Tuesday, 2 August 2016

Donald Trump is simply an uncouth progressive, and here's what to do about it (Part 2)

V

If I'm correct (and I haven't yet been proven wrong about the last post) then the default assumption for the modern American state, and its fundamental disease is the system of voting. One should always be suspicious of default assumptions. If you as an individual didn't come up with an idea yourself, or if the media is suggesting you move in that particular direction (this article excluded, of course) or if everyone else thinks some idea is "obvious, duh" then you are being lied to and someone is making money from that malfeasance. You have been warned.

So, if the above is true and both the Republicans and the Democrats are a distraction, then the very act of voting is part of the broken system and requires tweaking with a screwdriver. Or, more appropriately, bashing with a sledgehammer. If the voting system itself is broken, then results of a voting process cannot affect that system negatively and will only support it.

At this point, we also have to assume the process of democracy is torn at best and criminal at worst. I'm perfectly happy to be shown how actual democracy can work within some utopian society with a population magnitudes smaller than presently living, but that situation would be as far removed as possible from what we presently call "democracy" before the universe wraps around on itself.

That citizens are encouraged to vote and told there is no other way to operate as a "good" society, should clue us to the parameters of the box in which they have been placed. All boxes have edges. The key to discovering one is in a box is simple: when one bumps up against its cardboardy walls. Your choice then is clear: stay inside the box, forget the box or try to find a way out. I am addressing the latter option.

But if the entire modern system of government in a given developed country (yes, that includes New Zealand) is run on an American-style liberal democratic structure, then where is safe? Where is "outside"? If we are inside a box we cannot see, taste, hear or touch, then how did we get inside such a box? And is there even an outside to get to?

VI

All good questions. The truth is, there is no outside. In 2016, there are only two kinds of countries: either full democracies (based on the American-style liberal democratic parliamentarianism), or countries on their way towards becoming full democracies. To see this is correct, think about why and against whom the "international community" leverages its wars and sanctions. Are any of those nasty people democrats (it doesn’t matter if the upper case “D” is used or the lower case). No, of course they aren’t. Democracies don’t go to war against each other, everyone knows that!

So here we can start to see the box's edges. We know we cannot shrink the box because there is no way to stand outside and push. But being inside is not always a terrible thing, as some disbelieving Germans knew when forced to participate in Nazi Germany's war machine. From the inside, a person has a unique advantage to interrupt the system which would be unavailable to anyone on the outside (the enemy).

Simply put, the most dangerous action any of us can take in such a corrupt system is still with the individual citizen. It is a measure of power no governmental system can remove or steal from its subjects: the supreme personal power of inaction. The ability to stand still when every media message, police baton, public shaming or bullet compels the person to act in a certain direction. No one can take away this power. They will try, and you might believe the lie for a while, but the power is always with us.

This sounds like fighting talk, and fighting leads to pain. Everyone wants to avoid pain, so they’ll probably avoid fighting too. But understand that in this world, people aren't afraid of pain. Pain, after all, is limited and fleeting. It dissipates with time and can be numbed. What people are scared of - because they have been trained to be scared of it - is the act of fighting itself. Getting into confrontations is considered by progressives to be the worst thing anyone can do. Confrontational people are called criminals, anarchists, hateful and all manner of ugly words. And no one wants to be associated with a criminal.

This is a clever, effective, time-tested method of social control: split the populace between the rule-followers who desperately avoid fighting, and the rule-breakers who see nothing wrong with self-autonomy (because self-autonomy requires no outside authority, it is a "dangerous idea"). Throw in an institution whose sole job it is to maintain the idea of criminality as a societal negative in the minds of the rule-followers - otherwise known as the police - and a press which keeps reporting who are the rule-breakers and the terrible consequences for rule-breaking, and one has the recipe for a modern society.

As a bonus, the police ensure the rule-followers don’t turn into rule-breakers and join up with the other rule-breakers and decide one bright day to overthrow the rule-makers. It's perfect. The creation of a soggy meadow of fault and fear to trap everyone’s wandering feet.

VII

But rule-followers shouldn’t be concerned. I'm not telling you to fight. I'm not telling you to confront. I am only suggesting you stand still. I'm telling you to that the only fix here is to deprive the system of oxygen. It relies on the individual for the defence of the system. It wants the default assumption of all citizens to believe democracy and progressivism are the best ways of human government.

If the structure had to keep telling us this by blaring it from the street corner or in every newspaper, then it wouldn't work - it wouldn’t “stick,” as they like to say in advertising. Because if you have to say it, it's not true. The best propaganda is recited by the people, defended by those people and organised by those same people. This the process of complete and true psychological capture.

Realise, however, that in allowing the people to buckle their own chains the system has made a fatal mistake. There's a tightrope it has walked for decades, hoping a breeze doesn't unbalance its cautious steps. The modern government relies on the citizen to maintain the efficacy of democracy inside their heads. There are no "democracy lessons" to achieve this save oblique references hidden among media. It depends on each of us for its sweet oxygen.

Without the psychological capture of the citizen, the system cannot function. No system can function. Its efforts of capture are impressed from the earliest days of a person's schooling, through to the last days of university and beyond. This capture flows through the multinational corporations, the libraries, the NGOs, the press, your parents, your friends, the faces on a currency, the fact that currency exists, in cars driving on one side of the road not the other, with the language we speak and in what connects the "international community" we so venerate. It is this capture of every societal institution including, and most especially, our minds.

Understand that to achieve this psychological capture, we have also been mistakenly given controlling power. All we have to do is stop. To stop believing. To cease assuming and to not move when we are told to move. There is no need to kill, deport, enslave or arrest any progressive because once their system is starved of oxygen, the power once held by the psychology of the democratic system will flow to those who stand still. The progressive ideologues will then have two choices: either pull out the guns and batons or shrivel up and accept defeat.

VIII

If citizens stand still, the status quo must force them to act and it is here they will expose themselves for what they really are: a totalitarian, theocratic regime controlled not from the top down, but from the bottom up. They know the tightrope is stretched thin and may snap at any moment. They also know this rope is held by weak psychological capture. The great fear is that citizens could one day simply decide not to hold it any longer. So if politics is broken, democracy a sham and this progressive agenda unstoppable - will you drop the rope? Do you want change, or the illusion of change?

The first task is to understand we are in a box. The second is to discover its walls. Third is the realisation that there is no outside the box (yet). And finally, comes the task of doing no task at all until the box is dissolved. This means no politics, no media, no activism, nothing. Any participation in the structure of government - until its present controllers are no longer able to leverage its form - is to be considered maintenance of the very problem we are trying to expiate. The task of doing no task at all - the key safety valve - is to seize power, but not to hold power. The goal, if one is convinced the game is beyond repairing, is not to control this system, it is to dissolve it.

How should one spend their time in the interim? Waiting, as one may be doing, a lifetime for the system to asphyxiate. Spend this time by thinking of a better way of constructing government that does not rely on democracy, internationalism, Christianity or progressivism. Something truly new.

Or maybe uncover the old and incorrectly discarded. Ask whether there are ideas of government which were removed when modern democracy emerged that were better suited and less volatile for humans. Think about how a return would look like, how it might decrease friction in this world. Read history to discover those old ways of thinking, the heresy tucked deep within libraries and Google. Become an archaeologist of forgotten ideas.

Assume nothing is true, and everything is false. Start there.

No comments: