Injected Narcissism
Todd Hayen
Along with mRNA coursing through our veins (probably not yours and definitely not mine) there is a good wallop of narcissism. But that didn’t only come with the vaccine; they have been injecting that devil’s honey into our bodies for quite some time.
How? And how does it show up in the world? Well, think about it. It is everywhere. We are now taught to worship our individualism (well, not really, more on that later), our uniqueness (well, not really, more on that later), our specialness (well, not really, more on that later), and our diversity (well, not really, more on that later). Smoke and mirrors it all is—more on that later.
There are so many examples of all of this in our culture it makes the mind spin. And so much of it is just taken for granted—look at the “Woke Culture”…if you could describe all of that in one word, what would that word be?
“Me” Yep, “me”…in fact, “me, me, me, me, me, me.”
And if it isn’t about “me” directly, it is about you looking at me, and you telling me what I want to hear, not what is truthful, but what “me” wants to hear.
Call “me” by the proper pronoun, do not insult me, do not prejudice me, do not criticize me, do not describe what I am unless you describe me the way I wish to be described, do not restrict me, do not oppress me, do not ask me to do anything, do not judge me, do not hurt me, me, me, me.
It is your responsibility to look after me, to nurture me, to feed me, to love me, to validate me, to make me happy, to make me feel good, to give me whatever I want whether I have worked for it or earned it. Me, me, me, me, me, me.
That’s narcissism. But it is a strange brand of narcissism, a new version of it. And we have it in our culture by the boatload.
Did you ever wonder where this idea that “everyone is a winner, and everyone gets a prize” comes from?
I remember when I was a kid, and that was a long time ago, some neighborhood mother suggested to my mother that she should give a little gift to her other two children while celebrating the birthday of the third one. I don’t think she ever did such a thing, at least I don’t remember my jealous crying being calmed with a gift when my sisters got wonderful presents on their birthdays, while I got nothing, but I could be wrong.
Still, you get the point.
This narcissist feeding and prepping started a long time ago. It is probably a by product of the Second World War when the United States, as well as other nations, came home to lick the wounds of physical and psychological rape in Europe and the Pacific.
Long gone was the “let’s toughen them up for a cruel world” parental mantra of previous years. It was replaced with the sappy, “Let’s go easy on them, poor dears.” The 1950’s saw the start of walking the path toward opulence and well being, which was paved with good intentions. The world was still tough, but no need to grind it in.
This process started slowly, but eventually began to pick up speed. We still heard a lot of this: “my kids are going to have a better life than I did,” and what better way to lavish on the “you are so special” conviction than with providing everything that kid could possibly want or need (what do kids need other than love, shelter, food, and maybe a hand carved toy to play with when bored?) The “consume until you die” nature of the culture was certainly happy to oblige.
Soon, all this was cranked up to include not only material justification but emotional validation as well—such as never being on the losing team in sports and other competition. “There is a prize for everyone! No child is forgotten!” Kids never learned the agony of defeat, and consequently learned there is no reward for working hard and actually developing any sort of skill or know-how—or character, God forbid.
Yes, it created a mess.
I won’t go into any detail about other stuff, like the whole gender craze, the demand that everyone in the world kowtow to what the kids want (adults too, of course) with regard to pronouns, the selfie craze, the TikTok “look at me” craze, etc. (Are you aware of the thousands of TikTok videos of young, scantily dressed girls doing evocative solo dances in front of the selfie cam?)
For example, if a person doesn’t acquiesce and start memorizing every sort of craziness in sexual preference, they will then be accused of committing a hate crime. What more entitlement could anyone place on themselves? We see this in racial issues as well, no one seems to be able to look at anyone even sideways without being called a racist, or a white privileged asshole, or worse.
The problem pervades the culture so deeply and so persuasively that it is impossible to not be confronted with it in nearly every situation.
So what happened to relationships where each participant has some obligation and duty to the other? What has happened in families where there used to be tolerance for differences, and flexibilities regarding each member’s needs?
What happened to communities where people all work together for common goals in decency, character development, moralities, and good citizenry? (And I don’t mean common goals such as mask wearing, social distancing, or vaccinations.) It’s all gone, or so it seems.
And is this all in the name of diversity? Individualism? Uniqueness and specialness?
In fact, as much as they tout diversity, there actually is no tolerance for it any more, everyone is “equal”—remember? Individualism has become narcissism and self-absorption, with the requirement that everyone else verifies and defines the individual.
Uniqueness and specialness has been squeezed into a strange form of “treat me like everyone else or you are going to get in trouble.” In a very odd and strange way, the very thing people are claiming they want is the exact opposite of what they demand they get.
No one wants to be seen as unique, they all want to be the winner. No one wants to be an individual; they want to be identified as something with a rigid and dogmatic definition. No one certainly wants to be special because then they might be treated differently, and besides, being unique and special requires hard work, sacrifice, and discipline.
In my very humble opinion, we need to return to a culture where people define themselves, and as long as they are not hatefully labeled as something denigrating and derogatory, others need not define them. We need to learn to love one another as of equal value, but not equal in what makes us unique. We need to allow others among us to excel in certain skills that we admire, and reward them for, and what we may personally be deficient in.
We need to understand the value of hard, decent, work to better ourselves, to better the family we belong to and the tribe we call our own. We need to understand it isn’t always about ourselves, but about others around us as well.
We need to understand that the skills we develop are skills we personally will benefit from as well as benefiting the partner, the family members, and the community to which we belong. What we develop as a human being is a personal accomplishment as well as an accomplishment for the entire human race.
A tall order, eh?
Yeah, I don’t expect anything like this to change all that radically any time soon. And, again, the slow indoctrination into a self-absorbed culture was intentionally implemented primarily through our education system.
Our work must begin in the home and in our communities. It is “bottom up” work, and is essential in bringing back any semblance of normalcy into an impoverished humanity.
Todd Hayen is a registered psychotherapist practicing in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He holds a PhD in depth psychotherapy and an MA in Consciousness Studies. He specializes in Jungian, archetypal, psychology. Todd also writes for his own substack, which you can read here
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
I have the answer!
Follow me!
(Continued)
Also very revealing about children is the conference: “How to kill a child to turn him into a man (or a woman)” , by Agustín García Calvo, where he says things like (automatic translation):
“In what does this consist of learning the Morality or the Law that I present as the fundamental way of putting a boy or a girl to death: well, it consists simply in making them know, and in impressing on them to the core, the conviction that evil is good; at the same time that, for this purpose, they are convinced, they are impressed that good is evil. Without this investment, nothing would work in this world and it would not be possible to proceed to kill a boy or a girl. This is the fundamental condition.”
Spanish only: https://bauldetrompetillas.es/wp-content/uploads/pdf/comosemata.pdf
But you can read from the same author: “Analysis Of Welfare Society, 1993”.
Here in English: https://archive.org/download/garcia-calvo-agustin-analysis-of-welfare-society-1993/GARCIA_CALVO-AGUSTIN-Analysis_of_welfare_society-1993.pdf
Here in Spanish: https://contraelencierro.ascuas.org/asb_1.htm
This change in the treatment of children and young people in relation to the previous form of the Regime (the Regime of the priests) seems to have started of course in the USA (as the new form of the Regime), but already well before the Second World War. Nowadays, it is already successfully implanted in the whole western world (as the rest of the forms of the new Regime). Basically, God has taken the new form of Money. The new theology is Science. This change is only a cunning of the Lord to continue to rule over the people. As before, the central axis of domination is Faith. (This, against the nonsense that is often said that the man of today does not believe in anything: yes, yes. He believes and a lot).
About the spoiled child of the USA, it is very interesting what was already written in 1930 by an insightful traveler: Hermann Keyserling in his book “America set free”. It can be read online in the German version:
Amerika – Der Aufgang einer neuen Welt
Das überschätzte Kind
https://schuledesrades.org/palme/schule/amerika/sdr-q-4-7-69-40)
Mr. Hayen, are you familiar with the work of this guy: https://gaiusbaltar.substack.com/p/what-is-wrong-with-the-western-political ?
He’s written quite a bit on the narcissism – why our “leaders” are selected among those and further cultivated, what are they good for and why is it pushed so blatantly over all of us.
This is follow-up article (the last, for now, in a series of articles) on the topic.
It is injected as well, shown by the parallel rise of childhood jabs and autistic type complaints. Exactly the same situation as the rise in unexplained deaths and a recent medical procedure. Black Bertie Russell anounced the idea in “The Impact of Science on Society” quite succinctly, if a little obliquely, talking obout controlling populations by “injections, injunctions and etc” in a scientific dictatorship.
Narcissism functions as an empty catchall injected into social relations to the advantage of ruling institutions of population control; largely part of the medicalization/pathologization of systemic conditions of exploitation which depoliticizes possibility of organized resistance beyond privatized internalization of conditions by insidious blame-the-victim psychology, or psychobabble.
The abusive, traumatic conditions of capitalist class rule which routinely lay waste to life and well-being may be metaphorically understood in terms borrowed from mental health discourse, not least of all to describe the psychopathy of power.
But these terms, which themselves have no more scientific validity than any other diagnostic superstition (cf. DSM) of this industry’s role in serving power politics, not least of all through the Pharmafia’s eugenicist biologic for billions, provide possibility above all for professionally monopolized management (rule of expertise) over the ‘disorders’ created by class-based society, including further exploitation of divide-and-rule potentials of terms like narcissism when weaponized in horizontal hostility among the oppressed.
Thus do those who don’t march lockstep with convid or any other con serve as convenient targets of weapons of mass distraction like narcissism, deflecting from the supreme narcissism of the “masters (monsters) of mankind” (Adam Smith) as they surpass their past crimes against humanity.
And the powers that (shouldn’t) be hardly are finished in pathologizing populations to such extent as to make misinformation a mental illness subject to such ‘treatment’ as forced incarceration and medication.
Social sciences of engineering like psychology have long been at work converting autonomous human relations in homes and communities into commodities of the medical market forming links in the chain of bureaucratic, technocratic control over people.
If indeed we are in need of healing and recovery from industrial ‘civilization’ in the advance of alienation it inevitably produces, maybe our best bet is revolution striking at the root of the lies disguising our enslavement to mass insanity of class rule, which historically has been known to liberate its practitioners from traditions of dead generations weighing like nightmares upon the brains of the living (Marx).
As for the cultivation of any culture of narcissism (cf. Christopher Lasch), Amerikan imperialism long ago left the me-culture behind for a fuck-you culture of mutual antagonism that makes such a goal a necessity all the more in facing the coordinated anti-human agenda now imposed from above by the fourth industrial revolution.
… and fascism is institutionalized narcissism:
“The core of fascism is the idea that there is some elite, whether ‘Aryan’ or ‘chosen by God,’ or otherwise, who should run things, and that everyone else exists in order to serve that elite. Inevitably, this official elite consists of the people whom the powers-that-be assign as constituting the owners of almost everything that’s valuable. Increasingly, things become those people’s private possession — even what was formerly a public asset becomes now private. Beaches become private. Schools become private. Natural resources become private. It’s not just the art that was stolen by the Nazis and privatized to them and/or shown at museums that they control, which becomes private; it’s whatever the elite want to have, and to control: it’s all now private. That’s the fascist ideal.”
The irony of neoliberalism was that even though it professed to be about “rugged individualism”, it was more about lockstep conformity of the corporate class.
Excerpt from the 1975 film, Rollerball:
“In the Global Corporate controlled world of 2018, the individual free thinking spirit has been almost completely eliminated by the corporate bulldozer. The Caan character is a man where this individual expressive seed still stirs and under increasing psychological pressures from his corporate puppet masters, begins to recognize and resist the depth of control that is exerted on his own individual destiny and illusion of freedom.”
While I quite agree with the author that society-wide parenting factors into the “woke” narcissism of today’s youth, I don’t think it explains the society-wide top-down imposition of of “woke ideology” throughout the West. In other words child rearing and post-modernism in academia may help us understand “woke” at the micro-level – while the macro-level imposition of these ideas throughout Western institutions is a different matter since by and large there are still “adults in the room” in those institutional structures. I would contend that we are clearly being gaslighted by oligarchy, by the big boys, when the Same Song is being sung by all of Academia, all of MSM, all of the big NGO’s, all the Fortune 500 corporations, all Western governments and institutional structures from the military and police down to my local school board and YMCA – AND that Song is completely irrational, illogical, anti-science and anti-democratic. It feels very much like an elite gaslighting project to further the typical elite “divide & conquer” agenda – a sort of “controlled demolition of reality” – one that leaves the population arguing about “what a woman is” while the totalitarian censorship and surveillance noose tightens more and more each week.
Oh yes, yes…if I implied the woke culture was created by parents, I am sorry. Parents are a part of the brainwashed mass…so they of course become minions of the elite, but the “agenda” is clearly the culprit, 100%.
Maybe parents didn’t create the ‘woke’ culture but they certainly dropped the ball regarding the protection of their kids against it. Probably most of them had been too busy with day to day life struggle and didn’t notice the change in everyday culture, which was also accelerated in the last decade. Also some of the parents were already very inclined themselves to narcissism (boomers first so the X generation had a bad start).
“Our work must begin in the home and in our communities.”
My take: our work starts inside ourselves: if our body is the vehicle, who is driving it? For most here it is the mind, for the woke it is the emotions, for others it is the stomach and others their sex organ. All of the above have been proven faulty till date, just look at the world today. The more we drop interest, attachment, desires for the above, the more we can hear our other little voice indicating a yes or no or a sudden subtle change of events too follow. The Soul / psychic being – the inner Internet Of All Things and beings.
Without that driver our car will bump into X. Y, Z for one of the above motives.
Yes, the work of course begins in the self, what covers that up for a developing mind and psyche “begins in the home and community”…the home and community validates the innate “soul” of the child, which as impressionable beings is needed in the process.
Christopher Lasch says among other things that children become narcissists when their parents don’t punish them. Essentially, he says something I always agreed with: nobody gets out of this world alive. And thus, people who grow up punished grow up with symptoms of grief and depression. Witness the Greatest Generation. People who grow up unpunished show symptoms of pathological narcissism, and–especially–borderline personality disorder. BPD people are people who will do anything, anything, to get attention. They will lie, cheat, steal. They will start utterly meaningless and pointless arguments with other people. Anything for the attention. Witness the descendants of the Greatest Generation.
You see–your parents damn you if they do and they damn you if they don’t. There am no silver linings on this bus.
Unpunished ? Unpunished for what –
(deserved) physical punishment ?
How about Narcissism as a defense against emotional wounding ?
Christopher Lasch’s “Culture of Narcissism” was an examination
of society by studying its surface phenomena, akin to studying the
depths of a pond by studying its surface ripples…An interesting
study, but…
I would use the word “consequences” rather than “punishment”…and if parents teach their children consequences for their behaviour, good or “bad”, and they teach those lessons with love in their heart and with no “reactivity” which is an unconscious remnant of their own trauma from their own childhood, then we are good to go.
I think Lasch means spanking. He was allowed to say things like that back then. Unlike now when you’re not allowed to say anything.
And there is more to it. I just didn’t go into it. You should actually read his arguments, which are a long train of connected arguments, not the little snippet I gave. At any rate, he says that the children of the “Dr. Spock” parents could sense that their parents were being hypocritical when they didn’t punish, i.e., spank, them. That they weren’t sincere. That there was something wrong here. That the parents wanted to spank them but were holding back for some mysterious reason. That their parents are phonies, to invoke you-know-who. Creating in their children a feeling of disconnectedness, which isn’t the right word, but it’s the best I can do–a feeling that there is no ground, no basis, no moral center, no essential truth, a feeling that everyone, even your perfect godlike parents, are lying, and everything is a sham, and nothing is genuine. Resulting in borderline behavior. I would submit that “consequences,” whatever that means–going to bed without supper, having possessions taken away, being imprisoned in your room, being denied things you want–probably have exactly the same effect as punishment–symptoms of grief and depression. The argument is that there is no out. No Polyanna of Sunnybrook Farm silver lining. No psychobabble therapeutic industry feelgood I’m OK You’re OK solution. But instead a psychological flaw intrinsic to the human predicament: an absolutely ineluctable choice between depression and narcissism with no third option. Personally, I prefer people with depression, considering the alternative.
i would recommend the book “hunt, gather, parent.” michaeleen doucleff spent time in several communities which still maintained old-time traditiional child-raising philosophies. the parents & other elders never raised their voices at or punished the kids (& rarely praisd them), but involved them completely in the life of the home & surroundings. the kids grew up totally participating in daily life routines (“chores,” etc) with complete accord. thus, no depression or narcissism.
that’s shallow methinks. Hard core narcisso were always going to be that type – rewarded/punished, whatever – they are sick, attention craving, malicious bullies at heart.
as for societal narcisso – learned behaviour indeed – they see it rewarded so follow suit, simples.
Fuck them all.
What irks me most about the woke “me, me, me…” is the victimhood cult. The constant tip-toeing around these fragile souls is so annoying. The demands that the whole of society gives, gives, gives – mandatory absurd changes in infrastructure, language, thought paradigms etc. – is at the expense of a more vital focus on those given no attention at all, those that are scarcely surviving, human and other animals.
If at least the “me, me, me” were an expression of empowered narcissism. We could say, you’re different – well, congrats to that, now get on with your life and stop shoving it in my face!
Something I wrote a long time ago:
Finally, here are two simple questions to think about: first if the capitalist mode of production was just an economic “technique” and didn’t express itself as political power, as a prevailing ideology, how come I can’t opt out of it without risking starvation? I can’t just enclose a public park and live there and grow my food there. I can’t even enclose a remote plot land where nobody lives before being visited by armed uniforms, because every square inch of land on earth is either private or State property; which brings me to the individualist question: the following is a definition of Individualism found on a 1889 pamphlet by Canadian novelist and science writer Grant Allen: “An Individualist is a man or woman who recognises without stint the full, free, and equal right of every citizen to the unimpeded use of all his energies, activities, and faculties, provided only he does not thereby encroach upon the equal and correlative right of every other citizen.” Notice that recognising to others the right of the free exercise of their faculties implies limitations on what I can do in my own exercise since the more I do the less opportunity I leave to others to do likewise; it is the recognition of the social character of an individualist, as contradictory as the terms may appear.
“[H]owever,” he adds, “no such right or principle as this has anywhere reached any general practical acknowledgment. On the contrary, the young citizen finds himself from the outset turned loose upon a world where almost every natural energy, and almost every kind of raw material, has been already appropriated and monopolised beforehand by a small and unhappily compact class of squatters and tabooers. Not one solitary square inch of English soil remains unclaimed on which he can legally lay his head, without paying tax and toll to somebody; in other words, without giving a part of his own labour, or the product of his labour, to one of the squatting and tabooing class, in exchange for their permission (which they can withhold if they choose) merely to go on existing upon the ground which was originally common to all alike, and has been unjustly seized upon (through what particular process matters little) by the ancestors or predecessors of the present monopolists. He cannot sleep without paying rent for the ground he sleeps on. He cannot labour without buying the raw material of his craft, directly or indirectly, from the lords of the soil, the encroachers on the native common rights of everybody. He cannot make anything of wood or stone: for the wood and the stone are already fully appropriated; he cannot eat of the fruits of the earth, for the earth itself, and all that grows upon it, is somebody else’s. The very air, the water [not anymore for this item, I’m afraid], and the sunlight are only his in the public highway: nay more, even there, for a single day alone. His one right, recognised by the law, is the right to walk along that highway till he reels with fatigue – for he must ‘keep moving’ and then he is liable, if he sleeps or faints in the open, to be brought up before the magistrates charged with the heinous crime and misdemeanour of being a vagabond, without visible means of support, who has paid no rent to the lords of the soil for a square yard of room on which to die comfortably.”
People in the past were more clear-headed in their understanding of what Individualism must mean or what freedom implied socially; they didn’t shy from criticising the foundations of the system they lived under, unlike some modern anarchists who don’t want to get messy with the mechanics of Capital but rather see in everyone minding his or her own business the solution to the humanity’s crisis, within Capital. Of course, The so-called “individualists” who managed to own the world, and are admired for that, didn’t leave us, as they should have as individualists, anything to freely exercises our faculties and activities on; by their unrestrained activities, they infringed on the second part of the definition of authentic Individualism. People like Musk, Dorsey, Zuckerberg, etc. are the symbols of clever “individualists” who found ways and acquired means to freely exercise their faculties and for that are much admired. “That’s the law of this world, and you’d better figure out how to get along in this jungle” many self-perceived individualists or crap anarchists will shout. Well, Grant Allen will simply say that there are as many individualists today as living dinosaurs; that is zero.
An authentic individualist or anarchist will never tell you not to shove your problems on his or her face or to get on with your life. A true anarchist or individualist cannot conceive of a freedom that is not social at its foundation. It is indeed absurd to see unfreedom not in one or two individuals but in billions all over the world and still think it is intrinsically a problem with the will, not with the prevailing system of human relations, that is with the particular way of human dwelling, or Capital.
Call yourself what you will, but not an individualist or anarchist.
You: “An Individualist is a man or woman who recognises without stint the full, free, and equal right of every citizen to the unimpeded use of all his energies, activities, and faculties, provided only he does not thereby encroach upon the equal and correlative right of every other citizen.”
Exactly, I agree. That’s why I abhor the censorship of free speech against the mainstream and against the “woke” narratives, and the violence against, the defamation and even incarceration of anyone speaking out about it. I also abhor the oppressors, including the misguided woke communities, encroaching on the lives of the others. Examples include men pretending to be women competing in women’s competitions; men pretending to be women entering primary schools at reading time; classical and other literature being censored and rewritten; the mandated change of the written and spoken word, including nonsensical pronouns, etc.
In actual fact, no-one cares how adults wish to define themselves, whom they love (consentually between other adults), how they live. And that’s exactly what seems to be the problem. They want the attention and want us to agree with them publically.
You: “A true anarchist or individualist cannot conceive of a freedom that is not social at its foundation.”
True, however, that doesn’t mean that interactions are permitted to be forced upon another or even become violent if the other one does not agree.
You: “Call yourself what you will, but not an individualist or anarchist.”
You are contradicting yourself here by disallowing me to call myself whatever I want – a right you are so vehemently wanting to reserve for the woke communities.
Disagreement or agreement is all we can achieve in this or other context; and that’s all I hope for. I’m not trying to disallow you from calling yourself anything. I’m expressing a disagreement with your view about anarchism
Regarding interaction: It has to do with context; if there is something I learned it is to let things mature and run their course, as acting in a reactionary manner just adds one more layer of problems. This is also a difference I have with anarchists; things can’t be forced if time is not ripe for it, and so, I fully agree with you. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t interact to voice our disagreement or agreement in a context like this one, unless there is no willingness to interact.
Regarding woke community: It’s a symptom of the general decline. We can either try to understand it which will lead us invariably to the economic system, or we can judge it as something that shouldn’t be happening, which will prevent us from diving into its causes.
IMO there is a mistaken diagnosis of our current situation as something that doesn’t throw its roots far back in the past and connected with what Grant Allen mentioned; a situation that, instead, is solved through a reform of the system that nevertheless keeps intact its foundations; the same that operated all this time and produced their effects. This in my view mistaken diagnostic leads to solve encroachments by more encroachments, instead of letting it exhaust itself as a necessary consequence of a long development. In the first case, this woke phenomenon might be regarded as something devious that has recent roots and so more State coercion might take careof it; because, let’s face it, they won’t “mind their business” and hide; this is attention economy and they will seek it because that’s the only way their presence is felt. The fact that we are stuck with it is an invitation to dive in its relationship with other phenomena like liberal thinking and its predecessor, religious thinking, capitalist economy, etc.
Our freedoms have been encroached upon in a fundamental and decisive way centuries ago. That one encroachment produced all the other encroachments we are today complaining about, and we always fixed that by adding more encroachments to solve previous ones. My point is that that attitude doesn’t solve anything, you are of the opinion they should mind their business and get on with their lives and take responsibility, that is, an invitation for more encroachments. That’s the core difference..
I agree with a lot of what you’re saying and what I’m guessing you are also saying is that society simply isn’t mature enough to accept responsibility – each individual for him or herself. Never before has there been such a young victim generation. Every young person now is so precious and hurt all the time, for crying out loud.
The main problem IMO with today’s young gen is their ready compliance and complete hoodwinked sense of reality. They have a tool at their fingertips which previous generations, though much more questioning, did not even have – the internet. It’s puzzling.
I don’t understand how I’m encroaching on others if I believe they should leave me alone with their constant yammering and whining about how special they are and how they wish me/society to embrace that.
Does this stem from an upbringing where every child received accolades for even poor performance for the sake of inclusivity?
Yes, I believe things happen when they are mature for them to happen which really does nothing more than assert that forcing things or getting exasperated when there is resistance to change is not the only or the best attitude towards what we don’t like or don’t understand; besides neither do we know when time of maturity comes and thus no idea either when forcing is or is not indicated.
There is much disagreement on this question; some see in the individual effort, in the will, the mover and changer of reality; one has only to “put one’s mind to it”. Others think that the power of the will escapes our desires for change; that it is a historical product which can grow or lessen. Depending on which view one has, we either get impatient when we don’t see the change we’d like to see around us, or we accept reality as a necessary stage without which that change couldn’t take place.
Which view one adopts depends largely on one personal experience; this obvious fact (people’s views are the product of their experience, as everything is drawn from there; which curiously seems validate the historial nature of the will), so that when two significantly different experiences are put in presence of one another, either misunderstanding, even a tragedy could happen, or one yields to the other.
What is going on in the Middle-East is a live example of how the system of international relations, as an analogy to the system of factors that determine our behaviour, is not moved by what “ought to be” but by its own past. Consider this: Over the past few days, two weeks maybe, about 5,000 people (let’s use the official figures for the sake of argument), many of which are innocent civilians, including children and women, have died. The majority of these deaths have been caused by Israeli bombardment on Gaza, as a revenge. Why doesn’t the international community: US, UK, EU, Russia, China, etc unite against this obvious savage butchery, a massacre, and effectively point their arsenal on Israel with this clear message: “Hands off! You’ve already got your revenge manifold; one more bullet or bomb from you and we wipe you out of the map.” Why all that happened were innocuous, benevolent, lukewarm recommendations to deescalate; worse, billions to Israel and new shipments of weapons to her? Now somebody explain this to me. It is because international relations carry historical inertia, their own past, powerful enough to prevent them from stopping even a live human butchery.
Likewise, IMO, people do what they can, rarely what they ought to do, unless the two coincide.
I didn’t mean you were encroaching on others as a private individual. I mean if the general attitude towards a social phenomenon we don’t like is of impatience and exasperation, and is shared widely enough to determine policy, then the State will legislate its suppression (the only thing the State can do). And we know that, like in a disease, if the symptom is suppressed, the disease will find another outlet to express itself. In fact, History is a long stream of symptom suppression; we just fix things for a while; when the fix stops working, we find another fix. So, we may suppress (encroach upon) the woke community because it encroaches on the public, but the phenomenon will find another way to express itself that escapes legislation; this new expression in turn is suppressed, and so on, until the cause is examined.
Sorry, a point I didn’t touch upon: Woke mouvement in relation to freedom; IMO it is because our fundamental right, right to be equivalent without having to be equal, that is, the right of being equivalent in regards life; that is, the equal right to life-sustaining labour as a consequence of being alive; because that right, which no one can give but is a state of consciousness, a realisation, has been encroached upon, that we are seeing all sorts of fabricated rights attempting to make up for that loss: right to be this or that, or to have this or that, born within the same system of human relations that functions upon the assumption that that fundamental right not be fulfilled. It means that these fabricated rights, are not unrelated to the economic system we live in and which manifests in a taken-for-granted-kind of human relations.
That fundamental right, which renders unnecessary the manifestation of the fabricated rights because it contains them, is what’s is ultimately important to realise IMO. Meanwhile, we can adopt the attitude of letting the expressions of the fabricated rights exhaust themselves as a necessary stage.
That used to be called equal opportunity. I’m all for it. But I’m not for sameness.
What a mentally subnormal cretin Hayen must be to think that imperialistic Christians didn’t display the height of Narcissism100-600 years ago.
What is ‘the Jews being ‘God’s Chosen People’ but unbelievable narcissism and racism manifested over 2000 years ago?
What is the Quran but the height of narcissism assigning superiority to anyone who does what they are told and calls themself a Muslim, thus being superior to a ‘kuffar’?
Imperialists were all racists, calling the blacks ‘savages’. Europeans murdered more people in two wars in under 50 years than in the entirety of African history up to 1950. And that is somehow superior?
The Chinese now are racists. So were the Japanese. Russians are unbelievably racist. As are huge numbers of Americans. It’s the refuge of those who use force to cover up the fact that they are intellectual pygmies, in the main.
Hayen’s voice is of a 19th century murderer of homosexuals brave enough to be true to their sexuality at a time of animalistic thuggery and hypocrisy. There was no tolerance back then, no understanding of another’s reality, just a demand upon pain of death to live a life of utter falsehood.
It is the voice of men saying that the role of women is to be cooks in the kitchen, whores in the bedroom and mothers to helpless little grown-up boys. Just another set of lazy dogma imposing uniformity on every human being regardless of appropriateness.
Oh, I’m sure life is so, so easy for the middle 70%, happily born into ‘normality’, who miraculously are not punished for committing adultery in their failing marriages, but happily would hang a homosexual who remained true to a partner. So easy to bear false witness to the Christian church, meekly paying your tithes each Sunday and mouthing things you don’t believe whilst calling for the imprisonment of those whose spiritual integrity calls them to describe ‘establishment churchfolk’ as hypocrites and more.
And so easy to meekly go and kill people you have never met, have never lived with, to benefit solely those who would happily sacrifice you as a statistic, whilst making sure that their own kith and kin miraculously survive unharmed. Whilst calling for the public execution of those of conscientious objection who have greater humanity than all the animals that have brains the size of peas, morals as weak as wastrels and bloodlust sufficiently great as to make them indistinguishable from top predators on the African Rift Valley plains.
Life was so, so easy when no-one questioned the rulers, wasn’t it??
But it had zero integrity, it was just about surviving without having one’s own throat slit due to the violent manifestations of society’s crass contradictions.
Narcissism has been there for millennia and psychopathy was what previous centuries would have called ‘a survival instinct’.
It’s Ok for the rulers to be narcissists and psychopaths, isn’t it, Mr Hayen?
Just not OK for everyone else.
Why???
“It’s Ok for the rulers to be narcissists and psychopaths, isn’t it, Mr Hayen?
Just not OK for everyone else.
Why???”
Very good postmodernistic point. First – everyone was guilty. Second – let’s be guilty, cause it’s a way to defend ourselves in the world of evil. So let’s create more evil, more narcissism, more psychopathy.
Well, maybe there’s some kind of exageration in description of the past, although there are true elements in it as well, cause they must be, to make the false story, the distorted picture believable, and tempting to commit the very thing, we see as harmful.
I think, that when we see at the evolution of – especially western – culture and civilization, we see gradual and constant improvement. Not guilty until proven – for example, was not obvious at all.
So picture of the past you create seems to be not a result of the scrutiny, but a confession of your desire to see past the way you picture it. So you choose some thing, omit others, to prove your point, to make an argument for narcissism for all, to defend current epidemic of narcissism and psychopathy as justified, cause…
“It’s Ok for the rulers to be narcissists and psychopaths, isn’t it, Mr Hayen?
Just not OK for everyone else.
Why???”
Zbyszek,
“It’s Ok for the rulers to be narcissists and psychopaths, isn’t it, Mr Hayen?”
is obviously sarcasm– irony.
To some, hoomanity is ‘a work in progress”
To others, hoomanity ‘is a failed experiment’…
Youse all know what Klaus@WEF believes…
Its voluntary. You can join or not.
Pls respect your fellowman who wants to be a cyborg and women who wants 4 tits and 3 legs.
Its their choice and not your totalitarian dictatorship views suppressing and posing upon others, which should prevail in a free open society. 😂 .
Always love your analysis. Thank you!
The most important history Americans don’t know. Video
https://rumble.com/v3jj4nw-documentary-all-wars-are-bankers-wars.html
You are unique. Just like everybody else.
Thanks for affirming me!
Any moral judgement of the Other is an assumption of superior or better or right that seeks to guilt the other as priming for sacrifice.
The self-image is how we present to others AND to our self.
Saving the Appearances then becomes the preservation of the social order to which the perceived assigned threat is sacrificed for virtue’s sake. This ritualises the violence by which to raise it above vengeance – in a culture that shares the same moral ‘conscience’ of belonging – from which the scapegoat is excluded or denied.
Of course I see the denial or erasure of consciousness of felt connection, to a ghastly pardody of life, but I also see it is the result of our basis for seeking and applying ‘solutions’ that do not work, but deliever us to the evils we thought to escape.
In terms of magical or external ‘solutions’ to masked or dissociated inner conflicts, we buy time perhaps to a mitigated experience before all the elements of the original conflict partake of the arena of the wished for ‘solution’. What have people ‘injected’ – regardless of the sales & marketing claims of bent and bought ‘science’. For our science is also used to seek external ‘solutions’ to inner conflict, as the predictive control – to which our felt sense of participation is sacrificed to the Model or idol of ‘Progress’ – which is predicated on the demonising or invalidating of the past.
Deep cultural framing in guilt and fear born of self-lack seeking external boosting is ‘responsible’ for the unchecked ‘correctness’ toward groupthink of a collectivised mob or herd identity – cast out in any number of ‘individualised’ and constantly mutating ‘identities’.
Polarised identities are tyrannous, while also operating in sync with their shadow or double – in which they are intimately entwined.
To seek & find or be found in a ‘greater love’ than self-seeking (which easily masks in virtue signalling, is to release the judgemental convictions of self-& other AND therefore the face of control, to acknowledge in truth, “I do not know what I truly need, and above all esle I want to know”, Real questions open the receptive to real answer – that rises of and as our very being – not as a repackaging of a manufactured identity. And always as a quality of connection from which to take encouragement in recognising direction or guidance and support.
The first line of your comment indicates that you think it morally wrong to make moral judgements. Such a ludicrous position that you couldn’t even frame it w/o contradicting it!!
Morality is a synonym of truth and of love. To the creator, all are the same.
If there is no morality or truth, then why comment at all? By your own admission your comment is seeking to elevate yourself over others.
To accomplish what the writer suggests means we have to put down our gadgets and gizmos, interact with our family members, talk to the children, guide and admonish them and be models of the behaviors was are asking of them. How many in today’s follow the leader/pied piper world have the disciple and courage to attempt this?
Despite our angst over what is occurring we all have some attachment to the status quo, we saw how TPTB were able to intimidate and coerce folks into going along with their COVID PSY-OP by threatening their livelihoods, deplatforming, censoring and suppressing dissent. As the miscreants amp up their agenda, how many of us are going to openly dissent, resist or challenge the overlords’ anti-life programs?
Me, I hope …
Twitter/X shadowbanned me today when I posted the younger generation are anti-Establishment; they only support Israel at less than 50% unlike boomers approaching 90%.
Young people are some of those most damaged by the Coof shots – and it is noticeable that they recognize that Gaza’s population is about 60% under 18.
https://www.npr.org/2023/10/13/1205627092/american-support-israel-biden-middle-east-hamas-poll
You still believe in polls? After all we have been through??
Supporting either side and hating on the other is being totally “establishment”. When will people get it? They want us taking sides so they promote BOTH in different ways through different platforms, knowing their target audience.
If you really want to be anti-establishment tell the truth – that the elites use war vertically not horizontally. It’s not Palestinians versus Israelis. It’s the Israeli state and the Palestinian state (Hamas) agreeing to kill each other’s proles to benefit themselves. And at a higher level being directed to it by the Great Reset crowd who are currently using these “conflicts” to distract people from what’s really going on.
Just months before her untimely death, Rosa Koire—author of ‘Behind the Green Mask’—warned us about the totalitarian globalist takeover plan known as UN Agenda 21, and why it’s imperative that we resist it with all our might.
https://web.archive.org/web/20200613055358/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGA18p_XerE
It’s human language at fault. Julian Jaynes noticed the change in the way humans represented personal agency in writing, and developed a theory of consciousness around it (The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind). Specifically, he noted that prior to the modern era– as recently as the time of composition of The Iliad– humans did not describe human actions with any overt awareness of an inner life in the actors themselves. Heroes acted out their destinies by obeying or rejecting the edicts of the gods, and even disobedience was an unconscious act. (Instinctive opposition is not a product of thoughtfulness, it’s really just obedience with a negative sign. I think all of us who read Off-Guardian can recognize this admirable, if unthinking, instinct in ourselves.)
The “I/me” character, as an independent agent, did not appear in literature until very recently. Jaynes imagined that the appearance of this sense of independent human agency was a viral and an almost technological innovation which overtook the civilized human world very suddenly.
It’s an interesting idea, but it’s becoming clear to me that the change wasn’t as epochal as he imagined it. Humans didn’t all suddenly change a few thousand years ago. The “I/me” character is imposed upon us each of us by our culture, indivudually, in our own lifetimes. There is nothing fundamentally true about a conception of personal cogntive experience as primary or even profound. A six-year-old kid in a large family thinks of himself primarily as a member of his family, and not as “Me, the Kid.” What are taken to be manifestations of a sense of personal identity are really just hard-wired survival instincts, like the desperate cheeping competitions of nestlings when a parent appears with a worm. Birds don’t maintain this cosmic selfishness into adulthood; it’s an ephemeral artifact of youth. Only in humans is this mindless, infantile instinct cultured and transformed into a lasting conception of Self.
The inculcation of narcissism has always been a means of control. Outside of the small tribes in which human behavioral patterns evolved, the instinct for small-scale collective identity works against the grain of large scale group dynamics. Large-scale groups are not collectives; they’re sytems of individuals, they can’t function any other way. The isolation of individuals into solipsistic worldviews will always happen whenever people are embedded in societies larger than a hundred or so people. Otherwise, we would (and do) form competing and self-destroying factions whose destruction further emphasizes the “reality” of the only identity which survives the death of a faction: that of the individual.
The sudden splintering of the “I” character into a thousand new shards– most absurdly, the “I, a Man-in-a-Dress” character– is just a continuation of the splintering that began when civilization ripped us out of the tribal group dynamics for which we evolved. There’s no use complaining about it if we’re going to remain embedded in the civilization whose mere existence mandates narcissism. Withdrawing from society doesn’t and can’t help, because there are only two ways to do it: withdraw completely, and thus be eternally and inescapably alone with the very “I” character you hoped never to meet again; or try to link up with other like-minded people in a voluntary tribe which, because the members don’t and can’t ever truly need each other in a background of civilization, will come to hate each other and disband. Self-destroying factions are not the way out, they’re the way back in.
What we need is a gigantic asteroid.
I dare anyone to come up with a more appalling example of narcissism than this:
https://twitter.com/mariyyum/status/1713302734450115019
This is one Rochel Leah Boteach, the daughter of Schmuley Boteach the “most famous rabbi in America”.
Some more on the delightful Rochel:
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1465961913557830
“Meet Rochel Leah Boteach AKA “Baba”! She is the force behind The Thirsty Souls inspiring weekly Torah classes VIA facebook and instagram. Baba’s mission is to help facilitate a living, breathing Judaism for all!”
So all in all, we have here the ultimate embodiment of ferocious mindless solipsistic consumerism – a preening posturing monument to vacuous self-love fixated on infantile trivia whilst mindlessly mouthing sanctimonious platitudes to that customary “higher power” and casually relegating vast swathes of humanity to the slaughterhouse should any of those vermin touch a single hair on her head etc.
Schmuley Boteach – I go by Pintong Bok Choi
The previous name was Botach – so a message in the name changer. Which is Chabad. The group that surrounds Putin, drawn from Lubavitch, Russia.
The world’s a complex conundrum.
RFK jr
Boteach is apparently supporting RFK jr who is turning out to be an unprincipled coward and a betrayer of his family’s ideals. He undoubtedly knows who killed his father and so many others in his family. The same people that are butchering children in a genocidal attack on Gaza. All for a futile attempt to gain the presidency. What is the point of an “independent” that supports the status quo and the immoral policies of the establishment ?
Monstrous
Race supremacism at it’s most Satanic evil.
She believes Daddy’s fairy tales.
She believes the MSM fairy tales.
She believes government fairy tales.
She believes, until she grows up and SEES the Truth, or maybe like so many, she will never grow up,
Wow. There’s no bottom to the depths of superficiality!
The cats just knocked my beef broth onto the floor… let them have it. We’re all in this together
Chances are now that they’ve spilled it, they don’t want it. A cat would never deign to do a dog’s job.
This essay articulates something that’s been bugging me for quite a while. It’s this “look at me” mentality that seems to be on steroids now. An example affecting my life is that going kayaking with friends used to be about the water and nature. Now everyone is too busy taking pictures and posting everything to Facebook for every single second of every paddle. Then talking nonstop about their newest gear acquisition till you want to scream. Or planning the next “Pride” paddle……I hate rainbows now. No one even sees the eagle overhead or the porpoises jetting by. Nope. It’s just LOOK AT ME!!!!
Many of these beaming faces on social media soak their pillows at night.
Emptiness.
‘If you can’t see the chemtrails, you’re not worth talking to.: (about anything serious.)
Head of on your own, or with like minded folks. Incidentally, I had my first SUP of the season on a gorgeous local mountain lake just a few days ago. Caught a couple of redfin and a lovely sized rainbow trout. Also got very close to the local sea eagles. It was a sublime day.
Strangling fish is not my idea of fun. By all means watch the birds. There are 9000 species worldwide and you don’t have a chance of seing a fraction of that number.
I fish for food, rather than the strangling. I dispatch quickly and humanely. I live in a remote area and I also hunt and gather and grow.
Baked whole rainbow trout is delicacy. Food from source, not from the supermarket.
Peace and love to you.
What would you say of Joshua Haldeman, progenitor of Technocracy.
Apart from the fact that he is Elon Musk’s grandad and associated with the Frankfurt “New” School.
Opposition to the Establishment much?
Technocrats and psychopaths strike me as being on the spectrum, having a hard time recognizing and understanding emotions. So identity politics and virtue signaling become the synthetic virtual reality world, probably why they are so obsessed with getting us to live in the meta verse. The Overton window doesn’t mind if you express your heart out about sexuality, just don’t cross over into economic and foreign policy matters.
Things are moving so fast, that I admit I can’t keep up. Rather than post multiple links, I’ve put them in one place.
I beg the indulgence of this forum.:
https://moneycircus.substack.com/p/miscellany-sources-opinions-on-the
USA aka CYA. That pretty much says it all. “Cover your ass” has replaced “In God We Trust” as America’s motto.
No one wishes to be sued – yet almost everyone is on the lookout for someone to sue. (Probably the same everywhere else.)
So to preclude any chance of a lawsuit, the American people in their infinite wisdom have opted for absolute total complete equality in everything…
…except the only thing that matters: Income.
Funny how that works.
it’s a pity that narcissism became a term, like oedipus [ leaving aside freud’s nefarious betrayal of his patients , and all children] both these terms are based on misconceptions/misunderstanding the original stories.
Matt Walsh of the Daily Wire touched on the epidemic of narcissism a few days ago as it related to transvestites wanting to dance half nude in front of children. His focus was on a couple of Christian churches who have embraced the behavior. He is not qualified to pontificate on such things but still does a good job of hitting the nail on the head often. His efforts have created quite a stir on college campuses (and state legislatures) across the country. He and his fellow Daily Wire podcasters are working the college speaker circuit to try and deprogram young people to encourage them to question liberal minded professors. And they have become highly successful.
“transvestites wanting to dance half nude….” Which half? Probably the upper half, which would be nude were they the gender their outfits and mannerisms suggest. After all, revealing the lower half would give the lie to the identity they’re attempting to portray.
It’s all very taxing. Thank God I don’t give two hoots about the civilization shattering danger transvestites pose.
BTW, in Shakespear’s day, males played all the parts. Presumably they were on occasion called upon to don the dress of the fair sex. And Britain’s still around!
So you think we should embrace the mentally ill so they can continue recruiting the gender dysphoric to assist in leading them to the trillion dollar slaughter being tapped into by evil psychiatrists, surgeons and pharmaceutical companies?
You apparently haven’t watched them parading and chanting that they are coming for our children. These people have always been recognized as being mentally ill.
The only difference now is their empowerment by politicians who are using them to garner votes instead of assisting them in getting treated for their illness.
The Bell Curve does not lie. You can never normalize abnormal. Embrace aberrants all you like, but it does not change a thing.
Mentally ill narcissists who want the attention of children in order to recruit them into the lifestyle.
And you are OK with that?
What I’m especially not OK with is this dangerous notion that normality should be the standard against which all social interaction must be judged.
Given that parameter, we who refuse the clot shot would be abnormal and, therefore, mentally ill and in need of treatment.
I wish it were possible for people to recognize and differentiate trends from fads. This whole transvestite thing is merely a fad – nothing more. The cross-dressers will have faded away by this time next year.
A far more serious threat to society is the growing number of young people who seem to know little to nothing about the world around them. Perhaps you’ve seen the YouTube “shorts” wherein questions are asked presumably at random which the person interviewed cannot answer – such as “What year did the War of 1812 take place?”
You may want to reread what you just wrote.
A Jeff Foxworthy saying or two come to mind. The joke is buried about 2/3rds of the way through. https://youtu.be/RboPCdiP_AI
All of civilized society is based on the normalization of behavior. You might want to think about that.
Very true, and then the media take over leading up to a situation where, with very little prompting, large groups of people “correct” the behavior of each other.
This article echoes a long lineage of thinkers who want to de-school culture from the bottom-up. Ivan Illich spoke of “iatrogenic culture” as a culture-controlled pathology long before Covid; and so on and so forth…. But for the love of the last vestiges of anything real, can you not get it through the infernal obstinacy that the culture of invasion and mind-control is not in ‘their’ DNA, it is in the language, stupid!
The ‘mind’ itself is the major and singular vector of contagion; as inherited in the acquisition and acquiescence to the linguistic orthodoxy of psychiatric “culture-language”; as rational essentialism or better, metaphysical essentialism [ME.] Man is a psychological rational-causal animal after all, whichever is ‘his’ natural essence that sets ‘him’ apart and alone in ‘his’ supremacy. So what is this rational-causal essence of the mind, so-called?
When we acquired language, we acquired an entire lexis of words with pre-existing fixed definitions in pre-existing fixed relation to objective things. The received form is of “mind-independent reality” (real in extension) and a reality-independent mind (real in thought) logically, rationally and essentially linked by language, right?
Names name essences – “the what it is to be” – permanently (sine tempore – without reference to time). Further to the lexis of these self-existing ‘eternal essences’; we acquired the rules of their combination – the grammar – whichever separates essence from existence (substance from accident.) Further, we acquired the rules and criteria of judgement – the logic – whichever sublimates the eternal essence to the level of ‘truth’, ‘reality’, ‘goodness’, ‘rightness’ and so on, whichever is the basis of veridical truthmaking, knowledge, understanding, comprehension and morality, right?
These are the ground rules of truthmaking identity statements as propositional universalised statement-making in general complex discourse-making – as in real and correct correspondence of ‘word to world’ and ‘world to word’ (‘fit’ so-called) – that still ground this very commentary; indeed all commentary and all interpretation as the objectively real ‘rule of thought’ or nomology, right?
All of which is utterly dependent on the essentialism of name-entity connection as a logical and necessary connection of independent words and independent world in logical-analytical correspondence (that is a one-to-one isomorphy.) The extended mind-independent reality is correctly and objectively correspondent, veridical to the unextended reality-independent mind by way of rational essential representationism; just as the natural rational mind is the mirror-imagery of the natural rational world, whichever is epistemic of all possible knowledge, right?
No, this is as it always was, made-up mediaeval mumbo-jumbo as culturally imposed make-believe; as secularised – without the logical-analytical ‘big guy in the sky’ as ‘ultimate guarantor’ – it’s just fucking authoritarian bullshit that everybody is indoctrinated into as a neoliberal herd-animalisation.
Words are speechsounds made significant by cultural compact and social-engineering agreement – as inveterated ego-engineering; as per pre-existing ‘permanent’ phonetic-image pairings that previous authoritarian psychiatric “regimes of representation” made-up as an absolute essentialism of the culture, not any spurious word-world pairing.
The lexis means exactly what we were told to mean and the logo-syntactic combination is the cultural-control mechanisation grounded in the psychiatric “rule of nomological law”; as grounded in cultural essentialism; as grounded in grammatical separation, logical sublimation, and rhetorical differentiation; as grounded in the cultural essentialism of the specific differences so-called (injected narcissism of non-existent differences); of the “that which it was to be” (tode ti, to ti esti, to ti en einai); as grounded in absolute nothingness but rational psychiatric totalitarianism. The signature of words as “passions of the soul” is cultural artifice enforced by the deep-structure of language into truth-bearing statements based on nothing other that the indoctrinated and inculcated sound of the control-cultural voice.
If you ever thought or continued to think the language ever picked out things in the actual world you are absolutely wrong from first principle to last gasp utterance. The signature of language (phone semantike, vox significata) is cultural artifice (kata syntheken) made ‘real’ by indoctrinated and self-imposed cultural convention.
“The soundings of the voice (ta en te phone) are the symbol-based representation (symbola) of the affections and modifications (pathemata) of the cultural psyche [ME], just as the letters of the alphabetic repetition (grammata) are symbols of the things made symbolic in the cultivated conventions of the imaginary-symbolic cultural voice.” (Aristotle, On Interpretation – only ever slightly modified)
Thereafter: nobody created the language, the language created everybody. Nobody privately articulated the language, the language privately articulated everybody as a psychic endocolonisation self-intoned cultural voice resounding between the ears. Nobody enunciated “themselves as themselves”, everybody was enunciated by pre-existing imaginary-symbolic pairings of speech and cultural imaginability that was imitated in sound and further imitated in writing by abstracted and arbitrary assignations and associations of culturally symbolic control. Judging from the levels of credulity and servitude to cultivated symbol-based non-sense, artificial convention, and arbitrary law-given symbolatry; it all worked rather well up to now. Until we have to put it right.
Words have no ‘extra-mental’ relation to the world until and unless there is a significant change in pragmatic relations from economic to ecologic, whichever will be a mindfuck of paradigm shifting. Until which, words relate to words as a closed system of self-absorbed, self-referential, psychiatric narcissism whose only trait reality is in the cultural vocabulary in the head separating and sublimating one’s owned self-absorbed egoification exactly as one is supposed to as a cultivated economic agent; as a consummated, cultivated and controlling repetition-compulsion; or better – death-repetition (repetition-mortifiere) of the Cartesian recycling of life-affirmation as sentient meaning long dead and buried in the “great columbarium of concepts, the graveyard of perceptions” (Nietzsche: On truth and lie in an extra-moral sense.)
So, see you tomorrow or next week for the next instalment of culture-controlled debasement of the word-world irrealisation; as a ratiocentric recycling and reduplication of vox nihili (absolute nothingness) as psychiatric imaginability-only elevated to the level of personal realism by repetition and reification-only, and so on and on and on and on until people begin to take cultural indoctrination to be via linguistic transmission and transcription of the self-absorbed mind as absolute nothingness inculcated into defenceless infant perception in the form of hereditary imagination imitated by sounding imitated by lettering as the “alphabetisation of the popular mind” (Illich, Sanders) as self-indoctrinated logo-syntactic ‘in-formation’ technology of “order-words” which organised our reality as totalised, completed and ultimated unreality.
tl;dr Words mean nothing.
Lets just say the spiritual depth does not go to far in his world, no offense naturally, but I didn’t have the time to try to set him straight.
‘Me’ or the interpretive mechanism everybody uses to synchronise their economic behaviourism? All ‘I’ do is point out the flaws in the system, which are legion. Until we all agree on deschooling and a “paedagogy of hope” the rational reductive-mechanical ideology is all there is; whichever say nothing about anything of value violently and vociferously. As for the attempted essentialising of individual identity — increasingly none-sensically and incoherently for the reasons exposed above.
Never stopped anybody using them incessantly! We could excise the mediaeval mumbo-jumbo universalised in commentary and make concrete statements about the world with a view to therapeutic avoidance of the course of action we are on? But where is the fun in that!
Would you say the quintessential villain in this language game is none other than the much honored Annie Sullivan? She who gave a blind, deaf and dumb Helen Keller words for everything?
As previously discussed: the human rational interpretation of reality is currently destroying reality; whichever entails irreducible magnitude and irreducible multitude — that is: it requires orders-of-magnitude more than the current and historic population — more than everybody who ever lived — to produce insufficient for the psychiatric demand and libidinal desire of the high income countries. That is what the human linguistic misinterpretation of life has led to — a planet of insatiable and ingratiated hungry ghosts that never stop whining about their perceived loss of privilege and encroachment by the shadow of the phantasms of their absent minds — that which will no doubt be our destruction.
So, there is no ratio of proportion between the summum genera and a single instance of speech transmission. There is no “quintessential villain”, ironic or otherwise. The whole species across time as a divergent phylogenesis has developed a universalised conception, a wholly imaginary and symbolic mode and manner of being as an idiothetic ontogenesis. Right now, that involves more than everybody, everywhere, all-at-once, all-the-time across generations; acting as a speciated economic singularity in rejection of the physiologic, the phylogenic, and the sumbiogenesis of life-itself for an alien possession by the word. Thereafter: hic anima est.
And yet, a Helen Keller, or any “feral” human would be a sterling case in point regarding dealing directly with reality rather than indirectly through language.
Specifically, is the human brain hard-wired to seek names for things in order to commit them to memory. (In that regard, the mind is memory – without memory there is no mind: it’s a slate that forever remains blank.)
To the extent language as used is the enemy of reality, modifiers would have to be the biggest offenders. To say a particular bird is a “blue bird” is tantamount to asserting that the bird only exists if perceived by human eyes.
BTW, I have to assume you distinguish between descriptive (or concrete) language and philosophical (or abstract) language. And it would seem to be the former which better fits the idea you present regarding language?
In the case of the “feral human”; humanism is culture, specifically education as paideia; I have no idea what it would be like to acquire language whichever is that which makes us human (excepting for the mistranslation of logos as reason, not speech.) I love language, it is its abuse I’m not so keen on. Quite how we collectively came to interpret speech into a globalised market economy is beyond me, but we did; and now we have to undo that linguistification and mystification if we can.
The human brain is “the blankest of blank slates” around birth, massively ‘overwired’ which then gets “tuned and pruned” in vivo; whichever is synaptogenesis via inculturation or indoctrination. Nobody knows the origin of language but it is now thought to predate the human as homo erectus acquired at least proto-language. Even our unique ‘essence’ (logos as speech or reason) is not unique!
I think it is safe enough to conject that naming and early grammatical connection was survival based physiologic as adaptive, that somehow became maladaptive. As far as memory is concerned: we could probably reduce all the names of “perception, cognition, awareness” to mnemonics; as in <cognition is recognition>; memory — imaginability — invention (ingenuity) is the ancient form of the modes of memory. The problem is pathological imaginability that is not applicable to this actual world and the lack of practical wisdom to know the difference, or indeed to even care about the difference. ‘Pruning’ the adult mind may now be impossible, such is the enormity of the deviation of the economically rational from the ecologic real.
The particular bird is only blue if perceived by our eyes; other eyes — including birds — have differential chromatic perception. This is a version of Nagle’s bat analogy; we cannot ever know what it is like to be (essence — “the that which it was to be”) any other lifeform; something that you yourself have noted previously. The problem is not other lifeforms but that we (in the broadest sense) do not even know what it is like to be ourselves without transferring sense into abstract and arbitrary imaginary-symbolic representations.
Realism (so-called) vis-a-vis nominalism: I would completely deny any form of ‘philosophical realism’ as per abstract metaphysical objects — like forms and other such none-sense (re: overturning platonism; transvaluation of value from any sort of imaginary world to this actual world; re: from market economy to “really real” ecology). As you might be aware, any ‘hard’ delineation between abstract/concrete leaves sweet FA to say other than listing ‘natural objects’; then what about ‘social objects’ like money, corporations, governments, banks and so on that are essentially abstract but also really real?
That is what I meant by “mindfuck paradigm shifting” to create a new “post-metaphysical” theory of language that the likes of inter alios Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Austin, Searle, Habermas and so on have been engaged in.
In the meantime: I can go with Searle speech-act theory as he at least makes distinction of “brute facticity” and “institutional facticity” for quasi-abstracted social objects like money. As intimated before; even the social reality of the money-form is questionably completely abstract as in worthless and meaningless fiat as an already defunct social agreement in speech-only.
The ‘real’ question is “Whatever is really real?” dismisses almost all of social ontology. I’ve nailed my colours to doing whatever it takes to preserve the environment (re: degrowth); judging by the febrile cultural ‘human’ atmosphere, I’m beginning to thinks that is a forlorn hope. We need a ‘new ecologic humanism’ to replace the same old ‘economic humanism’ which I’m sure you recognise as a contradiction in terms.
You could have made it a bit simpler. We are subsumed, and carefully groomed into a symbolic system of which we are prevented from becoming aware by Words, Sword.
I watch and listen to the MSM constantly struggling to inculcate the carefully altered meaning of words/ideons (idea as a thing) into the general population to further blur and distort their already warped and diluted cognition/perception to make them (us?) easier to control.
I could have made it a bit simpler, yes; but then people still imagine an external controllere/manipultator. The point is: there is none. The word between the ears is the only control-mechanisation there is. The whole of humanity is now in activity, the permutations of which are literally incalculable. The calculative control, critical judgement, criteria of judgement of whichever must be internalised by education and maladaptive learning as per the dualistic model-theoretic above. I could just say we got it fatally wrong, but that won’t fix it. We have to know exactly how we got it wrong.
Wha?
We also need to inject common sense into woke.
The woke are facing their own censorship because of this middle east issue 😂
Your alternative update on #COVID19 for 2023-10-18. 74% jabbed Sweden experiencing excess death in 2023 & 31% jabbed Bulgaria 10% below average for 2023 (blog, gab, tweet, pic1, pic2, pic3, pic4).
Humanity needs to inject itself with some much needed humility. It should be compulsory or else we will all perish. That’s a real pandemic.
Comes close to the Paul Arden mantra: Whatever They Think, Think the Opposite
Even better is to not consider their thoughts and think for yourself.
There’s no “mRNA” coursing through my veins,as I refused to be jabbed, and how do we know there’s any mRNA in the shot or graphine oxide/hydroxide come to think of it, where’s the proof???
Todd,
You may want to look into Ana Maria Mihalcea‘s work, which suggests that many if not all people are dealing with this whether they took the jab or not.
Indeed. She has been doing lots of interviews on this lately. Well worth watching for research and possible solutions.
Insightful. If the shot does induce brain fog, then the focus of the impaired individual may turn inwards – promoting the narcissistic tendency, or its appearance.
It began long before drugs, however, with Edward Bernays’ promotion of affective advertising – torches of freedom in the case of women smoking.
Bernays, I’m sure readers know, was Sigmund Freud’s nephew.
Then we had a century of cultural programming by Hollywood,. But like the experiments that created the Summer of Love, ideation was never enough – the ‘state’ was bent from the start on druggery, drudgery and pharmacopoeia.
Even after 3 years of Covid response many are oblivious…
By the 1920s the Rockefellers, having made their money in oil, owned the pharmaceutical industry almost in its entirety.
Consider this.
“Bernays, I’m sure readers know, was Sigmund Freud’s nephew.”
I thought his uncle was Sigmund Fraud. Or maybe it’s just a Freudian slip. My bad.
Advertising has a LOT to do with it.
The advertising onslaught really took off in the 1950s.
Vance Packard nailed it with his books ‘The Hidden Persuaders’ and ‘The Naked Society’ back in the late 50s and early 60s.
Advertisers created ‘wants’ as opposed to ‘needs’. It’s been a shitshow since.
Now fame and celebrity are the BIG WANTS. It’s pathetic and self destructive.
JK Galbraith’s ‘The Affluent Society’ exposed our fallibilities, and Neil Postman’s ‘Amusing Ourselves to Death’ is even more relevant today than it was in 1985.
Yep, we’ve been had by experts.
The plague of gullibility continues.
Add to Vance Packard succinct descriptions of the rise of the consumer society The Waste Makers, The Status Seekers and The Pyramind Climbers. In the Naked Society Society he describes the dead letter of personal privacy!
If I could name one movie that captures the American culture better than perhaps any other movie, it would be Robert Altman’s masterpiece “Nashville.”
Granted, movies are no match for the written word. But in our short-to-no attention span society, even a long movie (3 hours) might manage to resonate. I personally think “Nashville” should be required viewing in every classroom in America.
As the article correctly points out, this change was driven by the environment (it’s the economy, stupid?). So it’s not a tall order, it’s rather wishful thinking to have it reversed without a change in the environment, which is inevitably coming as hard times are being created by weak men.
“Along with mRNA coursing through our veins (probably not yours and definitely not mine) there is a good wallop of narcissism.”
No shit! Some flaunt their newly acquired plastic tits, others the removal thereof and installation of plastic dicks, yet others who knows what fucking else.
Tovarish Hayen can’t help himself not to inform the world that mRNA is not circulating through his veins.
WHO GIVES A FLYING FUCK ….!!!!!
Believe it or not, there are people – in this very forum – who read articles either by Dr. Hayen or someone else, and throw a fit if something they felt essential was NOT specifically mentioned.
I do. Why?
Because it makes me egoistic happy when I in the most narcissistic way meet someone who are like me.
Play that strophe again Sam: “Definitely NOT my veins”. 😃 😍 😘 🤗 😇 😷 .
Great article. We live in the “l’histoire de moi” (“the story of me”) generation.
Spiritual warfare…
The academics and intellectuals call it a lot of names, but “linguistic programming of the population” was the best I could fine.
But these psychological operations or warfare psychological techniques are somehow quite easy to overcome, if one has awareness of it.