Join Us on FACEBOOKVă invit să vă alăturaţi grupului Facebook Mişcarea DACIA, ce-şi propune un alt fel de a face politică!

Citiţi partea introductivă şi proiectul de Program, iar dacă vă place, veniţi cu noi !
O puteţi face clicând alături imaginea, sau acest link




Academia Iluministă (79)

Maggio 10th, 2019 No Comments   Posted in Mişcarea Dacia

Este posibil ca imaginea să conţină: unul sau mai mulţi oameni

The Society of the Spectacle:

“In societies where modern conditions of production prevail, all of life presents itself as an immense accumulation of spectacles. Everything that was directly lived has moved away into a representation.” –Guy Debord

“…a pseudo-world apart…where the liar has lied to himself. The spectacle in general, as the concrete inversion of life…” –Guy Debord

“The spectacle is not a collection of images, but a social relation among people, mediated by images.” –Guy Debord

The 1968 French uprisings were almost entirely the product of the promptings of the Situationist International. It was their platform and political perspective that formed the ideological core of the protests. Quotations from Debord’s The Society of the Spectacle were painted on walls, put on posters and distributed in pamphlets. The Last Bling King by Mike Hockney is heavily influenced by SI themes. Indeed, several members of the Illuminati assisted the SI in Paris in 1968. The French President, Charles de Gaulle, acknowledged that: “This explosion was provoked by groups in revolt against modern consumer and technical society, whether it be the communism of the East or the capitalism of the West.”

Isn’t the fundamental problem of 1968 exactly that of today, but on an even bigger scale? The Situationist theory of the spectacle and the spectacular society is heavily indebted to Marx. In the spectacular society, everything is turned into a commodity to be sold for profit. People themselves are commodities being bought and sold all the time, just as they buy and sell.

Are you in demand (seller’s market) or are you ten-a-penny (buyer’s market)? Our world is nothing but a marketplace where a price is attached to everything; one that rarely reflects the authentic value of anything (“He knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.”). Each of our attributes, whether it be intelligence, good looks, creativity, empathy, diplomacy, hard work, loyalty, is given a price. Ugly people have nothing to sell in the beauty market while a model can become a multi-millionaire from selling her looks. That’s how brutal and reductive our world is. God help you if you have nothing to sell: you are well and truly fucked. You will get the shittiest jobs and you will know that you can be replaced at the drop of a hat. You have no choices.

This capitalist world generates incredible alienation. To be reduced to a mere commodity can’t be anything other than dehumanizing. How can you give of your best if you are treated as an object? As Marx observed in Das Kapital, capitalism doesn’t care about whether anything is useful, whether it’s socially productive or raises the quality of humanity. It has no interest in such issues at all. It is concerned only with what profit can be derived from a product or service. A product or service that degrades the whole of humanity but makes its provider fabulously wealthy is perfect capitalism. It is not, however, perfect for raising the quality of humankind. Capitalism is rarely anything other than an assault on the quality of people. Quality would be of interest to a capitalist only if he could make money from it, not because it’s an intrinsic good. Should not governments be solely preoccupied with improving the people? A capitalist government couldn’t care less. Capitalist governments trumpet the doctrine of “negative liberty” – leaving people alone to get on with their lives as they see fit, within the law. “Life” in such a State mostly consists of shopping. That’s the primary function of the citizen – to shop. The shopper feels good because he gets a temporary high from any purchase, and he thinks he is free because he has many objects from which to choose.

A proper government should always be engaged in “positive liberty” i.e. in maximising human potential through active policy of the State and constant intervention in people’s lives. No one is left to rot. No one is ignored. The State is always showing an interest in you and encouraging you to move upwards and onwards. The positive liberty State is dialectical – aiming for an omega point of perfection. The negative liberty State, on the contrary, is interested only in the perfection of the rich i.e. providing the perfect lives for the privileged elite of society. Here, the State leaves ordinary people alone because it has no interest in raising them up. Quite the reverse. If all of the people attained much higher quality, they would be a direct threat to the elite.

The last thing the elite want is to have their position challenged, so they have selected a system and a doctrine that ensures that can never happen. Negative liberty inevitably gives rise to a two-tier society of the elite and everyone else. A positive liberty society wants to eliminate the elite because everyone ought to be of high quality and the concept of the elite should therefore no longer have meaning. “Elite” only makes sense in societies of huge gulfs between people.

In capitalism, the price of a commodity often has no connection at all with its intrinsic value. Some cheap garbage can be sold for a fortune if the garbage is manufactured by a big, prestigious brand name. In other words, a completely nebulous entity – the value of a brand – is used to create an enormous price hike for a product that is no different from a much cheaper one made by a non-brand name. You are paying a huge premium for the logo. Why are people so obsessed with logos? It’s because of status. Thus we see that even status can be turned into a commodity.

A high status person is, so the logic goes, someone who wears high quality designer brands. A whole new marketplace is created in intangibles – in snobbery, in imagined quality.

The fairy-tale emperor – stark naked in his new set of “clothes” – was the ultimate victim of the brand. The tailors who conned him swore he was getting the best suit of clothes ever, the ultimate brand. When he paraded through the streets, everyone else agreed that this was the best designer wear they had ever seen and cheered loudly. It took a little boy to puncture the insanity by pointing out that the emperor was in fact stark naked. THERE WERE NO CLOTHES AT ALL – NO BRAND WHATEVER.

“Brand” inhabits that strange world between the emperor receiving gasps of adulation from the crowd and howls of derision when the truth dawns. A brand can be destroyed in an instant and become valueless. The Tiger Woods brand was more or less wiped out thanks to one notorious event involving a car, a fire hydrant and a wife with a golf club.

The nebulous world of brand value is all about the imaginary, not the real qualities of the brand. People would have paid a fortune to have a suit like the emperor’s – even though there was in fact no suit at all. While the delusion prevailed that the emperor had the best suit of clothes ever, everyone wanted a suit just like his. The spectacular society inhabits that same imaginary fantasy space, that hyper-reality where truth, authenticity, reality and actuality count for nothing.

The elite are the absolute controllers of the fantasy sphere. And it must be emphasized that in that space there are never any little boys who point out the truth. The balloon is never punctured.

People go on believing absolute bullshit. Naturally, religion also inhabits this fantasy space where the truth never penetrates. Reason is the Devil’s whore, right? It’s as unwelcome as truthful little boys. The spectacular society seeks at all times to radically falsify reality, to create an imaginary space in which perceived status is everything. In this fantasy space, everyone is drawn into status wars, and the elite have all the biggest and best weapons. They outgun everyone. Yet all it would take to destroy their entire edifice would be one honest little boy.

In the UK, no one is EVER allowed to interrogate the head of State. Is that not astounding? Why should the head of state be unaccountable to the people of the State? Because everyone, especially the Queen and her advisers, knows that the fantasy space she inhabits and from which she draws all of her power, would be destroyed when she was unable to answer some simple question, some hostile probing of her qualifications to be head of state; when some commoner treated her with contempt; when she was exposed as an unintelligent nobody propped up by pure illusion, just like the emperor’s imaginary clothes.

The English Queen is the perfect symbol of the spectacular society and the control of the people by the elite through imaginary means i.e. the manipulation of fantasy, illusion, delusion, deception, camouflage, hyper-reality and spectacle. Consider the incredible pomp and circumstance, the phenomenal spectacle of the “Royal Wedding”. All of the resources of the State were devoted to creating a total fantasy to be beamed around the world to create an entirely imaginary depiction of the UK. Reality came along a few months later in the shape of violent riots. That’s what the UK is really like, not the preposterous, fake and phoney image projected by the “Royal family” and their sycophants.

The Wizard of Oz is another supreme symbol of the spectacular society. A man is able to project an image of total power to the world, yet behind the curtain he is feeble, pathetic and weak. His power is sustained purely by illusion. Thus it is with the elite. They could be overthrown at any time if the people woke up and saw past the illusion, if they heard the little boy laughing at the naked emperor.

Imagine if the whole congregation had laughed at the Royal Wedding and mocked the royal couple. That would have destroyed the English monarchy. That’s all it takes. That’s how thin the dividing line is between the Old World Order and the New. We could start creating a perfect world tomorrow if we escaped from the spectacular fantasy of the elite, their dream world Matrix that no one wants to leave.

Capitalism, according to Marx, leads to reification (which means regarding something abstract as a material thing, as a physical object; and depersonalising a human being by treating him as an object). In particular, the work a person does is the reification of that person i.e. he is turned into a collection of the objects he produces. If they are of low value then so is he. If they are assigned a high value then he is a commodity in high demand. In the marketplace of capitalism, everyone becomes a thing, a reification, to which a price can be attached. When compensation is being handed out after some disaster like 9/11, an actual price is placed on individuals according to what sort of job they had, what salary they were earning and what prospects they had. In other words, accountants can actually itemize everything about you and put a price on it, rather than regarding you as inherently priceless.

Capitalism is nothing but a system for making people into things. And once a person is a thing, it’s easy to treat them badly. After all, they’re just objects. Slaves were notoriously regarded as things, possessions, and chattels – but so are we all in a capitalist society based on pricing everything. In a notorious case involving a British slave ship, several slaves on an overcrowded ship were thrown overboard so that a lucrative insurance claim could be lodged for the loss of the “cargo”.

Everyone in a capitalist society lives in a condition of existential bad faith where they refuse to be free and remain objectified and sedated. People develop a false consciousness, manufactured for them by the propaganda of the elite. In the UK, not a single person should have anything but hatred for the Queen, and yet many millions think she is the best thing about the country. In other words, they have been perfectly brainwashed and they see something that is supremely hostile to their interests as being good for them. When the system can hand people Hemlock and convince them that its nectar, the system has got it made. It has become invulnerable.

The Spectacular Society is a gigantic brainwashing machine that creates a false consciousness in all those under its spell. It can convince everyone that the naked emperor has the finest suit of clothes in history. Once you have achieved that, there is nothing the people won’t swallow. Look at the Islamic religion. Once you accept that the Angel Gabriel appeared to an illiterate Arab and dictated the Word of God to him, is there anything Mohammed says that you won’t believe? If you reject even ONE word, you are no longer a Muslim. It’s all or nothing. Similarly, a Christian must believe that the God of the Universe was born in a stable to a 14-year-old Jewish “virgin”.

Once you’ve bought into that, why would you doubt a single thing about Christianity? It’s not as if inherently improbable assertions cause you any pause for thought, is it? The Jews think that God spoke to Moses on the summit of Mount Sinai, gave him the Ten Commandments and revealed the Torah to him. If you regard that as true, you are logically compelled to regard every word as true because why would you doubt any of it after you’ve agreed with the infinitely farfetched opening premise? Are you going to believe one set of preposterous claims but not another? How would you distinguish between them given that they’re all preposterous? Once you’ve signed up for insanity, is there any exit from the madhouse? Yet, ironically, Jews have no difficulty seeing through the nonsense of Christianity and Islam, the Muslims see exactly how idiotic Judaism and Christianity are, and the Christians think Judaism has been replaced by Christianity and that Mohammed is a devil burning in hell.

The Spectacular Society gets people to believe the most preposterous garbage such as “freedom and democracy”, “banks are good”, “capitalism can’t be bettered”; “the elite deserve all of their wealth and power”; “the British Queen and the American President are good people serving their nations” …and so on…an incredible litany of lies.

The Spectacular Society involves a perfect storm of brainwashing. The power of narrative is mediated by images rendered with technological perfection – the more real than real. The most beautiful people in the world are used to sell hyperreal dreams. The spectators are presented with perfection, and what could be more captivating, more addictive than that? Even better, video games now give spectators the opportunity to adopt a perfect avatar and place themselves in the middle of a fantasy world where they can be the hero. No wonder gamers can lose themselves for days on end. They have placed themselves inside hyper-reality. Nowhere is more seductive.

Nowhere offers more thrills. The trouble is that the spectator who inhabits reality is alienated from the avatar who lives in hyper-reality. All ordinary people are alienated from the perfection presented in the Spectacle. Only the elite are having perfect lives consistent with the Spectacle.

Everyone else is being conned by the Spectacle. And that, of course, is its primary purpose. The Society of the Spectacle can be thought of as a secret society devoted to spreading the propaganda of the elite. They are the ones who designed the Wizard of Oz’s scary face and booming voice (and hid the real thing behind a curtain). They are the ones who made the emperor seem fully clothed even though he was naked (the little boy who laughed at the emperor was just a fairy-tale!); every day we see naked people – the leaders of the world – and yet somehow we ignore their nakedness. We think they have legitimate power and that it’s right that they should rule us.

In the Society of the Spectacle, representations of the world are everywhere. The world itself becomes a representation. It is no longer lived. It is passively observed via screens. And what appears on screens is edited and airbrushed. You never see reality. Most art that succeeds in the modern world is right wing, which is why it attracts rich capitalist patrons and buyers. The lie is often put forward that art is left wing and subversive. In which case, why is it bought by extremely rich figures of the establishment? Would these patrons buy anything that mocked the Jews or Israel or Jesus or Mohammed or the Queen or the American government or the Yankee dollar?

There is no real art in the 21st century. Art is controlled by gatekeepers and patrons of the establishment. There is no radical art, no truthful art. Gallery owners would never display genuinely controversial art. As for the SI, they rejected all art that wasn’t political. They saw that the establishment was seeking to create art that offered no critique of the powers-that-be. Reactionaries seek to infiltrate and neuter any activity that challenges them. They have rendered art sterilize, banal, and degraded, and ensured that it can be safely integrated into the establishment’s propaganda machine.

Revolution is never openly discussed in the media. No one is allowed to call for an uprising against the elite. In fact, you can be arrested for using Facebook to suggest a riot, even if it never actually occurs. In the UK, people have been jailed for “virtual crimes”. George Orwell’s prediction in his dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four that people would be arrested for “thought crimes” has now actually happened. What’s for sure is that the authorities are beginning to panic. Their towers of power are starting to crumble. Capitalism’s main product now is alienation – and that spells capitalism’s downfall.

The elite are no longer trusted or believed. They are no longer even regarded as competent. Their authority has vanished, so it’s only a question of time before capitalism dies. The Soviet Union staggered on for a little while after the fall of the Berlin Wall, but in truth it was dead as soon as the first bricks were hammered free. Similarly, capitalism died went Lehman Brothers went down. Now the world is looking for a doctor with the guts to “call it” – to pronounce the death of the terminally ill patient who has stopped breathing and is showing no brain activity.

When the computer age began, people were promised a “leisure age”. What happened to it? Why has modern technology not resulted in vastly more free time for people? Why are so many people still engaged in stunningly dull jobs? In fact, what they are actually engaged in is a fraudulent economy. Most people don’t work in any serious sense. What they do is spend many hours AT WORK but few hours actually working. Most people are hopelessly inefficient and bored. If they managed to work authentically for even three hours a day that would be quite an achievement. Most people are skilled at pretending to work. In the Soviet Union, the usual joke was: “They pretend to pay us and we pretend to work.” In the capitalist West, the joke is: “They pay us for pretending to work.” All that matters is that money circulates throughout the economy and that people can buy things. The West is based on consumption economics and the economy grows as long as consumption grows. If consumption falters, recession looms. What kind of economy is based on such a ridiculous and inherently unstable model?

In the Star Trek vision of the future, there’s no money at all. All basic problems have been addressed technologically. Everyone can get on with leading a high quality life. Shouldn’t we trying to build just such a future rather than buying a new iPhone and iPad every year to prevent the consumption economy from collapsing?

Why isn’t the world heading towards a Star Trek future? It’s precisely because there’s no rich capitalist elite in Star Trek i.e. the people who currently rule our world have no role in the future. They don’t want the future to come to pass – because then they’d be out of a job and out of power. We are led by people who are obstructing the future because the future is hostile to their interests. The elite want only one thing – for the gap between them and everyone else to be so wide it can never be bridged. They want to go back to the feudal world where the workers knew their place and never challenged the elite. Privilege is simply a new form of hereditary rule. The medieval nobility had “blue” blood, and today’s moneyed aristocracy have the green blood of the dollar.

CAPITALISM – DO NOT RESUSCITATE. NILL BY MOUTH.
__________

Dada:

One of the spiritual precursors of Punk Rock was the Dada anti-art movement that flourished between 1916 and 1922, and of which several Illuminati artists were members. It sought to oppose mainstream art in every way and rejected aesthetics, form, meaning, polite sensibilities and conventionality. It celebrated ugliness, absurdity, offensiveness, surrealism, nihilism and vulgarity. Its aim was to subvert and destroy the bourgeois institutions that had led the world to the slaughterhouse of WWI. It was surely time to reject the culture and aesthetics that had brought the world to that abattoir of the endless trenches. How do you respond to the insane orgy of mass homicide except by trashing everything that the old society stood for, by spitting in its face? One critic declared, “Dada philosophy is the sickest, most paralyzing and most destructive thing that has ever originated from the brain of man.”

Dada is sometimes identified as the birthplace of postmodernism with its emphasis on cynicism, distrust, skepticism, irony, satire, and mockery of the all grand traditions. The Nazis regarded Dada and its offshoots as degenerate and Jewish, reflecting all that was corrupt and perverted about the modern world. Dada artists characterised their movement as “a phenomenon bursting forth in the midst of the post-war economic and moral crisis, a saviour, a monster, which would lay waste to everything in its path… a systematic work of destruction and demoralization… In the end it became nothing but an act of sacrilege.”

Is not sacrilege a worthy response to two World Wars? And is sacrilege not the right response for the economic catastrophe the super rich bankers have brought down on our world? WHERE IS THE REVOLUTION? Where is the uprising? Where is the anger? Flashes of anger appeared in the UK during the riots, but where is the sustained HATE for the ruling class? Why hasn’t their card been well and truly marked? They have failed. Now they must be removed from power. They are quick enough to fire any ordinary worker for poor performance. So why aren’t they being fired for destroying the global economy?
__________

The Cabaret Voltaire:

The Dada movement is often identified with the Cabaret Voltaire nightclub in Zürich, Switzerland, where all sorts of anarchic events were held. Poetry, dance, music, recitations, readings of manifestos, and experimental art were all on the agenda. In WWI, Switzerland was a neutral country and many artists and freethinkers fled there. The Cabaret Voltaire became a place where the madness of the war was exposed. Exhibitions and performances at the club were often brutal, chaotic and insane as they attempted to capture and reflect the madness and horrors of war.

Look at the bars and clubs of today, preoccupied with making people drink as much as possible to boost the profits of the capitalist owners. Did you know that bar owners deliberately ramp up the sound levels because people drink much faster when they can’t hold meaningful conversations with their friends because of the noise?

Where is the creativity in bars and clubs? They are sterile meat-markets geared up for moronic drunkenness. In the UK, endless bars are filled with endless cretins screaming their heads off and throwing up after drinking twenty pints of beer and numerous shorts, chasers and shooters. In the UK, this is what is regarded as a “top” night out.

It ought to be compulsory for all bars and clubs to have intellectual and cultural content. How can you ever improve the quality of the human race just by pouring alcohol down people’s throats?

We need more Cabaret Voltaires and fewer corporate bars.
__________

The Situationist International:

DADA WAS AN INFLUENCE on the Situationist International (SI), an avant-garde revolutionary group founded in 1957 which played a prominent part in the French protests and strikes of 1968. The May 1968 general strike, where unions, students and radicals made common cause, brought the French economy to a halt and sent shock waves throughout the world. For a moment, it seemed that France might launch a new revolutionary phase in world history.

The SI movement’s main text was The Society of the Spectacle (1967) by Guy Debord, one of the key theoreticians of the SI. Debord’s central thesis was that capitalist society had created a fake reality in order to conceal its rotten, toxic core that degraded the whole human race. The media, the advertising industry, Hollywood, Disneyland – these were the primary players in the construction of a fantasy land, a world of endless spectacle, a hyperreality. Now people are trapped inside a phoney reality in which all truth and authenticity have dissolved.

The Situationists were so-called because they thought they could break the spell of the fake spectacular society by constructing “situations” – subversive, radical actions of an artistic or political nature in which the participants become conscious and authentic once more, aware of the possibilities and energy of real life. Debord grandly described a “situation” as: “a moment of life concretely and deliberately constructed by the collective organization of a unitary ambiance and a game of events.”

The aim of the Situationist International was to construct revolutionary situations that would shock the masses into a realisation of their predicament. Stunts, pranks, events, happenings, art shocks, flash mobs, street theatre, demonstrations, protests – all were valid to wake up the people. Jean-Paul Sartre had previously described a situation in a play as that which breaks the spectator’s passivity towards the spectacle. For the SI, the situation broke the consumer’s passive acceptance of the spectacle. It shattered the illusion, pulled back the curtain, made the people confront the lie and rediscover reality.

The Situationists created the new field of psychogeography, defined as “the study of the specific effects of the geographical environment (whether consciously organized or not) on the emotions and behaviour of individuals.”

Psychogeography will be one of the pillars of the New World Order. The environment is critical to the healthy development of consciousness. The elite are raised in the most enviable environments where the exquisite landscapes and luxury buildings they inhabit and enjoy tell them unambiguously that they are special, marked out for grand futures, better than others, superior, destined for great things. The great schools and colleges of the world are never ugly old dumps in hideous urban ghettos.

Most people in the world have to live in psychogeographical nightmares. Ugly, violent, stupid, overcrowded, deprived environments generate brutish people. What could be more certain? All ugly environments must be destroyed. If somewhere isn’t good enough for the elite, it’s not good enough for anyone and must be demolished. All environments must be made exquisite and they will then produce exquisite people. The New World Order must bring about a much more beautiful world. The best designers, architects, engineers, psychologists and sociologists must work together to create wondrous environments that provide sustenance for the soul. Another SI tactic was labelled détournement by Debord and “involves using spectacular images and language to disrupt the flow of the spectacle” i.e. it fights fire with fire. It subverts the “truth” of an entity by re-contextualizing it to expose the flaws that are deliberately disguised by the elite as part of their propaganda war. The aim is to mock, satirise, undermine and ridicule the elite, to show that the emperor is completely naked. If it is relentlessly deployed against the elite, détournement shatters their ability to sustain the illusion they have weaved to fool the people.

Détournement means “rerouting, diversion, hijacking” in French. The English word detournement is derived from it and means reusing elements of the mainstream media to produce a subversive message. English words such as “turnabout” or “derailment” reflect the meaning of détournement. The idea is to use the weapons of the elite against them, to turn the weapons around, to derail their propaganda machine before it can do any damage.

“Culture jamming” is a similar tactic deployed by anti-consumerist movements to sabotage mainstream media messages, corporate advertising and cultural institutions. Culture jamming is a form of “subvertising” – advertising that subverts rather than promotes, using such tactics as altering corporate logos to convey the precise opposite meaning of the one intended by the corporation. So, for example Nike’s logo of “Just do it”, with a tick, could have been replaced during the London riots with “Just steal it”, with an even bigger tick. Subvertising is all about spoofing, parodying and satirising the absurd propaganda of the elite.

In a healthy State, it should be mandatory for all mainstream ads to be accompanied by subvertising – then the advertisers will have to start being much more truthful to avoid being relentlessly mocked. Advertising would thus be turned into a dialectical industry. When your idea of something is radically shifted from one of fawning obedience to the elite to one of revolutionary rage, your world is changed forever. Once you no longer buy into the myth of the English Queen, for example, it becomes impossible for you to understand how there can be such a thing as a monarch in the 21st century, with human beings being referred to as her “subjects” and being expected to withdraw from her presence by walking backwards because it would be infamous for a “commoner” to turn their back on royalty.

Imagine the degree of false consciousness that has been built into the people of the UK to make them have anything but supreme contempt for the Queen. The Queen’s greatest supporters are the ruling elite on the one hand, and the most stupid members of the working class on the other. Badly educated, brainwashed people are always fanatical supporters of tyrants and mad religions.

The Sex Pistols, in all of their “offensive”, anti-establishment, punk clothes, signed their record contract in front of the gates of Buckingham Palace, the Queen’s luxury residence. Their explosive song “God Save the Queen (and her fascist regime)” was released in 1977, the year of the Queen’s silver Jubilee (25 years since her accession to the throne). This was a perfect work of détournement – taking the title of the national anthem and making it the ultimate protest song against the elite. The song reached number 1 in the charts but was in fact omitted and replaced by a blank space in the chart list – because the music industry and the BBC refused to offend the Queen. The song was banned and never heard in the mainstream media despite being No. 1. The elite always seek to ban the most potent challenges to their power. Can anyone imagine any contemporary band being banned? It’s unthinkable. Bands of today are all anodyne, shiny capitalist cheerleaders with nothing to say. We need a return to real music, the music of the Revolution. We need a new incarnation of Punk, which was in turn a new incarnation of the Situationist International and Dada. Revolution must break out on all fronts and a cultural revolution must accompany a political revolution.

The opposite of détournement is “recuperation”. This is the process by which subversion is reclaimed by the mainstream, repackaged as a commodity and sold to wannabe subversives. The perfect example is the famous poster of Che Guevara. Here we find the image of an arch-enemy of capitalism being packaged for sale by capitalists. Thus revolution is tamed – it’s just another commodity. Profit can be made even from subversion.

The manipulators of the Spectacle have proved adept at maintaining social control by embracing the challenges to their control and neutralising them via commodification and recuperation. If a capitalist can make money out of the image of Che Guevara, he won’t hesitate to do so. He has no expectation that those that buy the poster will read about Guevara and adopt his political stance and tactics. He assumes, and he’s invariably right, that the Guevara poster is just a phase a young person goes through and implies a rebellion against parental authority rather than against the State itself. Soon enough, the young person moves on to other posters – of superheroes, pin-ups, celebrities, Lord of the Rings, or whatever. Che would be spinning in his grave. Recuperation is equivalent to capitalist sublimation. Something dangerous is intercepted, remoulded, defused and incorporated within mainstream society as something safe, sanitised and profitable. It no longer poses any threat.

In the past, religion was a primary promoter of spectacle. Consider the astounding Gothic cathedrals of medieval Europe; St. Peter’s Square in Rome; the elections of new popes when the College of Cardinals assembles in all its glory; the hysteria over holy relics; the dream of Jerusalem and the Holy land that inspired the Crusaders. Everything to do with the Catholic religion remains spectacular to this day. Islam tries to put on a spectacular show at Mecca. Even the unspectacular Protestants have tried to create super churches, huge choirs, faith healing shows, speaking in tongues and so on.

We have lived under the Illusory Principle of the Spectacle for too long. It’s time for the Reality Principle to be restored.
__________

The Profit Principle:

“The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas….The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it.” –Marx

“This disposition to admire, and almost to worship, the rich and powerful, and to despise, or, at least neglect persons of poor and mean conditions, though necessary both to establish and to maintain the distinction of ranks and the order of society, is, at the same time, the great and most universal cause of the corruption of our moral sentiments.” –Adam Smith

What is the primary aim of the ruling elite? It is to control EVERYTHING. To control what you buy, what you think, how you think, whom you vote for, whom you dream about, whom you admire, whom you think are the rightful rulers, what gods you believe in, what heaven and what hell.

They can pull it off because they control all of the levers of power. They control the education system. They control the economy, the government, religion, the media, art, business, the police, the army, the intelligence services. Their gatekeepers control the books that get published, the movies that are made, the material that appears on the news, the TV shows that get commissioned.

This is all embraced by the concept of THE ESTABLISHMENT. They control the system of privilege that ensures the top jobs are permanently allocated to only those who come from within the system. They have succeeded in creating a permanent hegemony, an elite of dynastic families – a new aristocracy – that will go on and on. Even better, they have worked out how to commercialise every aspect of life, to make PROFIT from everything. Consider Facebook. It’s ostensibly a free service and yet Mark Zuckerberg is a multi-billionaire.

The people on Facebook don’t realize that they themselves are the commodity Zuckerberg is selling. Facebook’s subscribers have turned themselves into a product that capitalists can sell. Every time you update your page, make a comment, or post a picture, what you are actually doing is investing more and more in this capitalist product. The more heavily invested you are, the more time you spend on there – so capitalist advertisers know exactly where you will be. And because all of your information is on there, they know exactly what you’re interested in and what you’re likely to buy. The intelligence services also know exactly who you are. The police can monitor you. Future employers can vet you. You have offered up your whole life to your capitalist controllers, and you did it for free, and indeed you were eager to do it. You even had a smile on your face. No one forced you to do anything. You turned yourself into perfect fodder for the capitalist machine.

Because that’s what the capitalist machine has designed you for – to engage in precisely this type of activity where you become an actual product in the capitalist system – a commodity to be bought and sold like everything else. Your actual life – as presented by you yourself on Facebook – is now a capitalist profit centre. It’s not you who makes any money out of it, of course. You sell yourself for nothing. That’s how cheap you are, how gullible. You’re a slave and you don’t even know it. You have been objectified and commodified. You are someone’s “bottom line”.

The capitalist system knows who you are, what you are, where you are, what you like, what you want, what presses your buttons – and you handed it all to them on a plate for nothing because they gave you an easy tool for socially interacting with others. That’s how easy it is to deceive the world, to manipulate it, to turn unwitting people into profit centres for billionaires. Facebook is the perfect example of how capitalism can take a need – for online companionship – and turn it into a pillar of the capitalist infrastructure. Capitalism can profit from anything. It can sell anything, including you – and, moreover, get you to do all the hard work and data entry for free in your “spare” time.

At work, you spend your time making money for a rich capitalist. When you’re not at work, you’re still making money for a rich capitalist. The only time you’re not making a capitalist rich is when you’re asleep. In all your conscious hours, rich capitalists are giving thanks for your existence because you are making them loads of money. And the richer they get, the less chance in life you have. You did it to yourself. No one twisted your arm. That’s the genius of capitalism. Only one thing can overcome the establishment – REVOLUTION. But who will revolt? People love capitalism too much. They’re hardwired into it.

When you turn yourself into a capitalist object, when you give yourself for free so that someone else can sell you, and you don’t even realise it – then you’re in serious trouble. “By means of the spectacle, the ruling order discourses endlessly upon itself in an uninterrupted monologue of self-praise.” –Guy Debord

The elite always pretend to speak for the whole when in fact they are speaking only for themselves. They have identified their own interests as those of everyone. In their minds, they think that the relentless pursuit of their own agenda is beneficial for all.

What do the elite offer? The chance to sit in square boxes (houses), staring at a variety of bright, colourful screens – flat screen TVs, touchscreen iPhones, iPads, iPods, Xboxes, PlayStations. At all times, we are presented with opportunities to buy objects. We are also presented with endless narratives about wonderfully exciting lives lived by glamorous, beautiful people who deliver a stream of perfectly scripted lines.

But where has our actual life gone? We are alienated from reality. We are isolated, disempowered, lonely, unfulfilled, surrounded by images and tales of perfection, but acutely aware of our own imperfection. We see the perfect lives of the celebrities and the super-rich and we live vicariously through them. They certainly don’t live vicariously through us. This is an asymmetric arrangement. We worship them, and they have contempt for us (though they dutifully proclaim their love of their “fans”). We crave new narratives, new images, new visions of perfection. We’re addicted to this bright, sharp hyper-realty, and the greater our addiction the worse our withdrawal symptoms. We can’t escape.

Everywhere, we are absorbed by the Spectacle. We crave it. We want it bigger, better, shinier, in higher definition, 3D, 4D, 6D, surround sound, with enticing scents included. The Spectacle is all-consuming. Once you’ve enjoyed the spectacle, you can’t live without it. It’s the perfect Matrix.

Capitalism keeps delivering better spectacles that glue us to our seats, passively consuming everything they sell us. But where are our lives? Where did they go? On our headstones, they will engrave the inscription: “He watched every spectacle we offered, but his own life was no spectacle. He did nothing. He achieved nothing. He just spectated.”

Most people are spectators. Life passes them by. They watch others living and wish it could be them. Yet they do nothing to make it them. Instead, they worship celebrities. Who is alive these days other than celebrities and the rich?

The world is just as they planned it. They are the living and we are the dead, or rather the undead. We are the zombies in the shopping malls keeping the rich rich. We never challenge them. We do everything they say, everything they want. They are the wolves and we are the dogs they have tamed. All we want is a biscuit and a spectacle to look at.

It has been said that Debord’s aim was “to wake up the spectator who has been drugged by spectacular images”. Are we not all in thrall to the spectacle? What is Hollywood if not an industry dedicated to creating bigger and better spectacles? Do Hollywood movies get smarter? Do the plots become more intelligent? Is there better characterisation, more psychological depth, and enhanced realism? Or do explosions get louder and brighter, car chases longer, dialogue less plausible, actors more and more ridiculously pretty and perfectly honed (and infinitely less credible as real people in the real world). We get high definition. We get 3D. We get “sniffaround”. Always, the spectacle grows and at exactly the same time the quality, plausibility and quality of the content shrinks. That’s the spectacular equation.

We need much less spectacle and much more reality. We need to start living authentic lives again.
__________

The Perfect Citizen – According to the Elite:

“All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind.” –Adam Smith

First of all, the citizen shouldn’t really think of himself as that at all, but as a subject (in the manner of the people of the UK being the subjects of a Queen). He should recognise a rightful, divinely mandated higher authority (the elite) and never seek to challenge them. He should subject himself to their will at all times.

The perfect capitalist subject should be loaded with debt, hence terrified of losing his job, hence docile and compliant at work, never disobeying his inept and corrupt managers. He should be exhausted after work, hence unable to cause any trouble. He should sit in front of an assortment of bright screens, living in a fantasy world that presents no challenge to the elite. He should not read books since an educated subject will only cause trouble. He should have his credit card ready at all time, to make purchases. He should derive intense pleasure from buying objects. At the weekends, he should go to shopping malls and every type of consumer outlet where he can spend even more money. He should be preoccupied with consumerism and have zero spiritual yearnings, except as regards those institutional systems of approved religious control such as Christianity.

The capitalist elite want you to be someone obsessed with consumption, with consumer objects and services, with passivity in the face of stories and images presented to you by the capitalist elite on screen (all of which you pay for).

Everything you do should be making money for a capitalist somewhere. You have no other legitimate function than to make the rich richer by buying their goods and services. You should be tame, timid and docile. You should support law and order and never challenge your managers and leaders. You should accept your lot in life and be glad.

George Orwell wrote, “To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all.” And that’s all that the elite want from you – that you should exist as a consumerist automaton, not that you should be a living human being who refuses to accept their system.

Are you a perfect capitalist citizen? If you are, isn’t it time to WAKE UP?! Isn’t it time to say, “I REFUSE.” No more will you do the bidding of the capitalist elite. No more will you comply with their system of privilege that penalises you and makes you a second-class citizen. If you accept being on the bottom tier of a two-tier society then you truly are a loser.
__________

What a Fucked-up World:

A volunteer for the American Peace Corps told an astonishingly revealing story. He was working in a remote village and had a first-aid box. A village boy stood on a broken coke bottle and went to the volunteer for help. The volunteer gently removed the bottle, cleaned the wound, applied antiseptic and bandaged it. He asked the boy to return the next day to check that everything was OK. The boy duly returned, and everything was healing nicely. The boy had also brought two friends with him who had cuts on their arms and legs. The volunteer patched them up. Next day, ten adults arrived for treatment. By the end of the week, fifty people were in a queue for treatment. The volunteer’s medical supplies were almost exhausted. The village elder summoned him. “You’re causing me many problems,” he said. “People all around the area have heard of you and are coming here for treatment. But my village has no food and shelter for them. There could be big trouble. I want you to go away for several weeks. When you come back, never treat anyone again.”

And that’s what the volunteer did. He later reflected that if he hadn’t treated the first boy, he would probably have died of blood poisoning. He didn’t reflect on all those who subsequently died for lack of treatment. Doesn’t this sum up the world? Even helping people can cause problems. Giving a little help is futile. You should give TOTAL help or not bother at all. Tokenism is a disaster.
__________

Too Big to Fail?:

“If you owe the bank a million dollars, you have a problem. If you owe the bank a hundred million dollars, the bank has a problem.” –Robert Maxwell

Robert Maxwell was a notoriously corrupt Jewish businessman and media mogul in Britain who committed suicide when his crimes started to catch up with him. Banks have adopted his modus operandi. If a small bank has a liquidity problem, it could go out of business. If an enormous bank has a liquidity problem, it must be bailed out by the taxpayers to stop the whole economy collapsing.

The question is this – why would any sane government allow banks to get so big that their failure constitutes an economic catastrophe? Cui bono? Did the elite deliberately engineer such a situation so that they would have complete control over the economy? OF COURSE THEY DID! None of them will be committing suicide. They have the government exactly where they want it.
__________

4/5

Academia Iluministă (78)

Maggio 10th, 2019 No Comments   Posted in Mişcarea Dacia

Este posibil ca imaginea să conţină: unul sau mai mulţi oameni, oameni pe scenă, oameni dansând şi noapte

The Catholic versus Protestant Dialectic:

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’” –Isaac Asimov

CATHOLICISM AND PROTESTANTISM encapsulate two radically different attitudes towards “authority” and expertise. An ordinary Catholic believes that the Catholic Church stands between God and him and that the Church alone is qualified to hold that role of intermediary. Its ordained officials are experts in the Catholic religion and have attained all of the appropriate qualifications.

A priest is authorised to provide absolution after an authentic act of penance. A priest is qualified to transubstantiate bread and wine into the real body and blood of Jesus Christ. The Pope is the divinely appointed Vicar of Christ on earth. An ordinary Catholic knows that even though he himself may have a simple understanding of Catholicism, the experts know everything there is to know about the subject.

Protestantism, on the other hand, cuts out the middleman. Each person, regardless of their qualifications and knowledge, gets their own hotline to God. In fact, only one qualification is necessary – faith. One of the reasons why Protestantism flourished was that it pandered to the ordinary person’s vanity. Protestants regarded the many years that Catholic priests devoted to theological study as a complete waste of time. All that any Protestant has to do is say, “I believe” and he’s the match of any priest. Protestantism, when understood for what it really is, is a protest against expertise and merit. It’s a declaration that “intellectuals” have nothing more valid to say about life than someone who’s spent his whole life on a production line making baked beans. To a Protestant, books, learning and knowledge are a waste of time, if not actually Satanic. Not for nothing did Martin Luther declare reason the Devil’s whore. Luther’s message appeals to the legions of ignoramuses who think their ill-educated thoughts are as acute as those of professors.

The “conspiracy theorist” is almost invariably a Protestant. Not for a moment does he listen to any experts. Who are they to contradict him? He has absolute faith that he is right, and if he is right about God then he must be right about conspiracies. Of course, he’s entirely wrong about both, but that thought never enters his head. Many of the greatest intellectuals have declared that the more they know, the more they understand how much they don’t know. A Protestant has the opposite view. The less he knows the less he understands how much he doesn’t know. How can you know how ignorant you are unless you read lots of books? – but if you read lots of books then you won’t be ignorant, or at least you’ll be a lot less ignorant than when you began.

Catholicism historically fitted in with aristocratic and monarchic societies i.e. those based on a hierarchy. Modern democracy is essentially a Protestant phenomenon since it reduces everyone to the same rank regardless of their merits. As Dean Inge said, “Democracy is only an experiment in government, and it has the obvious disadvantage of merely counting votes instead of weighing them.” In democracies, no weight is attached to the opinions of experts hence expertise becomes devalued and anti-intellectualism is rife. In many Western countries, “intellectual” is a term of abuse. Not surprisingly, almost all intellectuals have loathed democracy. Nietzsche despised everything to do with democracy. He regarded it as an insult to life that elevated the mediocre and actively prevented the great from succeeding.

Protestant anti-intellectualism abounds in the Tea Party. One of their angles of attack on Obama is that he’s a sinister intellectual. In fact, they’ve obviously never met an intellectual if they think Obama is one. When does Obama ever say anything smart? Even so, in comparison with the likes of Sarah Palin he must seem like one of the Seven Sages.

The ordinary Protestant came to believe that if he read the Bible then he was as qualified as the Pope or anyone else to decide the meaning of Scripture. He failed to comprehend that the mere act of reading a book by no means makes you an expert on that book. Anyone picking up a book by Hegel is unlikely to be much the wiser hundreds of pages later. The reason for that is that in order to understand Hegel you need to be a highly intelligent person familiar with the philosophical tradition in which Hegel wrote. In other words, a particular book is just the tip of an iceberg. It is underpinned by an enormous number of unseen books to which the author is responding. You could never hope to grasp Hegel’s meaning while being ignorant of philosophy.

To understand Hegel you would first have to learn philosophy, which would disqualify about 99% of the population at a stroke. By exactly the same token, to understand the Bible, you need to do much more than read a single book. What was the historical context in which the book was written? What content was omitted and why; what content was changed and why? What did other religions say? Did the Bible borrow anything from other religions? Did they influence it? What coded messages were built into the Bible? What was the literary style of the day? What were the expectations of the people of Biblical days? Who were their enemies? What was the philosophy of the age? What did the heretics have to say?

In other words, only a total RETARD would think that reading the Bible makes him an expert in what the Bible says. But that’s what Protestants think. They say to themselves, “Fuck the Pope and the Catholic Church and all the so-called ‘experts’. I’ve read the Bible and no one can tell me that I don’t understand it. In fact, I understand it much better than any of those dumb asses. God has spoken directly TO ME!”

There are countless Protestant sects and only one Catholic Church. Why? Because Catholics believe that the Pope and the Church constitute the appropriate source of expertise regarding Catholicism. On the other hand, any Protestant can say he’s the expert on the Bible, and no other Protestant can contradict him because there is no formal Protestant truth. It’s all about faith, not reason and knowledge. If a Catholic rejects the Pope and the Catholic Church, he ceases to be a Catholic. If a Protestant disagrees with the teachings of a particular Protestant sect, he can start up a new Protestant sect to promote his own view. Thus there are no universally acknowledged Protestant experts. Any Protestant can call himself an expert and establish his own Church – the Church of ME!

In the Protestant way of thinking, a person can go into a bookshop, read a book on brain surgery then declare that he’s setting up a brain surgery practice because he now “knows” all about brain surgery. Would you be his first patient? Or would you prefer to have your surgery performed by a recognised expert who has studied and practised for many years?

The idea that reading the Bible, or indeed any book at all, makes you an expert on it is infantile and absurd. This attitude undermines the whole basis of education. It exhibits an astonishing degree of arrogance and self-delusion.

The Protestant attitude manifests itself to a ridiculous degree in the arena of conspiracy theories. Suddenly these “know-alls” (ignoramuses in other words) think they can pontificate on structural engineering, the properties of metals, aircraft technology, the modus operandi of the intelligence services and special forces, “secret government”, invisible, shape-shifting Reptilians and so on. Conspiracy theories should be renamed Protestant theories and indeed many of them actively accuse the Pope, the Vatican and the Jesuits of being behind almost everything.

Strangely, they rarely direct any bile towards evangelical Protestants. They never declare Protestant Fundamentalism to be a conspiracy against the world even though the vast majority of Freemasons are Protestants – WASPs.

We, the Illuminati, are Gnostics so we detest Catholicism and Protestantism, but we can’t help but notice how disproportionately Protestant the conspiracy theory world is. Conspiracy theorists are all self-appointed experts and just as Protestants won’t listen to anyone who tells them they know nothing about the Bible, neither will conspiracy theorists listen to anyone telling them that their views are ill-informed nonsense.

The Illuminati subscribe to the “Catholic” model i.e. it that of a hierarchy. The Grand Master is the equivalent of the Pope, the ruling council are the Cardinals, the lower degrees are archbishops, bishops and priests. The lowest degree is the laity. It would be unthinkable and preposterous for a first degree Illuminatus to say he knew more about the Illuminati than the Grand Master, and he would very quickly cease to be a member of the Illuminati since you can’t teach a fool anything.

Meritocracy is also “Catholic”. The most meritorious are at the top and the least meritorious at the bottom. No one is allowed to proclaim themselves an expert in the manner of Protestants. You have to demonstrate merit to the satisfaction of your peers. The Pope is elected by his peers, the “princes” of the Catholic Church, these being the best-qualified individuals within the Catholic Church. Within that context, the Pope is the most meritorious individual in Catholicism. In Protestantism, if you dislike someone’s opinion, you declare your own to be superior.

Everyone thinks he’s more meritorious than everyone else. In Catholicism, you need a priest (a qualified person) to forgive you and to mediate between God and you. In Protestantism, you forgive yourself and you communicate directly with God without any intermediaries.

In Gnosticism, you have to be an extremely special type of person to achieve gnosis. Only the people of the highest possible merit are eligible. In Protestantism, you just need to say, “I believe in my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ” and you’re SAVED. You’re on your way to paradise just because you said, “I believe.” How ridiculous can you get? Protestantism is the Ship of Fools. The Protestant attitude is painfully visible in the moronic Tea Party where a bunch of nobrain Christian Fundamentalists imagine that their embarrassingly stupid analysis of a complex world should be adopted by the whole nation. If it were, America would be destroyed within a single presidential term.

We live a world in which merit is neither respected nor acknowledged. Merit is attacked from two deadly angles. Privilege (“who you know”) wipes the floor with merit (“what you know”). And the self-appointed expert (“I know best”) – the “Protestant” – ridicules merit. The highly qualified are labelled geeks, nerds and dorks.

Modern-style democracy is a Protestant ideology. People are allowed to vote on things they know nothing about. How many people could write a 10,000-word analysis of the economic system of their country? And, if they can’t, in what way are they qualified to vote on who should run their nation’s economic policy? Is it rational, is it sane, to give a vote to the ignorant? What must be the outcome of allowing the ignorant to vote? Are you likely to get the best government, the most meritorious – or the government best able to pander to and manipulate the delusions of the ignorant? Capitalists are brilliant at manipulating people because their whole purpose in life is to seduce people into parting with their money.

Protestantism and democracy provide an extremely attractive message to stupid people. “You are experts,” they are told. “You have a hotline to God,” they are told. “You are special people, the saved, the elect.” And all the morons fall for it. Why? Because they’re egotists and narcissists. They’re vain, arrogant, self-deluded. They think they’re clued-up about the world. They think no one can fool them, even though in truth they are fooled all the time. If you don’t KNOW, you will always be deceived. Knowledge, not self-delusion, is the antidote to deception.

America is the archetypal “Protestant” nation, both religiously and attitudinally. Every American is an “expert” on everything, or so they like to believe. America is the home of the conspiracy theorist. The conspiracy theorist is someone who thinks he’s much smarter than the experts. In fact, the experts are invariably in on it, whatever IT is. But the conspiracy theorists can see through it all with their preternatural laser vision. American is the home of rampant ego and narcissism. Like all anti-meritocracies, America imagines itself supremely meritocratic. All the non-experts consider themselves experts.

The world despises education. If it respected it, the best educated and most intelligent would be running the world. But instead the money men are in charge, and they’re the dumbest fucks on earth, good at only one thing – lining their own pockets. If you allow the equation money = power to form then what do you expect but inept government?

******

What was the main problem with the Catholic approach to merit? It was the contempt that the Catholic elite had for the ordinary people. The elite kept the knowledge for themselves. They didn’t let the ordinary people join in. The monks, priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals and popes were all smart people, but the Catholic laity were dumb asses because they received no education.

The founders of Protestantism saw a gap in the market. They gave the people the Bible in their own language rather than incomprehensible, elitist Latin (that no ordinary person understood). Of course, it was then necessary to teach the illiterate masses how to read and write.

So that’s what Protestantism did. And because the ordinary Protestants could now read and write, they became much smarter than the average illiterate Catholics. So although the Catholic elite were enormously smarter religiously and philosophically than the barbarian Protestants who despised philosophy and cared only for Scripture, the average Protestant soon became smarter than the average Catholic.

Meritocracy, unlike Catholicism, wants everyone to be as smart as possible. There can be no such thing as a meritocratic elite ruling over a dumb population. The meritocratic elite must be the crème de la crème, the best of a fully educated population.

What could be more sane and rational than having the smartest, most meritocratic people in charge of the world? So why has it never been tried? Money, faith, superstition, ignorance and violence have ruled our world, never merit.
__________

The Will:

America has traditionally been ruled by WASPs – White Anglo-Saxon Protestants, originating from England, Scotland, Wales, the North of Ireland, the Netherlands and Germany. Freemasonry – which was originally anti-Abrahamist – gradually became a bastion of elite WASPs and deeply hostile to Catholicism which had banned Catholics from becoming Masons. The Anglo-Saxon WASPs via, first, the British Empire and, secondly, the power of America have in essence ruled the world for some 250 years. Britain, with the world’s largest, most powerful and most skilled navy literally ruled the waves until the end of WWII.

Virtually no country suffered more economically from the two World Wars than Britain, even though it was on the winning side both times. The cost crippled the British Empire and led to its disintegration. Britain could simply no longer afford to run an empire and, with powerful nationalist groups demanding independence in all of its territories, it steadily granted them their wishes. Britain is now a minor nation still haunted by the huge power it once wielded and in denial about its rather pathetic status these days.

America, the rebellious child of the British Empire, has supplanted its frail father but now its glory days are slipping away too and it’s disturbingly easy to imagine America slipping much further than Britain. Without its financial and economic clout, it’s possible to imagine America as a Third World country, full of poorly paid people suffering worse conditions than the Chinese and Indians.

Globalisation has placed enormous downward pressure on salaries for unskilled labour. An American capitalist can just as easily set up shop in China as in America. He will only establish his business in America if it can generate higher profits than its Chinese equivalent and that means that low-paid Americans are now in competition with some of the cheapest labour in the world, despite living in a much more expensive nation. This is a catastrophic situation. America could easily go down the tubes. Its debts are mind-boggling. America is INSOLVENT. If America were a business and all of its debts were called in tomorrow by its creditors, America would be closed down, all of its workers fired, all of its assets seized and handed over to the creditors. That is the underlying reality of America today. Their capitalist leaders have no national loyalty and care about only maximising their return on investment.

You don’t get out of this situation by savagely cutting debt, which only serves to cripple economic growth and throw the nation into recession and even Depression. Nor do you get out of it by printing money and generating more debt, combined with deadly inflation. In fact, you’re pretty much screwed whatever you do. The real solution is to recognise that the system itself is rotten to the core and has failed. A whole new system is required.

Germany had monstrous and terrifying problems in 1933 when Hitler came to power as the “strong man” to sort things out. Within six years, National Socialism had transformed Germany from a bankrupt nation in ruins to one of the greatest powers on earth. Just SIX years! Now, of course, no sane person would advocate that any modern nation should embrace Nazism. What we are saying is that a radically new political model with strong leadership can in an extremely short time transform a country’s fortunes.

Look at the hopeless muddle and deadlock in contemporary Washington D.C. Can any rational person regard that as EFFECTIVE government? It’s incapable of sorting out the mess. No one could succeed with that form of government. Its actual structure precludes strong leadership. It was designed that way, and now that feature, once such a virtue, has become a disaster.

Strong, decisive leadership is imperative in these dark days. You can be absolutely sure that Hitlers are waiting in the wings. If the world wishes to avoid a repetition of WWII, it must turn to strong but benevolent leadership dedicated not to war (as in Nazism) but to education (as in meritocracy).

It simply cannot be emphasized enough that there is only one way out of the world’s woes – much smarter, higher quality, more creative, more active, more ingenious citizens. There is only one way to create a new humanity – EDUCATION. Education must be the central preoccupation and defining condition of any modern nation. Education is the ultimate production line – for creating SMART HUMANITY.

Adolf Hitler was a man of immense will. Schopenhauer and Nietzsche brought the concept of the will to the heart of German thinking, but whereas those two men were intellectual and cultural giants, Hitler wasn’t. Hitler was a soldier, a racist, and an anti-intellectual – almost Protestant in his hatred of the intelligentsia. Any art he didn’t like he regarded as “degenerate”. He was infected by the Jewish idea of the “Chosen People”, which he converted into the “Master Race.” Like the Jews, he was obsessed with blood purity. Like the Jews, he was obsessed with the concept of one “God” – himself! – that everyone must worship and obey unswervingly. The greatest irony of history was that in terms of his attitudes, Hitler was the greatest Jew of all time. He subconsciously identified with Judaism so much that he wanted to BECOME Jehovah. You simply have to read the Torah to see that the Nazis were doing all the things advocated by the ancient Jews. Why is it that no one points out that Judaism has always been pure Nazism by another name?

Hitler associated the quality of the will with the quality of the blood. A race with tainted blood was ipso facto weakened and corrupted. It had inferior will and would inevitably be defeated by those of pure blood and pure will. Much of the Harry Potter saga is devoted to the idea that mixed bloods are “good” and can defeat pure bloods who are “bad”. Lord Voldemort is simply Hitler and much of the story is about presenting his supporters as menacing Nazi stormtroopers.

In their personal lives, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche were both extreme individualists. In terms of his philosophy, Nietzsche practically made individualism a religion. He would have loathed the mind-controlled automata of the Nazi movement who had sacrificed all individuality in order to follow the leader. For Nietzsche, will belonged to the individual and expressed the individual’s inner nature. It had no racial dimension whatever. Hitler, on the other hand, made the will political, racial and militaristic, and Nazism was the expression of national rather than individual will.

The true antidote to Nazism is to have a population of strong-willed individuals i.e. a nation full of strong wills rather than a nation with a collective strong will but individually weak and submissive individuals. All Nazis, by making Hitler their God, were effectively submissives. No dominants would ever have embraced Hitler’s “divine” leadership. The Prussian elite class regarded Hitler as the “little Corporal” and mocked him, but unlike Hitler, they had no vision of how to lead Germany out of chaos, so in the end they all bowed to Hitler. The 1944 assassination attempt against Hitler was led by a Prussian and aristocratic elite. Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg who planted the bomb that almost killed Hitler was from a Catholic aristocratic family on his father’s side, and the Prussian elite on his mother’s.
__________

The Same Old Story:

“Toughey” sent us the following message.

I am currently reviewing your webpage “Goldman Sucks”. You made an issue of the SEC finally “cracking down” on Goldman. To quote Matt Taiibi of Rolling Stone in his article, “At least $13 billion of the taxpayer money given to AIG in the bailout ultimately went to Goldman, meaning that the bank made out on the housing bubble twice: it fucked the investors who bought their horseshit CDOs by betting against its own crappy product, then it turned around and fucked the taxpayer by making him pay off those same bets.” So they made at least $26 billion. The fines they paid the SEC equalled $550 million. That’s a pretty good return on your investment, showing that white-collar crime pays.

Another interesting fact, the head of the SEC is a former Goldman Sachs employee, as is the head of the Fed, Ben Bernanke as well as the Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner. Goldman also arranged the loans for Greece that they defaulted on. I think being hung, drawn, and quartered would be a “soft sentence” for these pirates.

Our Comment.

Toughey’s completely correct. The SEC turned out to be more interested in posturing than doing anything serious. Same old story. No one ever takes the steps that need to be taken. Goldman Sachs should be closed down or nationalised.

Along similar lines, a Bloomberg report stated that the Wall Street aristocracy got $1.2 trillion from the Fed:

Citigroup Inc. (C) and Bank of America Corp. (BAC) were the reigning champions of finance in 2006 as home prices peaked, leading the 10 biggest U.S. banks and brokerage firms to their best year ever with $104 billion of profits. By 2008, the housing market’s collapse forced those companies to take more than six times as much, $669 billion, in emergency loans from the U.S. Federal Reserve. The loans dwarfed the $160 billion in public bailouts the top 10 got from the U.S. Treasury, yet until now the full amounts have remained secret. Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke’s unprecedented effort to keep the economy from plunging into depression included lending banks and other companies as much as $1.2 trillion of public money, about the same amount U.S. homeowners currently owe on 6.5 million delinquent and foreclosed mortgages. The largest borrower, Morgan Stanley (MS), got as much as $107.3 billion, while Citigroup took $99.5 billion and Bank of America $91.4 billion, according to a Bloomberg News compilation of data obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests, months of litigation and an act of Congress. “These are all whopping numbers,” said Robert Litan, a former Justice Department official who in the 1990s served on a commission probing the causes of the savings and loan crisis. “You’re talking about the aristocracy of American finance going down the tubes without the federal money.” (By Bradley Keoun and Phil Kuntz)

According to an inspector general overseeing government bailouts, the U.S. so far has committed nearly $2.98 trillion toward stabilizing financial companies and rescuing domestic automakers. “This is a huge, unprecedented financial commitment…$2.9 trillion is just short of what the entire federal government spent in fiscal year 2008,” said Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus. “It’s like having a second United States government budget dedicated solely to saving the financial system, and that is truly surreal.”

Are you happy that you bailed out the rich? But if you hadn’t, the economy would have collapsed because the economy is actually a plutonomy and is all about serving the interests of the rich. Ever feel like you’ve been swindled? Isn’t it time for a new economic system that doesn’t pander to the rich?
__________

The Bankers:

In October 2008, the people of Britain were within TWO HOURS of being unable to withdraw money from British banks. The entire banking system was about to collapse. Alistair Darling, the British Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time, described the bank chiefs that he was meeting with to avert disaster as “so arrogant and stupid that they might bring us all down.” Darling said of Sir Fred Goodwin, CEO of the enormous Royal Bank of Scotland, “[he behaved as if he was] off to play a game of golf.”

You have to wonder at a system that allows “stupid and arrogant” people, unelected and unaccountable, with a keen interest in golf, to be running a nation’s economy.
__________

The Tobacco Industry – pure poison:

A tobacco industry memo declared: “Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with ‘the body of fact’ that exists in the mind of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy.”

The tobacco industry, as a matter of policy, sows disinformation, encourages misinformation and seeks to personally undermine those who carry out anti-smoking research. They use expensive, high-powered lawyers to bully their enemies. Why are these crooks allowed to get away with it? Are their profits more important than ethics and the world’s health?

According to an academic report, smokers are heavily influenced by the glossy, colourful, stylish packaging of cigarettes. If cigarettes were instead presented in plain, brown packets, people would smoke less. Women in particular are influenced by the look and feel of a cigarette pack. A pack of cigarettes looks “cool” and seems sophisticated and rebellious. If presented in uncool packaging, cigarettes lose their allure. They become associated with losers, with people with no style, with the desperate, addicted underclass.

Capitalism relies heavily on packaging. Change the packaging and you change the perception of the product. It’s essential to make socially harmful activities uncool. Capitalism uses operant conditioning to hook people; reverse operant conditioning should be deployed by the government to unhook them. The same is true of religion.
__________

The “System”:

The rich – the plutocrats – run the nation. The desire of the plutocrats is to keep widening the gap between themselves and everyone else because they thereby massively enhance their power and influence. The plutocrats have an active interest in the erosion of the status of the middle class.

The plutocrats essentially want to make themselves an old-style aristocracy: a permanent, dynastic ruling elite, incapable of being challenged by anyone else. The last twenty years have seen an astonishing rise in just such a plutocratic aristocracy. With every passing year, it becomes more entrenched. The plutocrats, with the best accountants working for them, pay virtually no tax. The plutocrats prefer to have just two classes below them: a) the working class and b) the underclass.

The working class is designed to be full of people mortgaged to the hilt and with enormous credit card debts (i.e. they are to be defined by their indebtedness). Such people are cowed, servile and permanently anxious. They are terrified of losing their jobs and thus being unable to keep making their debt repayments. If they defy their plutocratic masters, they will be fired and plunged into the underclass.

The underclass is that ever-growing cesspool of humanity – the lumpenproletariat as the Marxists called them. They live in dysfunctional family units in ghettos. They are poorly educated and unfit to hold down any job i.e. they are unemployable and have no prospect of any prosperous future within the legal framework. They often join gangs for protection and status and become involved in criminality, especially drugs, prostitution, robbery and extortion.

The working class have this permanent spectre of horror in front of them – that one false move could plunge them into the underclass. The working class, unlike the plutocracy, are extremely heavily taxed, and most of their tax dollars go to “paying off” the underclass i.e. providing them with various welfare benefits so that they don’t go to war with the State.

So, the System consists of an arrogant, remote elite living in gated luxury communities who never come into physical contact with the other classes. They lead parallel lives that never intersect. Their children go to separate private schools and colleges. They receive medical treatment in private hospitals and they work in private corporations or top public jobs. They heavily tax the working class and they ensure that the workers are kept in a permanent state of fear involving a) debt and b) the presence of a sewer society where the losers and troublemakers in society end up. The taxes of the workers subsidise the gutter class just enough to prevent violence, but there is nevertheless constant criminality amongst the gutter folk (usually directed against each other!) and many do long stretches in jail, which makes them even more unemployable.

Does all of that sound horrifically familiar? That’s because we’re all living in the system, and it’s worse now than ever. The ultimate class traitors – the police and army – keep the plutocrats in power, brutalise the gutter class, and intimidate the workers.

Isn’t it time to change the system?
__________

The “Know Nothing” Party:

This Protestant Party was founded in America in 1845 and flourished for fifteen years. Its modern-day equivalent is the Tea Party. It was ferociously anti-Catholic, anti-immigration, anti-black, pro-temperance and pro-money: the usual sober, materialistic, money-grabbing racist attitude that we all know so well from modern right wing Americans and Christian Fundamentalists.

The Know Nothings’ particular hatred was reserved for Catholic immigrants from Ireland. These were fleeing the devastating Famine that killed one million people, despite the fact that Ireland was part of the United Kingdom, then the richest and most powerful nation on Earth with a vast Empire. The Protestant British were perfectly happy to watch the Irish Catholics starve to death.

Catholic immigrants from Germany received a barely less hostile reception. Catholics were regarded as an alien army under the direct control of the Pope – yes, you really have heard it all before. Conspiracy theorist Benjamin Fulford is always talking about Satanists in the Vatican. We call Catholics Satanists too, but we also include all Protestants, all Jews and all Muslims amongst the Satan worshippers i.e. every person who believes in the evil God of Abraham who ordered a father to murder his son. If that isn’t the essence of evil, what is? If you don’t call the story of Abraham evil then it means you have no moral compass whatever. If it doesn’t occur to you that it’s impossible for the True God to order anyone’s death in a human sacrifice then it’s no wonder you worship the Devil.

So, 19th century Protestants created conspiracy theories about Catholic immigration. The materialistic Protestant mindset is that of a natural-born conspiracy theorist and the theories are all about “aliens” (whether Catholic, Black, Asian, Hispanic or Extra-terrestrial) coming to take away the material possessions of the Protestants and to stop them practising their “God-fearing” religion. Ironically, the Know Nothings referred to themselves as “Native Americans”, although the actual Native Americans might have had something pointed to say about that.

Only Protestant males over 21 with British ancestry were eligible to join the Know Nothings i.e. they were the archetypal WASP Party. The Know Nothings (what an entirely appropriate name!) demanded immigration curbs and many, but not all, were eager supporters of slavery. The Party’s origins lay in the American Republican Party (not the same as THE Republican Party) established in New York in 1843, and which then became known as the Native American Party. In 1845, it went national, and in 1855 it rebranded itself as the American Party. The Know Nothings employed the usual right-wing tactics of invoking patriotism, nationalism, wrapping oneself in the American flag and saying, “God bless America.” Attached to the Party was a Masonic secret society called the Order of the Star Spangled Banner.

“Know Nothing” was the name derisively applied to the American Party because members were encouraged never to discuss the Party with outsiders and the phrase they were instructed to use with any interrogators was, “I know nothing.”

The Irish Catholics gravitated towards the Democratic Party, meaning that WASPs then favoured the Republican Party. In many ways, the Democrat versus Republican divide in America is Catholics (Irish, Poles, Italians, Germans, Hispanics) and African Americans versus WASPs (of British, German Lutheran and Dutch ancestry). It’s no accident that America’s sole Catholic and Black presidents both belonged to the Democratic Party. Jews split both ways, although they have often been more associated with the Democrats, though that is starting to change. In recent years, Christian Fundamentalist right-wingers have eagerly embraced Zionism and mixed it in with theories of Armageddon and the Rapture.

The platform of the American Party comprised:

1) Severe restriction on immigration in general and from Catholic countries in particular.

2) Political office to be restricted to native-born Americans of British lineage and the Protestant persuasion.

3) An immigrant could gain citizenship only after 21 years.

4) Teachers in public schools must be Protestants.

5) The Bible must be read daily in public schools.

6) There must be severe restrictions on the sale of liquor.

7) Only English must be spoken.

Doesn’t that platform sound remarkably like that of modern-day American Christian Fundamentalists? America is traditionally associated with virulent racism towards blacks, but it has also been ferociously anti-Semitic and anti-Catholic. In fact, America has proved itself one of the most hate-filled, intolerant nations on earth, and all of the hatred has emanated from a single source – WASPs. The WASPs of Britain and America have been one of the most evil forces in human history. Masonic WASPs entered into an unholy alliance with Zionist bankers to create the so-called “Anglo-Saxon” ultra-capitalist economic model, financed by Jewish money. The purpose of this model is to create a global dynastic WASP aristocracy and plutocracy that will always support Zionism and will rule the world in perpetuity. And it has done an astoundingly effective job. Go through a list of all the American billionaires and it’s virtually impossible to find anyone who isn’t a Jew or WASP Mason. Q.E.D.! This is the economic model and ideology that must be trampled into the ground and destroyed forever. It is utter anathema.

When are people going to wise up and realise the identity of the REAL enemy? It’s not Illuminati “lizards”; it’s WASP Masons and Zionist bankers. Tragically, because most conspiracy theorists are Protestants, they refuse to acknowledge Protestantism itself as one of the primary sources of the world’s ills. In fact, most Protestant conspiracy theorists are always looking to blame anyone OTHER than Protestants for anything that goes wrong. The “Illuminati” are the perfect fall guys because the version that exists in the minds of most conspiracy theorists doesn’t and has never existed – so it’s the perfect fantasy on which to project any old nonsense. And, of course, Grand Master Adam Weishaupt was from a Catholic background and had a Jesuit education. Could there be a better candidate upon whom to unload endless absurd theories? The fact that he was a law professor committed to the overthrow of monarchy and Christianity somehow permitted him to be described as a Jew, a socialist, a monarchist, an aristocrat, a banker, an international financier, a papal agent, a Jesuit agent yada yada yada. It’s complete insanity. To the Protestant mind, an intellectual from a Catholic/Jesuit background is the ultimate monster.

The Ku Klux Klan took much of their agenda from the Know Nothings. A leader of the American Party was depicted in Martin Scorsese’s Gangs of New York in the memorable shape of William “Bill the Butcher” Cutting (played by Daniel Day-Lewis), supposedly based on a Know Nothing called William Poole.

Karl Marx said, “Historical phenomena always happen twice – the first time as tragedy, the second as farce.” In fact, the same historical phenomena happen not just twice but many times and in many guises. The Protestant Know Nothings and Ku Klux Klan have re-emerged as the Tea Party, Christian Fundamentalists, Republicans and conspiracy theorists. Any conspiracy theory that puts Catholics, Jesuits, the Illuminati, socialists, communists or atheists in the frame is unquestionably produced by Protestants. Any conspiracy theory that looks back to a golden age that has been “ruined” by some group or other is the product of the Protestant mind.

The reality is this. Those in power have ALWAYS conspired against those denied power. Power itself is tantamount to conspiracy. Those with power will do anything to keep it and will construct strategies to ensure that outcome i.e. they immediately engage in conduct designed to increase their advantages and decrease threats to them. To put it another way, they automatically conspire.

There is only one type of system where the powerful have no need or scope to conspire: a meritocracy. In a meritocracy, you’re at the top because you’re the best. But when someone else is best, they take over. In a genuinely constituted meritocracy where merit is objectively obvious, the system cannot be rigged. Anyone who subscribes to meritocracy is essentially signing up to recognising the objective merits of others, and if someone has superior merit then they are thereby entitled to greater power. They have earned it. In non-meritocratic power structures, heredity is the main organizing principle. You get power because your parents had it, not because of any merit inherent in you.

The next most common organising principle is cronyism. Power is awarded to you if you are a friend and ally of those in power, or you’re one of their sycophants. Unmeritorious cronies will always be favoured over meritorious outsiders. But that very fact sows the seed of destruction of anti-meritocratic systems. Invariably, they let complete idiots get to the top, who then exercise appalling judgment and bring about catastrophe.

Why did the Credit Crunch happen? Ultimately, it was because our society is led by unmeritorious individuals – by the beneficiaries of privilege and cronyism. Stupid leaders create stupid systems. If you want to avoid boom and bust, you must turn to meritocrats. The best possible world is the one that gives maximum power to the most talented individuals, to Plato’s Guardians and philosopher kings.

If you WANT a disaster, make sure privilege, heredity and cronyism are allowed to go unchecked. Why do successful corporations fail? It’s usually because a leader of merit retires and makes the mistake of allowing a son or crony to take over. Look at the Murdoch Empire. It’s now collapsing. Why? Because Rupert Murdoch, a ferociously ruthless business mogul, went down the catastrophic road of cronyism and nepotism. He surrounded himself with a gang of immoral individuals who brought his stinking empire into total disrepute. They were the only people an operator like him could trust. He would never have tolerated having someone smarter than him in his organisation.
___________

The Communards:

FOR A FEW GLORIOUS WEEKS IN 1871, the working class people of Paris established a left wing Commune, the members of which were known as the Communards. The authorities then destroyed the Commune with horrific violence. The climax of the struggle between the Paris Commune and the French government was called La Semaine Sanglante (“The Bloody Week”). At least 20,000 Communards died (and some estimates go as high as 50,000), many being executed by mass, indiscriminate firing by the French Army, and artillery bombardment. Summary executions of anyone suspected of being a Communard were rife. 40,000 Communards were temporarily imprisoned, of whom 12,500 were tried and 10,000 found guilty. The ringleaders were executed and 4,000 were deported to a French colony.

Isn’t it remarkable that critics of the French Revolution always mention the “Terror”, yet most people have never even heard of the destruction of the Paris Commune, which involved a similar scale of violence by the right wing authorities? Why is it that left-wing violence is always highlighted while violence by right-wing governments is ignored?

The Internationale by Eugène Pottier (one of the Communards of the Paris Commune).

Arise, ye workers from your slumber,
Arise, ye prisoners of want.
For reason in revolt now thunders,
and at last ends the age of cant!
Away with all your superstitions,
Servile masses, arise, arise!
We’ll change henceforth the old tradition,
And spurn the dust to win the prize!
So comrades, come rally,
And the last fight let us face.
The Internationale,
Unites the human race.
So comrades, come rally,
And the last fight let us face.
The Internationale,
Unites the human race.
No more deluded by reaction,
On tyrants only we’ll make war!
The soldiers too will take strike action,
They’ll break ranks and fight no more!
And if those cannibals keep trying,
To sacrifice us to their pride,
They soon shall hear the bullets flying,
We’ll shoot the generals on our own side.
So comrades, come rally,
And the last fight let us face.
The Internationale,
Unites the human race.
So comrades, come rally,
And the last fight let us face.
The Internationale,
Unites the human race.
No saviour from on high delivers,
No faith have we in prince or peer.
Our own right hand the chains must shiver,
Chains of hatred, greed and fear.
E’er the thieves will out with their booty,
And to all give a happier lot.
Each at his forge must do their duty,
And we’ll strike the iron while it’s hot.
So comrades, come rally,
And the last fight let us face.
The Internationale,
Unites the human race.
So comrades, come rally,
And the last fight let us face.
The Internationale,
Unites the human race.

La Marseillaise (by Claude Joseph Rouget de Lisle).

Arise children of the fatherland
The day of glory has arrived
Against us tyranny’s
Bloody standard is raised
Listen to the sound in the fields
The howling of these fearsome soldiers
They are coming into our midst
To cut the throats of your sons and consorts
To arms citizens
Form your battalions
March, march
Let impure blood
Water our furrows
What do they want this horde of slaves
Of traitors and conspiratorial kings?
For whom these vile chains
These long-prepared irons?
Frenchmen, for us, ah! What outrage
What methods must be taken?
It is us they dare plan
To return to the old slavery!
What! These foreign cohorts!
They would make laws in our courts!
What! These mercenary phalanxes
Would cut down our warrior sons
Good Lord! By chained hands
Our brow would yield under the yoke
The vile despots would have themselves be
The masters of destiny
Tremble, tyrants and traitors
The shame of all good men
Tremble! Your parricidal schemes
Will receive their just reward
Against you we are all soldiers
If they fall, our young heroes
France will bear new ones
Ready to join the fight against you
Frenchmen, as magnanimous warriors
Bear or hold back your blows
Spare these sad victims
That they regret taking up arms against us
But not these bloody despots
These accomplices of Bouillé
All these tigers who pitilessly
Ripped out their mothers’ wombs
We shall enter into the pit
When our elders will no longer be there
There we shall find their ashes
And the mark of their virtues
We are much less jealous of surviving them
Than of sharing their coffins
We shall have the sublime pride
Of avenging or joining them
Drive on sacred patriotism
Support our avenging arms
Liberty, cherished liberty
Join the struggle with your defenders
Under our flags, let victory
Hurry to your manly tone
So that in death your enemies
See your triumph and our glory!
__________

The Punk Revolution:

Arguably, the greatest band of all time is the Sex Pistols. The name itself is virtually perfect: the ideal combination of the modern preoccupation with sex and violence. The Pistols certainly weren’t the musically most talented, but they were the voice of authentic rebellion, the supreme anti-establishment band, preoccupied with themes of alienation, nihilism, and class war. They loathed the English monarchy and their slogan was NO FUTURE. They were the heroes of hordes of unemployed young people and their anarchist swagger energised the whole left wing of the UK. Those who witnessed the Sex Pistols at the peak of their powers thought their music could change Britain. They could literally musically reprogram the minds of British youth and inspire an uprising against the privileged elite. How many bands these days are associated with the concept of transformation and revolution? All contemporary bands are corporate.

The Sex Pistols were the antidote to tame, anodyne bands with nothing to say but with interminable, self-indulgent guitar solos to inflict on the world. Now we need a new Sex Pistols to save us from the MTV corporate packaging and capitalist commodification of music. Nirvana stepped in briefly and offered something glorious, but there was only one way that story was ever going to end. A few hip hop songs have hit the mark, but mainstream hip hop has largely chosen to define itself with regard to BLING, a monstrous parody of rich, white America. Is there any sadder sight than a black person dripping with gold and diamonds? You might as well get on your knees outside Goldman Sachs and say your prayers to Mammon. If bling were postmodern, a satire of vulgar wealth, it would be fantastic. But it’s not. The bling kings actually love wearing all that shit. They’re so feeble that they need their self-esteem propped up by the ostentatious display of gold. Sad fucks. “Street” hip hop – an urban politico-cultural movement – is much more interesting but much less popular.

No more plastic. We want reality. We want authenticity. Destroy the fake and phoney bands. Destroy the bling kings. Music should be the voice of the soul, not of the dollar.
__________

3/5

Academia Iluministă (77)

Maggio 10th, 2019 No Comments   Posted in Mişcarea Dacia
Este posibil ca imaginea să conţină: 2 persoane

Introduction:

THIS IS ONE OF A SERIES OF BOOKS outlining the religion, politics and philosophy of the ancient and controversial secret society known as the Illuminati, of which the Greek polymath Pythagoras was the first official Grand Master. The society exists to this day and the author is a member, working under the pseudonym of “Adam Weishaupt” – the name of the Illuminati’s most notorious Grand Master.

The Illuminati’s religion is the most highly developed expression of Gnosticism and is called Illumination (alternatively, Illuminism). Dedicated to the pursuit of enlightenment, it has many parallels with the Eastern religions of Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism. It rejects the Abrahamic religions of faith: Judaism, Christianity and Islam, considering these the work of the “Demiurge”; an inferior, cruel and wicked deity who deludes himself that he is the True God, and who has inflicted endless horrors on humanity.

If you wish to judge for yourself how deranged the Demiurge is, you need only read the Old Testament, the story of the Demiurge’s involvement with his “Chosen People”, the Hebrews. You may wonder why the “God of All” entered into an exclusive and partisan Covenant with a tribe in the Middle East several thousand years ago, why he promised them a land (Canaan) that belonged to others, and why he then actively participated with them in a genocidal war against the Canaanites. Even more bizarrely, according to Christian theology, he then dispatched all of those Hebrews, whom he had supported so fanatically, to Limbo – the edge of Hell – when they died. They couldn’t go to Heaven because they were indelibly marked by the “Original Sin” of Adam and Eve. Only the atonement provided by the agonising death of God’s “son”, Jesus Christ, could wipe the slate clean and allow the Hebrews to be released from Limbo. But there was a catch. Only those who accepted Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour were eligible for Paradise.

Of course, the Chosen People of “God” have almost entirely rejected Jesus Christ. Therefore, from the Christian perspective, nearly all of the Chosen People are now in hell proper. Don’t you find God’s behaviour distinctly odd? Indeed, unbelievable? Don’t alarm bells start ringing? Doesn’t the behaviour of this God sound rather more like what would be expected of Satan?

Remember that this same “God” ordered Abraham to perform human sacrifice on his own son, Isaac. Abraham, rather than rejecting this monstrous command, rather than denouncing the creature that gave it as evil incarnate, agreed to butcher his own flesh and blood to demonstrate how slavishly and mindlessly obedient he was – the prototype of all psychopathic, fanatical “believers”.

Does God’s command to Abraham sound like something that would ever pass the lips of the True God? We pity you if you think it does because you are surely a creature of the Demiurge and one of the legions of the damned. If, however, you doubt the credentials of the Abrahamic God, you may be receptive to the message of the Illuminati and our future-oriented, rational, scientific, mathematical and dialectical religion of light – Illumination.
__________

Quotations:

“A civilization which leaves so large a number of its participants unsatisfied and drives them into revolt neither has nor deserves the prospect of a lasting existence.” –Sigmund Freud

“I am interested in anything about revolt, disorder, chaos-especially activity that seems to have no meaning. It seems to me to be the road toward freedom… Rather than starting inside, I start outside and reach the mental through the physical.” –Jim Morrison

“I, for one, hope that youth will again revolt and again demoralize the dead weight of conformity that now lies upon us.” –Howard Mumford Jones

“Inferiors revolt in order that they may be equal, and equals that they may be superior. Such is the state of mind which creates revolutions.” –Aristotle

“On one level the sixties revolt was an impressive illustration of Lenin’s remark that the capitalist will sell you the rope to hang him with.” –Ellen Willis

“Oppression that is clearly inexorable and invincible does not give rise to revolt but to submission.” –Simone Weil

“The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.” –Mikhail Bakunin
__________

The Historical Dialectic:

“If you don’t stand for something, you will fall for something.” –African Proverb

BE UNDER NO ILLUSIONS. You are living in one of the most important epochs in human history, if not the most significant of all. This Age began in 1989, the year that will come to be seen as the beginning of the end for all the dominant structures of the Old World Order. Where we stand now is at the juncture of old and new humanity. The War of Enlightenment, which has been raging since the time of Copernicus, can finally be won. The ignorant, greedy, superstitious and selfish past – the age of mad religions, evil monarchs and super rich tyrants who have dominated and degraded humanity – can be put behind us once and for all.

“What I relate is the history of the next two centuries. I describe what is coming, what can no longer come differently: the advent of nihilism. This history can be related even now; for necessity itself is at work here. This future speaks even now in a hundred signs, this destiny announces itself everywhere; for this music of the future all ears are cocked even now. For some time now, our whole European culture has been moving toward a catastrophe, with a tortured tension that is growing decade to decade: restlessly, violently, headlong, like a river that wants to reach the end, that no longer reflects, that is afraid to reflect.” –Nietzsche (writing in the 1880s)

“I WANT ALL OF YOU TO GET UP OUT OF YOUR CHAIRS RIGHT NOW.” –Howard Beale (Peter Finch) delivering his “mad as hell” speech in Network.

In 1789, the French Revolution decisively ushered in the Modern Age. The American Declaration of Independence of 1776 and the establishment of the American Republic had signalled the beginning of the end for the era of powerful monarchs, but America was a distant colony of the British Empire and not yet a giant on the world stage. Its liberation did not provide a fundamental psychological rebooting of the human mind. Europe was where the world was controlled and only in Europe could the transformation to modernity truly begin. The decisive blow was struck in France, which thus takes the honour of being the first modern European nation and world power. When one of the most powerful monarchies on earth fell to a people’s Revolution, and the King and most of his ruling order were executed, the irreversible signal was broadcast to the world that it was no longer business as usual for the ruling elite. Now the people would have their say.

The age of monarchs did not however properly end until the bloodbath of the First World War. In 1917, the Russian Revolution toppled the Tsar who was executed by Bolsheviks in the following year. 1918, the year in which the global cataclysm ended, also saw the end of the powerful German monarch, Kaiser Wilhelm II. In the meantime, the British monarchy, terrified of its people, was compelled to change its name from the Germanic “Saxe-Coburg-Gotha” to the English “Windsor” – a fake name for a disgusting, fake family.

The one hundred and twenty-nine years from 1789 to 1918 is how long it can take for a dialectical age of the World to be fully resolved. The Illuminati-inspired American and French revolutions began the modern world but only a World War completed the job.

The 1917 Russian Revolution was the beginning of the next phase of the dialectic: class war between the rich capitalist elite (who took over from monarchs and the nobility as the power elite) and the ordinary people. A war between capitalism and communism was inevitable, but, before it could break out, a new dialectical force appeared on the scene, a synthesis of capitalism and communism called Fascism (or “National Socialism”). Fascism was based on the concept of a capitalist elite being subordinated to a totally dominant national leader (a Duce or Fuehrer). The Leader allowed the capitalists to make healthy profits, but only if they did his bidding.

Capitalism, in Fascist countries, was harnessed to State policy rather than to free markets. Fascism and communism were both based on the same economic model of an enormously centralised command and control system under the charge of a totalitarian, paramilitary political party. The central difference was that communism outlawed private ownership of industry whereas Fascism was happy to use the capitalist class as its economic agents. National Socialism in Germany was spectacularly successful, transforming a nation in economic ruin and chaos, suffering from disastrous hyperinflation and enormous unemployment, in a few short years. Of course, most of the reason for the success lay in the fact that the whole nation was given over to rebuilding the German military machine to its former glory and providing the infrastructure – such as autobahns – to allow rapid deployment of forces to any part of the nation.

In the modern day, China has much more in common with Hitler’s National Socialism than it does with Marxism. Like Hitler, the Chinese totalitarian Communist Party now actively utilise the capitalist model of private ownership under central direction. Technically, China is no longer a communist nation but National Socialist i.e. Fascist. National Socialism has proved to be an extremely effective way of running economies – far superior to free market capitalism – because it is capable of avoiding the disastrous, irresponsible, greed-fuelled boom and bust cycles of irrational free markets.

Markets are like tiny, hysterical children, driven by greed during boom and fear during bust. There is no rationale at work, no controlling mind. National Socialism, on the other hand, provides a coherent framework, aligning the interests of the State with the capitalist economy.

Contemporary America is not governed by politicians but by banks, corporations and lobbyists. Non-elected entities, unaccountable to the people, direct the destiny of America. Politicians are irrelevant and have no real power at all. Elections are meaningless and are performed merely for show. It doesn’t matter who’s in charge, Democrats or Republicans. Wall Street, and the Jews and Freemasons of Goldman Sachs in particular, run America. America isn’t a nation; it’s a corporation run by business and banking interests, and a large army of lawyers.

The Illuminati’s economic system – which can be variously called social, public or meritocratic capitalism – has, technically, a certain similarity to centrally controlled National Socialism, with the critical difference that there is no totalitarian party in charge and no Fuehrer. In social capitalism, there are no privileged elites, no dynastic families, no inherited wealth, no free market mayhem, and no boom and bust.

In social capitalism, the most meritocratic individuals set economic policy according to the needs of “positive liberty”, the doctrine of actively seeking to improve the quality of humanity. All economic activities that seek to degrade, exploit and sedate “the masses” are outlawed. Free markets are fine, to the extent that they support meritocratic objectives. They are never fine if their purpose is to make disproportionate wealth for greedy capitalists who have no interest in the Commonwealth.

Despite all the obfuscation of economists, economics is a simple subject. It is in fact entirely a function of politics. In the nineteenth century, capitalism was production-oriented. That suited the political need to build an advanced industrial nation with a complex infrastructure. Capitalist goods were sturdy and long lasting. A person might own a single pair of shoes for years. Production capitalism was about functionality and utility: everything had to be useful, practical and enduring. But what happens when the infrastructure is built and everyone has their indestructible shoes?

After WWI, American capitalism had to reinvent itself. It switched from production to consumption and the birth of the consumer, who has been the focus of capitalism ever since. People no longer bought things because they needed them but because they wanted them. This was a revolutionary change. Now the purpose of capitalism was no longer to manufacture useful things but to stimulate demand for, essentially, useless things. This suited the political agenda because consumers, with an immense number of choices regarding what goods and services to buy, saw themselves not as cogs in a machine but as free people. Democracy, freedom and capitalism became effectively synonymous, and were always presented as a single package. So, if you were hostile to capitalism, for example, you would be branded an enemy of freedom and democracy.

The major competitor of capitalism was communism. This was also production-oriented but because it banned private ownership, profit-making and extra reward for harder work and better ideas, production proved inefficient, cumbersome, non-innovative and the goods produced were slipshod and ugly. In other words, the politics of communism and its hatred of salary differentials, hence of any incentive for anyone to try hard and come up with new ideas, inevitably gave rise to an unmotivated workforce manufacturing low-quality goods. There was no market to test goods, and no competition between rival companies since the State prohibited commercial competition.

While the Soviet Union produced endless ugly junk, capitalist America produced endless exquisitely produced junk. Americans liked their glossy junk that they were free to choose much more than the Soviets liked their shoddy junk that didn’t work most of the time and which offered them no choice.

Communist China was once like the Soviet Union, and in fact even more backward, but when it became “National Socialist” China, everything changed. The Chinese started manufacturing reasonable-quality consumerist junk that massively undercut American prices. So, the whole Western economy started buying enormous amounts of Chinese goods. Credit was handed out like candy to allow people to buy as much as possible. Major American corporations began transferring their production facilities to China, hence work started to dry up in America. As jobs became scarcer, the salaries of the low-paid were driven down.

Ordinary American people couldn’t afford repayments on their mortgages. Consumption stuttered and went into reverse. The global economy stalled. All the hidden debts in the system were suddenly brutally exposed and enormous numbers of people started defaulting on their loans. Banks, having loaned incredible amounts of money to all and sundry in order to maximise their profits, and retained practically no capital reserves (because the more they loaned, the higher their profits were, so why not loan every last cent, thus massively inflating the profits of the banks and securing gargantuan bonuses for the senior personnel?) were now all technically insolvent since they didn’t have the capital to meet their immediate financial obligations. That had never been a problem in the past because they could borrow what they needed from other banks, but now the other banks were in the same boat and couldn’t lend – the whole system had imploded. The game of musical chairs had ended and there were no chairs left at all.

According to the laws of free market capitalism, the entire banking system should have gone out of business, but of course that would have meant the death of capitalism itself and political chaos. So all the rich people were allowed to keep their wealth and the gullible taxpayers had to bail out the bankrupt banks. Now it was the State rather than the private banks that was groaning under an unmanageable debt. Governments all across the West had to slash public spending. Millions of workers were laid off and salaries frozen for everyone else. But the rich bankers kept getting their vast bonuses – now paid for by the taxpayers. The rich had found their holy grail – the privatisation of profits (i.e. they keep all of the profits in the good times) and the socialisation of losses (i.e. the taxpayers pick up the pieces when the high-risk games go wrong).

That’s the world we live in now. Capitalism is dead, replaced by capitalist socialism – the most monstrous economic miscarriage ever known. The rich, as the controllers of the global economy, simply get governments to transfer the losses of private corporations to the State sector. America could easily have declared itself officially socialist and proclaimed that the State was now running the entire economy, including the banks, since the taxpayers had effectively paid for the whole shooting match.

Ask yourself this – why are you paying for something even though you don’t get to own it nor to enjoy any of the profits (vast bonuses), which go to the people who screwed up the whole thing in the first place? Is that the act of a rational people? Moreover, how can employees of insolvent banks be getting bonuses at all (these are not of course paid out of genuine profits since there aren’t any – instead they’re paid directly by the taxpayers)? The reason they are paid bonuses is that that they will all leave if they don’t get them, and the banks will collapse. In other words, they’re blackmailing the taxpayers and extorting money from them with menaces. Why don’t the people lock them up in jail as if they were Mafia hoodlums (which is effectively what they are)?

Contemporary economics is a madhouse. Politicians aren’t in charge of it. The super-rich are. The whole point of Western economic policy is simply to prevent the rich from ever losing their wealth, and to keep saddling the taxpayers with ever-increasing debt. The official economic objective of the West (though never expressed in these terms) is: KEEP THE RICH RICH.

The West is terrified of what would happen if the wealth of the rich were allowed to be challenged. Banks would collapse, the stock market would endure the biggest fall in history and the entire political and economic system of the West would die. To avoid this, we keep the rich rich. They have a gun pointed at our heads and we are doing nothing to disarm them.

We are now playing out an economic catastrophe. There are hedge funds in America that are betting so heavily against the Euro that they are making its collapse almost inevitable. Bur if the Euro goes down, so does the global economy. So American capitalists are actually using the levers of capitalism to destroy capitalism in order to make massive profits from the collapse.

What these retards have failed to understand is that without capitalism, all of their ill-gotten gains will be useless.

When ultra-capitalists are betting on capitalism to fail, you know that the system has become insane. This is what it means to have “free markets” in charge of the global economy rather than intelligent politicians and economists with a clear agenda.

Neither Communist China nor Nazi Germany would ever have permitted free marketeers to destabilise the economy. Under Hitler, all of the hedge fund managers would have been put in concentration camps. In China, they might well have been shot as criminals.

Is it not an astonishing thing that although Western taxpayers have had to effectively buy the Western banking system, not a single politician anywhere suggested that governments should henceforth be running the banks for the public and not the private good and that all future profits would be returned to the citizens? Why weren’t all the rich bankers, who had spectacularly failed to run their banks responsibly, fired and replaced by publicly accountable officials? Why weren’t all of the enormous bonuses stopped? Who arranged the bail out? – expensive gangs of ex Goldman Sachs executives! Well, surprise, surprise. That’s like putting vampires in charge of the blood bank.

The American, hence world, economy has been hijacked by the rich elite and its only purpose is to protect the wealth of the rich come what may. The Afghanistan War bankrupted the Soviet Union, but the debts of the communists were as NOTHING compared with the debts of today’s capitalist West. If the Soviet Union was a failure, the capitalist West is an enormously bigger one. Why has no one in the media commented on this salient fact?

The degree of anti-socialist indoctrination to which Westerners have been subjected is so extreme that no one even suggested that the banks should be “socialised” from now on and that their specific remit should be to grow the economy in a stable way without boom or bust cycles fuelled by insane greed and hysterical fear. What sane person would say that banks shouldn’t have that function of serving the interests of the people? As it is, the purpose of banks is to generate enormous bonuses for a select few Jews and Freemasons. That’s their raison d’être.

Free markets must, ultimately, be under political control. If they’re not then they invariably submit to oligopolies and cartels and become irredeemably corrupt. All information relating to all markets should be freely available to all participants in the market at exactly the same time. There should be no hidden gambles going on such as those of hedge funds. Everything should be transparent, including all of the identities of all participants.

Capitalism, hitherto, has been about materialism, about producing objects, mostly of a junk nature. What’s the point? Capitalism doesn’t need to be about objects. Imagine a world with only ten percent of the objects that we have right now. Imagine that to fill the gap, ninety percent of the human working population wasn’t involved in producing and selling objects but in creating and delivering educational services covering all conceivable subjects. Imagine that you could make a living from teaching the subject you love best and that everyone around you was doing exactly the same. We all sell our knowledge to others and they sell their knowledge to us, and we all become smarter. There’s barely an object in sight. We go shopping for new knowledge, not for new disposable objects. Imagine an enormous marketplace in knowledge where we pick and choose what to learn – rather than an enormous marketplace in objects where we pick and choose what junk to take home with us and that we use to define who we are (“Hey, look at me, I own this set of objects so I must be cool and desirable.”).

All that really matters is that you should have a viable job. It doesn’t matter what you’re selling as long as there’s a marketplace for it. Objects need not be the main point of capitalism at all. It could be anything: art, culture, knowledge, music, spirituality, whatever you like. All that matters is that money should flow round the system, allowing everyone to live comfortably.

Imagine that you taught classes several times a week, and you also attended classes of other people. Instead of accumulating objects, you accumulate knowledge. Some subjects might have much higher demand than others and therefore the teacher can ask for more money. Some teachers might offer cheaper classes in order to boost numbers. Some might want a select audience and charge high prices, and thus we see all the normal marketplace mechanisms coming into play, but without an object in sight.

If we lived in a knowledge economy rather than an object economy, wouldn’t we become enormously smarter? Wouldn’t the quality of the human race rise prodigiously? Wouldn’t crime fall, and social deprivation? We would have a much more informed, cultured human race, with far fewer needless objects collecting dust. The planet would be much cleaner if we could avoid all of the pollution associated with industry and replace it with the ultimate “clean”, eco-product: ideas. We live in a staggeringly stupid and unimaginative economic system where we define ourselves by what objects we own. We have thereby turned ourselves into objects. We’re barely human at all.

******

The capitalism versus communism dialectic was taken on a detour by WWII when the capitalists and communists were compelled to unite to defeat the extremely dangerous hybrid form (National Socialism). Then it was business as usual – the “Cold War”.

In 1989, the fall of the Berlin Wall symbolised the end of communism. Yet, amazingly, it also signalled the beginning of the end for capitalism, although no one realised it. Borrowing from Hegel and Marx, Francis Fukuyama produced a brilliant but absurd book proclaiming that History had come to an end because “liberal democracy” had now manifestly defeated all challengers. Liberal democracy would be rolled out all across the globe and that would be it for the rest of time.

This demonstrated better than anything else the demented triumphalism of the capitalists. The leading capitalists now thought they were gods and routinely referred to themselves as “masters of the universe”. Given that there was no longer any viable alternative to capitalism, the leading capitalists could afford to dispense with all concerns over social fairness and demand ultra-capitalism based on zero government interference in the workings of markets. All controls were removed. Regulation practically vanished. Everything the capitalists wanted, they got. All sorts of laws restricting and controlling markets were repealed. Retail banks could start having investment bank functions. The amount of capital reserves they legally needed was shrunk to almost nothing, allowing every dollar invested in the bank to be maximally leveraged (meaning that the risks were magnified to a ridiculous degree). The whole economy of the West began to revolve around a single factor: house prices, the primary barometer of family wealth. While house prices went up, all bets were successful and everything seemed to create healthy profits. People actually convinced themselves that house prices could never fall. Mortgages were given to ninjas – “no income, no job or assets”. At this point, the system had become insane. The idea was that ninjas could keep borrowing against the rising value of their home and keep paying the mortgage: the ultimate Indian rope trick.

Of course, if anything went wrong, if house prices failed to go up, the whole system was CERTAIN to collapse. Not just to collapse, but to take the whole global economy with it. Any sane form of government, any economic system based on reason rather than voodoo, would have seen it coming a mile off. After all, isn’t one of the primary tests of a rational system the ability to analyse, predict and take evasive manoeuvres? A few experts – very, very few – did give warnings, but were promptly ignored and called doomsayers. No one in casino capitalism likes a party pooper. Voodoo beats reason every time.

Sure enough, house prices finally fell, and so the financial crisis descended on the world in 2008. After three years, things aren’t getting any better. In fact, the warning signs are all there again that we are on the verge of not just recession but the greatest Depression in human history. If it comes, and the odds are now maybe 50/50 or worse – does any leader on earth have any grasp of what’s going on, or any ability to control events? The markets have consistently crushed the politicians.

What is the “market”? It’s essentially a small, elite group of cartels intent on making money in whatever circumstances. When they act in any particular direction, the rest of the market – the hangers on, the sheep, the dumb cattle – does the same. Any effect is instantly massively magnified. Most players in the market aren’t reacting to any rational analysis of anything at all; they are simply reacting to whether indices are going up or doing. If they’re going up, the investors feel great and invest more. If they’re going down, they start to panic and sell.

The market is therefore a small group of hugely influential players harnessed to an enormous number of small players who are infected with greed or fear in an instant. The stock market can crash by hundreds of points in minutes because someone has spread a plausible rumour of impending disaster. Such rumours aren’t accidents; they’re agreed strategies by big players to “short” the market. The more they can drive down the market, the more money they can make.

Once they’ve driven it down, they can then of course buy at the new cheap prices and make a huge profit as the prices surge upwards again. So, they profit whether the market is going down or up and, more often than not, they’re the ones making it go down or up. Small players can’t have any significant effect at all on the market by themselves. Only the big players can set the trends. The whole system is geared up for manipulation and corruption, and none of it is ever meaningfully investigated.

So, this “market”, outwith the control of any government on earth and susceptible to extreme manipulation by organised cartels of big players, can change the economic climate in a second and induce ferocious greed or equally ferocious fear. Moreover, there are enormous computerised trading systems in operation and these aren’t under any human control at all. They are totally reliant on the skill of those who programmed them and anyone who knows anything about programming knows that all programs contain bugs and some of these bugs only appear in unusual situations – exactly the unforeseen and untested situations that occur during rapid boom or bust. And this is supposed to be a sane system! Who’s flying this plane?!!!

We’re over the ocean, and we’ve just realised there’s no pilot in the cockpit and there’s a catastrophic fuel leak. That’s capitalism for you. It’s utter insanity to leave anything to any “invisible hand” of any market unless you can rationally define the hand, all of the parameters associated with it and its entire scope of its operation. If you can’t, you have no choice but to tightly regulate it.

So, the death of communism had the unexpected effect of delivering a fatal blow to capitalism too, though that was the last thing that people grasped in 1989. They thought the opposite had taken place; the absolute vindication and perpetual triumph of capitalism. Yet that’s exactly when hubris takes over and, as the ancient Greeks understood so well, nemesis is sure to follow. Capitalism removed all the factors that had kept it relatively sane. The reason for this was that the rich elite demanded the removal of all obstacles blocking their path to ever-increasing profits. Governments gave them whatever they wanted and there was an enormous boom, with most of the money going to a tiny elite.

In relation to Barack Obama, the great hope of democracy, political analyst Drew Westen recently wrote in the New York Times of Obama’s failure to reshape the country: “A final explanation is that he [Obama] ran for president on two contradictory platforms: as a reformer who would clean up the system, and as a unity candidate who would transcend the lines of red and blue. He has pursued the one with which he is most comfortable given the constraints of his character, consistently choosing the message of bipartisanship over the message of confrontation. But the arc of history does not bend toward justice through capitulation cast as compromise. It does not bend when 400 people control more of the wealth than 150 million of their fellow Americans. It does not bend when the average middle-class family has seen its income stagnate over the last 30 years while the richest 1 percent has seen its income rise astronomically. It does not bend when we cut the fixed incomes of our parents and grandparents so hedge fund managers can keep their 15 percent tax rates. It does not bend when only one side in negotiations between workers and their bosses is allowed representation. And it does not bend when, as political scientists have shown, it is not public opinion but the opinions of the wealthy that predict the votes of the Senate. The arc of history can bend only so far before it breaks.”

400 people in the USA have as much money as the bottom half of the American population – 150 million people!!!

400 versus 150,000,000.
400 versus 150,000,000.
400 versus 150,000,000.
400 versus 150,000,000.
400 versus 150,000,000.

Is this sane? Is it rational? Is it comprehensible? Where is the REVOLUTION?!!! What kind of person tolerates this situation? How can anyone think this is the right and proper way for a country to develop? 400 private individuals, unaccountable to the people, have the same power as 150,000,000 Americans. Is that what the Founding Fathers intended? Wasn’t the separation of powers supposed to stop any group acquiring too much power? Why wasn’t it applied to private individuals? Why were the rich allowed to stand outside the separation of powers? Precisely because of that, they were allowed to use their enormous wealth to buy the political system lock, stock and barrel. They controlled the politicians, but no one controlled them. That’s the law of wealth. Wealth makes you a king above the law, a dictator with absolute power.

The rich became mad with vanity, greed and power. And they have brought destruction upon the rest of us, while suffering no consequences at all. The people are so powerfully brainwashed by the elite’s media machine that no one has taken any action against the rich.

That same situation of infinite power in the hands of the elite applied in pre-revolutionary France. The monarchy and aristocracy though they were immune. Then came 1789 and the world changed forever.

1789 is coming again. The countdown has begun. The arrogant elite are no longer held in high esteem. They are no longer respected or even deemed competent. They are now viewed as crooks, robber barons, carpetbaggers, looters, spivs and conmen in it purely for themselves. The total erosion in the reputation of these people will reap a terrible consequence in due course. They are now living on borrowed time, blissfully unaware of the storm coming, as oblivious as the elite of France at the start of 1789.

If they were at all rational, the rich would surrender ninety percent of their wealth to pay off the huge debts that their criminal irresponsibility and recklessness had on the global economy, and they would still be able to live in luxury. But we know they never will. The dialectic always plays out to the end. These infinitely greedy people are incapable of doing the right, honourable and rational thing. And thus they will reap their inevitable “reward”. 1989, exactly two centuries after the French Revolution, saw the birth of another critical dialectical strand that’s having an enormous impact on our world. It was the year Englishman Tim Berners-Lee invented the World Wide Web. The internet has been a revolution in itself but it also has another unprecedented effect: it’s a Revolution ACCELERATOR.

In past ages, books, newspapers, radios, music records, film and TV all served as social accelerators, but these were almost always controlled by gatekeepers working for one elite or another. What makes the internet radically different is that the gatekeepers can be bypassed. The “word on the street” can become the word all around the globe, without the elite having the vaguest idea what’s going on. The internet allows the elite to be taken out of the loop.

The sociological phenomenon of “other-directedness” goes hand-in-hand with the internet and massively magnifies specific effects. Other-directedness involves such things as peer group pressure, fashion, group-think and hysterical contagion. Other-directed people are not truly in control of their own behaviour. They are so influenced by others that they quickly adopt whatever posture and opinions are held by the dominant and “coolest” group. Fashions, opinions and memes can spread astoundingly quickly. Viral contagion can infect the internet overnight. A person can go to bed unknown and wake up next morning known all around the globe if something he has done has gone viral.

There has never been a phenomenon like the internet. The world hasn’t even begun to wake up to its true power and the changes it is bringing to the world. It has brought to life Marshal McLuhan’s concept of the “Global Village”. Everything is now local. All boundaries are breached and annihilated. Everything is converging. The existence of different cultures is coming under threat – the world is heading relentlessly towards a single, global culture. The Muslims of the Arab Spring were heavily influenced by American and European ideas. Eventually, Islam itself may start to collapse as Muslims identify more with the global culture than with daily prayers and reading the Koran.

One thing that now seems sure to happen is the death of “tradition-directedness”: life guided by ancient books and ancient bearded leaders. The great weapon used by tradition-oriented societies was separation. Community elders could literally stop the young people from being contaminated by outside influences by using physical barriers. Now anyone with an internet connection has access to the whole world. WALLS DON’T MATTER ANYMORE. It’s no use parents denying their children internet access. All it takes is for one person to have access and all the rest will get access via that person. And if parents don’t allow access, they cut their children off from the world and make them backward.

What caused the Muslim uprisings? – the internet. Many of the Muslims spoke of “freedom”, their idea of freedom clearly being based on Western notions. To that extent, these Muslims are becoming more liberal. But on the other hand, Islamic jihadist extremism has also been massively accentuated by the internet. So we see another effect of the internet – the disappearance of the middle ground. People become more liberal or more extreme. The mid-ground is a position of compromise but on the internet all extremists can find many voices every bit as extreme as theirs, so they no longer feel any need to compromise.

The Tea Party is an internet phenomenon. So is the conspiracy theory world. Conspiracy theorists create more and more bizarre theories, being fed all the time by the crazy input from millions of fantasists. The 9/11 conspiracy theory nonsense could never have happened as it did in the absence of the internet. Immense numbers of half-baked opinions, factoids, misquotations, distortions and curious facts and oddities can be spun together to create immense webs of conspiracy. Viral transmission provides a rocket boost and the natural tendency of most people to ignore reason and analysis (Logos) in favour of exciting stories and fantasies (Mythos) means that billions fall under the spell of absolute nonsense. How is it that billions of people believe in the Torture God of Abraham if not by a complete suspension of rationality? Humans are extremely prone to believing what they want to believe and ignoring everything else.

A conspiracy theorist is someone who accepts as true everything that supports the conspiracy theory and rejects as false everything that contradicts it. Indeed the contradictions are deemed misinformation and disinformation put out by the conspirators to put people off the trail. A few factoids and anomalies can be combined with fantasy, wishful thinking and a political axe to grind to create something that takes on a life of its own. BULLSHIT can be magnified to a ridiculous degree, and, as Hitler observed, the bigger the lie the more likely it is to be believed. People believe what they want to believe and if lots of others believe it too then it becomes reinforced, socially acceptable and hence TRUE! The internet can therefore make eccentric but popular ideas mainstream and credible.

The internet is a magnifier, accelerator, exaggerator and reinforcer. It makes the world more extreme. A more extreme world is where unthinkable things become thinkable. All bets are off. Black swan events become commonplace rather than the exception.

We can think of the world being converted not into a single global village but several such villages, each belonging to an extremist tribe, each hating the others. Intolerance will grow in all directions. Even liberals will become more intolerant.

******

As we have noted, the death of communism had the unintended consequence of delivering a fatal blow to capitalism. Flushed with triumphalism, the leading capitalists bullied and manipulated the governments into removing all brakes from the capitalist greed machine. Capitalism went out of control and in 2008 the Western banking system became technically insolvent i.e. capitalism had died on the operating table, but no one was willing to “call it” and pronounce the time of death.

Instead, the capitalists did the most outrageous and hypocritical thing imaginable: they invoked socialism to save them. In effect, private businesses transferred all of their debts to the State, but without transferring any control. It was the WORST POSSIBLE OUTCOME for the people.

They got all the debts dumped on them, with no formal ownership or control over anything. Why did the people get the debts but not the profits? “No taxation without representation!” the American Revolutionaries declared in the War of Independence. Yet now the American people have been swamped by enormous debt and taxation and they don’t have a single representative on the boards of any of the private institutions that needed to be bailed out. Is that not INSANE? The Americans have been betrayed by their leaders. They now have the constitutional right to remove the government from office, just as they had the right to remove the rule of the British Empire. It’s time for the American people to act.

The world has allowed the mad ideology of “free markets” to dominate economics. What is the aim of ALL of the participants in these free markets? TO MAKE MONEY! Generating profit is their sole preoccupation. A market does not care about reason, education, knowledge, quality, goodness, morality, virtue, moderation, caution, stability or any of the other qualities that we would expect to be exhibited by a benevolent government. It’s asking for disaster to harness government to an inherently unstable and irrational greed machine.

There’s a place for free markets but only within a carefully defined framework. The markets have to be subservient to government, not government to markets. We now know for a fact where free market economics leads us – CATASTROPHE. Free market economics is now as dead as communism. Just as every individual is free to do whatever they like within the LAW, markets should be allowed to operate freely within the legal framework that is imposed on them to ensure economic stability. The stability of the market is the main point, not its freedom, because unfettered freedom will sooner or later generate a catastrophe.

It always comes back to the same issue – who’s in charge? Should elected governments run a country, or private, unaccountable individuals in charge of banks and corporations? Should markets devoted solely to profit making (usually resulting in astonishing and deranged risk-taking and corporate immorality) be the economic engine of a nation rather than rational policies dedicated to stable growth and the improvement of the nation and its people? Isn’t it time the people were in charge rather than the rich?

All instabilities will now be massively and instantly magnified by the internet and global computer systems. Stock markets in every world have effectively merged to create a single stock market. All markets tend to go up or down at the same time because they are all reacting to each other. Any local rumour can become a global rumour in an instant. There are no firewalls separating systems any longer. In ships, to prevent them from sinking, it’s essential to have separate compartments in the hull. A breach to one compartment can result in localised flooding, but the ship continues safely on its way because all of the other compartments are unaffected. In the new global paradigm, we’ve lost all the safety compartments and firewalls. The situation is RADICALLY UNSTABLE. Any event can sink the ship or burn down the whole building.

It’s absolutely no coincidence that financial turmoil and excessive greed have reached unprecedented levels in the last twenty years. The scale of the gap between rich and poor that has appeared within this timescale is simply breathtaking. The number of major financial crashes that have occurred around the world in the last twenty years is without precedent. Yet no one in power has any idea of what’s really going on. They haven’t understood that we are perched over financial apocalypse because there are no safety mechanisms built into the global financial system. It’s like a nuclear reactor without a single control rod to moderate the chain reaction. And what happens to an uncontrolled nuclear process? – it explodes catastrophically. It’s a BOMB.

We are so close to Armageddon that it’s simply terrifying. And what’s even more terrifying is that the people charged with running the world are patently clueless about what’s going on. They are driven by the markets and the markets are the detonator for the biggest financial explosion of all time. Who will challenge the markets? Who will face down the rich? Who will build firewalls, watertight safety bulkheads and insert sufficient control rods in the financial reactors? Well, NO ONE AT ALL.

We’re on a runaway train and we’re rapidly running out of track. The buffers are now right ahead of us. Be in no doubt at all, the final dialectical crisis is almost upon us. It cannot be avoided. The current system will definitely fail. It cannot save itself because it doesn’t know how to. It doesn’t understand itself. It will perish through ignorance. In the end, stupidity is a terminal condition.

The real issue is what is to be done when the shitstorm arrives. Who will pick up the pieces? To whom will the world turn? If the world were sane, it would of course turn to its sanest, most rational, most talented people, but as we know all too well, the world is neither sane nor rational and anything could happen. We could get Fascist “strong man” dictators, or religious Messiahs. Fundamentalist Islam could sweep the world. All manner of nightmares are possible.

That’s why it’s critical for all sensible people to be ready to speak with a single voice and promote a single clear agenda. That’s why The Movement proved a monumental disappointment. Instead of preparing the agenda for a New Society, the members blabbered on about New Age bullshit, hippie crap and 9/11 garbage. In the end, several members of The Movement thought that their most important task was to investigate other members of The Movement and pronounce McCarthyite denunciations. What the fuck! When a group starts eating itself, you know it deserves to perish.

That’s the fast road to nowhere. We hoped people would write constitutions and declarations, that they would set up political groups and stand in elections, that they would seize the chance to prepare to implement a New World Order. Ho, ho, ho. No chance of that. It takes talented and smart people to do such things: a rare commodity within The Movement. Instead, there were legions of self-indulgent fantasists and bullshitters caught up in their own tiny, unimaginative worlds. How on earth could it serve anyone’s interests to open yet another thread on 9/11? Droning on about it will change nothing at all. Creating a New World Order will certainly change things…so why don’t you devote your time to that rather than to ludicrous, unproductive conspiracy theories?

“You will never get the crowd to cry Hosanna until you ride into town on an ass.” –Nietzsche
__________

2/5

 

Academia Iluministă (76)

Maggio 10th, 2019 No Comments   Posted in Mişcarea Dacia
Jiren Gray a adăugat 5 fotografii în albumul The Revolt of the Spectacular Society.

by Adam Weishaupt – Book 3/7

 The Revolt of the Spectacular Society by Adam Weishaupt:

The Anti-Elite Series – Book 3/7:

Este posibil ca imaginea să conţină: text

Blurb:

The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 signalled the end of not just communism but also of capitalism. The removal of its dialectical Cold War enemy allowed capitalism to release the brakes and bring about an enormous transfer of wealth from the ordinary people to the privileged elite. It is estimated that the richest 400 Americans are worth as much as the 150 million poorest Americans!

These figures spell doom for capitalism. The arrogance of the super rich now rivals that of the French aristocracy in 1789. The numerous stock market crashes that have occurred since 1989 have exposed capitalism as fundamentally unstable and destroyed the claims of the capitalist elite as trusted and competent stewards of the economy. Moreover, the elite have transferred to the taxpayers the debts their financial mismanagement incurred, while retaining the excessive profits they made when they were sowing the seeds of the greatest “bust” in history.

The elite traditionally control not just the economy but also how people think. To maintain their power, they have to seduce and condition the ordinary people into sharing their value system and acknowledging their wealth as legitimate rather than stolen and absurdly disproportionate. By controlling what students are taught at schools and colleges and by ensuring that the media reflects only their ideology, the elite exercise total mind control over the population.

They create a “Society of the Spectacle”, full of images of perfection, of captivating, beguiling events staged on a monumental scale. The people, entranced, worship at the cathedrals of capitalism. They are addicted to the spectacle, to the perfect lives of celebrities, royalty and the super rich.

Yet it has proved a disaster for capitalism to over promise and under deliver. People want their own taste of paradise now, but they are realising that the doors are open only to the elite. Anger, frustration and discontent are growing everywhere. All of the conditions that fostered the French Revolution are being recreated.

The Situationist International, the Dada movement, the Futurists and the Punk rockers were all revolutionary groups of the twentieth century who opposed the ruling order. Has their time come again? The Communards were Parisian revolutionaries of 1871, whose revolt was put down with ferocious violence by the authorities. Will the 21st century international brigade of Communards succeed where their spiritual predecessors failed?

What is the difference between “Catholic” and “Protestant” thinking? Do Catholics have more respect for expertise while Protestants believe themselves smarter than any experts? Does the 19th century racist, American “Know Nothing” Party sum up Protestantism?

Do capitalism, Protestantism and democracy go together, while community, Catholicism and meritocracy are a rival set of natural partners? Does a New World Order require the overthrow of the WASP – White Anglo-Saxon Protestant – political and economic model? Democracy and capitalism must be obliterated. It’s time for meritocracy and a new economy based on education not capitalist consumption as the central driver and focus. Humanity progresses through advancement of the mind and spirit, not through the acquisition of material objects.

Learn about meritocracy and why this is the inevitable, dialectical successor of democracy.

The New World Order envisioned by the Pythagorean Illuminati is one where merit and equal opportunities replace privileged elites; and meritocracy – rule by the most talented – replaces WASP democracy – rule by the manipulated puppets of the Power Elite.

******

A Book Review:

“Another excellent book from a series of excellent books by the Pythagorean Illuminati. If you have any interest at all in life’s greatest mysteries you need to read all the books by the true Illuminati. You should also check out the Illuminati’swebsitewww.armageddonconspiracy.co.uk (main) and their facebook pages/group www.facebook.com/pythagorean.illuminati andwww.facebook.com/groups/136240720298981/

The three authors of these books are very talented writers who make complicated subjects understandable to everyone. I appreciate their writing style very much.

If you have heard anything about the Illuminati before it was probably from some conspiracy theorist telling you how evil the Illuminati are and how they control the world. This couldn’t be any further from the truth. The real Illuminati are an ancient secret society founded by the genius Pythagoras. Some of the greatest minds in history such as Hegel, Leibniz, Plato, Goethe, and many others have been members of the Illuminati. The goal of the Illuminati and all the people who feel an affinity towards them is to transform this world into a rational Meritocracy. If you aren’t quite sure what that is think of the society portrayed on Star Trek and you will have the basic idea. I desperately want to live in that type of world. Why are we not revolting and doing everything in our power to make that type of society a reality?

This book asks that same question. We all need to wake up and seriously consider where this world is headed if nothing is done. Protesting isn’t going to be enough. If, like me, you live in America, you live in a country that committed genocide on one race of people and enslaved another race of people. To this day we continue to oppress all of these same people and millions of others around the world. This enrages me. As Noam Chomsky points out over and over America is the true rogue state. We are the main obstacle to a functioning international society. We need to do everything in our power to stop the oppression that America causes at home and abroad. Perhaps reading this book will help us get angry enough to begin taking action. If we don’t do anything you don’t need to be a genius to figure out what is going to happen to this planet and all the species that inhabit it.” –BG
__________

1/5

Academia Iluministă (75)

Maggio 10th, 2019 No Comments   Posted in Mişcarea Dacia

Nu este disponibilă nicio descriere pentru fotografie.

Sexual Liberation of Society:

“I do think I’m a bit of a masochist. It’s not something I’m proud of, and it’s not something I noticed until recently. I think it’s common for people who witness abuse in their household. They can never smell how beautiful a rose is unless they get pricked by a thorn.” –Rihanna (fan of being spanked!)

People are continually acting out domination-submission rituals in all aspects of their lives. It’s time for this sado-masochism to be removed from the social, economic, political and psychological spheres. Instead, it should be located in the sphere of sexual play. Our sex lives should become far more ritualised and BDSM-oriented.

There are four sexual types: dominants, submissives, “switches” (who can switch between either role with equal enthusiasm – many people are in fact stuck in one role or the other so switches are quite rare) and “equals” (who are neither dominant nor submissive but who could probably play at being switches).

Radical psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich was convinced that the solution to the problems of society lay in the free flow of sexual energy. Most people have become armoured and locked in terms of their character and sexual persona. Their orgasms are either disappointing or non-existent. There’s an epidemic of frigidity, erectile dysfunction and sexual neurosis. Few people have genuinely great sex lives. Hence, in Reich’s view, there’s a huge amount of psychic tension, frustration and resentment in the world that finds neurotics and psychotic outlets. Most disturbed behaviour is caused by unsatisfactory sex lives.

Reich dreamt of a world of “orgone accumulators” that could literally bathe the world in orgasmic energy and release all of the orgasmic blocks that beset people.

We agree with Reich that the world needs far more high quality sex. Sex should be at the core of the New World Order. The religious leaders of the Old World Order have tried to demonise sex and confine it to the missionary position in the dark in the bedroom, with no noise, between married couples only. We advocate dungeons, torture chambers, orgies, black masses, sex magick, sex rituals, sky clad ceremonies, burlesque, striptease, peep shows – a whole world of sexual exploration; everything that makes Jews, Christians and Muslims apoplectic. The burqa should henceforth be turned into fetish gear for kinky dom-sub sex. Sex is a perfect weapon to kill Abrahamism. It’s time for a Reichian sexual revolution, for rivers and oceans of orgasm, for orgasm to rain from the heavens as delicious orgasmodrops that make the land bright and fertile.

Orgasm melts those dreary fanatics with long beards and strange clothes.

******

Hypersex.

We’re all Kinky Now:

So, you think you’re well clued up on the state of sex in the world today? Think again. Take Britain as an example. This country is undergoing an extraordinary sexual revolution where regular sex is being replaced by a much more powerful and purer form of sex – hypersex.

Consider the following cases. On a popular Internet dating site, a beautiful 19-year-old Londoner says she’s looking for adult fun with a married man over 30. She says she ‘gets wet just thinking that he is cheating on her’ and promises to let him ‘cum all over me’ on their first date. A breathtaking 18-year-old blonde from Cumbria who describes herself as very posh says she’s seeking a black hunk, or maybe two, for an ‘intimate encounter’. A Yorkshire blonde sporting an impressive cleavage in her photo declares her exclusive interest in men in uniform: policemen, soldiers and sailors. But, she adds, traffic wardens and members of the Salvation Army need not apply.

The sex lives of these women are driven by a particular sexual peccadillo. Only partners who can satisfy it are sought. The conventional route to sex – falling in love/lust with someone for their own sake and then going to bed with them – has become redundant. Now sexual fantasy takes precedence over romance.

The French philosopher Jean Baudrillard, the champion of the concept of the hyperreal (the ‘more real than real’), put forward a persuasive case that the modern world is groaning under fakeness, artificiality and simulation, to the extent that these have become more representative of our real experiences nowadays than reality itself.

Why is a TV show like Friends so popular? For Baudrillard, the reason is that this programme presents a simulated, idealised, hyperreal account of friendship that’s vastly more appealing than the messy friendships we actually have. Viewers start to relate more to Rachel, Joey, Chandler etc and to take more interest in their fake lives and dramas than they do in the real lives of their real friends. The same is true of the protagonists of soap operas, dramas, Reality TV and so on. If Baudrillard is right then the prefix ‘hyper’ can be attached to every human activity. Islamic and Christian fundamentalism become examples of hyperreligion where people start to adopt a preposterously idealised and inflexible view of their beliefs, rendering compromise impossible. Self-immolation, as the final expression of the ideal, becomes practically mandatory.

The Virginia Tech killer, Cho Seung-Hui, went out in a blaze of hyperviolence, leaving tapes to immortalise himself that he would never see. The wealthy are more and more the hyperwealthy, demanding greater and greater rewards for their increasingly nebulous talents, and engaging in hyperspending to flaunt their riches. The overweight aren’t just fat these days, they’re hyperfat (“morbidly obsess”). Supermodels are hyperbeautiful. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt aren’t merely famous, they’re hypercelebrities. We’re drowning in a hypersea of impossible ideals and fantasy lives, and everyone craves their share of hyper experiences for fear, ironically, of missing out on ‘real’ life. Enter hypersex, the one supremely potent arena where most people can hope to get a slice of the action.

Baudrillard describes an extraordinary sexual event that he witnessed in Japan: ‘Prostitutes, their thighs open, sitting on the edge of a platform, Japanese workers in their shirt-sleeves (it is a popular spectacle), permitted to shove their noses up to their eyeballs within the woman’s vagina in order to see, to see better – but what?’ Incredibly, he has missed the whole point. Seeing ‘something’ isn’t the issue for these Japanese men. What could be more hypersexual than to pop out from work at lunchtime, and within minutes to have your head lodged between a beautiful model’s glistening thighs and be pressed right up against her pudendum, smelling her perfume, feeling the embrace of her flesh, in intimate contact with the most intimate part of her body. It’s hypersex overload, a bombardment of all the senses and requires no further explanation or justification. If you don’t “get it”, your libido’s obviously shot.

In the jaw-droppingly bizarre TV show Sex in Court, a woman is found “guilty” of not giving her fiancé oral sex and is ordered to attend a course on fellatio. The “jurors” were obsessed with the concept of reciprocity. If he licked her, they asserted, she should suck him. None of them considered the precedent they were setting: that a woman should be “persuaded” to perform sexual acts abhorrent to her. This is just one step from advocating that she should be pressured to have sexual intercourse against her will.

In the “newspaper” The Sunday Sport, a parade of glamour models were asked to comment on whether they enjoyed “bum fun”. Two teenagers were interviewed by the paper and allegedly claimed they were Britain’s biggest “slappers”, had slept with hundreds of “lads” and particularly enjoyed gangbangs and “roastings”. On an online dating, a brand new profile appeared on one of the sites, posted by a beautiful brunette (37, and a mother) from the North East of England. She said she was in an unhappy, sexless marriage and, rightly or wrongly, she was now seeking adult fun. Within twenty-four hours, fifty-five men had listed her as one of their favourites and many had rated her photograph as ten out of ten. In all probability, she received scores of offers of casual sex. Many would be from weirdos and desperadoes, of course, but no doubt a few were from hunky, desirable men. Imagine this woman’s state of mind. One minute she felt like an unwanted frump, the next she was being treated as a goddess by a legion of slavering men. She had opened the door to the hyperreal and, above all, to hypersex.

Soon, she was online constantly, no doubt addicted to the cyber veneration she was receiving. The number of men who rated her as a favourite continued to grow, soon passing one hundred. So, go on ladies, if you’re feeling a bit unloved and in need of an ego massage, post an attractive picture of yourself on a dating site, declare that you’re actively seeking adult fun and within minutes your inbox will be deluged with messages from men begging you to sleep with them. The script for how the brunette’s online sexscapade would inevitably play out was written long ago. She would meet several men for casual sex, her behaviour would alter radically, and even her inattentive husband wouldn’t fail to notice. Arguments would erupt, the truth would come out in the midst of one blazing row, and in six months’ time she would be separated from her husband, and awaiting divorce. She would join the ranks of single mothers, and she and her ex-husband would be searching for separate homes, thus doing their bit to fuel the housing boom. Such is the relentless logic of hypersex.

Of course, most postings on dating sites still belong to “old-world” sex. Dinosaur women still provide ridiculous lists of the qualities they demand from prospective partners. Their musings reflect the tedious Mills and Boon/Pride and Prejudice mindset to which so many women seem bonded. One declares that her ideal first date would be “walking hand-in-hand on a deserted beach in the moonlight listening to the waves.” Contrast this with the hypersex posting of a 28-year-old Merseysider who listed her interests as: “sex sex sex blow jobs pussy lickin anal.” Sensational semi-nude photos accompanied her profile. She said of herself: “hay guys u can see what am intrested in so come and get me i like to **** as much as i can been caled a slut in the past but hay i like sex i do do come on message me xxxxxxxxxxx.” Her ideal first date would be: “drinks then some of the above…”

There’s simply no debate about which of these two will attract more male attention. Hypersex always wins, so when are the dinosaurs going to get with the programme? Another beauty, a Scottish stripper, said in relation to a prospective first date: “no date just sex.” This could easily be the motto of hypersex. She said of herself: “hi i am a single woman looking for a man for no strings attached sex i like trying new things like loads of kinky sex mmmmmmmmm if u think ur brave enough leave me a message if not **** off.”

An Ann Summers’ “sex shop” prominently displayed an eyecatching nun’s outfit, given a suitably hypersex spin, of course (i.e. you would never catch a real nun wearing one). Perhaps it won’t be long until hijabs, niqabs and burqas are similarly fetishised. Think of the irony; the very items of clothing designed to protect a woman’s modesty will be transformed by hypersex into the precise opposite – the quintessence of immodesty. What will those who wear these garments do if they discover that nymphets using the self-same garments as fantasy-sex aids populate bedrooms all over the country? The power of hypersex is unstoppable, sweeping aside all obstacles and all religious taboos.

The “dogging” (outdoor casual sex with strangers, often in group situations and with spectators) and swinging industries continue to grow apace, and activities like bukkake (best not to ask!) are increasing in popularity. Then there’s the well-known phenomenon of old romances being re-ignited by sites like Friends Reunited, often fatally undermining current marriages.

The stark truth is that the sexual terrain of Britain has changed beyond recognition. People can indulge their sexual fetishes as never before. Hardcore porn, catering for every conceivable taste, is easily accessible on the Internet. Homes are awash with R18 adult DVDs and a plethora of sex toys (women are addicted to Rampant Rabbit!). Conventional relationships can’t keep up and no longer accommodate people’s sexual natures. Hypersex is here to stay, and it’s time society faced up to the revolution that’s occurring in bedrooms all over the country.

All debates about sex, drugs, education, marriage, the family etc ought to be viewed through the prism of hyperreality. The tragedy is that no politicians, no policy-makers, no Think Tanks, no opinion formers, are philosophically literate, and they certainly haven’t heard of Baudrillard. They continue to churn out their ancient nostrums, their “solutions” to the problems of an old world that no longer exists. They haven’t begun to comprehend the nature of the new paradigm we have all entered.

The logic of hyperreality has chilling consequences. Increasing polarisation is inevitable. The gap between rich and poor will widen. Eventually there will be a violent standoff between the hyperrich and the hyperpoor. The hypereducated will soon be like a different species to the hyperuneducated. The hyperreligious will come into open conflict with the hypersecular. Hypercelebrities will bestride the world like Olympian gods, and sprinkle hyperdepression in their wake as all the rest of us look on and know that our lives will never match these dream existences. Hyperdrugs will wreak havoc; hypersex will destroy the traditional family. Computer-generated hyper-virtualreality will further erode any sense of what is real. People will live in online fantasy worlds such as those provided by Second Life.

Britain has been declared the worst place in the advanced world in which to bring up a child. Not a single commentator observed that hyperreality is the true cause of this catastrophe. The British, with their poisonous hypertabloid newspapers, their hyperdisdain for intellectuals, their enslavement to hypercelebrity and hyperreality TV, their slavish devotion to fairytale hyperroyalty, their hyperconsumerism, hyperobsession with house prices and propensity for weekend hyperbingeing on alcohol have created a hyperhell. They are the hyperdamned.

When will the world face facts? We’re all kinky now, our excesses are out of control and are destroying us. Sure there are medicines – hypermedicines – but they’ll make us feel hypersick before they make us better, and none of us has the stomach for that. It’s time for a hyperreality check.

From the book Hypersex by Adam Weishaupt (coming soon).
__________

Trouble in the Promised Land:

“The fight to make a living even for people who have a decent job creates a lot of side effects. People are bitter and angry in a country that is rich but the people are poor.” –Shai Dagan

People are starting to talk of an Israeli Summer following the Arab Spring. It’s said that 90% of the Israeli population are discontented with the direction of their country. While a few Israelis are fabulously rich, the average take-home salary is £18,350. The people are now beginning to perceive that they themselves are in a sense victims of a dictatorship – not of the Arab kind but of the plutocratic kind. Israel’s economy, like that of America, is a plutonomy – it’s for the rich and driven by the rich.

******

An old Jewish joke – “If you have three Jews in a room, you’ll get four opinions.” Don’t they mean six given that all Jews are two-faced? When will Jews do the decent thing and renounce and denounce their Devil-God, abandon circumcision and declare that they are not the Chosen People?
__________

Is Sarah Palin an Illuminist?:

Sarah Palin recently denounced “crony capitalism” and America’s “permanent political class.” All we need now is for her to pronounce community superior to family and to proclaim the God of Abraham the Devil and we could be giving the hockey mom a call. Then again, she would need an intellect transplant to raise her IQ by about 100 points before that could ever happen.
__________

The Psychological Experiments that should terrify everyone:

PEOPLE ARE DELUDED ABOUT THEMSELVES. One subject that has ruthlessly exposed the ugly truths of human beings is psychology. A series of notorious experiments should be etched permanently on people’s minds to remind them of what they really are. These experiments touch on every aspect of the human condition and reveal why human history has taken the shape it has, and why people believe and act as they do.
_________

The Obedience Experiment:

The infamous Stanley Milgram experiment proved that two thirds of human beings, under the direction an authority figure in a white coat, would be prepared to administer a fatal electric shock to another person who had failed to answer questions correctly. Milgram and others guessed that perhaps only 1% – psychopaths – would deliver the lethal shock. In fact, two out of three of us will do it. And now we know why the Germans who worked in the death camps did what they did. And we know that two thirds of us who express our revulsion for the Nazis would do exactly the same as the Nazis did if we were ordered to (particularly, if we had been indoctrinated to hate a certain group of people and if we were told we would be executed if we disobeyed the orders).

When you consider the Nazis, don’t regard them as “Other”, regard them as “Us”. Scratch the surface and we are all Nazis underneath, none more so than the Jews themselves as their Bible proves conclusively and as their conduct in the West Bank and Gaza Strip demonstrates.
_________

The Conformity Experiment:

American social psychologist Solomon Asch showed in the 1950s that at least a third of us are conformist to an extreme degree. Conformists crave the approval of others and are terrified of straying from the consensus. They are the perfect victims of peer group pressure.

Asch’s experiment involved nothing more elaborate than straight lines of different sizes drawn on pieces of card. The subjects of the experiment had to compare the cards and say which line was longer, and the answer was always entirely obvious. The catch was that each subject was sitting amongst a group of what he thought were follow subjects but who were actually stooges working for Asch and who were under instructions to confidently say that line A was longer than line B even though this was patently false. Rather than disagree with the group opinion, one third of the test subjects chose to agree that A was longer, contrary to the blatant evidence of their own eyes. Many others were extremely uncomfortable when it came to contradicting the others. This is a perfect test of “other-directedness” – the tendency to let others shape your behaviour.

Asch’s experiment was extreme. A less blatant version of the experiment would have raised the proportion of other-directed individuals to even higher levels. Most people like to think of themselves as “individuals”. They’re not – they’re members of groups and they are excessively susceptible to group think.

Advertisers, marketeers, politicians, religious leaders and opinion formers are cynically aware of the extent to which people should be treated as groups rather than individuals, thus massively simplifying the opportunity to manipulate and exploit them. Once a tipping point is reached within a group dynamic, the whole group rapidly adopts the same opinion. Look at the rise of Islam. In its earliest years, most people easily resisted Islam (in fact for the first thirteen years of Islam there were only 100 – 150 Muslims), but Mohammed managed to produce an extremely strong group identity amongst his followers and they didn’t buckle under the pressure. Indeed, it was their minority group that then began to sway the less strong-minded and less cohesive majority group and, when the tipping point was reached, the majority came across almost as one to join Islam. It might have been expected that many would have held out against this strange new semi-Jewish religion of monotheism, but they didn’t. Soon, that entire part of the world was fanatically Islamic and has remained so to the present day, and continues to convert many others in Third World countries.

This shows how a small group with an extremely strong identity can overpower much larger groups with a less established identity. People are desperate to have an identity and the group that can offer the most solid identity always wins. That’s why crazy religions have been so successful. Why did Christianity defeat the Roman Empire? – because the identity of the Romans became fragmented. The Empire was vast and, by the end, all sorts of barbarian tribes were classed as Roman citizens. They often had extremely little in common, and subscribed to radically different cultural and religious beliefs. They had precious little in common with Rome. The Christians on the other hand were a fanatically cohesive group, willing to die for their beliefs. Where others were full of doubts and fears, the Christians had absolute conviction. Their victory thus assured. The fanatics always win.

In 146 BCE, long before Christianity cursed the world, the Romans destroyed the city of Carthage, killed or enslaved the entire Carthaginian population and practically erased all traces of Carthage’s existence. Cato the Elder’s insistent demand of “Delenda est Carthago” (Carthage must be destroyed) was carried out to the latter, though he himself was not there to see it, having died three years earlier.

If Christianity had come up against the Romans of Cato’s era, every one of them would have been crucified. Christianity would have been exterminated. The Roman identity of Cato’s era was easily the match for Christianity. The Romans of that time had a monumentally powerful identity and will, as any conquering nation must in order to create a great empire. They would have recognised the danger of Christianity and dealt with it. By the time of Rome’s decline, the Romans no longer had the will or identity to resist and they were at the mercy of Christianity.
__________

Chinese Whispers – the inevitable erosion of meaning:

British psychologist Sir Frederic Bartlett working at Cambridge University during the First World War was inspired by a game of Chinese Whispers to see what would happen when people were asked to repeat an unfamiliar story they had just read. What he discovered was that people change the story to fit their existing knowledge, and it’s the revised story that they then remember, and often it has little relationship with the original story.

Bartlett proposed that people operate within a ‘schema’ – a cultural, historical and intellectual framework in which to place and organize their memories. Everyone applies a particular personal context to things that happen to them and it’s not an event per se that they remember but the event intertwined with this context which they have placed over it but which had absolutely nothing to do with the event itself. This has serious implications for such things as eyewitness testimony and false memory syndrome. A court is expecting a person to accurately report what they observed, not to embroider it with a schema that completely changes the raw data.

False memory syndrome can be caused by an invalid and distorting schema being applied to a certain event. The schema “memory” is then remembered rather than what actually took place. A religious person, for example, may refuse to believe that they have behaved in an unholy way, and, with the help of their constructed religious schema, they will reinterpret whatever took place to ensure that their behaviour was consistent with their schema i.e. they make up a story that suits their own beliefs about how they conduct themselves. Such people are lying through their teeth but genuinely believe they are being truthful. They would pass a lie detector test. People who lie to themselves and believe their own lies can fool anyone. After all, they fooled themselves.

If you were working on artificial intelligence, would you apply a schema memory to an android or get it to report exactly what it observed? If you did the latter, you would have made it radically inhuman. If you did the former, you would make it extremely unreliable – just like real humans!

We think Bartlett’s work has even broader significance. It affects everything – humans do nothing but apply schemas. Abrahamists apply an Abrahamist schema to all of their experiences. They are looking for ways to validate their belief system, and reject anything that casts doubts on their beliefs. In other words, schemas are like “rose-tinted spectacles”. They make you see everything in a certain way and you become blind to anything you don’t want to see. We’ll say that again – you BLIND yourself to what you don’t want to see.

Why are so many lovers fooled by the infidelity of their partners? It’s not that they don’t see what’s going on. They certainly do. However, they then apply a schema which removes their suspicions and they go on living in blissful ignorance. It’s a brilliant ego defence mechanism. Who wants the truth? For most people, the truth is unbearable so they devise ways to ignore it.

Another crucial consequence of schemas is that they shape the way in which you understand something. If you read our website for a second time, you will have a radically different understanding of the material from that which you gained on first reading. The reason for that is that the very process of reading all of that material has changed your schema for understanding it. With anything complex, you often have to read it numerous times to get anywhere near understanding it properly. But people don’t have time to keep re-reading things, so most people go around with a schema for what such and such a thinker supposedly said, but which is often hopelessly wrong. We can tell from the emails we receive that some people get what we’re saying almost spot on, while others have invented their own version of what we’re saying that we can’t recognise at all – in fact sometimes it’s the precise opposite of our message!

You can’t teach someone more than they know. What they know is their schema. An Abrahamist couldn’t hope to understand Illumination. Their Abrahamic schema would make the task impossible. To learn, you must be highly rational and open minded, able to keep adjusting your schema. If you are locked into a dogmatic schema, you can’t learn. It’s almost impossible to teach Muslims anything because they are locked into the Koranic schema which shuts down all open and honest thinking.

You grow in knowledge to the extent that you can alter your knowledge schema. What we have discovered is that once a person exceeds a certain level of knowledge, their schema becomes almost infinitely flexible. This means that they can learn new things at an astronomical rate and grasp an author’s intentions immediately. It’s as if they are able to apply the schema that the author himself applied. Whereas most people have to wait for new knowledge to slowly penetrate an existing schema (this is what “learning” means), a really smart person grasps meaning instantly i.e. learns on the spot. They thus acquire knowledge and understanding at a dizzying rate.

Just as money goes to money (i.e. the rich get richer) so does intelligence go to intelligence i.e. the smart get smarter. A “genius” is a person who has passed the tipping point of acquiring new knowledge. He learns new things effortlessly, as soon as he hears them or reads them. He instantly forms creative new connections with his existing knowledge base, and new ideas spill out an astonishing rate. A genius becomes a kind of God in their field of expertise. He understands it inside out. While others are plodding along in the slow lane, the genius is on the fastest autobahn in the world with no other traffic, and his foot is pressing on the accelerator ever more heavily. He’s heading for escape velocity – into areas beyond all existing human knowledge. And that’s the precise definition of a genius – someone who thinks what no other human has ever thought or imagined. In his area of expertise, a genius is smarter than the whole human race. He’s smarter than seven billion people! He’s smarter than everyone who has ever lived. Can you even begin to conceive how smart that is? Could God himself know more?

But for those following in the genius’s wake, it’s as if they’re trying to climb Mount Everest without oxygen. They’re desperately trying to adjust their schema to his, but for most it will take a hell of a long time, if indeed ever. Even today, most people have ZERO idea of what Einstein achieved.
__________

Man’s inhumanity to man:

In the shocking Stanford Prison experiment in 1971, Philip Zimbardo set up a mock prison in the basement of the Stanford psychology building to study the psychological effects of being assigned the role of prisoner or prison guard. Twenty-four students were randomly assigned roles in the prison. To the amazement of Zimbardo, the students playing the prison guards quickly adopted extreme authoritarian personas and subjected some of the more troublesome prisoners to torture! As for the prisoners, most became highly passive and suggestible. They meekly accepted physical abuse, and even attacked each other at the instigation of the guards. The experiment grew so out of hand that it had to be stopped after six days. Decades later, Zimbardo gave expert testimony on behalf of one of the soldiers accused of abuse in the Abu Ghraib scandal since it was all horrifically familiar to him.

It appears that the situations people are placed in and the roles assigned to them can turn them into monsters or pathetic victims. Once again, we see a psychological defence for the actions of the Nazis in the death camps. Simply to be a guard in such a place is almost to guarantee that you will become a monster. If liberal Stanford students could abuse fellow students within hours, what would Nazis do to Jews they were raised to despise?

Yet the Stanford experiment perhaps goes much further than just the prison situation. What about police brutality? Why are police so uniformly appalling in every part of the world? What about managers in offices? Why do so many seem like little Hitlers? To give a uniform to a person or to place them in a position of authority often seems to release an inner monster. It’s as though they have been given official permission to become mini-tyrants.

And perhaps the concept of PERMISSION is the true meaning of the experiment. You don’t in fact need a uniform and you don’t need official authority. Look at the rioters and looters in the UK. Some of them behaved appallingly towards anyone who got in their way. One man was actually killed for standing up to them. Many people were burned out of their homes. Did the fact that so many people were involved give all of the participants the notion that they had group permission for what they were doing? If a person believes himself to have permission, does he lose all personal accountability? Does he think he can get away with anything?

The people at the top of banks and businesses seem to lose all sense of restraint. They believe they can do whatever they like. The law has granted them permission. They are masters of the universe. They are untouchable. And thus they become psychopaths.

Richard Nixon thought he could get away with anything in the White House. Why wouldn’t he think that? He had killed endless thousands in illegal bombing missions in South-East Asia during the Vietnam War. Did anyone stop him?

If you have no internal moral compass, do you have any limits?
__________

The Bystander Effect:

In New York in 1964, a young woman was savagely killed in front of 38 witnesses. None made any attempt to intervene and none called for help. This has been labelled the “Bystander Effect”. If there are many people present, each person thinks that someone else will do something, so in the end no one does anything. No one sees it as their job to get involved. No one wants to endanger themselves. And thus criminals can do whatever they like in broad daylight and stand a good chance of getting away with it.
__________

The Fake Patients:

Between 1969 and 1972, clinical psychologist David Rosenhan arranged for eight psychiatrically healthy individuals (three women and five men, including himself) to have themselves admitted to psychiatric hospitals around the United States. They each presented with a single symptom: that they were hearing a voice which said things like “empty”, “dull” and “thud”. They had been instructed beforehand by Rosenhan to act completely normally once admitted. Despite the fact that they were all completely sane, they were detained for periods as long as eight weeks. Seven were given a diagnosis of schizophrenia, which was said to have gone into “remission”. None of them were told they were sane. All were forced to admit to being mentally ill even though they had said they were now feeling fine and had stopped hearing voices. As a condition of their release, they had to agree to take antipsychotic drugs.

After Rosenhan’s revelations, one of the institutions exposed by him challenged him to send new “pseudo-patients” and said it would detect them all. In the following weeks, 193 new patients were admitted and of these 41 ordinary patients were identified by clinical consultants as “impostors” and 42 more were suspected of being impostors. Rosenhan then devastatingly announced that he had in fact sent no one.

Rosenhan’s paper on the scandal appeared in Science in1973 and was called “On Being Sane in Insane Places”. It dealt a devastating blow to the psychiatric profession, suggesting that they were not merely diagnostically incompetent but actually a serious danger to their patients. Rosenhan concluded, “It is clear that we cannot distinguish the sane from the insane in psychiatric hospitals.”

It was also apparent that once a certain label had been applied to a patient, it was almost impossible to escape this label, no matter how wrong it was. Moreover, there was a huge element of dehumanization involved. Patients’ opinions about their own condition were completely ignored. They were regarded as unreliable witnesses. Their protestations of sanity were frequently taken as deliberate attempts to deceive the psychiatrists and further proof of their mental illness. This was classic Catch 22 territory. In order to get out, a sane person had to agree he was mad, but if he admitted he was mad then he had provided justification for keeping him in. The successful strategy for being released was to completely agree with the psychiatrist’s opinion regarding your condition. If you agreed with him that you were a schizophrenic in remission, and that you would take your drugs, then he would let you go. If you told the truth that there was nothing wrong with you, that you felt fine and didn’t need any drugs then you would be detained.

When he was first admitted to the psychiatric ward, Rosenhan noted: “Minimal attention was paid to my presence, as if I hardly existed.” So, psychiatric wards go a long way to making sane people mad, or mad people much madder.

Is it not truly shocking that normal people are not detectably sane in the opinion of the so- called experts on the subject? Does that mean we’re all mad, or that psychiatrists are mad?
__________

To Choose or not to Choose:

In 1976, Ellen Langer and Judith Rodin conducted an important study in a New England nursing home called Arden House. The experiment was simply to investigate what would happen to the residents of two different floors of the House if they were allowed slightly more or less control over their lives. The residents of both floors were given plants and film shows, but whereas those on one floor got no say over their plant and how to tend it or when to view the film, those on the other could choose the plant and look after it themselves, and also choose which night of the week to watch the film. Eighteen months later, twice as many of those in the “choice group” were alive compared with the non-choice group. Taking control of your life, it seems, makes you live longer.

If you passively wait for things to happen, as most people do, you are already dying inside. You must be active in life, taking the initiative, choosing your path through life.

The rich elite are always on the front foot and they live much longer on average than the passive hordes waiting for their lives to be decided for them. People learn to be helpless and prove extremely good at it – so good they die earlier!

TAKE CONTROL OF YOUR LIFE. LIVE LONGER! If you don’t control the agenda, someone else will, and not to your advantage. Control the agenda or it will control you.
__________

Learning to see:

Vision is astonishingly complex. Most people think of an eye as much like a camera, taking objective pictures that some kind of “inner viewer” then “sees”. But the case of a blind man who recovered his sight tells a disturbingly different tale.

Born in 1906, Sidney Bradford lost his sight at 10 months old. Corneal grafts restored it at the age of 52. Sadly, he found the rediscovered world a confusing and disappointing place and died just two years later.

Studies on blind people who have had their sight restored indicate that we “learn” to see. Our visual system operates nothing like a camera. If it did, a blind person who regains his sight should immediately see exactly like a normal person. It would be as if we had cleaned dirt off the lens of the camera. But blind people with restored sight have no idea what they’re seeing. They have to be taught.

Our visual system is more like a self-learning camera that is continually adjusting itself to make sense of what it is being pointed at. It is the product of a complex accumulation of visual knowledge. A blind person who has not undergone that process is presented with an incomprehensible array of unidentified shapes. He can’t make any sense of what he’s seeing. Perhaps the baffling visual distortions that accompany an LSD trip give some indication of how it must seem for a blind person to suddenly see again.
__________

The Benefits of Patience:

In 1968, the psychologist Walter Mischel wrote a seminal book called Personality and Assessment. Curious about the way his own three daughters were highly impulsive at age 3 and much less so a year or two later, Mischel constructed an experiment in delayed gratification at the Bing Nursery at Stanford University.

The experiment was simple. Hundreds of 4-year-old children were asked to decide whether to have one marshmallow right now, or wait a while and get two. By chance, Mischel discovered an amazing fact. Those children who waited to get the two marshmallows were much less likely to drop out of college, use cocaine, get fat or end up in prison. The kids who just couldn’t hang on and grabbed the marshmallow asap tended to have considerably less good outcomes.

Nearly everything worthwhile in life comes from a core of disciplined behaviour. A star student is someone who can apply self-discipline when it comes to his studies. All hard work involves deferred gratification. Alcoholism, drug addiction, obesity, crime and getting into debt are all manifestations of instant gratification. You have to have something NOW. You can’t wait another moment. And if you can’t wait, you inevitably fail in life.

With the marshmallow test, we could literally identify all of the future problem people at 4 years old! We could then take remedial measures to stop them screwing up their lives. We could condition them to become much more disciplined. We would save tens of millions from lives of dismal failure brought on by their addiction to instant gratification. Sadly, capitalism is an economic system based on instant gratification and panders to everything that is worst in people.
__________

Group Think:

Henri Tajfel, a Professor of Social Psychology at Bristol University, developed a series of experiments known as the Minimal Group Studies. He was seeking to establish the minimum basis on which people could be made to identify with their own group and show bias against another group. In 1971, boys at a comprehensive school viewed abstract paintings by Klee and Kandinsky and were then assigned to the “Klee” group or the “Kandinsky” group. The assignments were entirely at random although the impression was given that the boys had indicated a preference for the group they were put in. Even though the boys didn’t know who else was allocated to their group, whenever they were offered the chance to award “points” to anonymous members of the Klee or Kandinsky group, they always gave more to “their” group. So even though the boys neither knew who was in their group nor who was in the other group, the mere fact of being assigned to a group made them start to prefer that group and see the other group as “different” and somehow as the enemy. The boys always sought to advance the interests of their group and penalise the other group, even though they had no idea who was who.

We almost instantly identify with a group. Group identity is astonishingly powerful and we can see its power in all areas of life: sexism, racism, nationalism, classism and religious bigotry. It’s always “them and us”. “We” are the good guys and “they” are other, different, strange, the enemy.

Patriotism and religious extremism are designed to milk group identity to the full. It’s easy to treat others badly once they are exposed as “them”.
__________

Unreliable Witnesses:

Elizabeth Loftus is famous for her experiments showing that memory does not provide an accurate record but is in fact influenced by what happens after a witnessed event. It’s as if the memory is a kind of unstable clay mould and, before it gets the chance to set, it can be heavily influenced by subsequent events. The “memory” that eventually gets stored is massively contaminated by everything that happened afterwards (which had nothing at all to do with what was actually witnessed). Questions by police can change the way an event is remembered. If they suggest something, their suggestion can easily become part of the memory. If some piece of information is shown to the witness – such as a colour, a piece of clothing or whatever, that information is incorporated into the memory.

What this means is that witnesses are extremely unreliable. Their memories can be reconstituted as a result of post-event experiences. Just as police are expected not to contaminate crime scenes, nor should witnesses have their memories contaminated if they are to be in any way reliable.

Loftus went on to show that just as a memory can be reconstituted by suggestions and information coming after the witnessed event, so can the same mechanism be used to implant a whole false memory. She demonstrated that 30% of subjects could be given specific information in the present day that then resurfaced as part of a false childhood memory.

Memory is astonishingly and alarmingly fluid. Many people may be capable of inventing entirely fake versions of things that happened to them. They can forget terrible things they did and invent a new scenario in which they did nothing wrong. Many religious people simply ignore their endless sins and imagine themselves paragons of virtue.

As usual, Nietzsche got there first: “People lie unspeakably often, but afterwards they do not remember it and on the whole do not believe it.” In other words, people continually create false memories of their own conduct. They would be genuinely astonished if you accused them of lying.

******

Shouldn’t all of these experiments be well known? Why are they stuck firmly in academic circles? Most people believe utter bullshit about themselves and others. They have no idea just how flawed, fallible, vulnerable, manipulable and exploitable most people are, including themselves.

Isn’t it time to take the radical step of telling people the truth about themselves? The truth will set us free!
__________

The Book of Pho’:

Look out for The Book of Pho’ – published by Hyperreality Books – coming out soon.

Visionary hip hop artist Pho’ is now the Movement’s BAD BOY. Is he angel or demon? Is he a sinister Nation of Islam infiltrator forcing women to wear burqas? Is he riding two horses with only one saddle? Will he fall off? Is he a “Smurf in a Gargamel cloak” (as the Inquisition labelled him)? Is he actually an Illuminatus? Is he “A Riddle Wrapped in a Mystery Inside an Enigma”? Man of Mystery, Pho’ will reveal all. It’s the publishing sensation of the decade. His book blows open the conspiracy.
__________

3/6