Posts Tagged ‘proles’

Explaining The Passive-Aggressive Nature of the Modern Era

Monday, August 21st, 2017

Human behavior occurs in layers because different levels of intellect penetrate more deeply into our motivations. For most people, the world is a two-dimensional surface filled with brightly colored squares for categories, and they manipulate these around like a puzzle game until they all fit.

This outlook is incomprehensible to anyone a layer above that, who sees instead a schematic, where one thing leads to another like a Rube Goldberg machine, and so certain things are linked together like smoke and fire, but they are uncertain as to whether these things can exist from another cause, or whether the link between them is always absolute or at full force.

At the top, there are very few who find themselves look at a three-dimensional machine which has both degree and time. The links between its parts are not like light switches, but more like volume knobs, and things change over time, either becoming more complex or simpler. There are no ironclad links, only particular situations and these must be viewed on a case-by-case basis.

This means that what is true to one group is nonsense to another, in both directions. The problem with this is that the more complex and therefore more accurate, sensitive and realistic views of the top are gibberish and insanity to those below; the Dunning-Kruger effect essentially states that you can only understand what you have the circuits to process, and anything more complex is mysticism.

For that reason, most people look at political allegiances, those in the middle look at economic motivations, and those at the top look at psychological outlooks and inner needs, such as recognition, when analyzing the behavior of their fellow humans.

I ask you to take a top-down look, as if you were in that higher group, and maybe you are, as we inspect the nature of modernity. Modernity is both a span of years, a philosophy and a time co-existing with certain factors brought on by technology. But the real core of it appears to be in that change in philosophy from previous eras, and its correlation with decline of civilization.

Historically, modernity began at about the time when the middle class — those above unskilled labor, but beneath aristocracy — began to become prosperous from their shops, trades, factories and farms, and started to challenge the aristocratic classes. They eventually allied with the peasants, who had in previous centuries staged unsuccessful revolts, and implemented equality and democracy so that middle class power could grow.

This means that we live in a time of middle class values and attitudes. The middle class cannot be separated from its mercantile roots, that is, in “making money” through buying, selling, trading and speculating, as opposed to origins in leadership or intellect. These roots lead the middle class to inherently defensive values.

Defensive values are those which have no direction except to avoid certain fears; to have a defensive belief, one must assume that the world never changes, or that it is irrelevant. To the middle class, everything is about buying and selling. They do not think about how to produce the conditions where such buying and selling are protected by a stable civilization.

Instead, they have shopkeeper’s values: do nothing that could cause anyone to have a potential grievance against you. This is another way of saying “the customer is always right,” which means that you adopt no opinion other than whatever is commonly accepted, because to do so is to endanger your business. That leaves you with a values system based in representing your own personal business interests only.

If you wonder why communism is the flip side of the coin of capitalism, or why socialism makes billionaires, it is for this reason. Our entire society is being conducted as if it were a shopping mall or bazaar. The only value system is in saying what makes the customer feel happy, and in doing nothing that will offend that customer.

For a shopkeeper, equality is inherent. Anyone with coin is welcome and whatever their dysfunction or merits, are equally desired as customers. You never turn down money, and dealing with someone who is crazy takes about the same amount of time as dealing with someone who is sane. Further, since your customers are other middle class people, they are looking for the lowest prices possible, so reducing quality to make a product more accessible is inevitable, which leads to a customer base which is as much in the working classes and unskilled labor group — proles — as the middle class. For that reason, no standard can be too low, but standards can easily be too high, which might offend someone. Modernity is a “race to the bottom” in order to expand the customer pool.

This defensive outlook means that no one can do anything except through a posture as a victim, because that way, they are the one offended instead of the one offending. This arises from egalitarianism itself, but that in turn has a prototype in the equality of customers. All are welcome, except those who disagree that all are welcome, because that would infringe upon profits.

Business is afraid of offending someone, not violating community standards, which are so broad that there is not an individual victim if they are violated, and for that reason, can be violated because in practical terms, no customers are lost. The only way around this is if customers form a group to boycott, because then they are being victimized by denial of that group. Business will bow to that, but what if groups conflict? Whoever has more victim status wins, because the herd will be offended by the greatest victimization, and not by victimizing someone who is less of an Official Victim.

The middle class are those who take civilization for granted because their only concern is their own success within it. This is the nature of individualism when translated into economic form, much as the peasant revolt is a form of hubris or individualism by those who attempt to rise above their station in life, and are inept at making the decisions associated with that higher station.

Modern society fits into a passive role because it is not concerned with forward action to achieve goals, but instead is backward-looking toward assumptions of stability, and defensive in that it aims to avoid taking a stand other than going along with the herd. This is why civilizations die, each person imitating all others, and no one with eyes on the road ahead.

Modernity As Swarm Production

Saturday, March 18th, 2017

The chicken-and-egg question of civilization decline dogs us repeatedly. Which came first, democracy or breakdown? The answer may be shocking: the tendency of humans toward individualism, manifested in both bourgeois oblivion and prole present-tense me-firsting, overcomes societies once they succeed.

From Naked Lunch by William S. Burroughs:

The Divisionists occupy a mid-way position, could in fact be termed moderates…. They are called Divisionists because they literally divide. They cut off tiny bits of their flesh and grow exact replicas of themselves in embryo jelly. It seems probable, unless the process of division is halted, that eventually there will be only one replica of one sex on the planet: that is one person in the world with millions of separate bodies…. Are these bodies actually independent, and could they in time develop varied characteristics? I doubt it. Replicas must periodically recharge with the Mother Cell. This is an article of faith with the Divisionists, who live in fear of a replica revolution…. Some Divisionists think that the process can be halted short of the eventual monopoly of one replica. They say: “Just let me plant a few more replicas all over so I won’t be lonely when I travel…. And we must strictly control the division of Undesirables….” Every replica but your own is eventually an “Undesirable.” Of course if someone starts inundating an area with Identical Replicas, everyone knows what is going on. The other citizens are subject to declare a “Schluppit” (wholesale massacre of all identifiable replicas). To avoid extermination of their replicas, citizens dye, distort, and alter them with face and body molds. Only the most abandoned and shameless characters venture to manufacture I.R.s — Identical Replicas. (81)

The more important question with this in mind is how to resist it. So far the best resistance has come from aristocracy, but aristocrats tend to sacrifice themselves in battle, lessening the ratio of intelligent leaders to unpunished herd. And worse, when the intelligent are made into babysitters, they tend to self-destruct.

Compounding this is the tendency for human beings, even intelligent ones, to create a false social reality in which human intentions and feelings matter more than reality. Socializing reprograms our brains to defer to other people, not reality. On top of that, symbolic reality is more powerful to us, including the approval of others, because it creates a stronger signal in our brains.

If any human society survives in the future, it will do so through a dogmatic elitism and strict attention to morality of thriving in all areas. Ugliness will be banished, and the one-fifth of every generation that are born neurotic, resentful and oblivious will be dispatched to other lands. This seems harsh, but like nature, its harshness will result in better outcomes.

For those who imagine golden fields surrounded by happy people, this may be the price necessary to pay. Good to the good, and bad to the bad, in all things with an eye toward biology, namely that allowing the bad to persist endangers not just other people, but the shared effort toward which we give our lives in cooperation that takes up our irreplaceable time.

Fred Nietzsche is probably right in that currently, humanity is in the saddle between ape and greatness, and what holds us back is our fear for ourselves that has us resisting commitment to greater things than our own desires. And yet as the last century has shown us, a society dedicated to human desires becomes ugly and corrupting for all.

Waste Of Time

Friday, January 6th, 2017

The struggle of our time has become clear: realists, who want civilization, stand against ideologues, who want to rationalize the decline by directing our attention with the false metric of “progress,” which is essentially virtue signaling for social status.

Realists face a series of tough realizations. The first is how much recent politics was bungled; after that, the time scale and scope expands. Soon it becomes clear that our society has been afflicted with deep rot for many centuries.

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of all this is realizing that the decay runs deeper than politics. It has infested all aspects of life, including the “lifestyle” and daily experience of people, leading to existential misery. Worst of all of these realizations is the knowledge that modern society is a giant waste of time.

Most of what we do is completely unnecessary except that it allows individuals to claim they are important. Most products fail, but their launches allow ambitious little sociopaths to claim they are wizards, at least for long enough to get hired somewhere else. Most tasks at jobs are there to demonstrate the importance of the manager. Most red tape events involve bureaucrats asserting their power over you. Most social events are jockeying for positions in a hierarchy, and art, culture, literature and even friendship get used as means to that end.

In short, competition has created an infinite demand for ways to compete. As has been observed many times, every thing creates more of itself, and so when we make competition in specific areas part of our society, that takes over everything else. That we do it with money makes it mandatory that everyone join in and waste their time.

The average job could be done in a few hours a week, if we subtract out the activities done to demonstrate the importance of managers and employees, the red tape which solves no problems but creates work for everyone, the waiting around for people who are merely posing at being busy elsewhere, the pro forma meetings and emails. Jobs are mental spam for the most part, and they obscure the tasks which actually need doing.

Add to that the other great waste-of-time activities in modernity: returning the constant defective products, researching products to see which of the options are not corner cutting scams designed to get some idiot promoted to management somewhere, spending days or weeks filing paperwork which no one will see, arguing with self-important customer service representatives and waiting in line — endlessly — while someone in front struggles with understanding the simple nuances of the obvious solution to their avoidable problem.

Modern society is a trap. It will kill us off the same way every advanced civilization dies: it tolerates the stupid, who then gang up on the rest, take over and make a society designed for idiots. This exhausts the intelligent, who promptly die out, leaving the stupid in charge for a glorious generation or two before their corruption accrues and society plunges (slowly) into third-world status.

The intelligent are forced into a role by civilization that they feel obligates them to the rest. What this means in reality is that the smarter parts of our civilization are forced to babysit the rest. That group, essentially reckless proles hungry for power and wealth, is the most destructive force in any society, like a stomach that thinks it is a brain.

This exhausts the intelligent, and makes it easier for the proles to take over.

While this happens, those of mental ability are forced to either (1) stand against the ongoing decay and become marginalized, dying childless in small cabins in the woods or (2) rationalize the decline as good, make the right virtue signals and “succeed” despite it wasting all of their time and energy in the process of babysitting the insane and stupid herd.

Rationalization of a clearly sick and moribund society makes them crazy, and from these tormented souls we get our intellectuals and social elites. They tend to be corrupt because their minds are scrambled by having to accept the destruction of their civilization as a good thing, and to assuage their guilt, they tend to endorse ideas like “progress” and Utopia in order to avoid talking about the actual problem, the collapse of civilization, because it is hard to solve where Utopian plans are trivially easy.

The dying civilization of the West has tormented its intelligent people and driven them insane as they try to adapt to a world created for the crass tastes of the herd. They were aliens in their own society long before diversity, and now they are simply ghosts wandering among the others, with everyone waiting for them to die out so the prole party can kick into high gear.

As we come to grips with how utterly insane and corrupt our leaders have been for the past eight years, it is time to reflect on the fact that these acts did not occur in isolation. We The People voted for these idiots; we are the bigger idiots. But who is “we”? Our society has been hijacked by a mob which wants to destroy civilization and replace it with an endless carnival.

Until we start talking about that problem, we are merely putting band-aids on a sucking chest wound. Our civilization is dying. It has been dying for a long time, and its death will be a slow descend into third world chaos, crime, and corruption. The only way to fix it is to take power away from the proles, and restore it to the responsible people, which recent elections have indicated is a popular (enough) idea.

How To Create Toxic Elites

Saturday, December 31st, 2016

Our elites are toxic, and our proles made it so.

The dominant story throughout human history is that people specialize in illusions, and when they get together in groups, they create an echo chamber which reinforces those illusions, and then they force those on others.

Then “intellectuals” get famous for inventing alternate stories about how it was not human group stupidity arising from our individual selfishness that did us in, but something else… something external to whatever group we perceive ourselves as part of.

Hence the mania, these days, to blame any group of elites: the Left blames the Rich™ and the Whites,™ and the Right blames the Globalist Elites.™ (And everyone seems to blame The Jews,™ which is causing many Jews to identify as right-wing in order to point out that Jewish Leftists are just as crazy as regular Leftists, but non-Leftist Jews are not part of that craziness and wish to avoid mass graves in the coming physical removal of Leftists — smart of them).

This is how intellectuals distract: they invent a positive story about our shiny future, identify a scapegoat that threatens it, and then push us toward an ineffectual but emotionally satisfying method of achieving that future, usually some variant on the universal sensations that make a room buzz: we are all one, peace on earth, love/accept/tolerate everyone, we are all equal, trust Jesus, etc.

All of those solutions amount to exactly the same thing: accept everyone, ignore goals, and do nothing. This is why they are popular: they are social tokens that signal happiness and success, but require absolutely nothing from the people involved except making the right noises and participating in a few symbolic activities.

In fact, the universal path to human social success is the same as the path to civilization doom: conjure up social pacifism by telling everyone that they are OK, and distracting from the real problem to focus on appearance, so that no one has to change themselves to adapt to reality, making them feel like they have finally escaped from the burden of Darwinism and common sense.

Once you get equality in place, however, you can no longer recognize that some people are born to rule by the fact that they have greater ability in this area. Your best neurosurgeon, computer programmer or car mechanic does not necessarily make a good leader, just like the guy sweeping the floor at the coffee shop probably makes a bad neurosurgeon (and most likely is already a bad programmer).

The reason you recognize right to rule by birth is that it keeps people from having to clobber each other to get ahead, and also, gives everyone who is comfortable with a reg’lar job a chance to succeed unless they are outrageously incompetent. When each person starts at zero, we will all be ranked by how far we get, and so life will become constant struggle to “get ahead” which involves holding others back.

Our modern time exploded into stupidity, cruelty and avarice when we abandoned the caste system. It seemed unfair to the proles, you see, and they are always their own worst enemy because what they choose inevitably empowers those who are cruel at the expense of those who are not. If you feel you are living on planet nitwit and most of your species are idiots, this is the reason why: the herd makes bad decisions.

If you want to know why so many psychotic laws and decisions were made, look to this competition. It enforces xenophilia, for example, because if you get ahead and want others not to, the best way to keep them down is to destroy them with cheap imported labor. With competition, no one can enjoy what they already have; every other person in society is most likely trying to seize it away from them. That is why people act to smash down the others while trying to climb up themselves.

Blame can be cast ultimately at the feet of poorer Caucasians in the cities. Our media likes to blame rural poor Caucasians, which as you know if you have been paying attention so far, is a scapegoat/distraction pair. They are doing this because they want to excuse the poor whites in cities who for years eagerly approved of big government, unions, diversity and other parasitic programs out of a desire to screw the rich. It backfired, because this just gave those in power a way to raise costs on the urban white poor and therefore, deactivate them as any kind of political force — they are too busy working and being driven neurotic by the insanity of the city to do anything. Proles self-defeat again.

Toxic elites spring up in these kinds of situations. They are chosen by nitwits through democracy, which means that appearance is more important than reality and whatever happens after the vote is forgotten; they must keep their position, so they give to the thronging masses what that herd demands, which turns out to be exactly what will destroy it. And so, with everyone miserable, the toxic elites have both lots of problems to claim to solve, and many methods of keeping the round-headed in their place.

A sensible society ends this competition caused by equality, and instead segregates its natural elites and gets them out of the job market by giving them wealth and power. At that point, they have nothing to prove, but are put into a role from which they cannot escape in exchange, and so become the smarter people who organize their local societies, to the benefit of all.

The Magna Carta (lives in infamy and soon will perish)

Tuesday, June 16th, 2015


This week most of the West celebrates the 800th birthday of the Magna Carta. No sane person would see this as a positive situation, because that document ushered in one of the foulest human creations: the determination of leadership through the relationship between financial interests and the masses. Previously money and power had been separated by removing its acquisition as a motivating factor, leaving wealth in the hands of aristocrats who did a much better job of minimizing its harms than the mercantilists to follow.

When the barons of England demanded rights which were universal and beyond the power of the kings, they created an alternate power structure which catered to commercial interests but, because those in turn relied on customers of the mass consumer variety, would quickly become a situation in which every plausible citizen no matter how uninvolved in keeping society afloat would have a vote. This created a channel to work around the question of leadership itself and replace it with a surrogate, namely utilitarianism, or what people think they want when asked in large groups with little in common.

The Magna Carta did more than just hijack power from the kings. It also changed the focus of power from the question of what should be done to create, develop and nurture civilization to the question of the individual, e.g. “What do I want right now?” Since the organizational principle of society has always been and always will be the trade-off of individual wants for what is necessary to do so that all may thrive, this short-circuits the impulse toward civilization itself and replaces it with a predatory self-interest motive, which in turn influences how people vote.

The new focus ignored civilization itself, which it took for granted, and focused on how citizens could maximize their own returns at the expense of that civilization. Although at first described as a method of allowing an equal voice for commercial interests, the new regime rapidly became a way for commercial interests to take over civilization itself. The entire question of leadership shifted from a shared goal of improving the nation and its habits, technology and values, to individual desires and individual profits. Each person became a contrary voice working against civilization itself, because now the two goals were at odds and reduced to a bargaining situation.

Once a society changes its focus from leadership to utilitarianism, or what the largest plurality of people think they want at a given time if phrased in A-or-B styled questions, it loses the ability to discuss improvement and maintenance of civilization itself because that goal contradicts what citizens will inevitably demand, which is more benefits to themselves. Self-interest, when not tied to a sense of communal dependency on common institutions and spaces, becomes as parasitic as crime but hides itself behind politeness, formality and politics.

This in turn corrupts the nature of the word “should,” as in, “What should we do about this?” Previously, the term should contained a notion of working toward an end, as in what should we do to preserve and develop our civilization. When the focus turned to the individual, “should” took on an air of universality, based on the lowest common denominator that all citizens have between each other, which is self-interest in the short-term and oblivious to the bigger picture of the long-term, consequences of actions and civilization itself. This removes any kind of cause-effect thinking where citizens are aware of what effects their actions have in the future, because the future is not even considered. Only demands now, and not how to achieve those demands.

As a result, civilizations which go down this path rapidly head toward becoming subsidy states where, instead of demanding performance before reward, the State rewards citizens simply for being alive and hopes to extract performance from them with a public ideology and the ability to shame them for non-compliance. As found out in the Soviet Union, Venezuela, Cuba and many other places, this process does not lead to better results but to impoverishment of the nation and its domination by ideological fanatics with a tenuous grasp of reality. This is the long-term effect of removing focus on leadership and turning instead toward what pleases the citizens in the short term; of course they will eventually want free money, and very few of them understand or care what is required to produce it.

The ugly truth of humanity is that in large groups we revert to our simian state. We follow what seems to be the group opinion because we have delegated authority to the group on the assumption that individuals do not inherit the consequences of group decision. This is why a mob will attack viciously until its own members start paying the price, at which point its inherent cowardice takes over and the mob fragments. Creating a collective government of the nature that democracy demands produces a permanent version of this mob and, in order to preserve itself, it makes its perennial order of business the process of eliminating those who might make any single member face any consequences for his actions: the elimination of ideological enemies.

It is not surprising thus that, after achieving their own version of the rights provided by the Magna Carta, every civilization which experimented with this path followed a similar series of internal collapses that presaged the lapsing into irrelevance of the larger society. First there is a pleasant anarchy; then, a sense of obligation to subsidize others; finally, a mad and accelerating impulse to destroy all who have more than the average or who resist the dogma indoctrination. Societies go from celebrating freedom to a pathological desire to extinguish it within a handful of centuries.

Long before these results became visible, the Magna Carta started the West down this path to doom. Its ultimate effect would become a severing of action from responsibility, but the financial interests which motivated its adoption did not see it at the time. All they wanted was to enable themselves to have greater profit without performing the acts of leadership, as a king does, that consider the long-term effects of ever action on the health of the society as a social ecosystem, its citizens, their genetics and their long-term future. The kings were portrayed as bad evil no-fun guys, but perhaps they were simply more intelligent and saw what the financial types did not, which was that this path led to short-term rewards and long-term losses.

99% of human activity centers on distracting from the actual issues in life, such as the health of a civilization or the need for the individual to discipline themselves and find purpose. These are grim truths to life, like that one must eat one’s vegetables before pudding. These actual issues do not “exist” because they are based on consequences in the future, and every con man tries to create a mental wall between action (cause) and consequences (effect) by promising that during the time between the act and the result, so many good things will happen that the price seems inconsequential. Every time they fail to mention the many opportunity costs — what options were lost by picking one over the rest — and secondary effects of the act.

For that feel-good warm and damp modern sensation of uplifting symbols and religious faith in the safety from consequences provided by being in a crowd, the Magna Carta delivers a whopping blast of good times like those cocktails with the little umbrellas in them. Eventually however morning arrives, and in addition to the hangover, before us lies the wreckage of what we did when too drunk to consider the consequences of our actions. Such is the 800th birthday of the Magna Carta, and those who realize this see clearly the case for its repeal.

The empire of the proles

Tuesday, January 21st, 2014


The promise was made way back during the Enlightenment. It said that what was holding humanity back was a focus on hierarchy, like that of gods or nature, and that if we put the focus on human individuals, we would live in an “enlightened” era.

Only a few centuries later — that’s like a blink in the lifespan of a civilization — we can see the results of our choice. Since getting rid of hierarchy involves a grand leveling of all of civilization to its lowest common level, we might call this the empire of the proles, because that’s what it resembles.

For proof of that, we need to look only at our art, architecture, public discourse and standards of behavior. Our art is now either fetishistic “elite” nonsense, or super-simplified simian entertainment. Architecture has become boxes and ugly internal supports exposed. Public discourse is now at the level of Idiocracy, with logical errors in public statements frequent and never noticed. And standards of behavior conform more to what our grandparents would have expected at an amusement park than an “enlightened” society.

Even more, for all of our great prole empire, we have backed off of what made us strong and innovative and are running in circles, regurgitating and reformatting the same tired ideas as if trying to convince ourselves they can work:

For example, when I first got a permanent job as a university lecturer, I recognized that I had one of the most secure positions in one of the most secure societies in history – and that this meant I had could embark on long term projects in scholarship, writing and research and scholarship ; that my secure position made it easy stand aside from trends; that I could be a model of teaching and scientific integrity and it was virtually impossible for my employer to sack me for it!

But in general colleagues refused to acknowledge the basic privilege and security of their position, and persisted in talking as if they could be thrown out into destitution and starvation at any moment – and therefore they had to go-along-with whatever fashion, trend and politically-driven lunacies and lies were floating around the university – and work at terribly unambitious scholarly and research projects that were neither useful nor radical – but merely aspired to be microscopic incremental increases in what were already trivial and irrelevant backwaters of tedium.

With technology, as with Enlightenment, we were supposed to enter a new era. The idea was that with labor-saving devices, we would do the same work in a quarter the time, and all work three-hour days and then go home.

Except that now, we’re working more than ever. It’s as if WWII never ended and we’re still all contributing to the war effort. Since most labor is not measured in quality, but in quantity, it becomes a question of who can spend the most hours in the office.

Even more, through the mechanism of social climbing, our society has convinced proles that by spending a lot of time on something they can rise, even if their judgment is terrible and the quality of their product as a result is poor.

We can even see this in our leaders, who bear strings of degrees and accolades yet frequently fumble and bungle basic concepts and miss points well established in history. Are they idiots? No, they’re proles, which means their judgment and discipline are horrible no matter how educated they are or how many hoops they jump through.

The best part is that the slaves are willing. We have freedom; what is freedom? Freedom to attend a job every day except on the weekends and two weeks of holiday, at which job you must spend most of your time waiting on other peoples’ personal drama, pretense, ineptitude and laziness. Most work is cleaning up messes made by thoughtless idiots and then charging them for the service. But lose your job and you may find yourself homeless and victimized.

We tell each other that we are free, but what we really are is dependent on each other. That in turn requires that mythos that each person is necessary and special. That in turn causes a crisis where we think backward, arguing from the person rather than toward a goal. If someone wants it, it must be important, our thinking runs, in contrast to a reality-based forward thought process which would first determine if “it” is worth having or feasible. Our civilization has become circular, chasing objectives because some want them and therefore they are profitable, but never choosing a path and working toward that end.

Even more, we have convinced ourselves that emulating success is success. Thus everyone seems excited to go off to these jobs, in exchange for buying power, and to then demand a role that makes them look important, a desk where they can do easy work like paperwork, and other people to interact with to make them feel as if they’re actually vital to something important. And the end result of all this is? A lifestyle as unhealthy as it is fake:

Doctors are urging the millions of people who work at a desk all day to stand up or walk around the office.

As CBS 2′s Dr. Max Gomez reported, our couch-potato lifestyle is killing us at about the same rate as smoking.

And it’s not just sitting around at home; it’s also our sit-for-hours workdays that are part of an unhealthy sedentary lifestyle.

Welcome to the empire of the proles. They deposed those who had actual judgment skills, and in their place implemented the mob. Now like simians run amok, the mob dresses in motley and goes through compulsive motions to appear as if it is equal to the greater minds who went before it. And the results are predictably bad.

Serf’s Up!

Sunday, March 26th, 2006


We like to think well of ourselves, in this modern time, and we like to feel smart — even though the smart people among us are a minority we hound to death for being “different” and daring to think both realistically and creatively. We like to congratulate ourselves on our society much like we would the purchase of a new boat, or car, or house, or the completion of a successful marriage or business merger. We like to look back at history and exclaim, “The horror! The horror!” while smirkingly congratulating ourselves on what we have.

After all, we’re free… no longer are we owned by the king, or the lord of the manor, but we can go anywhere we want and do whatever we desire — if we can afford it, of course. We have the right to move freely, to marry freely, to escape all boundaries of class and accident of birth, except, of course, the need to earn a living. And that is a bit of a rub. While we don’t have a lord of the manor, we do have landlords, or banks to whom we pay quite a lot for housing. And then we go to a grocery store and — well, you don’t want to not buy organic; you might as well smoke a pack of cigarettes a day. And if you send your kids to public school, they might end up stupid. Don’t want to live near a ghetto? Well, now we’re talking yuppie-class housing. Add up the organic food, the security system, the computers and other tools of success, the private schools, the better-than-average car, and of course the house in the suburbs or safe city neighborhood, and wow, you’re talking quite a bundle.

If you’re lucky, you can work from age 22-70 at some job and earn enough money that your family can live like yuppie kings on their own manse, and avoid becoming dropouts, gangsters, illiterates, drug addicts, or crime victim statistics. You’ll be doing okay, of course, until competition comes along; then it’s no longer enough to work eight hours a day and commute one. And of course there’s no limit to competition, because everyone wants the same thing: your yuppie lifestyle. So soon you’re working those sixteen-hour days, knowing that your wife’s diddling the pool guy and your kid’s into pot because you’re not home to anchor a family. At least you don’t live in the ghetto, because if you come from a good zip code, the courts will cut him a break on his first offense.

When you get done with it all, at age 70, you’ll have sent both your kids to college and paid for your wife’s venereal health and psychotherapy, because the poor thing’s bored out of her mind and keeps wondering if she shouldn’t be doing more with her life than yoga, kid-care and the pool putz. Enjoy your freedom. You can take one vacation a year, up to two weeks, anywhere that you can afford — and really, you’re the only one limiting yourself here by noticing that a $10,000 vacation leaves the curve of your kid’s college funding accrual a bit flat. So you drive to the grand canyon, or go to Hawaii, or some thing; enjoy your freedom. Back to work on Monday.

You can now mix races if you so desire, and there are no social classes, so you can marry anyone. You have sexual freedom so you don’t have to marry (although many did not marry in traditional societies, we like to pretend that everyone was hetero Christian and normal or they got speared immediately) and you can have as many partners as you want. When that gets boring, as it inevitably does, you can find a wife who’s as bored as you and you can both try not to scream out the wrong name during intercourse, wondering in the back pocket of your mind what exactly is different between people in this grunting, cycling motion. You can live as weirdly as you want, but if any complaints sneak back to the workplace… well, they don’t fire you for being different, but if the competition isn’t? You come up short. And are replaced.

Good thing we got rid of that medieval stupidity. Lord of the Manse, hah! The only people you owe money to now are the banks for your house, the credit cards you must use to stay competitive, the insurance companies and of course your retirement fund. When you get past 70, you’ll start living off that, so we hope that you didn’t spend too much on your yuppie lifestyle, because you’re going to have to save up investments which will produce $30,000-50,000 a year to pay for retirement homes. You wouldn’t want to be without medical care, or a place to go. Those people end up worse than homeless, or doing granny porn.

It’s amazing how hard people work. All of them want the same thing, but only a few percentage points of the population get a chance to have a life this nice; most people try to get rich, and do not succeed. It’s not always something they could have done something about either, as timing and market forces play a lot into it, as anyone who invested in Netscape in 1998 can tell you. You’re going to have to work harder in the future too, because to make all these new impoverished people and millionaires, we’ve had to expand humanity and now the air and water and even ground are poisoned. So in addition to buying your way out of the ghetto, you need to buy your way into a filter-sealed environment where the outside poisons cannot get you.

True, it is a never-ending cycle, this feedback loop that has us always needing more profit and thus causing more problems we try to avoid. There is no end, and there’s no mercy for those poor dumbshits who couldn’t get this far. Be glad you’re ahead — or are you? Scan those stock reports, job emails, and phone messages now (pay for the pool guy’s venereal test, while you’re at it). Is it any wonder that most of your friends get to bed with three glasses of wine, a sleeping pill, and some mantra that suggests they’ll never die? What are you throwing your life away for? All you do is work and then attend supervised, pre-ordained, purchased entertainment activities like movies, bars, rodeos, yoga classes. You barely know your wife or kids.

Fact is, modern man, you were so clever — you saw what the lord of the manse had, and you desired it, like Cain viewing Abel naked in the shower, resplendent in a natural glory you are in your Gollum-like ugliness not given, resplendent in a natural intelligence that in your Goliath-like stolidity you are not given — cheated! — like Esau viewing Jacob the future inheritor, like a dark-haired girl looking longingly on a blonde until longing turns to hate. You saw what those gifted by nature had and you determined you’d take it. You gathered all you knew and said, now we rule — and you did. You overthrew the Lord of the Manse, you married and impregnated his granddaughters, and now everything’s equal. Yet there’s a new Lord of the Manse and it’s not one person, but millions, hiding behind your credit cards and your house payments, parasitically wanting exactly what you do which is more money all of the time, and thus we all prey on each other, parasitic brothers locked in arms as we descend the whirlpool of our feedback loop rotting society for our profit — but surely it was worth it, because you’re free?

You’re not a serf anymore, or are you? Oh, you outsmarted yourself, and ruined the whole game in the process. Good work. Next time life gets you down, remember that you’ve not only prolonged your servitude but made it bitter and turned every person against all others for — for what? For gold? Oh, there’s no hope. Enjoy what you’ve made. Maybe even embrace depression and low self-esteem, and think about hating your own life and subjecting yourself to the most mindless tasks you can out of pure anger, even turned inward — like suicide, but parasitic and prolonged. There is no hope; leap into the vortex of darkness. Last one in’s a rotten egg. Serf’s up!

Recommended Reading