What is Amerika?

superbowl_power_failureWe post many analyses and solutions on this site. It’s time to tie it all together, since many people are still confused about what this blog stands for and why we keep harping on similar ideas.

The simplest it gets: there is something in humans that misleads us and propels us away from reality, which causes us to bunch together in groups to deny reality, which causes societies to become internally fractured and collapse. If you like civilization, you fight this force of reality-denial (Crowdism).

When people turn to the Crowdist way, they inevitably arrive at something like modern liberalism. The individual wants few constraints on itself, so it wants both an anarchic component, and a commercial component. Because these two create chaos, people then turn to an authoritarian component which holds society together.

The final stage of this process is globalism. Since the French Revolution, liberal groups have called for erasing all barriers to the individual’s total autonomy and total freedom of choice. Those include heritage, religion, culture, values and even sexual orientation. Nothing must come in the way of the whim of the individual.

I call this global process Amerika because it reflects what happens when a once-nice place falls under the control of liberals. First, they smash all of its decent traditions in the name of “freedom”, liberty and equality. Next they introduce crippling infrastructure failures. Finally, it turns into a totalitarian state.

That doesn’t last long. Totalitarian states decay because they rely on the power of one person. The result of totalitarianism is a slow collapse into third-world levels of low hygiene, corruption, warlordism, incompetence, laziness and social chaos.

Amerika combines the worst possible elements of humanity: the greed of consumerism, the apathy of socialism, the elective ignorance of democracy, and the binary approach to truth — our way or anything else — that marks totalitarian societies. It is a disease like cancer or paranoia. But it starts out sounding good.

This type of thinking first came about in the French Revolution in 1789, but had precursors in The Enlightenment some centuries before. Many people blame those roots on Christianity; I don’t think it’s that easy. The ancient Greeks described the same phenomenon happening to them, as did the ancient Indians. It is inherent to human existence.

We can call it narcissism or individualism, but it boils down to the same thing, which is a rejection of the possibilities of the world in favor of the judgments, desires, impulses and feelings of the individual. In other words, as if someone appointed us God, we put ourselves before everything else. Including reality itself.

Most human activities are designed to hide this simple truth. For example, in our popular culture, it is considered impolite to blame the individual for his or her own actions. It is better to find something big and impersonal to blame, like the Rich, racism, the government, the Kings, religion or even bad luck.

Most people when faced with this situation will go into denial. They write off society and start working for their own profit. The only problem is that when society goes downhill, it takes them with it. However, people cannot mentally process this because it shatters their sense of well-being. So like zombies they march in denial.

Amerika is the death of the West and the malaise that afflicts first-world nations. People are fundamentally miserable. They backbite and snipe, attack each other and sabotage each other, because they have found that living for the individual produces more ambiguity than actual solutions. They lie about this and claim to be “happy.”

This results in people who hate their own society and the people around them, and covertly but actively work to destroy it. The misery spreads from that. A quasi-sociopathic “me first” mentality replaces any sense of working with others, or even common sense and common decency. The death-spiral accelerates.

Much like the Soviet Union, Amerika is destined for failure. However, that will take time and during the intervening decades or centuries, it will destroy all that was once good and leave behind a cultureless grey population who have no ability to create civilization again.

Our solution here is simple: resist this decline by pointing out what it is, and by fighting back against liberalism. Get together the sane people, invade our political parties, demand change, and then throw out the parasites and their enablers. Put us back on track to a nicer and better way of life.

Right now, this seems like a dream. Modern society seems like it will never change. But as more and more of its vital systems fail, and the people who are replacing its creators seem unable to fix them, it becomes clearer that something must be done. You have a choice: stand for civilization, or stand for decay. Which side are you on?

19 Comments

  1. NotTheDude says:

    Great post. Whenever I ask myself or try to tell someone why I care about things I do and what I see wrong with society, I have to bring it back down to well being. I don’t want to mess everything up in the world and my life. Its so true what is written on this site .Our Liberal society really hates context and meaning because they have to live up to the responsibilities that come with meaning. They are happy to fester at this point in evolution, just able to feel hedonistic pleasures and blot out context and beauty. I have started saying that I live context every day. It is my ‘religion’.

    1. crow says:

      Such enthusiasm :)
      I enjoy your comments, NTD.

      1. NotTheDude says:

        Thank you. I’m just grateful to be part of the great thoughts that this site puts out there. The folk who post and comment on here are refreshing. I hope that they stop to think every so often about themselves and all the others who are like them and take heart in what they are a part of and what this site is.

      2. Me too. We’re very lucky to have our readers and commentators, as well as our contributing writers. It forms the basis of a community that in addition to being a welcome change from the usual zombie rhetoric, is also the foundation of possible growth and change in society at large.

    2. Liberal society is about control. Individuals don’t want to be out of control of their own lives. It reminds them of being frail. They set up a society based on everyone being accepted. Then they must control everyone else so that the lie is not seen through. This leads to them needing total control of both the individual and the state. Communism wasn’t an accident, it’s what liberals really want.

      1. John Parker says:

        I would respectfully disagree. Liberal society is about individualism and self-gratification without regard to or concern for the well-being of the organic culture. Control is the effect and inevitable consequence of this value and idea.

        1. I think we’re talking about two ends of the same thing. They want individualism and self-gratification to feel they are in control. In order to have that control, they need to band together into a hive/herd. This hive/herd will defend the unrealistic proposition that individual preference is reality more than reality itself, whether the collective, the organic culture, or simply “the whole.” As you mention, they want themselves first regardless of consequences, but their goal in doing this is to be free of any external imposition through the means of control.

          1. John Parker says:

            We are in agreement, thank you for expounding on your original comment. That was well said.

  2. Jay Lars says:

    Liberalism is like Versace, Coach, and Lady Ga Ga…It is fashion, and with all things fashionable, it timorously waits to become irrelevant. When? When they stop placing multiple bumper stickers on their automobiles. :)

    1. RiverC says:

      If anything, our Birth-Certificate-In-Chief will help accelerate this process. But it’s a bit like chemotherapy. Kyrie eleison.

    2. That was what Tom Wolfe said: liberalism is essentially a fashion. If we survive it, we’ll be practical again.

    3. Liberalism is about control by the individual. They do not want to accept any idea they do not want. For this reason they like surface ideas, like trends and fads, so they are never threatened by real ideas. Even our intellectuals are not attempting any really challenging thoughts. It is all pre-digested and “safe” so that it is under control.

  3. Robert Marchenoir says:

    Do you make a difference between liberalism and the left, and if yes, what is it ?

    1. The differences between anarchism, liberalism, leftism, socialism and communism are a question of degree, and time since infection.

      The idea starts with classical liberalism, which quickly questions itself and becomes mainstream liberalism, then becomes virulent as it dogmatizes and becomes leftism, which then runs through socialism to outright communism as it attempts idealized notions and when they fail, compensates with more dogma, gradually becoming more extreme.

      In a nutshell, all non-conservative movements are the same, separated only by a matter of degree.

  4. B1-66ER says:

    The answer to statism is not, more statism.

    1. Is statism really the problem? Even without a state, the people we have now would be self-deceived and selfish.

      1. B1-66ER says:

        I agree, most of the herd is vein and superficial but statism is the problem. Coercion, obvious or not, has left indelible scars upon the psyche of the masses. Pity isn’t exactly a commendable trait, but I cannot blame the enslaved for there enslavers’ misdeeds.

  5. Robert Cheeks says:

    Brett (gentlemen), I would like to read your thoughts on the best form of government? ..and why?

    1. Jay Lars says:

      Simple answer; Libertarian

      Why? Limited in power (absence of {the most} coercion) and fixed in posture*

      * doing what is necessary (“the way the wind blows”) to get re-elected.

      Like I said; simple answer.

Leave a Reply

37 queries. 0.484 seconds