For the sake of humans, replace the humans

the_unreliability_of_human_individualismAbout a decade ago, I identified the phenomenon of Crowdism whereby individuals demand to be freed from consequences of their actions, and band together into groups as a sort of mutual aid society that will attack anyone who doesn’t agree. This forms a hive mind that snowballs and soon creates a monolithic, paranoid Utopian groupthink.

The point of Crowdism is not that evil people exist, although they do, or that people are tempted by evil, which they are. It’s that stupid ideas exist and they sound good, and that in crowds, people bow down to the judgment of others and go along with the herd, resulting in destructive and illusory “solutions.” Socializing makes us dumb because we obey the social standard, not the reality standard.

An unpopular view, this was countered (coincidentally) by a spate of books praising “the wisdom of crowds” and other such flattering, pacifistic, and soothing nonsense. Their point was that in groups, we can guess average numbers well and so groups are obviously the right way to make a choice, because we can’t trust any single individual.

Logic dictates that this is nonsense because if we can’t trust any single individual with power when they are personally accountable, why are we taking those untrustworthy individuals and putting them in a group where they are totally unaccountable? Crowds are beyond accountability; if a crowd of 400 murders someone, you don’t kill all 400 in response. The punishment has to be divided by the number of members of the crowd.

However, nearly 230 years after we made rule of the Crowd the de facto standard here in the West, as exemplified in consumerism (crowd-sourced purchasing decisions), democracy (crowd-sourced leadership) and popularity (crowd-source social values), problems remain. For starters, Western democracies are crumbling as their vast entitlement programs implode. Second, the political problems we fought over throughout all of last century are still here, and they’re intensifying.

I guess you could say Crowd rule has been a total failure. However, the Crowd doesn’t care about the consequences of its actions. Its only concern is staying in power, so that its individual members do not have to face consequences of their actions. The result, starting in the second half of the last century, has been an accelerated drive to complete Crowdist takeover of the world, so that there will be no dissenting voices.

Political correctness, the new internationalism, pluralism/relativism, the United Nations (“world federalism”), entitlements, wealth transfer, etc. are social policies with a singular goal: to blot out any notion that there could be another way. This, we will teach our children, is civilization. Without it, there is nothing but savagery. And thus control will be maintained.

Not quite so fast there, humanity. It’s unclear whether the population has caught on to what a desperate power grab, mostly fueled by Baby Boomer wealth and votes, this has been, but it’s clear that people no longer trust each other. As social chaos increases, so does paranoia, and so does notice that people aren’t as peachy as others think they should be. In fact, we all want most of the rest of them to be gone.

Even more, we’re now seeing examples of how crowdsourcing fails. Take the complete ineptitude of the online crusaders who not only completely missed the Boston bombers, but identified the wrong people. Or the advances in robotics that are replacing unreliable, resentful workers. Never a union riot again.

The Crowdists knew their plan was not workable. They’ve never pretended that it actually works; they focus on what it gives in the short term and ignore its long term consequences. If we boil their ideology down to its root, it is selfishness and a desire for no accountability, which is why they accuse their opposition of being that as well. But the big joke is that it’s not a political doctrine, but a social one, and it’s oblivious to its effects.

As a result, it’s falling apart. This means that the Crowdists are pushing harder to bind us all together into a single mechanical system, whether one world government or something like the EU, so that we must all go down together. It’s a subtle form of collective punishment. We must make the crazy ideology work, or we all suffer. Sounds good.

However, somehow the world isn’t cooperating. All those details that the Crowdists pushed out of the way to make room for ideology have come together to make the plan fail. The Crowdist notion was that the world would be great with a few changes; they didn’t think to anticipate that those changes might in turn make others, and then others, in a chain reaction that’s out of Crowdist control.

What we’re seeing now is a mania by committed Crowdists to take control. Obama is this; Merkel is this. They can’t admit they were wrong, which would be on par with admitting that their lives’ work is a failure. Instead, they push on because their egos are too terrified of the alternative to be flexible. Thus we march in trope toward the abyss!

And yet, much as we’re seeing now, people are deciding to work around The People. We’ve realized that human nature is variable, but most people are sloppy and refuse to be honest about much of anything. Thus we replace them with robots, and filter them out with laws. As this civilization winds down, we’re building the next.

Let me pitch to you what that will look like: a vast industrial wasteland, riddled with disease, criminality, petty warfare, poor hygiene and corruption, offset by smaller suburban and rural areas which take people on an opt-in basis. To get in, you give up some bad habits and a lot of rights. But you get out of the wasteland.

These demi-republics will be organized by organic group, such as religion, culture/ethny, philosophy and social class or caste. They will not be unfriendly to outsiders; they just won’t let them in. There will be no pretense of rights or freedoms. You join these places because the acts you need to do are permitted and everything else verboten.

In exchange however you get the opposite of the failed Crowdist world which thrashes outside the electrified walls and gun turrets. You get a chance at a normal life. As the great hive mind vision winds down into chaos, people will defect at increasing rates, swelling a new society at the expense of the old and dying one.

24 Comments

  1. NotTheDude says:

    Thinking about the rise and fall of societies past is whittling away my doubt as to whether society will reach the afore mentioned state of disfunction. Every month seems to bring more frustrated terrorists, more meaningless chatter and more denial. We don’t seem to be much different to, say, the Anazazi of the past either. Living on dwindling resources, leading to more internal strife, it seems that if societies that lived nearer to nature can fall in a short space of time thusly, then it doesn’t bode well for we today.

    1. The more dysfunction we have now, the less we go quietly into total dysfunction and become a third-world society like India, Mexico, Africa, Brazil, Cambodia, Thailand, or Los Angeles.

      1. Loretek says:

        The one good thing about the internet that the left doesn’t see. The word of the chaos is spreading quickly. We do have a CHANCE for people to start to work against it before the point of no return is reached. For this I thank social media. For most of our problems I also blame it.

        Maybe it has allowed the world to get its progressive ideas out all at once so the chaos can be seen on grand scale, instead of slowly seeping in and imploding like it has in history.

  2. Vigilance says:

    The real problem of Crowdism in the modern world is not its existence but its use. Crowdism is used to wreck things for the personal gain of the swindler. It could be and has been used as method of self-regulation enacted upon the commoner. Hence the point of forced religious conversion. You don’t need a complex and overbearing legal system to keep the commoner in line when his peers do it for him. This post attests to the power of crowdism. The key lies not in smashing it, but harnessing it. This is a fact that the great swindlers have known all along.

    1. shoko asahara says:

      Well said, I find that my peers are generally self policing and afraid of anything that does not put their ego driven interests first. This both explains the cookware bombing of Boston as well as the reddit trolls on FBI agent amateur night. Kill some women and a kid, use MS paint to find some suspected Arabs and boy you sure do feel good about yourself! Make sure to update your Facebook status accordingly!

    2. This reminds me of the politicians who sign on for global warming and diversity jobs because they’re buzzwords and so that’s where the money is.

  3. Ted Swanson says:

    We need Elves to run the show.

    1. Anon says:

      Indeed, if the Elves from Lord of the Rings were running the show we’d all be a lot better off…but alack, “men are weak!”

      1. Vigilance says:

        I will never prostrate myself before an elf. Let them live in the Isles of everlasting life. There’s no glory in that.

      2. Ted Swanson says:

        I now call to order the Council of Elrond!

  4. I see the world as being composed of two groups: people with souls, and “red shirts” (like in Star Trek).

    People with souls tend to be conscientious and deliberate. They’re not always “nice” by the stupid social meaning that people like, but they always have a reason.

    People without souls just do the same stuff they always do by rote. They are not jerks, they’re just selfish. They will go out of their way to look “nice” in public. But it’s all for themselves. They are always manipulating us.

    When I hear about bad things happening to people, I wonder how many of them were just red shirts. Nature makes them to be food for bigger animals. I hope the sabre-toothed tigers come back soon, because humanity needs them. The red shirt to souled person ratio is tilting toward the red shirts.

    1. Conservatardian says:

      I agree with your analysis, though I get to wondering whether these “red shirts” can be split up into two more groups: the ones who, despite their selfishness are of potential use (ie. “smart”, but brainwashed) and the ones who are deliberately selfish and know they are of no use. Perhaps this isn’t a useful distinction, though it does certainly make me wonder how much of the “selfish” can be salvaged and whether the dysgenic process has entrenched itself so deeply that only about 1-3 in 10 people are worth their salt.

    2. Owl says:

      I’ve noticed this too.

      I just recently had the epiphany that most people do not ever do anything I would consider “thinking.”

      I realized that all most people ever consider are tangible phenomena in a binary sense: light is on or it’s off, fridge has food or is empty, tire is flat or tire is fine.

      They either directly observe these simplistic facts or else defer their knowledge to someone with authority: “I know (tangible fact) because (authority figure) said so.”

      This then gives us the ability to interpret and understand the nonthoughts of normals, particularly when you get into this pattern generalized to sociopolitical views:
      -“Racism are bad, I know bcuz teacher said”
      -“Democracy am good, I know cuz teacher said”
      -“Arabs is bad, I know cuz TV guy with nice suit said so”
      -“Rich people bad, I know cuz porfessor sed”
      -“All things in moderation am good health strategy, I know cuz The Crowd sez so all the tiem”
      -“College am good, I know cuz smart people said”

      …and so on and so forth.

      It became painfully obvious to me in a recent conversation that people as a whole do not do anything like trying to come up with a big theoretical model into which all of reality fits – instead they symbolize and iconify their living experiences like bad anime art and label everything either Goodtrue or Falsebad.

      When a new retarded fad diet comes out, for example the blood type diet, people aren’t sitting there analyzing the information as it comes out and comparing it against their experience. No, instead they see some commercial where Dr. So-and-so with his Great Wall of Credentials comes out and boldly proclaims that “The Blood Type Diet is Doubleplusgoodtrue!”

      Trog Pooflinger sitting at home sees this on TV and says “Goodtrue? Must has goodtrue! Give goodtrue now!”
      “Sir, I’m gonna need you to settle down. The book costs $19.95 and… SIR, PLEASE STOP MASTURBATING OR I WILL HAVE TO CALL SECURITY. There we go, good. Yeah, it will cost you $19.95 to acquire this book.”
      “No care, just want goodtrue!”

      …and Trog hands over his credit card.

      The next morning, all of Trog’s friends are grunting around the water cooler while their overseer is in a meeting. Trog gets to be the first to proclaim, “Diet book am GoodTrue. I know, cuz TV guy sed.”

      1. crow says:

        This lack of any ability to think is scary, once you notice it.
        So many people fall into this category.
        One very good way of telling who is who, is to notice how often the thinking-challenged begin sentences with: “I think…”

        But as I’ve so often observed before, thinking is not always good, and can be downright counterproductive. Think when necessary, if you are able, and the rest of the time, don’t.

        1. RiverC says:

          I don’t know the extent of this phenomenon. One thing I have noticed is that outside of their area of expertise (often self-defined) people tend to either defer to experts uncritically (herd-thinking) or be blindly cynical (anarchism). Educations even for the college graduate are increasingly specialized, giving people more areas where they feel they must defer or say something smart sounding. The worst is cynical group-think… conspiracy theories! a ‘liberal’ (free and open) arts education was supposed to be about educated people not being specialists, but being able to think and understand something about just about everything.

          Rob Heinlein had a saying about this, “Specialization is for ants.”

      2. Worse, a lot of them think, but only about details in linear order. This means you have “experts” of the trivial who can’t put together the big picture. Connect the goddamn dots!

  5. RiverC says:

    Those things used to be called families, until they finally removed the barbed wire and turrets, and the right to tell their members exactly what they could or couldn’t do.

    This latest gun-grab is part of the desire to Crowdify the family. As that MSNBC host said, children belong to the community, not to the parents. Of course they misunderstand why it might take a village to raise a child, and needless to say their ‘communities’ are simply crowds – do you know who is ‘raising’ your child in that circumstance? With the smooth professional Social Workers, is there a someone there to ‘know’? If the community is like a cake, then the cake is a lie.

    One of my personal names for this era is ‘Babel’s Return’, it being the classic lesson about the idiocy / destructiveness of crowds. I believe your pic is one of the classic illustrations of Babel; don’t know the artist.

    It also makes me think about the Hierarchy of values, where in terms of groups of people, the crowd or mob or mass is the lowest and meanest form of human association. It is like molecules in iron; all smashed together and pointing whatever direction the magnet pulls them. But they have no internal structure or organization, thus they can be melted and molded to whatever shape the worker needs them to take.

    I would suppose that true civilization (and not merely its veneer) is one of the higher forms of human association. Thus why it is always invoked and imitated to paper over a mob.

    1. Anthony says:

      by Pieter Breugel

      I sometimes call it short-sightedness; crowdist vision ends at his elbows.

      1. Ted Swanson says:

        Gosh, Renaissance painting was the best.

    2. Either our model for society is the family, or it becomes either the individual (anarchy) or the herd (socialism).

      Who is your family? If you have no one to claim but yourself, you care not what happens to others.

      Who is your family? If it’s the herd, because they allow you in for reading the Red Book or whatever, then you want the herd to succeed… even if individual members die for it like cells at the site of an injury.

      The family is a better model.

      1. RiverC says:

        Within my faith, the local Parish is a second family, with the Father being the priest and the Mother being his wife.

        Though in actuality, with more established parishes, the priest and his wife tend to be grandfather and grandmother, with the deacons and their wives becoming fathers and mothers.

        It is interesting to note that for most of my major bloodlines, Cherokee, Saxon, Irish, Welsh, Scots, our localities were not merely economic or social conveniences, they were large extended families.

        Not all were hostile to strangers of course, but most were highly cautious lest per Mark Twain they get suckered by some gold plated lead coins.

        What is interesting by the way, is that the ancient Irish Christians created little skete like communities around the monasteries; likewise the pattern that is developing locally for us is that people move near the church and the households function as small ‘sketes’ with the father of the house as elder, while for the singles and those widowed the parish becomes the surrogate family.

        When individual churches become too large, say over ~200 people or so, this falls apart. Cathedrals manage to get around this by being a conglomeration of many smaller ‘families': a bishop, many priests, even more deacons, and then thousands of households. As long as the hierarchy is clear and honorable, it is like something out of St. Dionysius.

        I worry for many of the single atheists I’ve known – when I was in college I bore witness to the herd mentality of the ‘Secular Student Union’. (Few College religious organizations were nearly as lockstep.) I pray for their sake that they are able to start families and keep them, and not get swept up into the Secular/Humanist herd.

  6. EvilBuzzard says:

    Corrupt human societies stubbornly refuse to die off. It took Rome almost another century to officially flat-line after they were for all intents and purposes done after losing the Battle of Hadrianople.

    1. Technology and overpopulation may accelerate this however.

      1. RiverC says:

        When I was in college, the leftist-soaked Intervarsity let us know that white westerners use something like 20x the resources each compared to black third-worlders. Maybe their solution is to turn us all into third-worlders so we use less resources.

Leave a Reply

37 queries. 0.525 seconds