Amerika

Americans tend to underestimate North Korea because we see them as impoverished and therefore incompetent, not using wartime conditions to maintain Control:

Reporting from North Korea, as I have, is a reminder that the region remains on a war footing. Troops that I spoke to told me how they embody the “real Korean” spirit and would die for their country.

North Korea’s million strong army — the fourth biggest in the world — is nuclear armed with long range missile capacity that can strike as far as the US or Australia.

Writer and Korea watcher Gavin Jacobson said: “No regime survives for 70 years — isolated and in dire financial straits — without a hardened backbone of logic supporting it.”

President Joe Biden would well know the lessons of history. For the Kim regime, survival is everything even if that survival means an unending state of war.

To be fair to North Korea: in my view, the USA has done the same thing. We still remain at a state of ideological mass motivation that was created during the world wars, and this is used to control us and orient us toward increasing egalitarianism instead of our founding culture.

North Korea has internalized the lessons of Joseph Stalin. If you win, people do not care about the losses; Stalin took a third-rate backwater and made it a superpower, and no one really cares about the tens of millions he killed or the thousands he consigned to death nightly simply for not being dogmatic enough.

(As a side note, Joseph Stalin did not actually smoke my favorite tobacco, Royal Yacht, although he was pictured doing so in a movie from the era. Instead, ever conscious of the optics, he smoked the then-expensive cigarettes of Russia — Herzegovina Flor — in his pipe, disguising his bourgeois tastes by appearing to smoke the briar of the people).

Kim knows that his people are more motivated by ribbons than rice. They enjoy having North Korea be a major player on the world stage, and feel lucky to be part of one of the nations making the news, even if they are eating grass and living with 1300s technology for most of their lives.

Biden knows the same thing. He wants to pitch the American minorities a sense of pride in conquest of those who are naturally above them, then use these minorities as his personal army to take over the world. All tyrants have this vision, and all of them enforce it with gratuitous loss of life.

They fear one thing: separation. Anyone who separates from the crazy Leftist system presents an alternative, and that alternative competes with the Left. What good is an ideology of symbolic equality when there is a normal life just next door?

For this reason, all Leftists are internationalists who aspire to a world federalist government, and all big business ultimately becomes seduced by the vision of selling their product to all of humanity rather than one national group.

Like the mercantile middle classes from which they came, big business executives believe that more customers is always better. They want more warm bodies in the door. If they can lower standards, even better, because those products have higher margins.

Their internationalism exists to prevent such alternative competition. They fear the possibility that someone else might succeed without equality and therefore all the talented people would defect there:

In his continually insightful new book “Australian Bush to Tiananmen Square,” the veteran China watcher Ross Terrill, an associate in research at Harvard’s Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies, quotes Mao Zedong as once explaining to a Thai prime minister how to deal with Communists:

“First, don’t make propaganda war against them; they’re thick-skinned and they won’t feel anything. Second, don’t kill some off ― because they think to be killed in action is heroic. Third, don’t send troops against them in the jungle, because they’ll run away and you can’t keep your troops in the jungle forever … Fourth, see that your own people are fed, clothed and happy; then the Communists can’t do anything.”

In the meantime, Leftists build their societies on the bureaucratic idea that the quality of person does not matter; instruct them in the correct methods, and order them to do this at once, and you get a mighty army of human ants which will tear down your enemies.

True, they will take frightful casualties, but you will pass out bolts of ribbon in medals and lots of praiseful words, and everyone will nod and think to themselves, well, this means more rice and potatoes for me.

The Leftist ideal — exemplified in Genghis Khan — is of an elite of people who “know better” through understanding how to manipulate others. Instead of seeing this manipulation as recognition that bad quality people exist among them and need to be exiled, these tyrants embrace the dysfunction and want to use those bad quality people for “good” ends, namely their own power.

To this end, these tyrants follow a simple mission: destroy everything but the one path to power that they offer through the power structure itself, which means conforming to the ideal set forth by the tyrants. You get rewarded for doing things their way, and punished if you do not.

This manipulation sets up a market, or competition for acting according to the manipulation, and that creates a feedback loop where people positively strive to conform, pushing back reality in the process as they affirm denial of the failure of the system and deny reality, while inducing groupthink via peer pressure:

As I see it as due to a “positive feedback loop”

I blame facebook and twitter.

The internet is a fast way to get info, and info is what moves the mind, and the thing is, the mind likes recognition. When the “likes” were introduced without negative feedback they created a copy-feedback subconscious, they made it so only “positive” opinions be propagated (also accepted), and in it’s way negative opinions to be obsolete.

Now everyone is too cowardly to have an opinion so they copy others they like, they are more likely to follow trends and say what others said, you can also see it with the paranoia of always wanting to listen to experts.

I wrote about this some years ago in the analysis of Crowdism, which basically says that human societies die by social pressure in the absence of a goal and the hierarchy it creates of people who can successfully achieve that goal.

In other words, if the thread goes off-topic or the teacher leaves the room, the inner monkey in humanity comes out and people become individualists devoted to their own social power by manipulating others. Tyrants are the absence of leadership and the start of a police state.

Once that happens, people “adapt” to the police state by emulating it, manipulating others and repeating its symbolic belief system — the Narrative which justifies and rationalizes it as good — in new ways, in order to increase their own social cred, erasing all sanity, wisdom, history, and knowledge along the way.

Crowdism says that tyrants govern by regulating process and procedure, not goals, since methods reflect conformity of action rather than goals, which are invisible to outside observers. You cannot force people to desire the same thing; however, by limiting their methods, you can force them to conform, at which point their minds will focus on the remaining options, and by that method, be controlled.

This shows us the essence of rationalism, or justification-based thinking, in the modern inversion of civilization. Instead of aiming for a goal, we aim to include everyone in a state of uniformity, at which point instead of asking “what is best” we are asking “how do we keep people united.”

Those who advocate for rationalism pretend not to notice this inversion, and believe that by editing the methods of rationalism, they can produce good results, even though like self-help books this tendency leads toward a disordered state of mind.

Consider the optimized rationalism of a new generation of scientific social engineers:

Galef, however, is an amiable ambassador for the movement, adept at distilling its concepts in an accessible and plainspoken manner. The speech of rationalists is heavy on the vernacular, often derived from programming language: “updating your priors” (keeping an open mind), “steel-manning” (arguing with the strongest version of whatever point your opponent is making), “double-cruxing” (trying to get to the root of a disagreement).

In her book, Galef argues for what she calls “scout mindset,” which she contrasts with “soldier mindset.” The idea is that evolution has wired our minds to be soldiers (focused on winning) instead of scouts (focused on ensuring our mental maps accurately reflect the territory of reality). To adopt a scout mindset is to resist falling prey to “motivated reasoning,” in which we distort our thoughts to achieve a desired outcome.

While one finds it hard to argue against the idea that we should update our mental maps to more accurately reflect reality, the weakness of rationalism appears in its deductive tendency: accepting the idea of human equality, and therefore keeping the group together, as the prime goal, what can we deduce from this that we can use to address our problems?

Rationalists aim for Control instead of answers. When they advocate for more rationalism, they are telling us to stop looking at goals and consequences, and to look instead at the methods that we use, implying that goals are connected to those, when really, the elimination of certain possible goals forms the only sure connection.

Conservatives tend to approach Leftists from a bipartisan assumption that both parties are interested in the fate of the nation. However, this makes no sense, since Leftists do not exist in a time span from past through future; they exist between past and now, and view being in control right now as more important than anticipating and avoiding future problems.

In their view, if they are in control, they will make future problems go away through one method or another, but without being in control, they cease to exist. Like North Korea, Leftists worldwide keep their people in a military mindset and sacrifice them willingly to keep up this control.

Tags: control, leftism