Civil war of some sort may well be inevitable, although I'm increasingly optimistic that it can be avoided. If so, so be it, but ... have you noticed the regime media has lately started talking about civil war? That strikes me as more desperation on their part.
Civil war of some sort may well be inevitable, although I'm increasingly optimistic that it can be avoided. If so, so be it, but ... have you noticed the regime media has lately started talking about civil war? That strikes me as more desperation on their part.
They are getting desperate. Ultimately, they lose, for all the reasons you articulated, but I imagine that in the near-term they either tighten the screws overmuch to keep control of the narrative, governments, and financial systems, and thereby provoke a full-on revolt, or they make a last-ditch effort to engineer the apocalypse via real bioweapons or nukes, while they hide themselves in their bunkers. The elites do have some cataclysmic weapons at their disposal, and I doubt they would ever willingly abdicate their thrones. Their desperation is real, because they know the writing is on the wall, and they are outnumbered by angry peasants a million to one.
"The elites do have some cataclysmic weapons at their disposal..."
Do they? Or do they only dream they do, in the same way they dreamed that their will can be made flesh, and that their utopia of bug-eating, interchangeable drones is inevitable. If one of them orders a Code Red on humanity, how certain is it that the suicidal order will be carried out by the managerial class?
To fully understand them, we must understand cowardice. I would bet that is a difficult chore for everyone posting here, myself included. But we must try to understand it, though we think they have no chance of ultimate success. Even (especially?) hopeless causes can cause a lot of damage on the path to defeat.
Wasn't a reference exactly. Just indicating that their tactic is largely to try and scare everyone into complying by making us think they're larger and stronger than they are.
I wonder about the effects of that much wealth, particularly of inherited. Humans have a tendency to use oversized capabilities as crutches, leading to the neglected faculties withering.
That kind of isolation sounds soul destroying. Still. I suspect there's more to it. When everything is available, effortlessly, effort ceases to hold meaning, no? It seems like that would lead to a comprehensive degradation in skill.
But, that's speculation. I've not yet ran in those circles.
Needing to ask people for a favor and really depending on their kindness is very unpleasant, but it does keep you humble and connected to others in an important way. Never needing that, and always being able to afford even the most outlandish and personalized "free-market" solution to your problems, and being able to always shift responsibility onto others, has got to make it really fucking difficult to develop admirable qualities.
That said, I met someone from the centimillionaire class in passing, and he was polite and did not seem to flaunt his wealth or position openly (though the status markers were there if you knew where to look), but there was a subtle aura about him that was almost unreal. Best analogy I can think of: it was like meeting someone from another country, who has adapted well enough to blend into your own culture without drawing attention to himself, but if you spend any time with him, you wonder if he's really a spy for his home country, because even though he moves among your countrymen, he definitely is not one of you or on your side.
That's something that took me a while to learn. I grew up with a mindset where one should be ready to help whenever needed, but sparing in asking for help ... which, I think, isn't a bad philosophy per se, since it maximizes altruism while minimizing freeloading. But in my case it was exacerbated by an almost pathological degree of independence, where I constantly wanted to demonstrate that I really can do it all myself, damnit. That's something I've had to work on, and I'm still like that to a large degree and probably always will be, part of the hardwired sigma male lone wolf grindset. To connect this to the discussion over at Doc's, that's given me a pretty intense appreciation of those bonds that are formed by the mutual aid of one's brothers ... it's not so much water to a fish as a campfire in a dark forest, and all the more precious for that.
You make a good point, and I hope you're right. Hopefully no one from the managerial class would be stupid enough to act out Slim Pickens' role in Dr Strangelove and ride the bomb rodeo style to its target!
Yeah, I actually had that very scene in mind. Strangelove is maybe the greatest horror-comedy film ever made. The dual climax of Kong's pseudo-kamikaze strike matched with Strangelove's depiction of the bunkers basically satirizes the whole of our fears about "them".
Civil war scenarios derive their appeal from the possibility of a decisive resolution of the present conflict. We are all getting exhausted by the situation and want things settled. Yet eschatology, even in its most refined and secular forms, is not a sound basis for political thinking.
The regime could collapse, but it is much more likely to use the next few crises as an opportunity for renewal. The alchemists version of the acronym INRI gets it right: igne natura renovatur integra...nature is made whole (or renews itself) by way of fire. The disgrace and replacement of the gerontocrat gangsters will provide vast opportunities for their most talented proteges to thrive. Leviathan will die, but the eggs it laid will hatch.
Civil war of some sort may well be inevitable, although I'm increasingly optimistic that it can be avoided. If so, so be it, but ... have you noticed the regime media has lately started talking about civil war? That strikes me as more desperation on their part.
They are getting desperate. Ultimately, they lose, for all the reasons you articulated, but I imagine that in the near-term they either tighten the screws overmuch to keep control of the narrative, governments, and financial systems, and thereby provoke a full-on revolt, or they make a last-ditch effort to engineer the apocalypse via real bioweapons or nukes, while they hide themselves in their bunkers. The elites do have some cataclysmic weapons at their disposal, and I doubt they would ever willingly abdicate their thrones. Their desperation is real, because they know the writing is on the wall, and they are outnumbered by angry peasants a million to one.
"The elites do have some cataclysmic weapons at their disposal..."
Do they? Or do they only dream they do, in the same way they dreamed that their will can be made flesh, and that their utopia of bug-eating, interchangeable drones is inevitable. If one of them orders a Code Red on humanity, how certain is it that the suicidal order will be carried out by the managerial class?
To fully understand them, we must understand cowardice. I would bet that is a difficult chore for everyone posting here, myself included. But we must try to understand it, though we think they have no chance of ultimate success. Even (especially?) hopeless causes can cause a lot of damage on the path to defeat.
"Do they? Or do they only dream they do"
Ooga booga!
I wish I got this reference. I bet it was a doozy.
Wasn't a reference exactly. Just indicating that their tactic is largely to try and scare everyone into complying by making us think they're larger and stronger than they are.
Very true. They are more like viruses than giants.
Lord of the Rings, only Sauron is really just the Goblin King hiding behind a curtain.
I wonder about the effects of that much wealth, particularly of inherited. Humans have a tendency to use oversized capabilities as crutches, leading to the neglected faculties withering.
That kind of isolation sounds soul destroying. Still. I suspect there's more to it. When everything is available, effortlessly, effort ceases to hold meaning, no? It seems like that would lead to a comprehensive degradation in skill.
But, that's speculation. I've not yet ran in those circles.
Needing to ask people for a favor and really depending on their kindness is very unpleasant, but it does keep you humble and connected to others in an important way. Never needing that, and always being able to afford even the most outlandish and personalized "free-market" solution to your problems, and being able to always shift responsibility onto others, has got to make it really fucking difficult to develop admirable qualities.
That said, I met someone from the centimillionaire class in passing, and he was polite and did not seem to flaunt his wealth or position openly (though the status markers were there if you knew where to look), but there was a subtle aura about him that was almost unreal. Best analogy I can think of: it was like meeting someone from another country, who has adapted well enough to blend into your own culture without drawing attention to himself, but if you spend any time with him, you wonder if he's really a spy for his home country, because even though he moves among your countrymen, he definitely is not one of you or on your side.
That's something that took me a while to learn. I grew up with a mindset where one should be ready to help whenever needed, but sparing in asking for help ... which, I think, isn't a bad philosophy per se, since it maximizes altruism while minimizing freeloading. But in my case it was exacerbated by an almost pathological degree of independence, where I constantly wanted to demonstrate that I really can do it all myself, damnit. That's something I've had to work on, and I'm still like that to a large degree and probably always will be, part of the hardwired sigma male lone wolf grindset. To connect this to the discussion over at Doc's, that's given me a pretty intense appreciation of those bonds that are formed by the mutual aid of one's brothers ... it's not so much water to a fish as a campfire in a dark forest, and all the more precious for that.
Great insight. That is one of many parts of masculinity that is taught wrong these days.
You make a good point, and I hope you're right. Hopefully no one from the managerial class would be stupid enough to act out Slim Pickens' role in Dr Strangelove and ride the bomb rodeo style to its target!
Yeah, I actually had that very scene in mind. Strangelove is maybe the greatest horror-comedy film ever made. The dual climax of Kong's pseudo-kamikaze strike matched with Strangelove's depiction of the bunkers basically satirizes the whole of our fears about "them".
Civil war scenarios derive their appeal from the possibility of a decisive resolution of the present conflict. We are all getting exhausted by the situation and want things settled. Yet eschatology, even in its most refined and secular forms, is not a sound basis for political thinking.
The regime could collapse, but it is much more likely to use the next few crises as an opportunity for renewal. The alchemists version of the acronym INRI gets it right: igne natura renovatur integra...nature is made whole (or renews itself) by way of fire. The disgrace and replacement of the gerontocrat gangsters will provide vast opportunities for their most talented proteges to thrive. Leviathan will die, but the eggs it laid will hatch.