefs.
Because of this, all heritage must be degraded in importance and the
authority of the male over his family becomes a threat to the system‟s
control.
The need for a common denominator results in the slow deterioration of
distinction in search for a common thread all can relate to and feel
comfortable within.
Mediocrity is the natural product of this requirement.
The child must be influenced and trained only by one authority, teaching
particular morals and ideals, and so all competing sources of knowledge,
principles and identity have to be made secondary or eliminated altogether if
they pose a threat to this course of action.
We see here why the current deterioration of the family unity as well as an
increase in feminism go hand in hand, as symptoms of the same process.
The State becomes a guardian of all children and a mate to all women.
It, as an abstraction of masculinity, risks no rivals and tolerates no
challengers.
None of its children will be harmed or punished, unless it is by its hand, and
no woman will be violated or dominated, unless it is sanctioned by its
authority.
The female and the effeminate male, being a more docile and easily
indoctrinated member of a social group, is more apt to pass on the teachings,
ethics and beliefs of the system to its offspring, as they, most likely, will not
possess any thought or desire to challenge its dominion or its values.
The male must follow suit or be excluded from the possibility of
reproducing his genes.
Not even his offspring are really his own, as he merely represents the system
that has ultimate custody over all. It will educate them, shape their
behaviour, teach them values and direct their activities.
The human parent is but a deputy of the system‟s Will.
--- * ---
“Marriage is the triumph of imagination over intelligence.” - Oscar Wilde
The abstracted masculine institution, being but a symbol of the male
archetype, just as money is an abstraction of value and/or resources, makes it
possible for anyone to purchase the position of institutional representative,
figurehead, since the sex of the individual only matters due to primal
psychological factors.
Factors, quickly being programmed out of human psychology.
That males have been traditionally the symbols of this masculine
institutional power is due to this:
It is normal that any progression would be rooted in the past and that, early
on, it would reflect its origins more prominently.
The abstraction of male authority through the institution, being a
continuance of natural phenomena, would obviously exhibit this immediate
connection.
Males are therefore the sole acceptable representations, in more primitive
social groups where the abstraction has not reached a certain level of
sophistication and man has not altogether detached himself from nature, to
the extent that later social unities have.
The psychological, biological bonds with our origins make it, even today,
difficult to accept a woman in these symbolic posts although habituation,
coupled with effective training/educating, is quickly making this resistance
to human intervention less forceful - the relative primitive state of
technologies would still maintain more primal balances and relationships
intact, whereas with the progression of technology the obsolescence of these
primal balances eliminates even this necessity.
For instance, the need for warriors with brute muscle power to defend and
expand the influence of a group made the maintenance of males as dominant
over females essential to the health of the group. With the later progression
of technologies this need diminishes, making it pointless for males to hold
even symbolic authority over females or over the family.
This essentially makes the family an obsolete human invention and it
eventually results in the emancipation of women not from masculine
authority, since the institution still remains the sole masculine entity
allowed, but from the secondary symbolic roles males have played as
representatives of this singular masculine authority.
Max Stirner again:
“What has the individual now become? A political Protestant, for he has come into
immediate connection with his God, the State. He was no longer, as an aristocrat, in the
monarchy of the nobility; as a mechanic, in the monarchy of the guild; but he, like all,
recognized and acknowledged only – one lord, the State, as whose servants they all
received the equal title of honor, „citizen‟. “
Feminism is basically the female political drive to eliminate males,
emasculated males, as an intermediate symbol. Their Will to Power
manifesting itself as a social movement seeking the attainment of a direct
contact with the, unchallenged, institutional master, allowing them to gain
the possibility of becoming a symbolic representation of its unchallenged
authority themselves.
It is the taking away of even the pretence of masculinity from biological
males, who are now relegated to equal status with women, as
feminine/effeminate subjects of the system. With equal rights come equal
roles, and the differentiation fades and is lost in civil etiquette.
As a consequence the social phenomenon of hyper-masculinity emerges as a
reaction to this collective trend. Emasculated males, trying to save the
pretence of maleness, exhibit exaggerated displays of manly prowess, often
using the very abstractions the system provides them with and the values and
ideals the system has indoctrinated them with.
In their haste to prove themselves worthy of procreation, the modern male
uses the symbolisms of his own submission and displays himself by using
the very evidence of his obvious capitulation.
The entire sexual game then becomes an act of female compromises and
male duplicity.
A by-product of these trends is the gradual modification of the definition and
function of marriage.
It‟s heterosexual purpose, which was meant to guarantee sexual exclusivity
to both females and males, is under social pressure to be renewed.
This is where the battle lines between the socially conservative and liberal
political forces are drawn anew, but neither of them dares to attack the
institution itself, as outdated, and expose it as just another method of
husbandry.
Here these, supposed rivals remain allied in their silence, as they do on many
other issues.
The political arena is basically a venue of competing positions over the
speed of social change and systemic adaptations.
One side rejects the complete overhauling of socioeconomic and cultural
dynamics, preferring to maintain the establishment where they have, or hope
to have, many successes, and so more privileged positions.
The other side wishes a radical change in the socioeconomic and cultural
dynamics so as to eliminate this need for intervening power brokers,
allowing the individual to make of himself/herself a direct representation of
State power.
The struggle is not substantive but only over symbolisms and rates of
allowable change.
The power itself is never challenged. Here both sides are in agreement and
their submission to it is total.
There is no question over the freedom of the individuality; the only
questions allowed is in how the illusion of independence be maintained and
what form dependence will take – individuality redefined in relation to its,
presumed, submission to an external will.
This becomes more evident when the, hypothetical, free-press, in the west,
never really challenges the establishment but only questions its superficial
displays and official accounts. The mass media is, in fact, part of the
establishment and so it has an invested interest in protecting it from anything
that threatens its premises.
“Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media.” – Noam,
Chomsky
It‟s only function, now, is to serve as a deceitful pretence of democratic
regulation over institutional power.
It provides a comforting illusion that the citizen matters and is supervising
governmental activities, through the mass media, in a system where no
individuality is, really, accepted and mass media is owned by the very power
brokers that participate in government.
--- * ---
It is noteworthy to mention that in traditional marital unions it is mostly the
woman that is asked to change families, adopt a new clan and the name that
goes along with it; it is, mostly, the woman who is expected to change her
religious and cultural designation.
In the past females were regularly seized and integrated within the structures
of the males that captured them. At times they were also exchanged as
goods, between tribes and/or families.
Alliances were forged by offering a prized daughter to another family,
establishing blood-ties.
In times of war, men and boys were killed, whereas women and girls were
spared and carried away as plunder.
No doubt, some resistance was offered, but most surrendered to their new
masters, gave him children and were slowly integrated into their new tribe.
If the practice were not so successful it would not have been so common.
The only analogous practice is that of abducting male children, as was done
by the Turks during their Ottoman reign, and then assimilating them into a
new culture, often turning them into ferocious warriors on behalf of their
new masters. But this is only possible when the child is still young enough
to not have been sufficiently inculcated with its own cultural identity, and so
offering little or no resistance to a new one.
Unlike a man, a woman does not fully carry the tag of her genetic history but
this tag can be traded and swapped between different clans or tribes or
cultures, like a valuable commodity; a practice she submits to, sometimes,
willingly or with little contention due to her temperament.
A man, conversely, is forever associated with his original national, racial,
tribal or cultural identity and is forever a representative of his creed, since he
can only function as a reproducer of his own kind.
This, in itself, makes the integration of males that come from alien cultures,
problematic.
It is why globalization, that has to integrate many individuals from different
cultural backgrounds, makes of the institution of family a remnant of a
primitive past that has to be redefined or completely obliterated.
The only battle against this trend is offered by the conservative mindset, that
desires to maintain the pre-existing social morays and social dynamics. The
liberal, mindset, on the other hand, welcomes the rearrangements of cultural
balances, as a way of enhancing harmony. By integrating as many
individuals into the fold and offering them the semblance of equality and
equal rights, the masses, no matter their background, are assimilated into a
new conception of a whole.
For this reason, alone, the concept of the family had to be redefined to
accept diverse sexual relationships and behaviours, as they were produced
and then nurtured by the system itself.
The family, now, ceases to be a heterosexual reproductive union and
becomes a social unity, approved by the state by providing rights to it.
Reproduction ceases to be its primary function in an overpopulated world.
The only requirement is that it fulfills the system‟s demands and is
productive and disciplined to it.
--- * ---
In the case of arranged marriages, as practices in bygone times and in other
cultural traditions, is it indicative that the importance of family alliances is
not left up to the instinctual whims of immature wills.
The crucial decision as to whom will marry whom, and so what family will
be indefinitely linked with another through blood ties, is not,
indiscriminately, given over to the inexperienced intellects of those
involved, but is planned and guided by more rational thinking.
How revealing that these same undesirable, by western standards, forced
unions seem to stand the test of time.
One more indication that a decision undertaken under duress or under the
influence of instinctive and emotional factors, is not, necessarily, the most
wise.
--- * ---
The foundation of the family is, unavoidably, the woman, who‟s loyalty to
the man and the offspring this union will bring about, determines the power
of the relationship and the male‟s investment in the health and prosperity of
the institutions that ensure it.
“The house does not rest upon the ground, but upon a woman.” - Mexican Proverb
Her role, in the past, was to be impregnated and to pass on the male‟s ideals,
as he was a agent of communal ideals. In modern times this secondary
function has been replaced by being, herself, a version of communal ideals,
without having to rely on a male as the intermediary.
In fact, her success is determined by how thoroughly she takes on the
characteristics of the culturally ideal female role, and by how successfully
she reproduces the ideals and ideas of her group.
Her intelligence is focused on how well she can predict which power will
dominate and how well she can integrate herself within it.
In this willingness to accept unquestioningly and completely any dominant
power, finding in her “belonging” to it her highest achievement, women
become the tools of indoctrination and social engineering.
A female‟s current equality is one in relation to the emasculated male.
She is no longer subservient to the more useful, to the system, male but has
come to her own, by being just as useful, if not more so, than the more
uncontrollable male – even if he may be ineffectual.
She is now the ideal member of the social system that is benefited more by
total submission to its authority, and no longer requires the muscle and less
controllable male‟s sexual drives to survive.
Technology, the very tools that men used to compensate for weakness, has
now made them obsolete.
Females profit from this loss.
Family
No doubt the topic of family and family values is an intricate one; a topic
that is sure to raise contentious subject matter and to engage a multitude of
socio-economic, cultural, historical, psychological, political, and sexual
issues which are sure to force disagreements and heated debate.
Nevertheless, the only thing we can hopefully agree upon is that the
institution of family, as we know it, is currently in decline in the west and
quickly becoming an antiquated part of the past.
The fact that in many other parts of the world it is still holding on to its
intended function can lead us to consider the possibility that the causes for
this decline might be found in our ongoing modern western reality.
Growing divorce rates and the emergence of single-parent families, as the
new norm, exposes growing strain-fissures upon the structure of an old and
weathered tradition which may be becoming outmoded even though it has
served as a successful method of integration and harmonization for social
unities in the past.
The tribal unit, the village, soon turned to the extended family, then to the
nuclear family and is now quickly deteriorating to a single-parent
accommodation – not to mention the emerging trend of same-sex marriages
and the creation of homosexual family units as well as a variety of hybrids
such as combined family units.
Most of these are meant to take advantage of the economic benefits the
system provides families, as a way of preserving their viability. It is one of
the reasons why the concept of a family is currently under pressure to
modernize and redefine itself so as to integrate the products of the modern
sheltering system within its character.
--- * ---
Like all human organizations, the structure of the family is dependant on a
hierarchy and a division of labor.
It imitates all systems in that it strives for a more efficient organization, in
reference to the environment it has to maintain itself within.
In the west, as in most cultures, the man became the head and the
administrative leader of an institutionalized tradition that was meant to
assimilate as many human beings as possible within the social structure and
make them invested participants within it.
As “king of his castle” the male became a conduit of cultural ideals and the
one responsible for keeping his family in tune with acceptable collective
practices.
The male was a representation of his group‟s shared spirit, within unities
consisting of homogenous populations.
Present multicultural environments and racially and religiously diverse
social superstructures is necessitating a further deconstruction of the family
into its individual parts because this representative is no longer required and
actually inhibits a more harmonious integration of the members under his
symbolic dominance.
The institution of the family is a continuance of a primal male domination
over females, asserting certain sexual and instinctual limitations to ensure
that each man became the honorary alpha-male of his own small faction of
relatives and blood ties, over which the system or the true ruler maintained
the watchful and critical eye of absolute maleness.
The true ruler has gone through many changes over the centuries, from tribal
leader to king and more recently to the abstraction of the institution.
This is what feminists today call Paternalism.
--- * ---
The family unit, in all its forms, represented an ally of systemic power along
with religion and education, ensuring the production of disciplined members
and their easy assimilation within cultural ideals. Because of this “family
values” are part of the conservative arsenal, usually coming forth as a
preserving drive to maintain the status quo and the existing power balances.
Yet, the institution of the family often finds itself at odds with systemic
power; in our modern multicultural world.
It is a place where seditious ideas are often nurtured and secretly taught, in
contradiction to cultural doctrine, and where the male is tempted to stretch
what minimal power he possesses over a larger and larger group using the
promotion of often alien, to the norm, ideals and/or where individuals find
the support to overcome established cultural power balances and peer
pressures.
This is why homosexuals find the need to participate in a tradition that was
originally meant for heterosexual integration.
The family structure often served as a counter-balance to peer pressures and
cultural ideals, ensuring that the individual was given an alternative and a
safe-harbor away from an often threatening world.
Also, the emerging global connectivity and multiculturalism makes family
units the havens of often divisive world-views.
For these reasons along, the family is now considered inhibiting to social
integration and so is slowly being reinvented, allowing a more direct
manipulation of individuals without the need for intermediating
representatives.
This more direct systemic control takes on the façade of individuality, in an
age of me, when what it really consists of is a more direct taking of custody
over mankind‟s fate by cutting individuals away from their support systems
and making them more vulnerable to centralized organization.
The Renewable Resource
It is posted on billboards, transmitted through the airwaves, integrated within
every artistic expression, in the most garish manner.
No talent required.
A primitive drum beat accompanied by simplistic lyrics containing no
vagueness and then a voice filtered through computer software and made to
sound as more than it is.
All the really matters is the image.
Raw sexuality, pulsating to rhythms that mirror physical ones, designed to
cause a predictable reaction.
The decreasing flexibility of the average human mind makes any more
complicated creativity lost in translation.
No, sex must be obvious, these days, and the promise must be made clear.
The mediocre mind cannot fathom anything beyond this level of primordial
need.
Subtlety is lost on it. Only the vulgar registers as declining abilities to
concentrate demand a more exaggerated shock to be focused.
When instincts are denied expression this pornographic directness provides
an essential outlet of defusing repressed energies and the culture of no
culture utilizes any means necessary to satisfy its stabilizing uniformity.
The entire culture is now preoccupied with fucking, because it is no longer a
given, for males…and some females.
It has become another luxury to be earned.
Our everyday senses are continuously assaulted by sexual overtones.
Children witness it everyday through every information venue, until they
become desensitized to its effect.
Tits and ass are not to be avoided; everything conspires to arouse you in
every way possible and make you act - force you to be active.
Your libido agitated and then directed, as one directs cattle in a farm, with
hyper-inflated shocks to overcome this growing desensitization.
“Do you want this?” Then act…be active, be productive, buy.
The vagina at the service of socioeconomic forces. It is the gateway to the
promised land.
A man lowered to the level of his basic desire to release his sexual energy.
Inactivity is laziness and laziness is unproductive.
All must be kindled into fiery tumescence and agitated into spasmodic
reactions.
All must be made vulnerable to external stimulations.
“When a woman reaches orgasm with a man she is only collaborating with the patriarchal
system, eroticizing her own oppression.” - Sheila Jeffrys
Body parts are exposed everywhere; marketing ploys of productivity.
Females play the part of exploited victims when this is their preferred
element; outside sex they become irrelevant and easily ignored – they do not
matter.
If feminists had tried to distance themselves from sex, altogether, then they
would be more respectable and their message would be more logical…as
things stand they are nothing more than adolescent minds attempting to
procure, through state sanctioned “rights”, what they cannot earn through
deeds.
They do not reject sex and sexuality, because therein lies the only source of
female relevance, but they embrace sex, wishing to change the rules, and in
the process accept the very premises they want to deny as being determining.
Then, in a twist of irony, they call this reinvention a newfound purity.
Their, preferred, excuse for their glaringly obvious historical absence being
that they have not been give, GIVEN you see, the opportunities to prove
themselves as being more than what is determined by their biological
function; every day that passes, a renunciation of this transparent subterfuge.
They can deny this using words but their actions speak louder political
rhetoric. Quickly they revert to sexual allusions when they find themselves
cornered by wit – emasculated males are no different, in this, as all men are
forced to use feminine tactics where all others are forbidden.
--- * ---
The feminization of man has made sexual distinction more difficult just as
globalization has made racial and national distinctions more ambiguous.
Distinction is muddled in commingling amalgamations and communal
imitations.
A man‟s world?
Increasingly not so.
A woman‟s world isn‟t devoid of violence and exploitation, it is lacking the
reasoning for violence and exploitation; an emotional world of intuited
vulgarity; a world retaining its plausible deniability; a world of innocent
brutality and ignorant irresponsibility.
The notion that females can do better than men have, is laughable when one
considers nature objectively and if one thinks about metaphysics void of
human ideals and emotional arguments.
In a world governed by the struggle for survival, by an ongoing war against
death, where is this promised land of milk and honey and endless peaceful
coexistence in sunny meadows of luscious fields of gold?
Only a naïve dolt could fall for such tripe.
What can be more vicious and obscene than an action pretending to be
righteous and struggling to find reasons for its indecorousness?
Better at what?
Better at pretending, at hiding, at playing the blameless, never responsible
for anything, victim?
A woman can walk into a room full of men wearing nothing but a pushup
bra and a miniskirt up to her ass, and then act insulted by having these men
ogle at her; she can cruelly discriminate and then pretend it‟s all about
chemistry and…Lord have mercy…about love!!!
An emotional world where the emotions presented as emancipating are
about as fleeting as our shallow understanding of them!
Reason be damned!!
There is no longer any reason for reason.
In this feminized world, sex is turned into another commodity to be bought
and sold – materialism at its best – love is for all and all deserve it.
Nothing escapes marketing and consumerism.
What do you lack: pride, self-esteem, integrity, friends, love, sexual appeal,
relevance?
Buy it.
Young girls dreaming of being fashion models or, more sincerely, porn-
stars.
Why not?
In a childish world, where nothing is determined, all is possible and all is
permissible.
Like with Negroes and their unceasing usage of their past slavery and
victimization, their relevance begins and ends with their references to their
own emancipation and the ideals these are constructed upon; ideals they had
no hand in producing themselves but were merely the “innocent”
beneficiaries of historical forces they do not entirely comprehend, just as
they were the “innocent” victims of these earlier ones.
Pawns in a game they have no contribution to. Merchandise, still, now
finding wealth in entertaining those they once served, and finding self-worth
in gaudy displays of marketable representation.
The weak are always an exploitable resource for the powerful.
This is an uncomfortable fact. Their freedoms and enslavements mere
products of forces they have no hand in.
Constitutions were never guarantees of individual rights. They were
documents enacting a new age in human herd management.
Individual opinions were no more respected now, than they were in the past;
they were manufactured and sold as commodities that offered the grand
illusion that the individual himself had come to them on his own.
Are not political ideologies another product to be marketed and sold by
convincing the consumer that they want it…that they need it?
“All over the place, from the popular culture to the propaganda system, there is constant
pressure to make people feel that they are helpless, that the only role they can have is to
ratify decisions and to consume.” - Noam Chomsky
Every part of modern culture is penetrated by a feminine seduction. Products
as banal as frozen dinners are advertised using sexual innuendo.
The average male is made helpless under these circumstances, as his
primitive nature takes over where his reason fails, and he is made into a
mindless erect penis, begging for entrance into the restricted and finding
self-esteem in the permission.
In this feminized world the male is taken over by the desire to prove himself
worthy of his identity.
Here is where the female reigns supreme.
“The orgasm has replaced the cross as the focus of longing and fulfillment.” - Malcolm
Muggeridge
Do you wish to entice this female, impregnated with social and cultural
norms?
Then live up to her ideals, as they‟ve been seeded there by the very system
you wish to resist – become the corporeal extension of this ideals spiritual
power and make your penis its penis, and your sperm its seed.
A compromise is made crucial.
Play the game or be excluded; lower yourself to lothario or be labeled a
loser.
Entertaining Ramifications
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that
there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read
one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us information. Huxley feared those who
would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared
that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a
sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we
would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy
porgy, and the centrifugal bumble-puppy. – Neil Postman
The amount of time a species dedicates to play is proportional to its overall
intelligence.
It appears that the intelligence that enables a species to survive and to
become successful, also endows it with a mind that needs more qualitative
and quantitative stimuli to maintain its mental health but also, through its
success, it then awards it with more free time to spend trying to distract itself
from boredom, due to its ability to sustain itself with relatively minimal
effort. Furthermore, heightened brainpower makes play not only a diversion
but a necessary aspect of growth and training that prepares the individual
being for the upcoming demands on its mind.
This double-edged sword of intelligence, that bestows superiority but also
the burden of demanding constant stimulation to escape tedium, is more
pronounced in man, the highest and most successful of all earthly beasts.
Man need only spend a fraction of his time and effort on matters of survival
but must then find outlets for his leftover intellectual energies.
Play, therefore, has become for man, not only essential but an important
participant in his mental and physical well-being. But more than this, play
has ceased to be merely entertainment through action and participation and
has evolved into a passive voyeuristic pastime where an individual
vicariously involves himself in distraction through third parties and through
their extraordinary athletic and/or creative abilities.
This vicarious, passive distraction and the extent to which mankind indulges
in it, appears to be a distinctive characteristic of mankind‟s existence and
how it has evolved, in time, to meet, not only mankind‟s natural
requirements in a modern civilization, but mostly mankind‟s social and
cultural ones.
Where play once served as a training function, a productive diversion and a
display of excessive virility, it now, in our modern civilized times, has also
taken up the role of an indoctrination tool and a pressure release mechanism
for man‟s more subversive and socially destructive natural inclinations.
Entertainment as an Institution
“Creativity is discontent translated into arts.” - Eric Hoffer
Modern governments, as in past times, regularly use distractions to alleviate
the pressure of scrutiny and criticism; there‟s nothing like a war, for
instance, to take a population‟s thoughts away from economic hardships, and
athletic events or the theatre are often used as substitutes for real action,
something the Romans and the Greeks knew all too well.
As such the entertainment industry in any nation serves as a pacifier for
discontentment and a method of taking the focus off national problems and
personal dissatisfactions.
With the advent of recent technological means of communication,
entertainments has also acquired the power to coerce, control, distract and
direct entire populations and has established itself as one more institution
with its own, authority and impetus.
Hollywood, in the U.S., is in fact a major power-player within the political
and social framework, who‟s voice is never underestimated or ignored, and
the music industry one more lucrative businesses that can impose its cultural
messages upon millions of young or not-so-young listeners and export
cultural ideals around the world.
Only the Indian equivalent to Hollywood, Bollywood as it is referred to,
stands as a notable second example.
But where entertainment has achieved its greatest strength and power is
through television broadcasting and its accessibility, by millions, from the
privacy of their own homes. We, in fact, live in the age of the television,
quickly being replaced by the internet. There is no home that does not have
one - in most cases more than two - and there are few individuals that do not
share the common culture of T.V. experiences, now becoming on-line
experiences, no matter what their national backgrounds or social status.
Knowledge is disseminated through these corporately controlled medias,
opinions are offered and shaped, information and disinformation dispersed
and minds are insidiously and subliminally coerced to buy or to believe or to
behave in specified ways.
The cultural norms are often expressed using subtle methods of
psychological manipulation, all under the premise of being amused, where
the mind is inculcated with favoured thinking using the effects of constant
repetition and subliminal imagery.
For instance, in the North American pop-art markets the image of that goofy,
chauvinistic, yet salvageable, male caricature or the uneducated, yet
harmless, homophobe or the misguided, ugly, yet only wanting love, racist,
as part of its ongoing message. These personality sketches are presented as
the personification of uncivilized and uncultured traits, against which are
juxtaposed the more attractive cultivated ones.
Ridicule becomes a powerful tool in expressing distaste without actually
doing so directly, and the positive or negative outcomes of these educating
skits induce a desire to imitate or a not the traits and/or beliefs depicted as
socially good or bad.
In classic sit-com scenarios the message is repeatedly passed-on that the
particular traits theatrically illustrated are not only destructive but also
foolish and rooted in childish psychological needs, such a need for attention
or validation.
A patronizing angle is used to imply what is never openly stated.
Of course no insulting inferences, as these, are made about the more
acceptable dispositions. Here no underlying motive is implied, but only the
serene, healthy disposition of a socially adapted individual is offered as the
only other option.
Impressionable children, and adults, by using the power of relentless
suggestion, are unconsciously trained to have a positive or a negative
reaction towards certain ideas and behaviours.
Then, for a lifetime they will vehemently defend positions they have not
thoroughly thought through, but only feel them as being “right” or “wrong”
in their gut.
Just as product placement has turned out to be a successful way of ensuring
brand recognition and a sense of habituation which increases positive
reactions (path of least resistance) to them, so too is the greatest product of
all, the cultural ideal, promoted and marketed using inconspicuous methods
of mind programming, ensuring loyal customers for life.
The association of happiness with a particular brand or the association of
freedom with the actual choice between brands, becomes ingrained within
the mind to such an extent that it is considered self-evident, and anything
that contradicts it becomes associated with illness and/or dysfunction.
In this way racism, sexism and, in the U.S. liberalism, are now tainted with a
stigma that‟s supposed to result in self-censorships and shame.
Best way to prevent a thought, without overtly banning it, is to make it
embarrassing.
--- * ---
“What the mass media offers is not popular art, but entertainment which is intended to be
consumed like food, forgotten, and replaced by a new dish. “ - W. H. Auden
The line between entertainment and seriousness has blurred to such an extent
that news shows are marginally different from entertainment shows, and
pseudo-documentaries, often proposing paranormal superstitions, cannot be
distinguished from real documentaries offering real insights based on
scientific methodology.
In this respect commercialism puts on the pretence of information and the
façade leaves the mind feeling enlightened and certain.
This blurring is not accidental as convention is best served by equating all
ideas that come from communally recognized sources and by degrading
reason, so as to enable absurdity to infect the human mind and keep it from
distinguishing one from another. Confusion is preferable to awareness and
the flooding of the information highways with endless streams of
questionable knowledge only prevents a consciousness from being able to
discriminate between what is more and what is less likely.
In Neil Postman‟s Amusing Ourselves to Death he proposes that this
constant drive to entertain and to be amused, not only takes away from our
focus on important, life threatening or enhancing interests, but the very
method of entertainment and the means by which it is presented, is creating
a type of mind that is unable to deal with deeper more difficult ideas, and a
type of mind that increasingly relies on images and small, superficial pieces
of information, because it cannot focus its attention on any specific item for
any period of time over the duration of a typical T.V. commercial.
He says:
“To say it still another way: Entertainment is the supra-ideology of all discourse on
television. No matter what is depicted or from what point of view, the overarching
presumption is that it is there for our amusement and pleasure.”
In his view this metamorphosis from a, what he calls, “typographical” mind,
that thinks and deals with ideas using metaphorical language and
imagination, into a television-mind, that suffers from attention deficit
disorder, ignorance and an inability to comprehend ideas other than in a
piecemeal, superficial way and that requires any subject to be chaperoned
and submerged in hefty amounts of mind-numbing amusement.
Postman goes on:
“ America is, in fact, the leading case in point of what may be thought of as the third
great crisis in western education. The first occurred in the fifth century B.C. when Athens
underwent a change from an oral culture to an alphabet-writing culture. To understand
what this meant, we must read Plato. The second occurred in the sixteenth century, when
Europe underwent a radical transformation as a result of the printing press. To understand
what this meant, we must read John Locke. The third is happening now, in America, as a
result of the electronic revolution, particularly the invention of television. To understand
what this means, we must read Marshall Mcluhan.”
We have reached a point where news reporters cannot be distinguished from
entertainers and where presidential candidates are judged by their T.V.
personalities and their photogenic qualities and not, so much, by their
opinions and mental qualities.
Looking at our modern western world we see how, overindulgence in
entertainment, has created people dependant on it and unable to occupy
themselves with anything of importance if it does not contain some aspect of
amusement. This dependence makes the entertainment industry a very
powerful instrument of mass control, equal if not superior to religious
dogma, and an educator of massive proportions.
But let us dissect the utilities of mass entertainment and see how they play a
part in directing and forming psychologies and mental qualities.
“Anyone who tries to make a distinction between education and entertainment doesn't
know the first thing about either.” - Marshall McLuhan
Utilities of Entertainment
Due to the complex demands of the human mind and the necessities of a
complicated modern existence within civilization, entertainment has
acquired multiple uses, which all coexist and work in unison, to create
specific human drives and to divert others into useful avenues or suppress
them into neurosis.
I have categorized the utilities of entertainment into three main groups, each
containing in itself multiple sub-categories with common routes and goals.
“Ideally, advertising aims at the goal of a programmed harmony among all human
impulses and aspirations and endeavors. Using handicraft methods, it stretches out
toward the ultimate electronic goal of a collective consciousness.” – Marshall McLuhan
Distraction
This primary and most primitive of entertainment utilities remains the
driving force behind it all and has lead to unforeseen consequences through
the arts.
The essence of entertainment is inspired by mankind‟s propensity to become
bored and to require a diversion for the mind‟s restlessness.
But, where once we were the creators of our own amusements, we are now
more willing to allow others to distract us, giving rise to the entertainer, the
artist, the professional athlete, that indulges his own creative or physical
talents in play and allows us to participate, as passive observers, vicariously
acting through him/her.
--- * ---
The amount of distracting a being requires is inversely proportional to the
amount of time it requires to meet its physical needs and social
responsibilities.
The need to be distracted, may also expose a deeper discontent with the “real
world” or with the beings overall ability to express itself within it. This
limitation on its choice of action may demand an escape from reality into an
alternate one where its repressed side can find some relief from what it
cannot deal with.
There are many, socially allowable, ways to distract oneself.
Starting from the original participatory ones, of playing or creating oneself
in athletic competition or through artistic expressions, and ending with the
non-participatory ones, made obligatory by economic or social restrictions,
including being a passive observer of another‟s athletic or creative pastime
and going as far as escaping reality through another‟s imagination: as in
movies, books etc.
The difference between the two being the difference between
creator/producer and distracted/consumer.
“Television is a medium of entertainment which permits millions of people to listen to
the same joke at the same time, and yet remain lonesome.“ - T. S. Eliot
In our modern western world the active distraction option has been exceeded
by the more passive, non-active one. We find, in our age, such a degree of
stressful demands on our time, that a further active element is made
practically impossible.
In its place the passive element has come to dominate and is made feasible
through technological outlets and through proxy “experts”.
Just as thinking has been institutionalized, and modern man finds himself
only being able to think through the mind of another, a mediator, approved
by the system and popularly acknowledge as a reliable source or a specialist,
so has entertainment met a similar fate.
Man, today, is more likely to sit on his couch watching how others play,
create and even live than do so himself. He substitutes his own life with
those of others - with the ideal and preferred other - whether real or
mythical, and he lives a thousand experiences through them.
The obliteration of the distinction between “I” and “other” is furthered
through this vivid association of one‟s self with that of the other.
Man no longer lives but experiences living, like a detached observer; he no
longer participates in reality but is a voyeur in a hypothetical, superlative
hyper-reality where his nature finds an outlet and his instincts are defused so
that he can remain a simple, automaton in a faceless system - a mere statistic
with no distinguishing personality or relevance – a number – predictable,
manageable and totally dependent.
And so, sports teams become extensions of his family, his tribe, celebrities
become intimate friends, idols and mentors to be fantasized and emulated,
singers become echoers of his voice, movies and books become new realities
to replace the one he is forced to exist in.
Man can no longer be autonomous. He is totally immersed in otherness.
Indoctrination
The indoctrinating element of mass-entertainment should not be
underestimated.
It is through subliminal consistency that rules are established, opinions
guided and moral attitudes maintained.
Something as simple as a joke in a movie, a commercial with a particular
image, an anchor on a news show using a specific word instead of another,
may appear as harmless, but when repeated continuously over a period of
time and from diverse sources, it becomes a deciding factor as to what is
considered “true” and what a “lie”, what is “good” and what “evil”, what is
“real” and what “fantasy”.
On T.V. channels that are supposedly dedicated to documentaries and/or
history there are regularly interspersed advertising segments, pretending to
be news shows and paranormal, pseudo-historical segments that deal with
fantastic theories in the similar manner employed by legitimate scientific
documentaries.
This muddies the distinction between fantasy and fact or respectable and
unrespectable ideas and the mind begins associating the source with the truth
rather than the idea described through it.
With the constant bombardment of information from multiple sources the
difference between legitimate and illegitimate, genuine and disingenuous
becomes hard for the mind to filter through and memories based on real
events and fictitious ones becomes a matter of personal tastes and immediate
self-interests.
“One of the effects of living with electric information is that we live habitually in a state
of information overload. There's always more than you can cope with.” – Marshall
McLuhan
The amount of information sources in modern, western society is not proof
of accessibility to diverse opinions since most information centers are
controlled by a few corporate entities with common interests and common
goals. The few individuals that have access to mass audiences must go
through the same outlets, in other words they must first be chosen,
supported, endorsed and bankrolled by them – they must sell themselves as
being a good investment.
They are all, on top of that, the end result of the same social environment
and so share the same influences of religious and cultural institutions. The
few “bad apples” and the few “dangerous opinions” that may get through
can be censored and slowly be allowed to perish through indifference.
The latter are deemed to have no audience, since audience tastes are shaped
through institutions, and so they inevitably lack market value, as the usual
excuse that preserves the semblance of free-speech, and so they never have
access to mass audiences.
On the internet they are lost in the cascade of information overload and low
attention spans. Within the jumble few manage to discern, or have the time
to try to do so, between what is reliable and what is not.
“Television is altering the meaning of „being informed‟ by creating a species of
information that might properly be called disinformation. Disinformation does not mean
false information. It means misleading information - misplaced, irrelevant, fragmented or
superficial information - information that creates the illusion of knowing something, but
which in fact leads one away from knowing.” – Neil Postman
It may be argued that no direct control is exacted upon the disseminators and
facilitators of mass mind manipulation and that they are allowed to function
freely with only popularity and profit as the guiding standard; this neglects
to consider the indirect control exacted by those owning the entertainment
outlets and how they choose which artist, which reporter, which musician
will be allowed to roam freely within their realm.
A knowledge of human psychology – the same being denied as being
present within some pseudo-intellectual circles - goes a long way in
producing a desirable outcome.
Where no market exists, one is created by stimulating the right instinctive
nerves and by constructing the appropriate associations.
On radio broadcasts particular songs and artists get airtime, when they
appropriate moneys are exchanged and the right backing is there, while
others are lost in the shuffle and disappear in anonymity.
How much greatness has vanished in this way? One can only wonder.
"We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely
by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our
democratic society is organized." – Edward Bernays
Censorship is rarely obvious, in modern systems.
It is conducted during the choosing process, behind closed doors, which
allows for the illusion that free expression is endorsed by the system, that all
opinions are tolerated equally and that popular tastes are the deciding factor
as to what gets produced and offered-up for mass consumption.
But who gets promoted to the top, within these institutions, if not the one
who possesses the “right” talents and beliefs, attitudes and, most of all, the
“right” image?
In fact popular tastes and values are themselves coerced by the disseminators
of entertainment and not judged by the general tendencies of the masses. The
people are conditioned to have particular drives or to have particular needs
to express their natural inclinations, either through the entertainment
industry itself or through other religious, social and cultural institutions such
as the education system. Then they are given the very thing they were
coerced into wanting, or are offered an alternative to substitute a need that
cannot be erased but also cannot be accepted as it is.
“A single factory, potentially capable of supplying a whole continent with its particular
product, cannot afford to wait until the public asks for its product; it must maintain
constant touch, through advertising and propaganda, with the vast public in order to
assure itself the continuous demand which alone will make its costly plant profitable.” -
Edward, Bernays
Even when subversive ideas are allowed to be expressed, it is in such a way
as to diffuse their power and to minimize their effect. It is not surprising that
those opinions that contradict the popular, official, position are exposed in
fantasy scenarios, in humiliating simplicity, or are associated with other,
more juvenile, theories and labelled “conspiracies”.
This devalues them, as a possibility, and takes away the necessity for an
explanation and a response.
“Madison Avenue is a very powerful aggression against private consciousness. A demand
that you yield your private consciousness to public manipulation.” – Marshall McLuhan
Venting
Another use for the entertainment industry can be found in how it provides
society with a venting, pressure release outlet, by which many of the species
more undesirable natural inclinations are allowed to flow through and so
made innocuous.
Through the method of passive participation man lets loose some socially
unwanted energies and enables him to remain disciplined and malleable in
his other, more socially desirable, activities.
As such…
-Sexual promiscuity is undesirable so pornography comes in to allow some
release for a creature that is, by nature, licentious. Furthermore, through
sexual entertainment, some more mischievous, aggressive and culturally
unacceptable sexual behaviours are allowed to vent their energies.
-Violence is undesirable so entertainment comes in to allow a passive
experience that allows for any level of violence to be explored and
represented for a creature that is, by nature, violent, in order to maintain the
standard of lawfulness and peace that makes civilization possible. In the
process some more personal vindictive, destructive characteristics are
allowed to be expunged and cleansed.
Many other such human, “culturally undesirable”, predispositions are
deflated and freed from the constrains of the human subconscious and thus
prevented from becoming pressurized and explosive, in this manner.
Adventurism, rebelliousness, destructiveness, aggressiveness, egotism,
arrogance, laziness, free-thought, unwanted creativity, confrontational
political ideals, and a multitude of various other unacceptable expressions of
individuality and uniqueness are given an avenue to be articulated and
forgotten.
Here is where entertainment serves as a pressure valve through which most
of the human natural heat is vented and rendered null, for the benefit of the
social norm.
The very fact that these entertainment outlets exist speaks more as to the real
nature of the homo sapient and how it has been manipulated and mutated to
fit into idealized systems of its own creation.
--- * ---
Evidently the demands of civilization limit man and his actions and impose
an added boredom to the natural one stemming from an overactive mind; the
success of our species and the overpopulation this has lead to also detaches
man from direct attachment to his creations, his work and his fellow human
beings and dehumanizes him into an abstraction, a number, a simple
consumer statistic.
This manipulation of individualism and natural drives is achieved through
many institutions, of which, the entertainment industry is only one. It is not
only the subject matter of entertainment but the mode by which it is offered
in that plays an important part in how we think, what we think and why we
think it.
“Art at its most significant is a Distant Early Warning System that can always be relied
on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it.” – Marshall McLuhan
--- * ---
“Life imitates art far more than art imitates life.” - Oscar Wilde
No other institution displays its nature more readily than the business of
show business.
The self-referential sampling where music repeats its melodies and
individuals impersonate fantasy pop-culture caricatures, leaving reality on
the periphery, cannot be denied here.
No more does man mirror nature in using parody and allegory, but man
imitates man using parody and allegory.
We have now entered into the realm of the surreal, where artifice is taken as
authentic and creation consists in experimenting with the creations of
another…and he on another…along the long dark path towards a beginning
that is forgotten in the haze of historical references.
The entire thing is more than a burlesque play, it is a parody of a parody
where the participants have forgotten that they are caricaturing another
caricature, to the point where it all becomes a staged event, depicting a
staged event, with no actual importance.
The looping effect closes the circle and the cocoon of artificiality tries to
seal its porous membrane against external infections.
“When we begin relying on the Internet for all of our news and information we will turn
into a nation of zombies.” - Neil Postman
The superorganism struggles to self-complete like any other living organism.
It‟s parts, lacking the ability to survive independently from the main body,
are cut-off, protected, assimilated, organized (institutionalization) and
armoured against any external effects.
The world is engaged through the refraction of the diaphanous film covering
the outer layers of community.
No light is allowed to enter and nothing is allowed out, unless expelled as
unusable excrement, without the mitigating judgment of the centralized
nervous system that decides what is usable and what is detrimental to
communal harmony.
No other judgment is permitted within, unless it is guided by acceptable
standards.
Nihilism
“- Noun
1. Total rejection of established laws and institutions
2. Anarchy, terrorism, or other revolutionary activity.
3. Total and absolute destructiveness, esp. toward the world at large and including
oneself: the power-mad nihilism that marked Hitler's last years.
Philosophy.
4. a. An extreme form of skepticism: the denial of all real existence or the possibility of
an objective basis for truth. b. nothingness or nonexistence.
5. (sometimes initial capital letter ) The principles of a Russian revolutionary group,
active in the latter half of the 19th century, holding that existing social and political
institutions must be destroyed in order to clear the way for a new state of society and
employing extreme measures, including terrorism and assassination.
6. annihilation of the self, or the individual consciousness, esp. as an aspect of mystical
experience.”
As a philosophical force, nihilism has a distinctly masculine attitude.
Without a feminine counterbalance it may result in total destruction of all
and everything – the absolute end of extreme resistance, by the obliteration
of all resistance.
A denial of life itself.
The monopolizing masculine entity of the state, takes on the form if this
destructive energy, as all is laid bear before it.
Only it can yield this hammer.
Behind it is left a flat terrain of evenly distributed dust.
“The modern mind is in complete disarray. Knowledge has stretched itself to the point
where neither the world nor our intelligence can find any foot-hold. It is a fact that we are
suffering from nihilism.” - Albert Camus
The promotion of self-deprecating ideologies and dogmas is part of this
machinery of leveling.
Distinction is a hindrance to uniformity and discrimination is a resistance to
absolute control.
The system‟s parts must be made to comply with its power and so diversity
is not permitted, unless it is associated with service to the whole.
Specialization and the rewards of accessibility and proscribed privilege are
the only acceptable modes of distinction, and this only because they provide
an inspiration and an example to be emulated – the spark of socially
acceptable ambition.
--- * ---
As a religious and political movement nihilism takes on many
configurations.
Some are upfront and honest while others are deceitful and vague.
Most of the major religious and political canons of our time are profoundly,
if not directly, nihilistic in their strategies.
The elimination of all sense of self, of ego, of identity; the shaming of
selfishness and of specific socially unwanted ideas; the eradication and
degradation of consciousness and its discriminating purpose; the denigration
of reality and the world at large… are all indicative of this insidious drive to
eradicate all forms of opposition to systemic control.
In this war, manhood becomes the first casualty.
In slow succession many of the human traits, we take for granted, are
exterminated or forced to flee into the subconscious, as a final refuge, where
all relics linger for a time.
The system‟s nihilistic motive may or may not be resisted by the individual,
as the rejection of his own obsolescence - the negation of negation - as a sign
of resistance to this all encompassing absolute.
The demise of intelligence is not far behind. Awareness is detrimental to
blind acceptance and anything that distinguishes, and by distinguishing can
choose, is redundant if peaceful coexistence is to be made possible.
Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Communism, Democracy,
Equalitarianism, Humanitarianism, are all manifestations of this staged
obliteration of individuation and the consciousness that maintains it as a
distinct entity.
A direct assault against multiplicity, as the very essence of existence.
All these new age and old hack dogmas preach some form of self-denial,
forced respect, love for one and all, unbound tolerance, and the denunciation
of distinction.
In this fight, feminine psychologies, of both the male and female biological
kind, fall into line behind one type of nihilistic despair or another – they
surrender to it.
In its promise they find a relief from the responsibility of self and the price
of existence – They find an intoxication against the dis-ease of
need/suffering.
If the eradication of self is part of their salvation and if unconsciousness is
what it takes, then they are all for it.
There is nothing weakness will not sacrifice to find some form of power.
In what they are told to give up they, mindlessly, place the absurd hope of an
incorporeal consciousness, a mind beyond the flesh, a universal
consciousness, or they dream of their non-birth, like a slave dreams of his
freedom by death.
Metaphysical arguments take effect and the parts are taught that they are not
distinct at all, or that distinction is wrong and can only prolong suffering.
This is essential to uniformity, since it attempts to completely destroy the
very sense of individuation or the very idea of multiplicity.
The world, we are told, is an illusion or a passageway, a step, towards a
higher stage; a better world.
A staging area, testing faith.
Spiritual purgatory for those that lack all spirit or can even define what spirit
means without resorting to mysticism.
Nothing is worth striving for, except total abandonment, and so nothing is
striven for, unless it is abandonment.
The individual is now readied for full assimilation. He no longer
acknowledges the self and so becomes a malleable, dull, particle, capable of
fitting in anywhere.
Thoughtlessness is turned into a mystical experienced and called:
meditation.
Stupidity is turned into a necessary salvation.
--- * ---
When the sense of self is totally taken over by external wills and identity is
rerouted through institutional wellsprings, the individual senses his dilution
as a relief and his identity is completely taken over by organizations and
external wills.
The sensation of release from the responsibilities and burdens of
individuality takes on a spiritual nature and the mind feels its association
with a larger whole as a broadening of its consciousness – a metaphysical
orgasm.
The stunted mind feels at one with God…and at peace.
--- * ---
Self-examination is not flattering to all. Very few can fully appreciate or
accept what this examination uncovers…or is unable to uncover.
The phenomenon of nihilism is not a rarity, as many would like to think, but
it underlies most of today‟s major spiritual and political dogmas.
What is admonished is only the honest expression of nihilistic despair. The
pretences must be maintained, or else reality, once more, is exposed, and
reality is exactly what is being denied.
The preaching of self-hatred is often masked behind love, just as the
eradication of individuality is often purported by those pretending to be
defenders of it.
The duplicity of civilization is the underlying current of conformity; the
promise far exceeding the real.
Stupidity
“Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do.” - Bertrand Russell
Stupidity is turning into this age‟s defining individual asset.
A necessary ingredient for a more normal, modern, life-style where your
achievement is ordained by your willingness to accept what is given without
doubting its validity or wavering before its demands.
The benefits of thoughtlessness are celebrated, nay, worshiped in our
culture, as charming adolescent buffoonery and fashionable defiance;
celebrated in a world that is obsessed with naïve youthfulness and with the
ostentation of uniqueness.
“There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity.” - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Mindfulness, on the other hand, is vituperated as being un-cool and
snobbish, or as a killjoy to the endless pursuit for elusive happiness and
enthralling distraction.
The thoughtful one is dubbed arrogant if (s)he is unable to accept absurdity
as “possible” and if (s)he cannot show respect towards what is beneath its
reasoning.
All deserve the benefit of the doubt, and no less will be permitted, if all are
to remain assured that, no matter how stupid and childish their opinions are,
they too must be appreciated.
A simplistic Perspectivism is employed to allude to probability where little
is justifiable by those lacking the ability to defend positions with no merit.
Weakness and its intellectual counterpart stupidity must be defended against
anything that threatens to expose is as what it is…an unfit element protected
within a system that depends on it for its own survival.
--- * ---
Thinking “too much” can only lead you into more worries, more despair,
whereas the dumb, enjoy the blissful cheerfulness of mental retardation.
All that matters is immediate gratification and hedonistic escapism, in a
system that sells it with ostentatious abundance.
The western superorganisms‟s life blood, capital flow, thrives on the
rejuvenating injections of unfulfilled expectation and exaggerated promise.
What else is life good for, for the nihilistic mind that has lost all sense of self
and now finds it in consumption and momentary orgasmic releases of
repressed energies?
Happiness is this culture‟s mythology: A hazy oasis in the distant hot sands,
shimmering with voluptuous promise, but never delivering the goods.
What else could it have been, in a universe that exhibits no static state and
life is etched in unceasing degrees of dissatisfaction?
Would not total satiation deliver an end to action?
Yes, ungratified need is the driving force of life; its conscious interpretation
of its own nature.
But all of this is only possible when there exists a paternalistic system, an
omnipresent parent, protecting little girls and boys against the more dire
consequences of their own errors and their endearing gullibility.
The system becomes parent to its citizenry and this only amplifies the
conditions that maintain the populace in a perpetual state of adolescence.
Common sense practices, like living within one‟s means, or not risking too
much in harebrain activities and get-rich-quick schemes, have to be taught
to, hypothetical, adults who exhibit the credulity of infants high on sugar.
The idea that if something sounds too good to be true it is, most likely, not
true, escapes their pampered dispositions and inflated hopes.
Their anxiety laden hopefulness will have none of this dose of icy
pragmatism.
They could not cope, on these hot desert sands, without its cooling mirage.
Thousands of self-help books, sold to those that have to be told that
spending more than you earn is a recipe for disaster and the only way to lose
weight is to take in less calories than you burn, earn millions of dollars for
those clever few that can exploit stupidity within the boundaries of economic
rules.
Television programming is now offering daily updates on how to deal with
the disastrous repercussions of what it has previously promoted, as part of
the system it serves; moderation, communicated by the very instrument of
raging consumerism; millions of mindless automatons given advice by the
same “experts” that sunk them in the quagmire they now try to crawl out of.
The same products that resulted in disaster have been repackaged and are
now being resold to the same idiots that bought them in the first place.
They call it consumer confidence.
The same system that lives and breathes endless consumption is now
advocating self-restraint, postponed gratification and self-discipline –
capitalism momentarily accepting socialism so as to survive from the
consequences of its own unbridled methods.
The height of tragic comedy played out in real time.
But what do you expect when the system has stripped the individual of all
self-respect and sheltered it from a reality it has little experience with?
Government steps in to protect its citizenry from its own idiocy, by
providing social safety-nets and enforcing rules that are meant to place limits
to witless activities.
The herd must be exploited but not to the point of debilitating exhaustion.
The system self-corrects, as its greed and hunger is pulled back, for a
moment, and some respite is given to the cattle it bleeds dry.
--- * ---
Immediate gratification is what rules these fabricated lush surroundings, and
what is stupidity but an inability to foresee or postpone gratification for the
hope of a better return?
The cultivation of idiocy and the maintenance of the population in a state of
childish inexperience with any degree of suffering, only serves to enhance
this short-term perspective where the immediate supersedes anything
exceeding the mind‟s ability to calculate and so to foresee and understand.
The capital, inevitably, flows and the masses are directed with manufactured
desires and inflated expectations, until the bubble burst, as it always does,
and the moron is cast into despair where he becomes even more malleable.
--- * ---
“Anyone who has studied the history of technology knows that technological change is
always a Faustian bargain: Technology giveth and technology taketh away, and not
always in equal measure. A new technology sometimes creates more than it destroys.
Sometimes, it destroys more than it creates. But it is never one-sided. The invention of
the printing press is an excellent example. Printing fostered the modern idea of
individuality but it destroyed the medieval sense of community and social integration.
Printing created prose but made poetry into an exotic and elitist form of expression.
Printing made modern science possible but transformed religious sensibility into an
exercise in superstition. Printing assisted in the growth of the nation-state but, in so
doing, made patriotism into a sordid if not a murderous emotion.” – Neil Postman
In this age of technological wonders the printing press has given way to the
television and to the computer, and the word has given way to the image and
to short sound-bites, returning man back to his primal mental state of visual
and ocular reactivity.
In a world of abstractions the minds cultivated are unable to grasp
abstraction and thus become victims of it.
The image takes over where concepts cannot be formulated and human
discourse turns into an exchange of verbal grunts and semantic acrobatics.
Our environment, in the west, is permeated with imagery, with idols and
celebrities, and accompanying them all a few choice words imposing an
emotional text upon us and demanding the same responses.
The perfect ass, a lush grapefruit, a shiny automobile, giving-off the illusion
of health and virility when it is founded on a cesspool of lies and rotting
duplicity.
A façade of splendor over petty dullness, and the image in place of
substance.
Stupidity finds its place here and with ferocity defends its “right” to
ignorance.
--- * ---
The sheltering effect of the system does not only result in the absence of any
experience with discomfort, making the individual more vulnerable to any
slight degree of it, but it also eradicates the worse consequences of error and
so promotes a more brassy unjustifiably arrogant personality, thinking of
itself as invulnerable in a world it has a paltry comprehension of.
A personality that conveniently, also, serves the state‟s need for mindless,
obedient, reckless participants.
“Stupidity is the deliberate cultivation of ignorance.” - William Gaddis
Manipulation is guaranteed when dependence is cemented.
Once the full extent of reality is excluded, fear made into an anathema, and
need is easily satisfied, the mind loses all habituation with the indifferent
frugality of nature. It can no longer tolerate anything above a certain level of
discomfort and with the slow maintenance of anxiety it is made malleable to
external influence.
Where fear causes cautious efficiency, within natural environments, in
manmade ones its, relative, absence results in imprudent incompetence and
flamboyant posturing.
Children raised taking for granted their own safety and well-being, become
convinced that this is due to some intrinsic quality they possess, some
transcending privilege they have a “right” to, rather than it being given to
them by a community that will demand its investment back tenfold, at a later
time.
Children are raised to feel invulnerable and fearless. They are told that there
are no barriers to what they can accomplish, no predetermined limitations to
their qualities, as long as they adhere to communal rules.
A dearth in self-discipline and respect, is the result.
Where there is no great cost, there is no great fear.
Where there is no fear there is no caution.
Where there is no caution there is no respect.
But the world cares not about such human contrivances. In the end a cruel
awakening awaits these eternal children, as disillusionment ensues when
reality fails to concern itself with their inflated hopes and exaggerated
dreams.
“As if there were safety in stupidity alone.” - Henry David Thoreau
At this point, they are ripe for the picking.
Dejected and defeated they await the slightest glimmer of hope to latch onto
and offer themselves to, like desperate whores.
--- * ---
If, as we have said, intelligence is a projection of self into the unknown, a
preemptive assessment that prepares and more efficiently focuses energies,
then stupidity is the mental equivalent of shortsightedness - consciousness
contained within a not too distant event horizon, where anything beyond it
does not affect its peace because it is simply not perceived.
Information overload, certainly makes it stressful to deal with all the
probabilities awareness opens up.
Especially in this day and age with its abundance of information,
bombarding consciousness constantly, the mind is hard-pressed to
distinguish relevant from irrelevant knowledge and reliable from unreliable
sources.
The normal recourse is to run from it, into the comforting embrace of
ignorance.
A self-inflicted blindness.
“Stupidity often saves a man from going mad.” - Oliver Wendell Holmes
But this, in itself, is no response to its challenge. Denial and ignorance can
only save you from the knowledge of the inevitable, but not from it.
In the eastern traditions this mindlessness has been raised to the status of
holy communion with the essence of existence.
The self-hypnotized brain senses its own temporality, with no substantive
core, as a return to a source, and an escape from the consciousness of its own
existence.
If consciousness is a discriminating, rejecting and resisting method of
distinguishing self amongst multiplicity, unconsciousness becomes a release
from the continual effort this entails.
In that moment of thoughtlessness the mind is partially unburdened from its
sense of existence and feels the unconscious flow it has sprang from.
The relief is addictive and rejuvenating. Abandoning self and denying
reality, surrenders the mind to the inevitable end; accepting it as
unavoidable.
The empowering lucidity of indifference but, in this case, an indifference
built on obliviousness.
The ego and the world that has made it possible is annihilated with a simple
act of denial – a twist in perspective.
But the effect is imaginary. A perspective cannot alter reality, unless it first
perceives it accurately, accepts it as what it is, and then engages it actively,
utilizing this understanding to manipulate it.
The devout denier is still maintained and only the consciousness of reality is
inebriated into numbness.
Being unaware of a danger does not make one immune to it. In fact, it makes
one all the more susceptible.
The “selfless” one reaffirms the self and the world, with every breathe, every
heartbeat and with every acceptance of nourishment and hydration.
His essence is continually resisting disintegration, fighting off external
threats and maintaining its boundaries, while it spews out words of
condemnation and ascetic overindulgence.
Words are exposed as duplicitous when actions contradict them.
The “enlightened one‟s” refutation is hypocritical if not plainly ineffectual.
The very denunciation of ego is an act of ego, as the very act of selflessness
is an act of self – the self manifesting itself in the time/space continuum as
will.
Choice is only possible through this temporal process of congruent energies.
The denial of self is, ironically, possible by the emergence of self.
Without it choice is superfluous.
The only thing really denied is awareness, consciousness, which can only
increase care and the stress this results in.
The mind is, merely, denied its fullness. It is rendered partially comatose to
avoid the ramifications of awakening.
The objective of this spiritual compulsion is to dilute the sense of self back
into the flux.
To return back to the state before birth and degrade existence as a counterfeit
interlude.
Nihilism permeates from these premises, as a desirable death-wish.
Stupidity is made into a spiritual awakening; a rebirth.
Many flock to it for salvation.
They were never meant to survive, and their inability to cope validates this
uncomfortable truth.
They only live because the system permits them to.
Path of Least Resistance
“The average man's judgment is so poor, he runs a risk every time he uses it.” - Edgar
Watson Howe
The path-of-least-resistance is the path all unconsciousness follows.
Rivers flow along it, winds are directed through it, mountains crumble
because of it, predators hunt within its grounds.
The basic principle here is one of interactions and relationship: ephemerally
congruent energy interacting and flowing towards the direction that offers
the least reaction to its unavoidable action; in the flowing towards the being,
the becoming, is determined by these interactions and reactions.
When dealing with living organism with a central nervous system, which
have evolved to more efficiently direct actions, or focus energies {Will},
towards a direction {object/objective}, then the path-of-least-resistance can
also be characterized as a constant cost/benefit analysis where both the
potential costs and benefits to an action are judged in accordance with the
mind‟s abilities and inclinations {genetic inheritance}, and its successes
determined by the accuracy of these judgments {experiences}.
Only a conscious mind, and a sophisticated one at that, can choose a path-of-
most {or more}-resistance with the prospect of superior gains in the future.
In this case the organism chooses a more risky action in the hopes of a more
valuable benefit. Consequently, the ability of the mind to project itself, using
the imagination, comes into play and intelligence presents itself as a
formidable tool of pre-emption and preparation - efficiency.
Nevertheless, in nature risks are kept at a minimum and powerful predators
hunt for the weakest prey or the one that will offer the most nutritional
return for its expenditure of energy and the risks to life and limb.
Existing, alone, is risky enough, without adding to it. Even a simple act
contains some element of danger, and so the natural inclination is one of
minimizing the probabilities of chance upon existence. The conscious mind
seeks order as a matter of self-preservation and only a mind suffering from
some psychological overriding motive goes against this basic purpose.
Chance being a euphemism for the unknown factor; order being its
minimization.
The majestic lion, when it hunts, pursues the easiest prey. It, too, does not
push its luck, when a mere fracture can mean its end.
--- * ---
In all activities movement, activity, is governed by this flow towards least
resistance - where resistance is measured in relation to what is acting.
With life, and the evolution of consciousness, this activity is made more
powerful, through the aforementioned synergetic effect, and so more
resistance to it is required to thwart its purpose.
Efficiency is, thusly, achieved and the organism, this emerging self-ordering
unity, increases its survivability or its potential for completion, its spatial
possibilities, by increasing its power.
With the addition of memory and the storage of experiential data, on top of
the genetic code which is determined by previously successful activities, the
organism gains an advantage over all other unities and over the unconscious
flux.
This can be referred to as an increase in power/strength or possibilities, from
a metaphysical standpoint.
Using this stored genetic code {natural inclination, predisposition} and
experiences/knowledge {nurture} as the only way to override the effects of
these pre-programmed activities and pre-established directions and modes of
conduct, the organism can overcome its own attraction towards what offers
least effort and least resistance and opt to take a harder path so as to gain an
advantage over others by thinking further ahead, with a longer event
horizon, and by, hopefully, pre-empting their pre-emptive projections.
This turns into a battle of intellectual forces – a chess match.
In such a case the risks increase not only in the immediate assumption of
amplified effort but in the long-term, by assuming an outcome and/or its
value before it is made certain.
The evolutionary superiority of intelligence is, here, most evident.
The cost/benefit analysis of potential burdens to potential returns is affected
by the mind‟s ability to accurately determine what potential burdens and
costs will be involved and what potential benefits will reward the taking on
of these burdens. But, also, they will be determined by the mind‟s ability to
evaluate the value of these costs and benefits to the particular individual –
self-consciousness, since all value is based on comparisons and all
comparisons are relative.
As is often the case, the simpler mind overestimates the benefits and
underestimates the costs and so is always, partly, disappointed by the
outcome; its energy incorrectly spent.
From the previous we can see how simpler minds can be manipulate and
guided into activities that are not beneficial to them, or into activities that
demand too high a cost in relation to the possible benefits. This is feasible by
manipulating the judgment of the minds in relation to the both the cost and
to the benefit.
Overstating the benefits or understating the costs is a method of ensuring
desirable activities, and both these manipulations are possible when little
self-awareness is present.
When the system infuses the young mind with ideals and ideas that
determine value judgments or when the environmental conditions, such as
human societies, impose a comparison, because all value judgments are such
comparisons, between self and the average other, then the system in the one
that defines the value of the object/objective, while protecting the individual
from the full extent of the costs, and thusly ensures a certain preferred
activity.
“The falling rate of use value, which is a constant of the capitalist economy, gives rise to
a new form of privation within the realm of augmented survival; this is not to say that this
realm is emancipated from the old poverty: on the contrary, it requires the vast majority
to take part as wage workers in the unending pursuit of its ends – a requirement which, as
everyone knows, one must either submit or die. It is the reality of this situation – the fact
that, even in its most impoverished form (food, shelter), use value has no existence
outside the illusory riches of augmented survival – that is the real basis for the general
acceptance of illusion in the consumption of modern commodities. The real consumer
thus becomes a consumer of illusion. The commodity is this illusion, which is in fact real,
and the spectacle is its most general term.” – Guy Debord {The Society of the
Spectacle}
--- * ---
Risk Factor
Nature‟s more impecunious environments demands a more cautious
temperament. It is only in the safe, sheltering, superfluous environmental
conditions of manmade systems where risk-taking is considered a venerated
activity, and this only because these environments depend on constant
capital overturn and the constant and consistent mindless activities of its
members.
Yet, risk taking is part of natural selection.
When risk is undertaken in nature it is at a high price. A price, often,
demanded by the impact of the libido upon the mind that becomes possessed
by its madness - an unconscious compromise towards the inevitability of
death.
The seasonal head-butting competitions of mountain goats can go on for
days on end, forcing the male to neglect his, much needed, nourishment, in
preparation for the coming winter conditions.
The male peacock carries a conspicuous burdensome display of its prowess,
increasing its vulnerability.
All this due to the agitation of the procreative impulse and the necessity of
proving genetic worthiness to the opposite sex.
No reasonable mind would endure such hardships or forsake its own short
future for the sake of a momentary release or for the uncertain rewards of
posterity.
The entire act, in fact, is highly irrational.
“Only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-
shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex … More fittingly than the fair
sex, women could be called the unaesthetic sex. Neither for music, nor poetry, nor the
plastic arts do they possess any real feeling of receptivity: if they affect to do so, it is
merely mimicry in service of their effort to please.” – Arthur Schopenhauer
Only by keeping this in mind can the frequency and the exaltation of risk
takers, in our culture, can be more fully appreciated.
The underlying motive is one of sexual fulfilment, even when the male is
attached to a female by holy matrimony.
But not all is so cut and dry.
There is an alternative motive for the capitalistic system, in particular, to
promote risk-takers and gamblers.
Without them the flow of capital would dwindle to a drizzle, where
downpours are desired.
Reflecting existence, the system depends on the constant flow of capital, and
capital, money, is no more than the abstraction of resources …energy.
Promoting the sexiness of go-getters, through pop-culture, and playing upon
the intrinsic procreative and empowering aspects of ambition, the system
ensures a steady stream of players.
The allowance of upward economic mobility is like the publication of lottery
winners who, against great odds, are marketed as proof that the system
works and that anyone can win.
The gambler ignores the odds and uses those few instances of publicized
wins to maintain his obsession with the game.
But the gambler rarely leaves a winner, in the end. Even when he does win
he does not stop playing the game, ensuring a future loss. The odds are
stacked against him because the house never loses…and without the house
there is no game.
“The gambling known as business looks with austere disfavor upon the business known
as gambling.” - Ambrose Bierce
But things are not as dire as all that.
Where in the wild a slight mistake, a risk unsuccessfully taken, a foolhardy
endeavor, can spell death, here the risk taker is not really at risk and he is not
as bold as he pretends to be.
The fighter that enters into the rink knows that, no matter what, there‟s an
entire structure waiting to take care of him, win or lose.
He may fail, he may lose, but it is highly unlikely that he will pay the
ultimate price for his gamble: death, as the end of all choice.
The, supposedly, audacious investor, as well, risks what he can afford to
lose, knowing that even if all goes to hell, he will not go without food or
water or shelter.
In such a case the sheltered individual can put on an air of courage, when
his/her survival is protected and there‟s a meal and shelter awaiting, no
matter what the results are.
This behavior is all for show, usually practiced in staged events under
controlled conditions.
Motivated by censored libido or by the ennui sheltering environments
produce in abundance, the individual enters into activities that offer the
imitation of nature‟s unpredictable brutality, seeking a reconnection with
something more real – more profound.
These surrogate methods are meant to offer a platform for the mind to
unleash its full potential, to maintain its sharpness, when safe trivial
predictability has blunted its wits; it is meant to give a particular action a
weightiness it lacks in everyday life, where even sex has lost its original
substance. It is a melodramatic overindulgence, meant to imitate the finality
of natural selection.
Finally, the display of hyper-masculine machismo is really a display of
sheltered certainty.
These same children, trying to prove their prowess, would not dare even to
think about doing what they do, without the knowledge that there‟s a system
there to take care of them and cushion their fall if all goes wrong.
Without it they would either excuse themselves or perish, like the idiots that
they are.
Epilogue
“Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.”
- Dylan, Thomas
Given all that has been said, so far, it is relatively clear that the “perfect”
type of social participant is the feminine one, along with all of the traits that
go with it as a condition of its necessity.
It is clear that the increasing need to integrate heterogeneous, multifarious,
populations into one cohesive, malleable, and stable whole makes it
necessary to diminish the aspects of individuation that confronts conformity
as insufferable and as an affront on individual dignity and the free
expression of self.
That the other threatens us or challenges us or causes us distress, is not a
convenient justification to dismiss it as evil or as unnecessary.
Truth knows of no wants but only demands an acknowledgment of its
presence.
Truth is not stringent but must remain as flexible as the world purports it to
be; truth that challenges us to keep-up or fall-back as its fatality.
The imposition of a rigid ideal is not realistic but a hopeful projection of our
own desirable ending to an existential process that exhibits no such end and
no such purpose.
Our charge, if we are to accept one, is to keep up with its recalcitrant
presence and our individual interpretations, our perspectives, are to be
judges by how well they adhere to its obdurate provocation.
Perspectivism is not an argument to preserve our own established beliefs, it
is a trial we must present ourselves as worthy of.
The underlying premise, throughout this essay, is that the world does not
bend to our will, unless we first perceive our own place within it and admit
to our own misgivings; it is unaffected by declarations and simplistic
denials, based on hope rather than an honest assessment of reality.
All gains entail a loss as all losses entail a gain. To ignore what is given up
so as to justify what is acquired is not a rational desire but an emotional one,
that wishes to bury under lies and ignorance what is unflattering or troubling
to immediate gratification.
The world exists before our emergence and continues after our downfall. It
is unconcerned with our preferences and our dismissals, but only submits to
our relentless and clear resolve, when we fully comprehend it and use this
understanding to bend it to our will.
Human ideals represent direction, vague signposts that define our character
but are never, ever, attained. The sequential effects determining the
substance of our expectations and the viability of our hopes.
My motive is not to hurt anyone or to cause anyone distress; I am not out for
cheap attention by using controversy to garner underserved consideration.
My motive is only towards a reality I am ignorant of and that I explore, as a
matter concerning my own self-interests.
In presenting my views publicly there is no desire to be followed or to be
accepted as a teacher, a leader, or an authority, replacing pre-existing ones,
but there is a desire to test myself against the perceptions of others and to
offer my thoughts to the edifying examination of scepticism.
In my haste my style may seem uncompromising or insufficient but this is of
a secondary concern. What cannot be doubted is that my words are honest
and direct…or that they are my own, no matter what resemblances or
agreement they may find in the opinions of others.
They have not been constructed through imitation, but only through
inspiration, and not through regurgitation, but only through quotation as a
supportive element to my own deliberations.
--- * ---
The idea that ideals and ideas are only as good as their rhetoric or their
hypothetical promises, is ludicrous and naïve.
How perfection applies theoretically is rarely how it is practiced
pragmatically.
The component of the human condition is, almost, always absent from any
speculative application of theory to practice.
How we wish human beings should or could behave is different from how
they, actually, are behaving, despite words paying lip-service to romantic
hopes.
A test to objectivity:
If your expectations are consistently dumbfounded and your visions,
surprised by reality, then you should not seek the reason in the imperfection
of the world, but in the imperfection of your interpretations and expectations
of the world.
If you find yourself constantly readjusting your opinions to your altering
self-interests or to your forced adaptation to a reality that does not easily
yield to your wants, then you should not take this as evidence of your open-
mindedness and objectivity, but as evidence of your continuing error in
successfully deciphering your own sensual translations of the world as it is,
rather than as you hope it would be.
An error produced, if by northing else, by your own emotional reactions to a
world that does not care about them.
The bottom-line is that our perspectives are only as good as their ability to
explain the world around us and offer us insights as to predict its patterns,
rather than by how well their reflect our own desires and how they make us
feel.
Using this decisive factor my own perspectives should be judged as useful or
not. Their adherence to modern, popular myths and feel-good opinions
should not be used to determine their validity.
An opinion is either timeless, in that it holds true across cultural and
temporal conditions, or it is not, and so it is only relevant within the context
of current mythologies and cultural movements, as they are shaped by
environmental conditions.
--- * ---
Unavoidably sex must be discarded as primal or else one must submit to the
premises that make sexual behaviour pleasurable.
One cannot selectively throw away the aspects that are unflattering or
undesirable, while retaining the aspects that are flattering and desirable,
without admitting to the influence of subjective thinking and emotion.
What constitutes sexual intercourse as gratifying must, also, be considered
as being responsible for our displeasures and as a factor in ingratitude.
The strategy of differentiating between appearance and essence is a
metaphysical standpoint that not only relies on duality but that, also, offers a
comforting appeasement to our existential angst.
--- * ---
Within this melee of continuous struggle to maintain presence, resistance to
fragmentation, and the desire to increase power, the individual finds
himself/herself lost in a sea of confusion.
The self is first sought as a starting point, from where all else may follow.
To this end I offer my own views.
The levelling of mankind continues.
READ PAPER
