Monday, October 13, 2014

Futility and Victory

2008 Jews Sans Frontieres made a cute, but quite accurate breakdown of how to make a case for Israel and win; however cutesy, it condenses all 21st century genteel arguments for genocide (sic) under the subheadings:
1. We rock. 2. They suck. 3. You suck. 4. Everything sucks.
It's all the normal stuff bullies use, only more refined for this now. America is the greatest, America is democratic, other countries are not the greatest, other countries are not as democratic, you hate America, go live in a cave in Afghanistan, therefore cluster bomb ten thousand Arabs. As computers said before Bill Gates created bluescreens, "Does not compute." And yet, here we are, centuries after Nero, having the same argument. There are so many layers to every nuance of the multifaceted ways in which we all dance about this latest particular issue of mass murder; hasbara is project management is green energy is shtick. Points 1-3 of the argumentative formula presented above are irrelevant, incorrect, and inappropriate, whether dressed up to be politically correct or not. "Whiteness is superior" becomes "powerful republics connected to central banks are superior," "niggers die" becomes "protect women's rights," and "traitor" stays as "traitor." It's ludicrous to even have an argument with the junior brownshirts about whether the Talmud justifies gunning a bunch of kids into a ditch; the justification of mass exterminations occurring in a global asylum is what makes it an asylum, as though it's reasonable to moderate a debate between a serial killer and the bleeding man he has chained to the wall.

What's most meritorious about the essay, and what distinguishes Gabriel from the bulk of anti-genocide people out there, is the endpoint to which his argument crystallizes: the "everything sucks" qualification, which is indeed the final and necessary refuge of antilife arguments.

Among informed people, for example, you can't argue ("We rock") that 1820 America is a democracy, because slaves and Indians and poor people and women aren't allowed to vote, and because wealthy political parties control the voting process anyway, making the vote an act of conformance to one of a small subset of candidates approved by the monied powers; 2010 Israel, too, fails that same apartheid test, just as attempts to dissemble the issue by citing the behavior of other people ("They suck") fall flat. Some Indian braves scalp people in battle, therefore we'll burn this village; there are public executions in Saudi Arabia, therefore we'll burn that village. The ignorant and the angry can reconcile these tenuous connections into a pro-genocide stance, and as Gabriel says, if that doesn't work, there's always ad hominem, calling someone a traitor to the race or whatnot.

That's all easy, and here we all are watching it happen again, watching another powerful white military exterminate another dark population, even though we have all these fancy scientific global communication devices that will surely put an end to such things once we have more. If only we had faster connections and could IM by thought alone, we'd solve all our problems. Solution: more technology. But put that aside for now; we want to focus on the last point of the argument, to which greedy murderers must always turn: "Everything sucks." Here's Gabriel's quote:
When you're done, there will always be dead-enders insisting that abuse of gays in Iran does not justify ethnic cleansing in Palestine. Take a deep breath, and pull the doomsday weapon: You suck! You're a Jew-hater, Arab-lover, anti-Semite, you're a pinko, a commie, a dreamer, a naive, a self-hater, you have issues, your mother worked for the Nazis, Prince Bandar buys you cookies, you forgot you were responsible for the holocaust, etc. The more the merrier. By the time you end this barrage, only a handful would be left standing. For mopping them up, you use the ultimate postmodern wisdom: Everything sucks.

War, genocide, racism, oppression are everywhere. From the Roma in Italy to the Native-Americans in the U.S., the weak are victimized. Why pick on Israel? It's the way of the world. Look! Right is only in question between equals in power; the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. Ethics, schmethics. Life is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Eat, drink! Carpe diem! The Palestinians would throw us into the sea if they could. Ha ha!

That's the ultimate argument behind war, to which we are all conditioned by the acceptance of Hobbes and Nietzsche, and the invisible hand(s) of both the financial and genetic marketplaces. Everything sucks, so why bother arguing about it? Of course it's a genocide, but that's the way of the world. Inferior organisms die off, making way for superior organisms.

Down here this one has had my own personal experiences having this exact type of discussion with Zionists, where, after over an hour of reciting how, to protect fragile democracy, the Arabs must go (since Arabs and democracy are incompatible), then yielding gradually to questions of who gets voting rights, the Zionists will admit that Israeli voting policies are bad and unfair, but "that's the way the world goes." "Yes," they'll admit, "apartheid state, but it must be this way, because it always has been this way in human societies, which are all unfair." And then, a week later, they'll have the same argument, in the same way, with the same people, repeating the tropes about "democracy" as though they don't remember having admitted last week that it really was just a land grab occurring between better- and lesser-equipped sets of people in a harsh world. Why they don't just start out with "survival of the fittest," I'd like to say I don't know, but of course I do--the fittest survive by pretending they believe in morals, while still exterminating natives and stealing resources. Only later do they rationalize it as a necessary consequence of a harsh world. Tough western conservatives think liberals are unrealistic wusses for making nice speeches about equality, when the liberals are far more efficient at indirectly starving or atomic-bombing targeted populations. Silly redneck, killing's for Democrats!

It all comes back to market-style evolution. You'd like to blame it on the Fed, maybe, if you're smart. The Fed showed up in 1913 and started the Great War right away, after which tumorous offshoots of the central banks appeared across the world, leading to over a hundred years of endless world war culminating in the newly contemplated conflicts brewing even as you read this. The Fed showed up in 1913, and shortly thereafter the Congress and the Supreme Court had been bribed into acceptance of an income tax, as taxes are necessary to create wars and destroy peoples. It seems to match so perfectly, and now, all roads, even the Pentagon road, lead back to the Fed. Anyone ever asking cui bono passes through the Fed. It's the foundation behind politician, council, and corporation; it's the determinant of social rights, the comptroller of universities and research, the setter of drug and police policy, the demander of wars, the elector of the elect, the prompter of the publisher, and the coder of all computers. It's behind every curtain controlling every single great wizard.

But even the Fed lies merely alongside the yellow brick road; it is not immune from the last time around. The Fed was just the offspring of the Second Bank of the U.S., against the creation of which even Andrew "Childslayer" Jackson fought, and which Bank was the offspring of the First Bank of the U.S., against the creation of which even Thomas "Manowner" Jefferson fought. So no, it's not just Janet "Let the World Starve" Yellen and her cohort of heartless vampires who eat the blame. The Fed had its own managed evolution, springing forth from a country whose creation and genocides were scripted and funded by central banks. The same geosocial composers who popularized the misrepresentations of Adam Smith and Charles Darwin paid for, also, the Nina, the Pinta, and the Santa Maria, all in the ultimate service of exterminating humanity. So all roads lead to the Fed, but once the current Hannibal has been discovered and securely masked, the road leads ever on and on, down from the very door where it began, mmh? And that door--the American front door, with its division of me/you space and readily apparent v. probable cause, waits for us all to go through it, to bow down before a numberless fleet of solar-powered, never-landing, standalone drone terminators whose noses are tatted excepto nam rex.

And enjoy the decline

All these little arguments we have are alternating expressions of life or antilife; of our own inner worries that there is or is not meaning. As the Israel argument example above brings out, we see that there are various stages of circumstantial disagreement we can have. Or the War on Terror or the War on Drugs or any of it. We're playing, primarily, on the surface level, and entities with greater tendency toward "meaning" have a higher rate of correlation to the sensible side of the surface-factual arguments, but those arguments don't really matter, because the people supporting the stupid end of the surface-factual arguments tend to be making those stupid decisions because they are entities with a greater tendency toward "no meaning."

Does Hamas/al Qaeda/ISIS/Boko Haram exist in an independent sense, or is it a creation of MI6/Mossad/CIA doing exactly what it's supposed to do?

Does marijuana/heroin/cocaine threaten the fabric of human society, or are drug laws crafted to control the market by preventing the growth of effective medicines which can be cheaply created by ordinary people who don't hold patents on more complex, dangerous chemicals that need to be artificially developed in expensive labs?

Does a tiny island with a population of weak, pasty, inbred cretins control the literal ground of the entire planet because of its inherently superior intellectual qualities? Do the homegrown leaders of far more powerful places kowtow to the inbred islanders only randomly, without any kind of pre-existing social network designed to coordinate everything they do through the pestilent, camera-littered Bleak Island?

Are brown humans really a savage variety of great ape, or is the nation known as "the United States of America" systematically exterminating them, right now in the open in 2014, a fascist death wonderland where supposedly-gulag-informed citizens aren't willing to resist the police even as Schindler's List plays right in front of their faces? Pick one of those two--there really are no other choices, or did you need to review both needle and street execution rates again?

Obama's Defense works in the pop-evolution world, because given those constraints--the universe devoid of meaning, morals relative, might making right, et cetera--it is the only valid answer. Proscribed diversity is right because it produces cultural vibrancy and efficiency and strength, not because diversity is right, and so forth. All lesser theories spring from this seeming battle between light and dark, Word and Void.

Environmental Foreshadowing

Oceanic coral and plankton die off, protracted nuclear fallout and hard rock mining waste gives everyone autoimmune diseases, and gigantic islands of disposable diapers and plastic bags fill the seas like tumors. Fresh water vanishes, replaced by sickened water that goes to golf courses and carwashes instead of the household filter. All the food is cancer, and everyone's killing each other, and we're busy buying another trillion dollar jet fighter because we like the idea that there might be a real dogfight again after fifty years of zero dogfights. Trying to change anything involves taking on international banking interests that control everything, there are certain plausible aspects of ethnosupremacy that prevent outsider interference in the control of wealth and communication, and everyone's too stupid or beaten down to understand anyway. All that. And again, they're melting the planet and we're all going to die, except certain elites are not going to die, they're going to become technologically immortal. They will finally have everything they ever dreamed, including robots to do all their work with zero percent chance of rebellion, and we'll all be dead so that we stop offending them by our inferiorness. The eugenic paradise will be complete in their robotic pleasure skyscrapers, their floating cities on the moon after the landfill planet has been abandoned.

They're doing it on purpose; it's the only rational conclusion. They have access to more information than you do, and you know that when the ocean dies, food will be a problem, right? So they must know that, so their apparent lack of concern means that they're not just greedy and shortsighted, but actually pure evil, 100% evil, attempting to wipe us all out, including themselves. That's what their timeless body-preservation in sensory pleasure is; it's the gentlest, most pleasant form of suicide they can imagine, perfectly concocted for people who want so badly to believe in Hobbes, Keynes, mass extinctions, and starvation-permissible human societies. Plot Summary, again: antilife is the anti-life; fearful minds seek to end all existence in order to nobly save us all from the pains of living.

Victory

I win. Not because of the pain, or the lack of pain, but because the long power is impossible to stop. Victory was guaranteed at first light; victory was already complete.

There's no harm in telling them how and why they've lost, because they already did. In every way, they're trying their best to destroy this planet, this species, and themselves. We can try to shield ourselves from reality by believing, "Oh, Koch and Soros are just trying to maximize their own pleasurable neurological sensations, and that includes knowing they'll have a 'legacy' in human history; they know we can last at least through their lifetimes, so that's why they destroy the world, because they only care about themselves." But they've read about Robespierre, and they saw Jobs die from commoner cancer, and they know all their "loved" ones are just waiting for them to die, and they know almost everyone here loathes them, and they know almost everyone will loathe them more later when memories are reloaded, and they know what it is they're doing, and they want the hell out. But theirs is the long game, which is why they're so very, very far ahead of you. They're willing to think generationally; they're aware that putting an end to this thing that they hate isn't going to be accomplished by even another world war or a major nuclear exchange, but by a slow poisoning that so gradually stills life that life doesn't recognize what's happening to it; doesn't respond to the gravity of the situation because the creep is so slow. So tariff becomes tax becomes probable cause becomes eviction becomes stop and frisk becomes born in prison becomes it's always just been that way.

The Rothschilds financed all sides in the Napoleonic Wars, not because they thought that would actually eliminate Europeans, but because they were making a selfless contribution to a future of eternal death: they were setting up 1812 and Ireland and Ottoman and Boer; they were readying the Confederate States; they were stoking the lusts of the nascent American Empire; they were setting up the permanent war-terror of the 20th century forward, leaving million-year poisons in their wake. The London Metal Exchange matters because nothing is ever fair, and the ultimate genocide isn't meant to be by the bayonet, but by the next iteration of supertoxin. Fantasize not about Ebola--Oh, sorry, were you worrying? Fine, worry not about it--for the future is meant to be blamed on no known cause, and simple infection makes great video games but causes simpletons to actually respond, which we don't want. The supercancers will be blamed on your DNA or the weather or your consumer habits, and there will be no cure except being loaded onto a computer, which will be pricey. So the elite spawn will evacuate to their tower-cities and moonsex resorts.

Stagnating nothings; Tuck Everlastings trapped in the same room forever. Imagine the future of their customized, perfected Hell, when nothing is exciting enough to get them wet anymore, and the most powerful high doesn't even earn a computed response. Pity their entrapment. Imagine the horror of the First Irradiate Space Expedition when rocketry is rediscovered, and the geigerous Earthlings begin to explore the lunar tombs of the ancient God-Kings, who were buried alive for centuries of the purest form of misery. How many Hollywood scriptwriters are willing to raise their hands and admit that they get most of their premises from old novels and new blogs? Well, guess what happens when you exterminate the proletariat? That's right--the caviar starts to taste like wet fish-shit, you don't feel like smiling when Cosby hugs his kids, ten Thai preteens can't make you hard, and you realize there's nothing more to laugh at. Ever. Welcome to banker's hell.

There's an easy distinction here between naive and optimistic. We recognize that they're trying to kill us all, and we're able to say, "Those assholes. This is terrible." But we're not so childish and naive that we wonder, "Gosh, how can they be so shortsighted and selfish?" We can recognize their horror, but see its ultimate service; see the failure of their attempts to reject the goodness of existence. It really is intellectual laziness on our part for us to see them littering the world with nuclear waste, and choking the ocean with mountains of diapers the size of Texas, and then blather, like so many Ralph Wiggums, "wow, they sure are greedy!" The Cuban Missile Cocklength Contest, if nothing else, should've made clear that this wasn't simple solipsism or psychopathy. Self-interested thinkers wouldn't be so willing to risk their Manhattan panic rooms to a Chinese nuclear strike, even if it earned them another billion, because they already have more money than they or their grandchildren can spend. They're not masochistic cutters, either, because they're going for the kill, and they're not suicidal, or they wouldn't be willing to be alive their entire lifetimes, spending all that time and effort trying to ensure that future generations are born with tumors. They literally hate everything.

We win. Why did the dinosaurs die? Because we wanted to grow. The shallow seas receded over a long and predictable period and the dinosaurs passed into something new and improved. Don't buy their ridiculous and unproven comet story, because they are so heavily invested in a random, meaningless world that is your enemy that they will come up with anything to explain everything--anything except an understandable progression. The world is your friend. Like Melkor, the poison and discord the elites are trying to weave into this is ultimately in our service. The radiation, the unnatural chemicals, with which they poison us, will kill humans, but will lay the groundwork for a faster, better next stage of evolution. The ten thousand year banker's hell has begun, but considering time (throw in a capital "T" if you prefer), it's not really that long. Silicate forms will be more malleable to personality expression; neural fields will drastically expand; we'll no longer be so naive that memories have to be checked in and out every transition. It's happened in plenty of other places, and it'll happen here, too, these tantrums of the proto-conscious and their obsession with returning to the womb of nonexistence. Let them make their piss and call it sacrifice. While they cackle with glee, strangling the ocean and scattering the sands, they're inadvertently sowing the seeds of the next spring. They are our tools. They can't be anything but. If they're nice, we develop slowly in an earthly paradise; if they're cruel, we go farther faster.

We win. Why did the humans die? Because we wanted to grow. The carbonic patterns receded over a long and predictable period and the humans passed into something new and improved.

It doesn't make what they're doing any less foul. They are Foulness incarnate; they are the holdover of a pre-time that never was, at once the most definitive horror and the most pitiful thing ever existable. It is not going to be fun getting through it, but we deserve it, and we'll emerge better. Just think of it as a really hard workout, if it helps. Yours is the consciousness of life, the affirmation of existence, the proof that a scatter of dust can compress itself into an eternal cycle of lights. Theirs is the futile contraction of everdeath and nonexistence, a fantasy of something that cannot exist, a relic of a battle that was fought only once.

There is nothing here they can use to kill us.

6 comments:

  1. So, what are you going to write about after this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The most important evolutions are not matter rearrangements. The desire to retrogress to nonexistence is a failing, but one with the potential to make things slower and more miserable--and dealing with it here is part of that process.

      It's akin to the pain, and apparent senseless difficulty, of choosing form over Void, or awareness over non-, which you've already done. It doesn't make any sense until you realize what you can do with increased perspective. (E.g., life is pain, but cheesecake is tasty.)

      Delete
    2. You should be my girlfriend. (I look good naked, plus the future of humanity demands it.)

      Delete
  2. Well, it is difficult to forgive. Rage is good. They don't even have that, they're just methodical.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, forgiveness is difficult; this one's still working on it. It's a really good one to get, though, because then you don't have to come back here anymore unless you're feeling charitable. At least, that's what they promised. /sigh

      "They" have got plenty of rage. However they may bluster, it's reserved mostly for themselves. You can't do what they do unless you've put yourself through certain things.

      Delete