Tuesday, June 2, 2015

The Biggest Lie Ever Told: Civilization

Consider that the world is made of people, minds of a sort, which are in many forms.  Let's say humans are just one sort of  people, a person being a sentient being capable of relating to another sentient being with empathic consideration, consideration in the broadest sense of 'being cognizant'. So now that we have defined a world as a domain populated by people, and also constituted by them, we can discuss the sort of world we have in mind.

Let the world be understood as being qualified by the sorts of relations which exist between these people. Let the natural environment itself, the context of their situation, also be a sort of person. Let all aspects of their existence have a personal character, to include all properties of experience, even the sense that some experience is of a thing, which can be taken to be, as it were, a "mute person". Persons in some sense are mutable, can become so.  That would be one extreme property of personhood, namely, thinghood.  A person is a being with interiority that is private, but an individual is a "thing" with a public address ('address' as in purchase in and of a person's existence for being reached by another person, not the number on a house per se; the 'being seen' of the seen being, for example).

Our world has some properties which we call "material bodies", and these exhibit a very variable sort of personality, which is only related to us through our passive experience of them, or our active effort upon them.  These are the elements, compounds, minerals, masses, and all their varieties and phases. These don't relate to us very directly in ways we usually find convenient except within a certain narrow framework of relation.  Ground is stable enough so we can walk on it.  Water is fluid, we can drink it.  Air is gaseous, and we can breathe it.  Light is stimulating to our retinas. They don't relate to us in active ways beyond these primitive sorts for the most part.

Some bodies are complex, such as those we directly control with our volition.  These also directly impress upon us a stable set of experience modalities, which are the means by which we organize relations to the world of other bodies, relating to them more or less personably according to the character of the feedback we receive when we express ourselves to them through our bodies.  The elements are cognizant of our bodies per the elements in our bodies, and we are cognizant of them through the way that our bodies react to those elements.  Thirst, hunger, aspiration are the desires for water, food, and air. Beyond these needs, the body has tertiary needs, which all reflect some desired relation to elements in the environment.

Then there are the more complex bodies, which may or may not reflect personality as we understand it on our level.  Minerals, plants, animals, and all other sorts of life.  Let us not forget energy forms such as heat, electricity, magnetism, and so on, which are elemental forms of personal expression that are manifested by things in their lower denominations of personality, and which can complexify in aggregate (e.g. brainwaves).  When we get to the human level we interact with an understanding that we have a shared nature of some kind, at least in being bodily situated in a kindred fashion.  As with all other things, the kinds of things involved are considered in terms of the relations they have, the nature of their interactions.

That humans coexist is obvious.  What they discover as they grow up is that they came to exist in their bodily forms through reproduction, as they were "borne forth" by their parents, most directly by their mothers.  They were taken care of by them and others until they could learn how to do this more and more on their own, until they were "grown up".  Then they learned how to repeat this cycle, and either did so or didn't, and in either case lived with more or less success in whatever they did besides this. Minimally, they needed to survive in relation to their less personable environment, which they all had in common.  They also needed to relate to each other to make this more feasible, and less problematic, insofar as their living conditions required them to relate through a complex situation created by environmental pressures, reproductive processes, and the need to develop a greater and greater sense of the stability of these factors in mind when surplus psychical awareness existed beyond the utility afforded by any practical efforts. They have to cultivate sanity, which is a stable, sustainable, and adaptively evolving mental condition which transcends merely reactive interactions with the environment, to include its own body and lower mental aspects.

But in all this people found it necessary to schedule their efforts according to expected results, including rotations of work and rest, vigilance and ease, expression and perception.  This must be related to the environment so that productive effort is a stable result.  This political economy would be the psychosocial equivalent of what sanity is for the individual person.  In relation to one another people must agree in their actions and efforts so that they do not interfere with one another and, if mutually desired, assist one another to reach results not attainable otherwise.  That would be the ideal and abstractly stated condition of their best relations with one another.  It seems that this could be arranged no matter what each wanted to do, and no matter what any group wanted to do, as long as it was always done so that the basic rule of non-interference was followed.  This is where things get complicated.

Some people found that what they wanted was already created by others, and wanted to take a share of the results of creation without contributing to the production.  Some wanted to avoid work because they thought of other people as means to an end rather than ends in themselves, so they wanted to have it so that others were like trees, providing fruit for them to take without requiring any further work but to take it, or perhaps only to command it forth.  In other words, they didn't really relate to others as persons in the first place, not as persons engaged in creative effort.  They for some reason saw only partially what was going on, lacked the perspicacity for ethics as well as any motivation for forward engagement in productive effort; they lacked empathy and industry.  Perhaps they lacked industry because they never learned it due to a lack of empathy which would be required to learn how to work.  They lacked a certain basic intelligence in that regard.

Perhaps they lacked empathy more generally, but only those who had enough empathic cognition to get by could get away with trying to let others take their slack while they took a share of rewards.  They passed on their genes because they were successful thieves, and their wretched culture was sustained biologically and also socially through the pressures of their influence in all strata of society.  This being is the thief, a particular way of saying a predator, which is really a subset of the being called a parasite.

When they learned how to systematically arrange their preferred way of life over others, it became a way of life for those who had to endure this enslavement.  Unless they were put down, the criminal elements eventually took control because that is what their lifestyle requires in order for others to serve their needs properly according to the nature and habits of these tyrants. They must teach others to submit to their requirements, whether by direct force, persuasion, or some mixture of the two.  For this not to occur, they must be resisted, and culled from society.  They break the fundamental rule of an ideal society, in that they interfere with others' actions, namely by taking away their incentive for their efforts, and adding a burden of concern, fear, and instability to all their works.  They became defined as criminals, as defective persons, and treated accordingly, or else they take over society and make themselves an exception to such rules, often under the pretense of being stewards of the public safety (i.e., a protection racket).

Thus a more subtle version of criminal took control of society and used his more uncouth cousins as a foil by which to distance himself from any villainous reputation while maintaining the benefits of the criminal lifestyle of a parasite living on society "as a whole". He managed this through institutions which all in society had to agree have a function which pervades all society, though located in a finite space, and which is controlled and staffed by a finite number of persons, who are a small subset of society, but whose permission to act unilaterally was distributed across all of society, or some subset of it. This process occurred when people built cities, and these institutions were called offices of authority, institutions which were structured to have broad application over groups of people, and to have intergenerational and transpersonal significance and endurance of validity, but which were not necessarily vested in a group or lineage of people who had demonstrated a profound and environmentally tested set of virtues which forged justification for legitimate leadership.

These offices of authority were ideally to be staffed by those who were best suited for the tasks they were nominated to perform.  In reality that was never actually the case.  The tribal, nomadic power structures simply and greedily demanded "first dibs" in all such power, and so old power was instantly corrupted in demanding the right to found and staff cities' offices of authority.  Corruption was the birth of office, not a merely ancillary, if unfortunate vicissitude of its promulgation over time.  From the beginning of civilization, the egos of the previous generations who had power in nomadic periods were also inherently corrupted so the offices they set up and/or usurped as though their own rightful reward were founded in that soil of corrupt character, however magnificent in power of one kind or another, no matter how beheld and treated by those who accepted as legitimate what in fact was not.

In this way from the beginning the environment of criminality which was created by social entropy was a threat to social purpose, and was typically ejected by force only in ways which scapegoated the losers in the hierarchical scam of power, leaving the winners looking like do gooders and heroes. The strongest wolves made an example and sacrifice out of the weakest of their fold to keep their own ranks culled and to impress the sheep. Those losers reformed as hierarchically structured banditry and brigandry, as a criminal subculture, and many colonizing nomadic forces emanated in this way from their stabler social origins. Some nations were more developed and already learned that the treating other nations who were weaker as though some sort of slave could sometimes be sustained for long periods of time, and did so.  They often used pretexts for war to justify galvanizing and further enslaving their own populations as part of an effort of enslaving other populations.  They learned to use criminality, on the streets and outside the city walls, as well as foreign threats of other kinds, as excuses to impose their wills on their own native populations as a "necessary interference".

Other nations would have done the same, often enough were, and through this provocation would resort to actions which made for a further justification for this synergistic system of international and intranational tyranny.  All forms of civilization cultivated in these conditions were co-opted at inception, and so were doomed to slavery from the start. The crime family tradition was ensconced in civilization at its very start and never released its grip to this day.

The city was always a rent game scam that became more transparently so over time, but was from the beginning fated to be such due to its the corruption of its founding, as well as from the steady evil of a criminal environment which ruled over all human action, either more from within the walls of the city, or else more from without, but always both in some ratio.  All that modernity has accomplished is a furthering of the sophistication and thoroughness, as well as the opacity of this system of evil. And the world's history, its cultural and social structures and artifacts, all are symptoms, effects, results, evidence and reinforcements of, inducements for and recapitulations to this systemic evil which is their cause and purpose, though all this is actively dressed up to be other than the case.  And that is the active disease of man, this his delusion which is a feverish warping of his mind and which is culturally cemented into his being, and which prevents him from even knowing that he is sick with an infestation of parasites which eat him into oblivion, destroying his mind and soul until he really is just a thing of muddy insignificance, except that his is a mud that an evil master can command to take any chosen and debased shape, and this he does.

That evil-minded master of mankind rules it to this day.

No comments: