Inversion = Equality = Individualism

inversion_equality_individualism

What is the root of our disease?

Most people of functional mind now understand that the American dream is not only dead, but was an illusion, brought on by a pocket of history between bad decisions and the moment their consequences arrive.

Even more than that, we are now seeing that Western Civilization has died, and we who are left — functional minds, again — want a new civilization to replace it.

Something went wrong, long ago, and we have been surviving since that time on the slowness of decay. Like a monkey on our back, this original mistake lives on as an assumption, and for this reason, no matter what we try, it is infected with the bad assumption.

We are like a person trying to clean a virus from a computer network while using an infected machine, so that no matter how much he cuts away, he re-infects everything he touches. The disease lives in us, the Typhoid Mary of bad ideological dogma assumptions.

Reactionary Future describes this as it was envisioned through the writings of Mencius Moldbug as a type of Puritan reaction:

The trouble is that, while war, slavery and poverty are in general bad things, they may well be profitable for some. Especially in small doses. And if you can create a feedback loop by which Universalism causes war, slavery or poverty, but does so in such a way as to reward those who practice and promote Universalism, you have a loop that can continue indefinitely.

Take, for example, the “peace process” in Israel and Palestine. Now 60 years old and counting. How confident are you that this “peace process” is not, in fact, the cause of this similarly unending conflict? It certainly generates a very comfortable living, full of meaning and importance and not a few frequent-flier miles, for all those involved. Why shut it down?

RF hits back with his own analysis, which is closer to the truth:

What we have then is the system itself being the driver. This is the key point, and one which can only be repeated in as clear a way as possible, without the added distraction of the additional context provided by Moldbug when trying to explain it – the unsecure system is the problem, and the mechanisms of this unsecure system create the environment which selects for progressivism. Power is above culture.

The power system literally created this culture.

Power systems are proxies for leadership; people decide that kings are too dangerous, and so they implement a series of rules and incentives (a “system”) for managing people who are presumed to be roughly equal in moral character, mental ability and instinct.

Perhaps instead we should look toward the fundamental assumption there, which is equality. Equality is a human tendency wired into us since early days because it is how one forms a group. Offer inclusion into a new group, or tribe, to a number of people, and promise them that they share equally in its profits, and they hop on board. This is an addictive virus to the human brain: less responsibility, and the possibility of more gain.

This is why equality seems, on a mathematical level, to be a good game-playing strategy. The forgotten factor (as usual) is time, or more accurately, iteration: profit-based systems, over time, decay from high-margin to low-margin as the efficiency effects they bring become more widely distributed.

Visualize a new technology product, for example the iGroin. This product constantly stimulates the groin with small electrical shocks to keep the wearer awake at his boring job, tedious television watching, and stultifying small talk. At first, it sells for $700. But as more people own them, costs go down and competition increases, so prices drop.

Ten years later, the iGroin is a generic type of product that sells for $50 at grocery stores.

Equality has the same curve. At first, it is a brilliant power grab: the new tribe takes everything it can, distributes it, and becomes wealthy. Over time, there is less to grab, and so the parasitic process becomes unruly. This then requires the implementation of the same administrative and leadership roles that the parasites took from their host tribe, a larger group. At this point, the parasite becomes the host, but because it has no mode except parasitism, it starves itself as it fragments into smaller groups trying to parasitize it.

This is why all advanced societies have died so far, on Earth and in the heavens: the society becomes wealthy, subsidizing those who could not have survived without it, and then those take over through equality, because equality is social magic because it cannot be opposed without the opposer looking like a cruel tyrant to the herd. Then, the society chokes itself to death, and reverses the process of civilization.

In this view, the system is the result of the assumption, not the cause of it. This is more accurate.

The problem is Us. Individualism arises from people who do not understand civilization. They exist within it because they can only exist when someone else takes care of the basics of life and social order. At that point, they take it all for granted, and start agitating for more (hubris). With that, the parasitism begins.

With the rise of parasitism, all values and meanings are inverted, meaning that they come to mean the opposite of what they were originally intended to mean. The reason for this is that equality demands inversion. To include everyone equally, one must remove any differences between choices, and even words themselves, by making them mean the same thing, ideologically. This means that any terms describing something other than the ideology must be inverted.

Now the cycle is complete. Inversion = Equality = Individualism. The needs of the individual, expressed through a collective, alter the definition of symbols, and create a false consensual reality in which realistic thought is suppressed. Then the society drives itself insane with its inability to find the assumption which started it on a path to doom.

There is only one solution for this: keep the people of highest intelligence and moral capacity in power, make as many of them as you can, and drive away the useless people. Darwinism in nature has no analogue in civilization except this, and it is vitally needed.

In the future, an advanced civilization will survive this threshold. It will do so by adopting the view of the Spartans not in a military sense, but in a social one. Its people will wage constant war against stupidity and idiots, and exile them to distant lands, without having to make a case for laws being broken. People will be sent away simply for being fools.

This society will not be excessively wealthy. The casting away of fools removes the vast profit motive of consumerism, and also requires that even the highly intelligent do actual work. That will paradoxically reward them, as it gives them a break from their over-heating brains, and allows for a lack of the tedium of nonsense work.

In such a civilization, people will spend very little time on inventing new theories, except as pertains to physical science discoveries. Most of their time will be spent in silence, contemplation and enjoyment of life. They will embrace the mundanity and reject the “exciting” as fetishistic.

This type of civilization fits with what Plato saw as ideal:

In the succeeding generation rulers will be appointed who have lost the guardian power of testing the metal of your different races, which, like Hesiod’s, are of gold and silver and brass and iron. And so iron will be mingled with silver, and brass with gold, and hence there will arise dissimilarity and inequality and irregularity, which always and in all places are causes of hatred and war. This the Muses affirm to be the stock from which discord has sprung, wherever arising; and this is their answer to us. – The Republic

The gold are those of excellent moral and mental ability, and the silver those who can implement that vision. When these castes are mixed, those raw abilities are lost.

Hierarchy in human tribes takes this form: there must be some who rise to the top not by manipulation or brute strength, but by ability and the direction in which they appoint that ability.

Here are the gold, silver, bronze and iron castes in another form:

He is called a Brahmana in whom are truth, gifts, abstention
from injury to others, compassion, shame, benevolence and penance.

He who is engaged in the profession of battle, who studies the Vedas, who makes gifts (to Brahmanas) and takes wealth (from those he protects) is called a Kshatriya.

He who earns fame from keep of cattle, who is employed in agriculture and the means of acquiring wealth, who is pure in behaviour and attends to the study of the Vedas, is called a Vaisya.

He who takes pleasure in eating every kind of food, who is engaged in doing every kind of work, who is impure in behaviour, who does not study the Vedas, and whose conduct is unclean, is said to be a Sudra. – “The Four Orders Of Human Beings”

In failed societies, we find false Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaisyas as we see in our current society. These are caste-mixed people who take on the behavior and moral attributes of Sudras.

In healthy societies, we find Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaisyas who act according to their station, much as they were called Jarls, Karls, and freeholders in Europe according to their ability and inclination.

This hierarchy is the opposite of equality. It is quality-based, meaning that it aims to produce more of quality, instead of attempting to normalize everything to one level as equality does.

Equality arises from social politeness in mixed groups. One must assert the opposite of the truth in order to include everyone else. For that reason, the ugly person becomes beautiful and the weak strong. Then the group bullies and gangs up on everyone else to enforce this.

Maintaining this order over centuries requires a maintenance of genetics, because only people of quality can enforce it. The tendency of civilization is to burden those people with responsibility for the welfare of less capable others, thus exhausting them and driving the good ones into exile.

This is why Darwinism is the solution: the less capable and bad must be driven out, not “rehabilitated” or kept as serfs, because they are the destroyers of civilization, even if it takes centuries.

The Spartans understood this on a gut level, but used military aptitude as a proxy for goodness. The next civilization to inherit this earth and the stars will use no proxies, and will simply rank people with a cold and emotionless eye, always pressing the best upward and the worst outward.

Tags: , , , , ,

39 Responses to “Inversion = Equality = Individualism”

  1. avraham says:

    I had noted that the Western Civilization did seem to lack one basic guiding principle or set of principles. I spent some spare time in high school looking at different world views. [I had time for this since in those day they did not overload the kids with homework as they do nowadays.]

    I would not have put it in such terms in those days but philosophy did seem important as the underlying paradigm of civilization. That is the way people look at the world even though they do not know that that is the way they are thinking. They do in unconsciously because it is part of their paradigm.

    • Philosophy was known to the ancients as a type of discipline of knowledge, meaning that discipline was applied to our otherwise boundless tendency to “know” things. It is pruning a garden, not fertilizing it, because life is abundant but mentally inert, so requires leaders to cut it back. I agree that philosophy, or a tendency to look for ultimate truths and transcendental clarity, is the essence of the Western paradigm.

  2. MeToo says:

    What’s the cutoff point for someone who’s not smart enough for retention in this society you are proposing?

    There’s people who take 50 years to become at least halfways wise, and most likely the vast majority of 30 year olds are of poor judgment. Maybe this is why, in the past, in eastern societies, the elderly were respected. It was understood that youth = foolishness.

    You can’t get around any of this, Brett. Nobody’s born smart in the ways that are important.

    • Nobody’s born smart in the ways that are important.

      I completely disagree with your unfounded assumption. People are born with their intelligence and character. Over time, they develop this — if and only if they have the innate inclination to do so.

      I could have told you at age 18 who was going somewhere in my high school, and who was going nowhere, and then those in the middle who would simply succeed at making money but never really be of much importance.

      • MeToo says:

        There were kids in my school who were incredibly smart and ambitious and seemed to have a bright future. Trust me, they didn’t all succeed. Some whom I know became alcoholics, others total failures (“losers”) and on and on. One boy in particular went on to do shocking things that put him on the outs with society.

        Schit happens to people in spite of wonderful inborn qualities.

        At what point do you say “Yes, they seemed to have it all in high school, but they are not performing as expected so let’s give them the heave-ho; they’ve had their chance.”

  3. TheMacThatWentToPot says:

    We are actually living in the best era of humanity.

    Child mortality is the lowest it’s ever been, as are deaths from war and child birth.

    People are living longer, living better and have a higher literacy level than ever.

    Technology is at its peak

    Just because this world has failed you and made you miserable doesn’t mean it’s the same for everyone else.

    • MeToo says:

      “People are living longer, living better…”

      Maybe not. I think they are being held together with wax and string, i.e., medical technology. Long ago, people – in spite of propaganda saying otherwise – who made it to 80 or 90 and more did so on the strength of their tough constitution. Anyone who reaches those ages now it’s due to the application of medical technology of one kind or another.

      Mother Nature’s (the Creator’s) wisdom offed those with weak constitutions through socalled infectious disease, with the result that only the inherently strong could spread their genes. Now, we have unnatural methods of pulling virtually everyone through.

      Living “better”? Having gratitude for what you’ve got is better living. Now – who is satisfied with anything?

      • I think they are being held together with wax and string, i.e., medical technology.

        It seems like we have a lot of people who depend on thousands of dollars of drugs a month just to survive. There are many others who would not last a night in a forest if given only a knife in the early afternoon. That by itself is troubling.

        • MeToo says:

          So, let’s enrol everybody in Tom Brown Jr.’s wilderness survival and tracking school! Seriously.

          I got lost in the forest once and while I found my way out eventually (dirty & clothing torn, etc.) I do not care to repeat that experience.

          • Possibly restoring a 50-50 nature-human balance would increase familiarity with life itself, instead of only the narrow segment defined wholly by human intent.

            • crow says:

              When humans refer to the world, they are almost always referring only to the world-of-people.
              Shockingly, that is quite likely to be the only ‘world’ they know.

              • Human world = people respond to emotions, everyone must be included, all things are defined in abstract terms or as concrete objects which do not reflect the passage of time.

                Extra-human world = death, aging, time, vastness of universe/tininess of humanity, fear, doubt, demons, gods, wizards, dentists.

                • crow says:

                  And then there’s the actual world. Nothing humans do, think, feel, or fear, plays any part. Their only function is to demolish it.

    • Asian Person says:

      A worshipper of Mammon would say that. But this world has robbed me of any sense of purpose and normalcy.

      The domesticated animal does live longer, but better?

    • crow says:

      Wow. A passive-aggressive, left-wing kindergarten teacher. What are you doing here, old gal? Call a cab, quick, before something icky stains your frock.

    • Low child mortality = accumulation of deleterious mutations

      Deaths from war = highest in WWI, WWII, Civil War (all democracy’s wars)

      People living longer = more time to reflect on lives wasted at jobs

      People living better = conned into accepting ersatz substitutes

      Higher literacy level = pretend literacy, able to sound out the words but not understand

      Technology is at its peak = using ideas from the 1960s, therefore that was its peak, this is just marketing

      The most common defense against a dying civilization is to declare that it does not affect oneself, which requires merely lowering standards. That way, the individual in question can make fun of other individuals for not being as enlightened as he, and because he has programmed his mind not to notice failure, will completely disregard it as he ignores the effect his is having on his personality, intellect and soul.

      Reminds me of sour grapes, in inversion. “Those grapes are really good, but these mediocre ones are more abundant, so I am happier here.”

      • crow says:

        The greatest stumbling block to successful communication is the presence of ‘levels’.
        These levels exist as a hierarchy of concepts that carry the message.
        To one who is capable of seeing only one or two levels, anything containing more seems like nonsense, and is thus discarded as garbage.
        There’s no way around this, once it gets established. Varying degrees of goodwill and humility once sufficed, but those qualities are now long-gone.
        In this, nihilism sorta gets it right in claiming that nothing can be communicated.
        It can and could be, but mostly isn’t.

        • To one who is capable of seeing only one or two levels, anything containing more seems like nonsense, and is thus discarded as garbage.

          I agree. In addition to the Dunning-Kruger effect, modern society rewards only thinking of one level. As does democracy. Depth is scary to a crowd, so it is demonized every time.

          • crow says:

            I don’t care if you ‘agree’ or not. Why is it you make such a thing of announcing your agreement/disagreement, anyway?

            I suggest it is in your interests to dispense with this crowdist phraseology, and unearth other ways of concurring with stuff, or not.
            In fact, this qualifies as a Secret of Life…

            Stop immediately judging, and leave things to be whatever they are, crap or not, while the passage of seconds brings things into sharper focus.

            “I agree…”, “I think…”, “In my opinion…” etc.
            None of these prefaces serve any purpose, and instead do clandestine damage.

            Unless, possibly, I am missing something?

            • Finnish Individual says:

              I agree with crow.

              Wait…

            • Stop immediately judging

              Possibly an assumption was made here which is not correct.

              • crow says:

                It’s no assumption. People judge. The smarter they are, the more they judge. This is what separates them from life itself.
                The wise man, smart or not so smart, knows this, and saves his judging for later, if ever.

                Seriously: consider it. Contemplate it. Meditate upon it. Deal with it.

              • Original Doug says:

                I’ve always preferred “amen, brutha” to “I agree.” There you go, this one’s on the house. (ha ha)

    • Finnish Individual says:

      That comment is ignorance and delusion incarnated. What are you doong on this site? THAT is the kind of undeniably useless comments you should not publish, Brett

      • crow says:

        Brett likes inflammatory stuff. It’s debate-fodder. I, like you, would rather nuke it on sight.

      • Asian Reactionary says:

        Its good to see what the addled minded say, so that their pitiful arguments will be swiftly sunk as they should be.

    • graematicus says:

      Classic mistake of Modernity – thinking quantity can be substituted for quality. Technology, longevity, wealth.. these are all measurable metrics that seem impressive, but say nothing of the inner quality of the person. The richness of his subjective experience. The Reactionary reacts because he is aware of how modern man’s inner life pales in comparison to that of those who went before him.

      In a healthy society, a man may live in a hovel but contain unknowable riches inside. In our degenerated society, a man is a millionaire, but inside he is a wasteland.

      • The Reactionary reacts because he is aware of how modern man’s inner life pales in comparison to that of those who went before him.

        Starting with the sacrifice of his time to nonsense, and his children to an insane, voracious, and destructive System…

  4. EX says:

    Individuals tend to make mistakes, even the quality ones. Would such an unwavering society be even possible?

    • Asian Person says:

      Competition will weed out mistakes. To the victor, the spoils.

    • Yes, because of one simple difference from today’s society:

      We look at the whole of that person’s history.

      When you go into a courtroom today, or even stand in line, it is discouraged that someone notice what else you have done in the community, for bad or good.

      In a future society, we look at the whole record and see if this person has contributed anything. If they have, failures are less significant. Even if they have not, failures in pursuit of a positive goal are less significant than lack of failure and lack of contribution other than obedience.

  5. avraham says:

    It was I believe the Western way of education to emphasis the classics. When I was in High School they taught me Job and Chaucer.

  6. Original Doug says:

    The search for microbial life in our galactic back yard actually has little to do with the neighborhood and everything to do with potential effective nullification of the notion that we could somehow be a one-off amongst gazillions of stars. Yet even after MC Single Cell drops his first terrestrial album, the increasing desire for face to face contact with an equal or greater extraterrestrial intelligence may be no less futile (although my instincts are to have confidence in the unpredictability inherent to existence).

    So considering that the stakes may be above our ability to quantify since with the skies remaining largely UFO-free our best and brightest could for all we know very well be above average universal IQ, us taking a long enough bong hit break to dig out the tracking information for that shipment of act getting together would be a wise decision indeed.

  7. […] Spencer has in the past pointed to the root of our downfall as “individualism,” against which he posits an aggressive realism. We must not project ourselves onto the world, but accept it as is, and then we see what we can do with it, instead of creating fantasy worlds of Utopian ideology and then insisting that others treat them as real. […]

  8. AgentofReactivity says:

    This is why I hate the gutless, they keep on changing their positions, they support hierarchy when hierarchy holds people back from living their lives to the fullest, and they support equality when equality holds people back from living life to the fullest, this is the false choice we are presented with, equality or hierarchy, both punish people for having a genuine zest for life. The gutless create vast systems to hold back anyone with more of a authentic hunger for life than themselves, as an example, look what happened to sexuality, sexuality used to be about existential loneliness and embrace of the flesh, now it has been reduced to a crass objectifying of fetishized body parts, depersonalized and without any admirable character traits, this change in sexuality was initiated by cowards who thought that living a worthwhile life was too “burdensome” so they embarked on a campaign to cheapen the appetites so as to spite those who live life to the fullest because putting any actual effort into giving things value was too “burdensome”.

    • The gutless create vast systems to hold back anyone with more of a authentic hunger for life than themselves

      Good point. The neurotics and gutless are mostly afraid of those who are above them, naturally, and so they create an unnatural “humanistic” system to keep those who are naturally gifted from rising.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>