“Lying is a pervasive human behavior.” [first sentence of abstract in Evans, Lee; Dev. Psychol. 49, (2013)] We start lying at age two, obvious lies, and the further development is in the ‘executive functions’, covering our tracks, taking the knowledge of the deceived into account. We lie, lie more to hide the lying. “Lying is a pervasive behavior in the adult world.” I add with confidence: As our mind becomes more complex and fractionated while nevertheless maintaining the illusion of a consistent person-hood, we become experts in lying and keeping this hidden from ourselves, first personally, but thus and in turn socially!
All in charge or sufficiently clever agree that “free democracy” does not work in large populations of apes without an iron fist hanging over the masses telling them what to believe; we apes are just too stupid, irrational, and violent, including populations with high average intelligence. The advantage of systems such as in China is that one can be quite honest and objective about this - not that they all are more objective or honest – but they can freely point out that the party is the top dog; they will not lose their employment like a Westerner if pointing to the truth that there is something more powerful than “free democracy” in control, in spite of that “democracy” and “freedom” are now also top words in China’s indoctrination, “democracy” usually the second or at times even first of the 12 or now often 16 words pounded into people everywhere, every park, every light show, freshly hammered into stone in many public squares – “freedom” is number five after “harmony”.
Those in charge or sufficiently clever in the Western “democracies” of course also know that there is no “free democracy”, especially many who are actively employed in the make-believe business. However, since the West is based on an almost religious belief into that a “free democracy” is already actualized, including free speech and access to information and the truth as it comes from unbiased science, (self-)deception is crucial and there is more deception and more sophisticated deception involved, and indeed so much that science is corrupted. Western(ized) science (and thus the international scientific community which the East still copies without improving) is not censored or only misinterpreted for the masses, but it is already internally corrupted; certainly the “social sciences” are so unscientific that one cannot speak of a science at all except for its academic posturing, a similar style of mating dances so to say. But how does the deception work? As direct deception, it is impossible, which helps denying the deception altogether!
Of course, there is no great conspiracy, say a Jewish one, at least not consciously so, and those conspiracies which there nevertheless are, including in some Jewish, say Zionist or orthodox or progressive circles, or with Bilderbergers or whatever else, are not as powerful as the unconscious, socially evolved mechanisms (the evolution of the Jews themselves gives a good example for that, see here and here). In order to approach a better understanding, let me ask a few questions.
An average journalist of some local rag already distorts the truth all the time, always of course rationalizing, justifying, and insisting on being a good and truthful person. On the other hand, every journalist has been once a naïve child, going to school, largely believing what is presented, and at some point truly believing that being a journalist is nice and good for free democracy, or perhaps even “An investigative journalist, oh yeah, wow, uncovering the truth and telling the world, that is what I want to become”. Now I ask you, when did the transformation into a weasel such as a common mainstream journalist, lying for a mediocre salary, happen? Certainly, there did not some day appear a Jew in the dark with a bag of shekels in one hand and a gun in the other whispering “Hey, you are seriously studying to be a journalist we see; there are a few secrets that you better never forget if you don’t want to have an accident.”
There is no abrupt transition, neither in time, nor between sub-populations.
Nevertheless, there are the two ends, and it seems very weird how there can be a transition from one end, the naïve deceived, to the other, the consciously deceiving. Most young soldiers are deceived, because otherwise, if they knew the truth about, for example, what happened in every recent Western war including WW2 all the way up to basically all conflicts today, the lies and mass murders of innocent people followed by what is effectively abandonment of the damaged veterans, no man in their right mind would sign up for such, not for any money. On the other hand, it is also beyond doubt that the majority of upper level people in journalism, politics, or the military know well that, for example, all the many conveniently timed accusations about supposed weapons of mass destruction and gift gas attacks “against his own people” and babies ripped out of incubators and so on have of course all been lies or false flag operations that were consciously supported by, for example, the UK government, so that the recent poisoning in the UK, allegedly with “Russian nerve agents” was likely ordered by the UK government, perhaps to incite war, but I am afraid it may be as lowly as nothing more but having yet another police enabled Islamic child rape ring vanish from the news. What goes on in the wide range between a believing stupid young solder at one end of the spectrum and a lying general or journalist on the other, especially given that, the child becoming a journalist, an officer a general, the apes move along the spectrum, swapping their beliefs in the lies with supporting those lies against better knowledge? After all, it is not just a few dishonest people, but human apes do such more or less all the time, usually believing that their actions are reasonable and ethical on grounds of the beliefs they claim to have.
There can be no abrupt transition, of course, but it seems that there can be no gradual transition either, at least not without at some point deeply shocking the previously uninitiated who still believed in the Easter Bunny! Both ends are consistent and stable; one deceives and one is deceived. But how can a semi-rational ape be anywhere in between, gotten however far yet happily not going further, assuming a single conscious person, nothing similar to "split mind/multiple personality disorder"? For example, how is it possible that such a being is fully aware that the government has lied to him so many times, for so many years, and yet, the being also seriously believes that somehow, although nothing changed fundamentally, the same sort of accusation happens to be the true this time around, yes this time we believe that the guy we are supposed to hate dipped babies into nerve gas and put his ID card on top, this time it is true.
Assuming individual persons that have access to their own knowledge in some integrating, consistent fashion, it all does not fit one way or another, for example, in almost all cases, not just with “those in charge”, people are neither evil enough to know nor stupid enough not to know. “The Russians are coming!” was a standing joke also in Germany; it made fun of old stupid people such as my Nazi grandma. Now suddenly, in only a few short years, most Germans believe “The Russians are coming!” – also or perhaps mainly educated ones, I know it from my own family! How is such a fast transition toward hating our brothers on grounds of transparent propaganda possible, assuming semi-rational persons without "split-personality disorder"? I am not asking about the exploitative Jewish oligarchs that Putin thankfully kicked out of Russia and who now push the propaganda – they exist but are not the problem, could not be the problem if I did not have to ask instead how people such as my brother, although being far more intelligent than necessary to see propaganda as what it is, tolerate and support the lies, even as it is going on so far now that the reckless provocations may well trigger direct responses and justified preventive actions from Russia, read: Direct War(!) (instead of the continuous proxy wars that annihilate mostly brown people nobody gives a damn about) How can normally healthy apes understand best that normally healthy apes just are like this (my abnormally Aspergerian brain cannot count as a counter example or viable alternative).
Our core assumption is wrong! The ‘attribution error’: We attribute our actions and thoughts to a single, consistent “person”, our “self” with its apparent integrity. We are evolved to identify as a single entity that therefore can be held responsible for its actions. We attribute our thoughts and actions to a single entity which we feel is one continuous, consistent consciousness with a consistent system of values and so on, while actually, such personhood is an illusion. We are all, every single ape, no more than an inconsistent bunch of neural modules reacting, doing whatever they do, including constraining what we believe to be, at any one time, and then what we feel to be when playing another role, being usually in several ways completely different, inconsistent, yet always feeling to be the same guy acting on grounds of good reasons. Perhaps democracy could work with such persons, with those “souls” that also religion is co-evolved to make us believe in, but there are no such things beyond our illusions, our feeling as if.
The huge difficulty with this truth, the reason it is so unpalatable personally as well as socially, is that it denies responsibility, but our central illusion is evolved to provide precisely that, namely the concept and emotions of responsibility as necessary for social structure! See, under the assumption that we are what we usually feel we are, namely single semi-rational persons, terrorists are correct when they say that there are no innocent adults in Western democracies, for example innocent people working in a bombed building. You cannot on one hand be proud to be free and supposedly living in a democracy where you are allowed to actively (!) participate, including free speech and putting yourself up for election, but on the other hand, although not being desperately poor, deny being responsible for supporting the same sort of mass murder again and again, another time one of the two parties, another Tony Blair, another Bush, another time Merkel with no term limits, in spite of knowing that they are, in effect, traitors and serial mass murderers all the way back to Winston Churchill and beyond. My brother claims that he (again, an intelligent, highly educated guy who could not just vote but be elected) cannot do anything against the “political class”, and of course he insists on having deserved his holidays goofing around and plenty of free time in motor bike clubs and so on. He knows that all his consumption supports the “political class”; he rejects China as something evil because it is not a “free democracy”. Does he really think that his ridiculous justifications about being a good father and a vegetarian are going to impress somebody who had his family killed by the people and propaganda that his consumption and silence support every day, knowingly, for decades? An average person’s justifications are the stammering of the guilty, especially in the “free democracies”, and we are not expected to believe but to be just as guilty and therefore support this mutual self-deception.
Practical ways of dealing with this responsibility are either: Continuing in your denial of that you are a delusional, multi-personality, irrational ape, and thus dealing with this truth the same as you deal with most other truths, including shutting down of the discourse if it becomes too meaningful, as is happening now at an accelerating pace all over the Western hemisphere, reaching all the way into destroying families – mothers usually excuse most anything their son’s do, yet it is still more comfortable to believe your son has been poisoned by evil Russian propaganda than to look too deeply into the mirror. Or else, and I prefer this way of dealing with my personal responsibility for all the murder and torture and deception that I have tolerated and supported for many decades, admit the truth about what I really am: bio-software that is evolved to deceive and be deluded in order to function in the co-evolved social structures.
No alternative movement stands fully behind this, also not the “new” or “dark enlightenment” and their denouncing of “the cathedral”. All the offered alternatives have their own pile of deception that you are not allowed to poke, and so, ever more people feel disillusioned in the most negative ways. As a White guy in Europe perhaps, clutching your pepper spray hoping the bus does not break down near a No-Go Zone, having little prospects for finding a good wife, peaceful civilization breaking down around you like the Florida bridge designed by an overpaid team of “diverse” female engineers, your own kind becoming rapidly rarer and anyway fighting each other, it feels as if all is lost. Modern “Nazis” such as Anglin prosper by simply stating obvious truths (most of the time and taking sarcasm/irony into account(!), their analysis is usually better than anything in the news) and largely admitting the irrational yet natural sources of their own thinking. (It is the new cool, and as such, I welcome it – hell what else can you look at today without feeling treated like an idiot? Andrew is as funny as progressive Jews still were just a few years ago (which made me think from day one they likely ghostwrite it for him). BTW: Anglin/Weev is a great example in this context, since it is also likely a Jewish operation to split the extreme right - as I said before: I welcome that. Any movement that falls for such should.)
To many in the West, on all sides, it consistently seems as if all is lost, and that seems to be an evolved mechanism by itself by now, but that is another discussion. I like to give some hope. Xi’s commenting on that he knows about the “fickle character of human relations”, and Putin surely knows too, is the closest to a mature understanding among influential forces that we can hope for. There are powerful countries with responsible leaders, political systems that have learned how to deal with “democracy” given the objective state on this planet of the apes.
Sure, they do not let just anybody in; that is one important thing about them that makes them what they are, but if you are as able as you claim, get your act together and you will be welcome. Sure, Western society is in such a miserable state that it may take down the whole world with it before admitting that their system is rotten, but every day it becomes more likely that the West’s declining capabilities would be eradicated before triggering global atomic destruction. They may help rape poor countries such as Syria another few times, but already they dare not cross China or Russia in any significant way, fearing the wrath of the red dragons. Perhaps it is not too optimistic to hope that we may die in peace and of old age.
These last few sections may appear to much of the alternative right as defeatism and treason against my race and culture. I am confident in my ability to argue against such an interpretation, and on grounds of understanding evolution (bio-social-techno) as an autistically obsessed scientist rather than somebody who ventures into such only in as far as it provides support for an already held ideology. You will not find anybody in the world more red-pilled on “natural constraints” against progressive wishful thinking, starting at the rock bottom basis of my never doing anything but finding myself in the already just happened past. That “I fundamentally can do nothing” does not offer the option of doing nothing, and nothing fundamentally forbids that a largely peaceful and benevolent “big solution” will have been seen to have rather suddenly emerged and taken over globally in the social substrate, leaving everybody happy, including the Nazi, the negro, the stoner, the cows and pigs. The probability of such is positively correlated with finding your own actions having been consistent with that emergence. This is plain fundamental science of emergence, no wishful philosophy whatsoever.
Comments