Everything about globohomo and the woke requires coercion, coercion requires force, and cancel culture is that force. Why did the CDC just vote unanimously to recommend the Covid jab for babies? Mostly it is to eliminate all liability. But also, if you aren't unanimous in all things mRNA jab, you don't work for, associate with or get funding from CDC, FDA, NIH. That is both coercion and force.
I don't have much sympathy now though, for the argument that "I just need to get to retirement, but the benefits, my insurance, I have to feed my family, etc, now that they have tripled down on jabs for babies. You don't get to complain about the coercion and force preventing you from taking a stand once it starts looking like genocide.
"These categories are not meant to be all inclusive. Can you think of others? If so, drop them in the comments!"
I can think of two others at the moment, that I believe are distinguishable from the rest.
4. The bribed and/or blackmailed: the targets of a sophisticated carrot-stick strategy, in which they come to believe everyone is caught in the same net, and the only way to free themselves and enjoy life's fruits is to retail ever more obvious and grandiose lies.
5. The posessed: in secular terms, I suppose you could see this as the victims of a certain trigger or switch being activated in the mind, after which the normal (i.e logical, inheritable) system of value is inverted, while still managing to reinforce a heroic self-image.
Yes, those make sense to me. I see 4 as another who believes they will materially benefit from the system, even if they might be competent enough to do even better if there was a free market. I'm sure a lot of folks in this category might say that we'll never have a free market, so might as well play the game. I have friends that fit into this category, I wouldn't necessarily say all of them need/want compliance, they're just decided to benefit from the system and not rock the boat. For 5 I think that pretty much describes "NPCs" no?
"4 as another who believes they will materially benefit from the system"
The difference in my mind is lies in their genuine fear of the stick (blackmail). In the wake of Epstein's "suicide", I began applying the blackmail filter with far more frequency, in examining some of the weirdest and most transparent lies.
"5 I think that pretty much describes "NPCs" no?"
No, but I see the NPC's emptiness/hollowness as a common (if not quite a necessary) pre-requisite for demonic possession, in the sense of making "room" for a guest at the level of energy exhanges
I'm in the process of writing a piece about this now, to explain my perspective more precisely. In the meantime, here is one of the case studies I'll be looking at.
And here is a recent example of one way in which I think possession differs from the more mundane NPC format. Note the common traits of physical transformation and child harm:
Worth noting that in Hoskins' case, it wasn't a matter of him being a hollowed-out NPC, but rather of near constant proximity that allowed for partial "infection". He might be the closest thing to what I'd call a "forensic ponerologist" I've ever run across, and he's living proof of how dangerous of a profession that can be.
The inherent complexity as you look under the hood makes me think of just going with a methodological dualism here and just characterizing that anyone who stands to benefit from a systemic apparatus of coercion, whether materially or ideologically, will work to support a system that selects for compliance.
Oh, don't get me wrong, you have way more than a maybe out of me here. I totally agree that these are sub types, it just made me realize that there are probably so many more that we're not accounting for that trying to annotate all of them would be a trying task. I'll dig into this because the ponerology issue is fascinating, and I do think it is important to understand the mechanisms by which decent people can be twisted into participating in/becoming evil.
I would add regular people who know there is a problem but just want everything to go back to normal, but who otherwise are kept silent by the general silence and the power of community consensus.
I would also qualify #2, because the biosphere is a mess, we are many, we are a long way from nature and we don't know how to return and make peace with it.
With respect to #2, something I think is important to consider is that the drive for compliance puts us further and further away from nature. Dirigism just doesn't work, and taking care of the environment is no exception. Stringently enforced property rights of individuals puts the locus of control where it is needed to turn the situation around. All the stuff about negative externalities in the free market don't account for how strictly enforced property rights via our available legal mechanisms, including civil litigation, could win the day. The solution like with everything else is elevating cooperation over coercion. Since I'm not immersed in the topic as you are, I'd love to hear your thoughts, but one of the watershed moments in my intellectual journey to where I am now was reading Joel Salatin. If people like Joel were empowered to be kings of their own castles so to speak, I think that would align the incentives about as much as we can hope for.
Also, thinking more about it, the climate crisis is a pretense for total technocratic control, to save the planet. But that looks like a controlled demolition of the economy and quite frankly democide. That is an immense amount of coercion, and deadly force.
Preferable would be to mostly, almost entirely dismantle the administrative state.
When you have Bill Gates competing with pension funds and private equity titans to drive the cost of agricultural land to the moon, to be used for grains for international commodity markets, ecological collapse is guaranteed. I saw even WaPo mentioned, where are all the insects? Published as we are heading into winter and no one is thinking about it. The incentives as in every other thing are inverted, and I am going to assume nothing but necessity turns them right and in balance. I don't know what to do about it in the meantime but use wisely the land I have access to, and write fiction about a society that lives more in harmony with the earth. .
I could go either way on the "regular people" category. I'm just not sure if they qualify as true Globohomo, or if they're better classified as the victims of that enterprise. Wanting things to be "normal" seems normal. Then again, it makes me think of that soliloquy in "The Dark Knight" where the Joker describes various horrors as being "all part of the plan."
What I'm really trying to capture is all of the folks that really want/cheer for a system that enforces compliance. While if all of these individuals stopped complying simultaneously we would be home free, they can't be thought of as the driving force causing the system to converge on selection for compliance as much as they can be thought of as the targets of that driving force.
Perhaps my favorite feature of it is the notion of how long dissidence with regards to compliance cultures has been around, and how little the best tactics have changed.
If it's any consolation, his authorship is theoretical, and has been questioned. It was originally an anonymous or pseudonymous essay (for obvious reasons) Kind of reminds me of many substack authors, actually
Although I am elsewhere, I still have some connections with one university in mainland China -- this connection expiring January 2023. Because nominally of the Covid-Zero policy, the faculty there get tested every TWO weeks and likewise need to report their movements. Compliance rate: 100% -- from what I can tell based on the WeChat group all the faculty belong to. The Bio-Security Administrative State is actualized -- although obviously also still undergoing development.
In the USA, such efforts been largely corporatized -- but said corporate leaders and other members of the donor class likely also revolving door members of the Administrative State.
You are calling upon one Western Tradition -- the one concerned with Liberty. But before John Locke or JS Mill or F. Hayek, there was Thomas Hobbes, who discarded divine right but nevertheless argued for the absolutism of state power. According to Degree Query: Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan is the most-assigned book in Ivy League colleges, appearing in 209 syllabi. https://www.degreequery.com/the-most-popular-college-books/
A sign of the times, indeed. Our Ivy League educated and so presumed elite likely have no doubts about their right to rule.
Thanks for sharing that. The Hobbesian view is certainly another ideology that animates these enemies of liberty. I hadn't realized that it is the #1 book in Ivy League schools, but I suppose that figures. That Leviathan is more popular than Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments is an affront to nature and reason.
I feel like a simpleton writing here for all of you are so well read, but my experiences have shown me that there is what I call an Alien Mind, or Satan, which works against mankind continually. JeSus called them the Tares. They are empathetic and work together by mind against us, also urging others not quite a part of them their way. They are strong mind-wise and can cause someone pain or ill health of varying degrees, as Mary Baker Eddy of the Church of Christ Scientist understood. Richard Shaver who dealt with them said that even toe stubbings are caused by them. Those who have lost their veil covering their mind because of the sins of the fathers, are more prone to lean their way unless they have been given extraordinary understanding of God and the Reason of Things. Evil has its own self-destruct mechanism. I don't think you can sort out the various type off people who might succumb to this evil because it is too varying. We can only suggest how we might overeome it.
Bab Roberts, the prophet, said that from time to time God had to intervene to take some of the Alien Mind away so humanity could move into the future. Apparently that mind can also make us forget things. We have seen how they have tried to erase Christianity or at least moral thinking here in the US. Sometimes the evil had grown to a threat level, more evil minds than good, and they had to be blasted off the face of the Earth, like what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah. In the Book of Revelation, John speaks about God coming to remove Satan for 1000 years so we have time to evolve. That was Job's job. He suffered greatly and didn't know why. God simply said even good people suffer. Bab had said that Job was like Prometheus who was chained to a rock and made to suffer unto death every day, only to regenerate at night, to be ready to be attacked again the next day. God had made Job, Prometheus and even Bab a Lamb of God, in that they suffered every day. Every day God allowed the Predators, those of the Alien Mind, to attack, in effect marking them as someone who follows the Beast Mind, the mind of force and coercion. Once marked, God can take them from the Earth. Bab had said there are many involved in this process and spoke about a man in Africa who suffered as he did.
The Alien Mind is also patient and works many years ahead to cause things to happen. Their hope is to destroy humanity completely. God rejected them because they would not follow the Perfect Pattern for our level of development, and in retaliation they come after the Wheat, our generation.
💬 When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it. ~~Frédéric Bastiat, a couple of centuries back
~~
Once we throw meritocracy out of the [Overton] window and never look back, the inevitable merry march along the chain begins: wise fool → clever idiot → well-intentioned idiot → idiotic idiot. The endpoint being the rule by rube™ (h/t your favourite pr cat).
I lifted the ↑ sequence from inestimable Tim Morgan who labours patiently & relentlessly trying to (re?)situate the public concept of economy onto its actual base as a primarily *energy system*. Looks like largely in vain so far 😢
I agree, and have a similar term "institutionalized trauma", where different sectors self-select for and amplify one or more of Laurence Heller's Development Trauma Survival Styles. I haven't included the military in my list of institutions, but I think that fits too. Some relevant excerpts from my article on this
"... in the UK and US in particular, it seems our institutions have become so very locked in to institutional forms of defensive states, devoid of any supervision from right hemispheres' way of attending. Institutionalized left hemisphere attendance indeed! By “institutions”, I am referring to our political, news media, corporate, academic and medical systems. I see these as having become self-selecting and amplifying of, and hence largely made up of people with, certain trauma survival styles.
The manner in which our institutions are communicating with the folks they are meant to serve, is itself, in my view, clearly very triggering to large sections of the people, and is driving a lot of people into permanent, heightened defensive nervous system states, thus spreading left hemisphere overactivation. At the same time, the institutions are also clearly reacting very defensively when the worldview of lots of people is contrary to the institution's own narratives.
Unfortunately, our institutions are now resorting to blaming and shaming the very people that ineffective messaging and lack of good communication skills has already triggered into defensive states. The fastest way I am aware of for rapidly escalating defensive states is through shaming and blaming. One reason for which is that the left hemisphere also does not accept responsibility for anything.
In this way, it seems to me that we have entered a cycle of increasingly explicitly threatening rhetoric, and the resulting increasing entrenchment against or resistance to the messages."
Love the incorporation of the LHB/RHB balance paradigm. You get all the way through The Master and His Emissary? I haven't even started instead relying on Winston Smith and John Carter for their synopses and second hand analysis. I agree 100% that institutions are central to this phenomenon, and I think those who would seek to use coercion to enforce compliance would naturally gravitate towards institutions for the same reason they gravitate towards the state. Taking hold of the state is the ultimate prize for such individuals, but every institution is helpful along that path, and capable of exerting coercive pressure in their own right as you observe here. Thanks for sharing your article, I'll check it out!
Yes, I read it, but not have been quite so successful with his even longer new book "The Matter with Things"! But I must have listened to hundreds of hours of his interviews! His work is a really important part of my framing, along with Dr Stephen Porges' Polyvagal Theory and Laurence Heller's Development trauma work...
Nice essay, but I have a question. If the elites of globohomo believe in equality why do they have a victim hierarchy? It seems to me they are far more motivated by hatred of traditional constraints of behavior, such as Christianity or white power structures, and in fact view these as competitor systems of control which they want to destroy.
Thanks! The victim hierarchy apportions power in an effort to address inequity. While the American way is to treat everyone equally under the law understanding that innate differences will result in some degree of inequality, CRT takes the position that such inequality isn't so much the result of innate differences as it is the result of power structures that you reference (that I don't think exist unless you're talking about mundane in-group preferences). If their premise was true, this would actually be a pretty elegant method of promoting equity. Unfortunately it isn't true. The hierarchy in society today isn't based on race or religion, it is based on class and ideology, so instead of getting equity as a result of destructive interference of two inversely proportional hierarchies, you get greater inequality and diminished fairness from constructive interference were there are certain massive winners and other massive losers when the hierarchies of class and victimology intersect. Whether or not it is motivated by hatred or love is beside the point, although I do agree with you in a sense that those who aren't currently elite (many of globohomo are not elite, most in fact)are motivated mostly by hate. All globohomos aren't necessarily interested in equity as the raison detra of the managerial class isn't equity, it is serving the oppressed. Turning the oppressed into somewhat more comfortable slaves is just as globohomo as wanting equity. They don't agree on the particulars. The only point I'm trying to make with this essay is that they ALL need a centralized system to be able to force people to do things against their will. They want a system that can force compliance because they know people won't conform to their vision for society if they are free.
Thank you for your response. I'm still not sure. My problem is with people like Lukov and Pucker in the link below. Two rich women who pretend they want equality but are actually using race and sex to undermine beauty, not to mention traditional morality. Why do they promote such ugliness? They aren't bad looking so it can't be jealousy, either sexual or class. In other words, they are exploiting inequality and bad taste. LOL. They like it because they can use it to gain status through seduction (i.e., their own looks and money) and gatekeeping. We're probably saying pretty much the same thing but I disagree concerning ideology. There isn't any – just emptiness and irony. They all play cat-and-mouse games with themselves. You just have to SUSPEND DISBELIEF and you are in. Just don't vote for Trump!
You have what I'm getting at when you say they like it because they can use it to gain status. Exactly. Why is this associated with status? I argue, like Michael McConkey, that it is because managerial liberalism is the ideology of the managerial elite/ruling class, and the raison detra of this ideology is progress in the name of serving the oppressed. It doesn't make sense any other way, and no, it isn't the best way of taking care of the oppressed either. You escape oppression through individual empowerment and integration into a robust organic community, not by tearing down the foundations of western civilization. There is an internal logic to it, their priors are just ridiculous.
"the raison detra of this ideology is progress in the name of serving the oppressed. It doesn't make sense any other way,"
Well, yeah, it appears that way I suppose. However, I think women and blacks are simply exploiting the the great fear of being labeled racist or sexist. It's a kind of religion, like Kneeling Nancy, but without a bible or manifesto. If white men didn't care about this, like most men throughout history, it wouldn't work. In my opinion serving the oppressed is window dressing to act as a cover for a desire for power devoid of accountability. It certainly explains why so many people are professional victims. These victim groups cannot compete fair and square against white men and have resorted to a strategy of blood libel and sexual slander.
I think any ideology is inherently self-serving in addition to whatever else. The trick is to find one that is simultaneously moral by your own standards. Managerial liberalism is built on a foundation hypocrisy, and CRT even more so. People will tend to use whatever advantages they can that they deem morally acceptable. I don't begrudge anyone that, I do this as well, it is human nature. What I am disgusted by is people who take advantages that they find morally abhorrent and reprehensible when such action is taken by others. Hypocrisy, in a word.
Most "pundits" on the populist side try to find a single source for the evil that is threatening us. I appreciate the fact that you are more nuanced.
For Mathew Crawford that single source are the bankers and the DoD. They are pulling the strings. Everybody on their side who is not an idiot is either on the payroll or blackmailed or both. See But Why? section at the end of this post: https://substack.com/inbox/post/79820887
I think there is an underlying cognitive bias at play here. I'm tempted by it too. I remember parting ways with the idea that we can ever isolate one variable as being responsible for anything that occurs in a complex system while I was writing a paper about Donald Rumsfeld's influence on the Iraq War while in undergrad studying political science/international relations. These days I tend to waffle between praxeology and political constructivism when trying to wrap my head around this stuff. Reading Mathew's article I get the impression he's more making the argument that those financial factors provide the greatest incentives, but I do think that there are ideological factors that drive the train just as much, but there is of course a bidirectional relationship between these things. It really reminds me of my conception of the forces that conspired to lead us into the GWOT, which is why I brought it up. Neoconservatism + 40 trillion dollars in incentives. Why not both?
Everything about globohomo and the woke requires coercion, coercion requires force, and cancel culture is that force. Why did the CDC just vote unanimously to recommend the Covid jab for babies? Mostly it is to eliminate all liability. But also, if you aren't unanimous in all things mRNA jab, you don't work for, associate with or get funding from CDC, FDA, NIH. That is both coercion and force.
I don't have much sympathy now though, for the argument that "I just need to get to retirement, but the benefits, my insurance, I have to feed my family, etc, now that they have tripled down on jabs for babies. You don't get to complain about the coercion and force preventing you from taking a stand once it starts looking like genocide.
Great stuff, Grant.
"These categories are not meant to be all inclusive. Can you think of others? If so, drop them in the comments!"
I can think of two others at the moment, that I believe are distinguishable from the rest.
4. The bribed and/or blackmailed: the targets of a sophisticated carrot-stick strategy, in which they come to believe everyone is caught in the same net, and the only way to free themselves and enjoy life's fruits is to retail ever more obvious and grandiose lies.
5. The posessed: in secular terms, I suppose you could see this as the victims of a certain trigger or switch being activated in the mind, after which the normal (i.e logical, inheritable) system of value is inverted, while still managing to reinforce a heroic self-image.
Yes, those make sense to me. I see 4 as another who believes they will materially benefit from the system, even if they might be competent enough to do even better if there was a free market. I'm sure a lot of folks in this category might say that we'll never have a free market, so might as well play the game. I have friends that fit into this category, I wouldn't necessarily say all of them need/want compliance, they're just decided to benefit from the system and not rock the boat. For 5 I think that pretty much describes "NPCs" no?
"4 as another who believes they will materially benefit from the system"
The difference in my mind is lies in their genuine fear of the stick (blackmail). In the wake of Epstein's "suicide", I began applying the blackmail filter with far more frequency, in examining some of the weirdest and most transparent lies.
"5 I think that pretty much describes "NPCs" no?"
No, but I see the NPC's emptiness/hollowness as a common (if not quite a necessary) pre-requisite for demonic possession, in the sense of making "room" for a guest at the level of energy exhanges
I'm in the process of writing a piece about this now, to explain my perspective more precisely. In the meantime, here is one of the case studies I'll be looking at.
https://stoneageherbalist.substack.com/p/the-tale-of-richard-hoskins-a-life
And here is a recent example of one way in which I think possession differs from the more mundane NPC format. Note the common traits of physical transformation and child harm:
https://lionessofjudah.substack.com/p/satanism-on-full-display-at-local
Worth noting that in Hoskins' case, it wasn't a matter of him being a hollowed-out NPC, but rather of near constant proximity that allowed for partial "infection". He might be the closest thing to what I'd call a "forensic ponerologist" I've ever run across, and he's living proof of how dangerous of a profession that can be.
The inherent complexity as you look under the hood makes me think of just going with a methodological dualism here and just characterizing that anyone who stands to benefit from a systemic apparatus of coercion, whether materially or ideologically, will work to support a system that selects for compliance.
I get that. And I'm not trying to change your mind (although perhaps something I write will get you to say "maybe", someday lol)
Oh, don't get me wrong, you have way more than a maybe out of me here. I totally agree that these are sub types, it just made me realize that there are probably so many more that we're not accounting for that trying to annotate all of them would be a trying task. I'll dig into this because the ponerology issue is fascinating, and I do think it is important to understand the mechanisms by which decent people can be twisted into participating in/becoming evil.
I would add regular people who know there is a problem but just want everything to go back to normal, but who otherwise are kept silent by the general silence and the power of community consensus.
I would also qualify #2, because the biosphere is a mess, we are many, we are a long way from nature and we don't know how to return and make peace with it.
With respect to #2, something I think is important to consider is that the drive for compliance puts us further and further away from nature. Dirigism just doesn't work, and taking care of the environment is no exception. Stringently enforced property rights of individuals puts the locus of control where it is needed to turn the situation around. All the stuff about negative externalities in the free market don't account for how strictly enforced property rights via our available legal mechanisms, including civil litigation, could win the day. The solution like with everything else is elevating cooperation over coercion. Since I'm not immersed in the topic as you are, I'd love to hear your thoughts, but one of the watershed moments in my intellectual journey to where I am now was reading Joel Salatin. If people like Joel were empowered to be kings of their own castles so to speak, I think that would align the incentives about as much as we can hope for.
Also, thinking more about it, the climate crisis is a pretense for total technocratic control, to save the planet. But that looks like a controlled demolition of the economy and quite frankly democide. That is an immense amount of coercion, and deadly force.
Preferable would be to mostly, almost entirely dismantle the administrative state.
When you have Bill Gates competing with pension funds and private equity titans to drive the cost of agricultural land to the moon, to be used for grains for international commodity markets, ecological collapse is guaranteed. I saw even WaPo mentioned, where are all the insects? Published as we are heading into winter and no one is thinking about it. The incentives as in every other thing are inverted, and I am going to assume nothing but necessity turns them right and in balance. I don't know what to do about it in the meantime but use wisely the land I have access to, and write fiction about a society that lives more in harmony with the earth. .
I could go either way on the "regular people" category. I'm just not sure if they qualify as true Globohomo, or if they're better classified as the victims of that enterprise. Wanting things to be "normal" seems normal. Then again, it makes me think of that soliloquy in "The Dark Knight" where the Joker describes various horrors as being "all part of the plan."
What I'm really trying to capture is all of the folks that really want/cheer for a system that enforces compliance. While if all of these individuals stopped complying simultaneously we would be home free, they can't be thought of as the driving force causing the system to converge on selection for compliance as much as they can be thought of as the targets of that driving force.
I agree. That reminds me of something I meant to ask you: have ever read Etienne de la Boetie's "Discourse on Voluntary Servitude:
https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/kurz-the-discourse-of-voluntary-servitude
Perhaps my favorite feature of it is the notion of how long dissidence with regards to compliance cultures has been around, and how little the best tactics have changed.
You bet I have! The fact that he was ultimately cowed into becoming a bureaucrat was a source of much spiritual anguish in my infantry years.
If it's any consolation, his authorship is theoretical, and has been questioned. It was originally an anonymous or pseudonymous essay (for obvious reasons) Kind of reminds me of many substack authors, actually
-- present company excluded, of course.
Although I am elsewhere, I still have some connections with one university in mainland China -- this connection expiring January 2023. Because nominally of the Covid-Zero policy, the faculty there get tested every TWO weeks and likewise need to report their movements. Compliance rate: 100% -- from what I can tell based on the WeChat group all the faculty belong to. The Bio-Security Administrative State is actualized -- although obviously also still undergoing development.
In the USA, such efforts been largely corporatized -- but said corporate leaders and other members of the donor class likely also revolving door members of the Administrative State.
You are calling upon one Western Tradition -- the one concerned with Liberty. But before John Locke or JS Mill or F. Hayek, there was Thomas Hobbes, who discarded divine right but nevertheless argued for the absolutism of state power. According to Degree Query: Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan is the most-assigned book in Ivy League colleges, appearing in 209 syllabi. https://www.degreequery.com/the-most-popular-college-books/
A sign of the times, indeed. Our Ivy League educated and so presumed elite likely have no doubts about their right to rule.
Thanks for sharing that. The Hobbesian view is certainly another ideology that animates these enemies of liberty. I hadn't realized that it is the #1 book in Ivy League schools, but I suppose that figures. That Leviathan is more popular than Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments is an affront to nature and reason.
I feel like a simpleton writing here for all of you are so well read, but my experiences have shown me that there is what I call an Alien Mind, or Satan, which works against mankind continually. JeSus called them the Tares. They are empathetic and work together by mind against us, also urging others not quite a part of them their way. They are strong mind-wise and can cause someone pain or ill health of varying degrees, as Mary Baker Eddy of the Church of Christ Scientist understood. Richard Shaver who dealt with them said that even toe stubbings are caused by them. Those who have lost their veil covering their mind because of the sins of the fathers, are more prone to lean their way unless they have been given extraordinary understanding of God and the Reason of Things. Evil has its own self-destruct mechanism. I don't think you can sort out the various type off people who might succumb to this evil because it is too varying. We can only suggest how we might overeome it.
Bab Roberts, the prophet, said that from time to time God had to intervene to take some of the Alien Mind away so humanity could move into the future. Apparently that mind can also make us forget things. We have seen how they have tried to erase Christianity or at least moral thinking here in the US. Sometimes the evil had grown to a threat level, more evil minds than good, and they had to be blasted off the face of the Earth, like what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah. In the Book of Revelation, John speaks about God coming to remove Satan for 1000 years so we have time to evolve. That was Job's job. He suffered greatly and didn't know why. God simply said even good people suffer. Bab had said that Job was like Prometheus who was chained to a rock and made to suffer unto death every day, only to regenerate at night, to be ready to be attacked again the next day. God had made Job, Prometheus and even Bab a Lamb of God, in that they suffered every day. Every day God allowed the Predators, those of the Alien Mind, to attack, in effect marking them as someone who follows the Beast Mind, the mind of force and coercion. Once marked, God can take them from the Earth. Bab had said there are many involved in this process and spoke about a man in Africa who suffered as he did.
The Alien Mind is also patient and works many years ahead to cause things to happen. Their hope is to destroy humanity completely. God rejected them because they would not follow the Perfect Pattern for our level of development, and in retaliation they come after the Wheat, our generation.
💬 When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it. ~~Frédéric Bastiat, a couple of centuries back
~~
Once we throw meritocracy out of the [Overton] window and never look back, the inevitable merry march along the chain begins: wise fool → clever idiot → well-intentioned idiot → idiotic idiot. The endpoint being the rule by rube™ (h/t your favourite pr cat).
I lifted the ↑ sequence from inestimable Tim Morgan who labours patiently & relentlessly trying to (re?)situate the public concept of economy onto its actual base as a primarily *energy system*. Looks like largely in vain so far 😢
https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2022/10/19/242-the-dynamics-of-global-re-pricing/
And yes, ty once again for McConkey! 👌 Can’t promise it’s the last instance 😊
I agree, and have a similar term "institutionalized trauma", where different sectors self-select for and amplify one or more of Laurence Heller's Development Trauma Survival Styles. I haven't included the military in my list of institutions, but I think that fits too. Some relevant excerpts from my article on this
https://garysharpe.substack.com/p/trauma-at-the-institutional-level
"... in the UK and US in particular, it seems our institutions have become so very locked in to institutional forms of defensive states, devoid of any supervision from right hemispheres' way of attending. Institutionalized left hemisphere attendance indeed! By “institutions”, I am referring to our political, news media, corporate, academic and medical systems. I see these as having become self-selecting and amplifying of, and hence largely made up of people with, certain trauma survival styles.
The manner in which our institutions are communicating with the folks they are meant to serve, is itself, in my view, clearly very triggering to large sections of the people, and is driving a lot of people into permanent, heightened defensive nervous system states, thus spreading left hemisphere overactivation. At the same time, the institutions are also clearly reacting very defensively when the worldview of lots of people is contrary to the institution's own narratives.
Unfortunately, our institutions are now resorting to blaming and shaming the very people that ineffective messaging and lack of good communication skills has already triggered into defensive states. The fastest way I am aware of for rapidly escalating defensive states is through shaming and blaming. One reason for which is that the left hemisphere also does not accept responsibility for anything.
In this way, it seems to me that we have entered a cycle of increasingly explicitly threatening rhetoric, and the resulting increasing entrenchment against or resistance to the messages."
Love the incorporation of the LHB/RHB balance paradigm. You get all the way through The Master and His Emissary? I haven't even started instead relying on Winston Smith and John Carter for their synopses and second hand analysis. I agree 100% that institutions are central to this phenomenon, and I think those who would seek to use coercion to enforce compliance would naturally gravitate towards institutions for the same reason they gravitate towards the state. Taking hold of the state is the ultimate prize for such individuals, but every institution is helpful along that path, and capable of exerting coercive pressure in their own right as you observe here. Thanks for sharing your article, I'll check it out!
Yes, I read it, but not have been quite so successful with his even longer new book "The Matter with Things"! But I must have listened to hundreds of hours of his interviews! His work is a really important part of my framing, along with Dr Stephen Porges' Polyvagal Theory and Laurence Heller's Development trauma work...
Nice essay, but I have a question. If the elites of globohomo believe in equality why do they have a victim hierarchy? It seems to me they are far more motivated by hatred of traditional constraints of behavior, such as Christianity or white power structures, and in fact view these as competitor systems of control which they want to destroy.
Thanks! The victim hierarchy apportions power in an effort to address inequity. While the American way is to treat everyone equally under the law understanding that innate differences will result in some degree of inequality, CRT takes the position that such inequality isn't so much the result of innate differences as it is the result of power structures that you reference (that I don't think exist unless you're talking about mundane in-group preferences). If their premise was true, this would actually be a pretty elegant method of promoting equity. Unfortunately it isn't true. The hierarchy in society today isn't based on race or religion, it is based on class and ideology, so instead of getting equity as a result of destructive interference of two inversely proportional hierarchies, you get greater inequality and diminished fairness from constructive interference were there are certain massive winners and other massive losers when the hierarchies of class and victimology intersect. Whether or not it is motivated by hatred or love is beside the point, although I do agree with you in a sense that those who aren't currently elite (many of globohomo are not elite, most in fact)are motivated mostly by hate. All globohomos aren't necessarily interested in equity as the raison detra of the managerial class isn't equity, it is serving the oppressed. Turning the oppressed into somewhat more comfortable slaves is just as globohomo as wanting equity. They don't agree on the particulars. The only point I'm trying to make with this essay is that they ALL need a centralized system to be able to force people to do things against their will. They want a system that can force compliance because they know people won't conform to their vision for society if they are free.
Thank you for your response. I'm still not sure. My problem is with people like Lukov and Pucker in the link below. Two rich women who pretend they want equality but are actually using race and sex to undermine beauty, not to mention traditional morality. Why do they promote such ugliness? They aren't bad looking so it can't be jealousy, either sexual or class. In other words, they are exploiting inequality and bad taste. LOL. They like it because they can use it to gain status through seduction (i.e., their own looks and money) and gatekeeping. We're probably saying pretty much the same thing but I disagree concerning ideology. There isn't any – just emptiness and irony. They all play cat-and-mouse games with themselves. You just have to SUSPEND DISBELIEF and you are in. Just don't vote for Trump!
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/art-in-common-nonprofit-2204448
You have what I'm getting at when you say they like it because they can use it to gain status. Exactly. Why is this associated with status? I argue, like Michael McConkey, that it is because managerial liberalism is the ideology of the managerial elite/ruling class, and the raison detra of this ideology is progress in the name of serving the oppressed. It doesn't make sense any other way, and no, it isn't the best way of taking care of the oppressed either. You escape oppression through individual empowerment and integration into a robust organic community, not by tearing down the foundations of western civilization. There is an internal logic to it, their priors are just ridiculous.
"the raison detra of this ideology is progress in the name of serving the oppressed. It doesn't make sense any other way,"
Well, yeah, it appears that way I suppose. However, I think women and blacks are simply exploiting the the great fear of being labeled racist or sexist. It's a kind of religion, like Kneeling Nancy, but without a bible or manifesto. If white men didn't care about this, like most men throughout history, it wouldn't work. In my opinion serving the oppressed is window dressing to act as a cover for a desire for power devoid of accountability. It certainly explains why so many people are professional victims. These victim groups cannot compete fair and square against white men and have resorted to a strategy of blood libel and sexual slander.
I think any ideology is inherently self-serving in addition to whatever else. The trick is to find one that is simultaneously moral by your own standards. Managerial liberalism is built on a foundation hypocrisy, and CRT even more so. People will tend to use whatever advantages they can that they deem morally acceptable. I don't begrudge anyone that, I do this as well, it is human nature. What I am disgusted by is people who take advantages that they find morally abhorrent and reprehensible when such action is taken by others. Hypocrisy, in a word.
Most "pundits" on the populist side try to find a single source for the evil that is threatening us. I appreciate the fact that you are more nuanced.
For Mathew Crawford that single source are the bankers and the DoD. They are pulling the strings. Everybody on their side who is not an idiot is either on the payroll or blackmailed or both. See But Why? section at the end of this post: https://substack.com/inbox/post/79820887
I think there is an underlying cognitive bias at play here. I'm tempted by it too. I remember parting ways with the idea that we can ever isolate one variable as being responsible for anything that occurs in a complex system while I was writing a paper about Donald Rumsfeld's influence on the Iraq War while in undergrad studying political science/international relations. These days I tend to waffle between praxeology and political constructivism when trying to wrap my head around this stuff. Reading Mathew's article I get the impression he's more making the argument that those financial factors provide the greatest incentives, but I do think that there are ideological factors that drive the train just as much, but there is of course a bidirectional relationship between these things. It really reminds me of my conception of the forces that conspired to lead us into the GWOT, which is why I brought it up. Neoconservatism + 40 trillion dollars in incentives. Why not both?
Did you mean this essay by N.S. Lyons (not The Bad Cat) by any chance: https://open.substack.com/pub/theupheaval/p/its-not-hypocrisy-youre-just-powerless.
Yes! This is exactly what I was looking for, article updated to reflect. Thanks!