Sunday, August 20, 2017

Humans believe what they are told

And nothing else.

From Unqualified Reservations.

"So: who educates the public?
"Our answer is simple: the Jews. (Sorry, Jew-haters. Just kidding.) But seriously, we should note who else took exactly the same line of thinking:
'Just as a man's denominational orientation is the result of his upbringing, and only the religious needs as such slumbers in his soul, the political opinion of the masses represents nothing but the final result of an incredibly tenacious and thorough manipulation of their mind and soul.
'By far the greatest share in their political 'education,' which in this case is mostly designated by the word 'propaganda,' falls to the account of the press. It is foremost in performing this 'work of enlightenment' and thus represents a sort of school for grownups.'
"That would be - yes - Adolf Hitler. So, as you can see, we are on dangerous ground here. We must be careful where we put our feet; there is no other answer. For what it's worth, my feeling is that Herr Hitler is personally responsible for all the world's problems today. Perhaps we'll explore this delicate issue, Nazism, next week.
"One does not have to be a Nazi, however, to believe that popular opinion tends to match public education. In other words, people believe what they are told to believe - sometimes minus a little stubborn deviation, electorally negligible.
"So, to combine Lenin's question with Hitler's answer, we ask: if the People control the State, who controls the People? The teachers. And who controls the teachers? Hm. What an interesting question. We'll have to think about that one.
"But I do hope I haven't activated anyone's crimestop with these terrible, terrible thoughts. Note: we are no longer asking a philosophical question. We are asking an administrative question. The answer is not a matter of logic, but of fact.
"You see, there is another way to classify governments. We can define them in terms of the means that those in power use to prevent those not in power from taking said power away. Since pure democracy is impossible, there are always those on the inside and those on the outside. For example, USG has a permanent civil service which no power in Washington can purge, restructure, or otherwise attack. If that isn't the inside, what is the inside?
"The chief distinction in this category is between sovereigns that hold their positions by the tactics of physical warfare - that is, conventional military and law-enforcement methods, which allow the State to manage the physical actions of its subjects - and those which hold their positions by the tactic of psychological warfare - that is, information management, which allows the State to manage the thoughts of its subjects.
"Of course, all sovereigns require physical security. Therefore, the only question is whether they use psychological security as well. As we'll see, permanent psychological warfare is an essential aspect of the Modern Structure, which is a big part of why I have so much trouble with it.
"If we exclude the possibility of pure democracy, we see instantly that every democracy must be a psychological-warfare state. Most people get their opinions from others. If public opinion commands the power of the State, the power to inform is the power to command the State. Just as you will seldom find a stack of twenties on the sidewalk, this power will not just be waving around in the breeze. Someone will capture it, and hold it until it is torn from their hands.
"Even if you have not been reading UR long and remain a good democrat, it disturbs you to see the resemblance between political communication and commercial advertising. This is because you know the latter consists largely of psychological-warfare tropes (as per Bernays, Lippmann, and the like). Their goal is not to inform you, but to control your behavior. You know this. And yet...
"What is psychological warfare, exactly? What do we know about psychological warfare in modern American history?
 From A gentle introduction to Unqualified Reservations (part 5)


One way to solve this problem is to democratize the universities and have the parents vote for all the teachers. This moves the point of sovereignty away from the Cathedral and places it more in the hands of the bourgeois, who, because they have children, automatically have an investment in the future, and therefore are less likely to behave in an insane manner. Also, because politics must now pander to them, it becomes a war of the middle against the high and low, rather than an alliance of the high and low against the middle.

Another way is to tax campaign contributions and use the money to fund campaign contribution vouchers given to the nations small business owners. This moves the point of sovereignty from the "Swamp" of Washington DC to "Main Street" USA.

Instead of a democracy controlled by mad elites and even madder college professors, you get a democracy controlled by parents and business owners. You get a "middle democracy," or a "volk" democracy.

The academics of this county have driven America insane with ideology and are no longer fit to rule.


  1. How's Moldbug's Technocracy going? Doing great, right? He also failed hard in his economic theories (primarily because they were derived from the Libertarian vein)
    Education and the Educational System are a problem itself, he never considered that and neither you. Have you ever Taylor Gatto? You guys amuse me some times.

    "One way to solve this problem is to democratize the universities and have the parents vote for all the teachers."
    Naive at best. Do I really have to explain myself here? Voting? Democracy? Informed people, not misinformed? People with Agency? Majority rule? 51 tops 49?

    The solution to Academia and the Educational System as a whole is to end Social Studies, only retain hard sciences in the Universities, Medical school and Engineering (but this would make Universities' revenue plunge deep, so will they do that? No, of course. And their ideology, will that make them double down on their shit? Yes, absolutely).
    To the Commons, why even bother with University? Revitalize Guild thinking in the society, make children go to Trade Schools since early age instead of "Normal" ones. Civilisation was built by people who couldn't even read, but that were very skilled in their works, so why bother? If you're bothering, give the solution - that way you'll destroy Unions too, decentralize this function and create a competitive market among Guilds, which is a natural form of monopoly preventing that worked really well in Europe for a thousand years and that when it got destroyed destroyed (Guilds were intentionally outlawed by payed, new democratically elected politicians) allowed monopolies to rise.

    1. "(Guilds were intentionally outlawed by payed, new democratically elected politicians) allowed monopolies to rise."

      Maybe vouchers could have helped with that.

      Do you find democratization threatening? Are you liberal. If yes on both counts it must be a fantastic idea.