Binding Chaos

From now until the PayPal14 ransom is paid to eBay, I would like to donate all proceeds from this book to their fund. Since there aren’t any proceeds from this book, that is difficult. Please go here and donate to them anyway, read it, you’ll see why.

The world is long overdue for a completely new system of governance.

If there was ever a need for political representation or a paternalistic and opaque authority it has been removed by technology. Every political system we have tried has proven incapable of protecting human rights and dignity. Every political system we have tried has devolved into oligarchy. To effect the change we require immediately, to give individuals control and responsibility, to bring regional systems under regional governance, allow global collaboration and protect the heritage of future generations, we need a new political model.

Hard copy is expensive because colour inside. Feel free to print the PDF in black and white instead.

Amazon
CreateSpace store
Binding Chaos PDF 6 X 9
Binding Chaos PDF 8.5 X 11
Enlazando Caos Spanish, thanks very much to Sandra Bit (@ebitlution) for translation.
ePub version thanks very much to Kevin Beynon

Share in any way you like with attribution (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0). Linkback to here if possible.

Pay what you feel is fair. Anything I earn gives me more time to write.

With Bitcoin: 12kRdHWsZ6agchT3svNwRYb34n4A2pAFju
Through Bitpay
Through Paypal
Ongoing support through Gittip

If you do anything interesting with the text, leave a link in the comments and I’ll link to translations, different file formats, etc.

In this interview I try to answer the most common questions people have about Binding Chaos.

And here is How to replace your democracy with governance by the people.

There are no nation states

Nation has always been a fuzzy term. Even in times when distance, mountains and rivers posed insurmountable barriers to assimilation, when nations were divided by language, dress, laws and beliefs, both the customs and the populations of these nations were constantly evolving.

States have no resemblance to nations. States are created by the highly militarized partitioning of societies into economic markets and property ownership completely regardless of who the people in those states are or how the creation of the state divides and restricts our nations.

While nations are living and fluid and variable depending on context and perspective, states are an attempt to freeze one official historical viewpoint for all time. States preserve culture to prevent it from living, keep it steeped in formaldehyde unable to breathe and grow. Nations as defined by states are inviolable, to suggest change is sacrilegious, to question perspective or boundaries is deemed intolerable.

The reality of layered and overlapping nations, of intersections, of cooperation and flexibility is denied by the rigid borders and uniformity of states. Traditions of fluid property custodianship, sharing and merging are rejected for one tradition of rigid ownership clamped down and made law for every region on earth. Ethnic and societal realities of no fixed lines between groupings are ignored for false categorizing. While nations are gathered for community, cooperation and sharing, states are imposed for segregating, competing and allocating.

Nations create Us, states create the Other.

While nations reveled in their diversity, states decree a homogenized sameness, a world where everyone wears the same grey suits, international law assures uniform belief systems worldwide, the trade economy is the one god all must serve to survive. Like agricultural crops, people are raised in the manner most efficient for industry, the same worldwide. Nations are people, states are corporations.

States insist partitions between identical blocks of people are necessary for safety. States seek to divide and categorize. Diverse nations already do live together and overlap peacefully everywhere. Nations have fought over resources many times in the past. The problems associated with trade economy are applicable whether ownership is international, national, regional or private and will only be addressed by addressing trade economy. It is no less awful for people to be killed by a foreign corporation pillaging resources than by competing local nations. States did not bring peace to these problems, they brought totalitarian rule by global resource mafia. People in different nations sometimes oppose each others values to the point they wish to shun each other. International boycotts such as the BDS campaign against Israel prove this solution does not require states and indeed, states only boycott for economic interest, not human rights.

Nations are ideas and traditions which exist across borders and generations and they cannot be killed. States are tied to the property they control and they die without militaries and coercive laws to keep them in power. States attempt to present themselves as prefab nations, as if control of property and written laws and constitutions can be applied to populations and everyone in a geographical region will suddenly become bonded with national identity. Everywhere in the world nations such as the Kurds, Kachin, Catalan and many others refuse assimilation and states such as the five eyes prove they will never be anything but corporations.

Kill the states. Let the nations breathe.

Glossary

The following is a glossary of what I personally mean when I say these words. I realize there are many different definitions for most of them and this is not an attempt to impose my definitions as the correct ones or an invitation to debate the definitions, this is only the definition that applies to anything I say or write. As language is meant to be a shortcut to communication I try not to spend too much time discussing definitions and usually avoid the names of things like ideologies which are sure to derail every conversation into a discussion of definitions. Let me know what’s missing.

Special Note: I have not created a political ideology called Stigmergy. Stigmergy is a method of action based collaboration, one of many methods which work under different circumstances. It is not governance.

—————————————————————————–

Approval economy: Economy based on societal approval and acceptance instead of trade to the powerful.

Auto-coercion: Transparent, consensual coercion a society applies onto itself.

Autonomy: The right to governance by user group including governance of self for those things which impact only self.

Autonomy, Diversity, Society: Qualities that need to be balanced to allow a system where everyone can reach their full potential.

Butterfly: A dissociated idea which can cause a hurricane of change. Reference to the butterfly effect.

Centripetal force: Acts on dissimilar populations in egalitarian structures to create ponzi schemes of celebrity, wealth and power.

Charity: A dissociated population will need charity to care for those whose needs are not inherent in the structure. Mary Wollstonecraft stated “Where there is justice there is no need for charity.” Due to the difficulty of defining justice I would rather say “Where there is society there is no need for charity.” and use that law as a measure of whether a society has failed.

Commoner: A role created by oligarchical coercive force. Mass acceptance of this role creates a solid block of uniform opinions which can be used to create and uphold oligarchy and ostracize witches and wretches.

Concentric circle: Peer promoted voices or ideas in a transparent, permeable structure where the ones at the centre receive the most amplification.

Democracy: Governance by representative or direct voting systems.

Diversity: There is diversity between every two humans. Societal structure ought to inherently provide equivalence for all.

Epistemic community: A way to provide elite expertise for projects without relinquishing control to an elite oligarchy. People or ideas are peer promoted from within the user group and communities remain transparent and permeable to everyone. Acceptance or rejection of the ideas is always up to the user group to avoid an unassailable oligarchy. Typically organized in transparent, permeable concentric circles.

Equality: An observably false idea that all people are equal used to justify imposing an egalitarian structure on diverse populations and preventing equivalence.

Equivalence: The idea that all members of a society are entitled to equivalent benefit from the society and no one should be valued by standards of achievement which others have greater ability to attain. No one should be forced or coerced to strive for goals they do not choose or prevented from striving for those they do. No contribution to society is inherently of greater value than another although the degree of effort may be.

Feminism: If capitalized, I am talking about the industry, those who presume to speak for womankind. Feminism strengthens a gendered outlook. Fighting Masculinism would remove it.

Fraternity: Fraternity as a goal is not suitable to global collaboration as it implies both equality and unanimity of principles. It has resulted in a fraternity of Great Men aligned by the principle of capitalism holding power.

Governance: A force directing actions taken by society.

Great Man: Reference to Thomas Carlyle’s theory that “The history of the world is but the biography of great men”. My definition of Great Men is those with the ability to capture the attention of the masses. The difference between a Great Man and a knowledge bridge is that Great Men do not act as a bridge between the masses and those outside their Overton window, they act as a gate. They use selected information from the shadows to increase their own power and block that which does not benefit them. In an egalitarian system centripetal force will create oligarchs out of Great Men. Not to be confused with uncapitalized great men who are just men who are great.

Iron law of oligarchy: Theory of Robert Michels, “Who says organization, says oligarchy”, justification for fascism. Theory I want to disprove.

Ken doll: Anyone with the ability and expectation, due to demographics and non-elite expertise, to become a Great Man. Usually caucasian well-educated men but women and other ethnicities can be Ken dolls if they have the right background and connections.

Knowledge bridge: People who help disseminate information from an expert to a novice level of understanding and collectively audit what the epistemic community is doing. Besides being essential for education and auditing, this is important to avoid demagogues and Great Men who have the ability and time to develop mass appeal but are not the source of expertise at the level the world needs. Epistemic communities and knowledge bridges allow elite expertise a direct path of communication to the entire user group and provide a path for anyone in the user group to achieve elite expertise if they wish.

Lesser Great Men: Great Men accepted as such only to provide tokenism for a gender or ethnicity.

Libertarian: When I say libertarian (rarely) I am referring to the ideas of John Locke.

Liberty: Liberty is an idea aspired to as an opposite to slavery. There is no true liberty. Coercion, responsibility and dependency all exist and did even in a state of nature. Liberty as a goal should be replaced by transparent, freely accepted, societal auto-coercion.

Master morality: Reference to Nietzsche’s idea in On the Genealogy of Morality. Morality adopted by the powerful to pretend their situation is one of superiority or virtue, values pride, strength, power, superiority, etc.

Paedosadist: The more accurate word I use in place of paedophile, someone who harms children for their own gratification. I do not use it to refer to a child who is a sadist.

Patriarchy: When I say Patriarchy I am referring to the work of Robert Filmer, specifically Patriarcha.

Rainbows and unicorns: Wonderful things used to promote ideologies they have no connection to, ie the conflation of human rights with democracy when there is nothing in the principle of democracy which guarantees human rights.

Sandbox villages: Societies (do not have to be geographically defined) where we can try out new ideas for governance and collaboration.

Seductive coercion: Coercion which persuades rather than forces but can be much more powerful than force, particularly if unnoticed or acknowledged.

Singularity: Common definition is of a technological singularity, a time when artificial intelligence will have progressed to the point of a greater-than-human intelligence and begin progressing beyond a point of human comprehension. I refer to a social singularity to describe society that is already far too complex and requiring far too much information processing for individual comprehension to be attainable. We now require mass collaboration to understand any of the forces controlling us or to be able to rationally govern ourselves.

Slave morality: Reference to Nietzsche’s idea in On the Genealogy of Morality. Morality adopted by the oppressed to pretend their situation is one of choice, values kindness, humility, sympathy, endurance, etc.

Social morality: My preference for the future. Values personal achievement and contribution to society.

Society: Interdependent relationships of people who have agreed to be bound by a social contract with each other. All people belong to many different societies of every size.

Stigmergy: Action based method of collaboration where people who don’t have to talk to each other or know each other work on the same project and build something together. There has to be one idea that everyone understands and agrees on as a goal but beyond that no one is the boss or telling anyone how to work or even if they should work.

Systems: Interacting people, ideas, infrastructure and labour which work in a common area. Similar to ministries in today’s governance. Health is an example of a system. Systems have local and global levels. The global usually acts as an epistemic community and the local is the acceptance and rejection of ideas and implementation of them. Systems can overlap and cooperate with each other.

Systems of dissociation: Systems constructed to isolate and divide people from their basic needs or each other and their ability to collaborate. Counter-intuitively, the concepts of equality, group affiliation and collectiveness are dissociative as they deny diversity and isolate those outside their defined borders.

Thought Leader: A communicator who acts as a Great Man.

Übermensch: Reference to Friedrich Nietzsche’s idea of evolution to a higher level of man, except I use it as a reference to what a Great Man thinks of himself as, where Nietzsche felt he was describing what he is.

Witches: Sources of knowledge or innovation where the powerful do not want knowledge and innovation. Usually from wretched populations. A witch who has won acceptance occasionally becomes a Great Man.

Wretches: Those whom society has chosen not to see.

Witches and how they are silenced

Part of a series, Autonomy, Diversity, Society. Posts about our roles, relationships and governance. No article in this section is meant to stand alone, there will be a lot more coming soon that will clarify the current posts.

—-

A weed is a strong plant thriving where those in power do not want it. A witch is a strong person thriving where those in power do not want them.

The last millennium promised utopia and received instead plagues, wars, and capitalism. European histories of the first half write of a dark time when not much happened because the history of the peasant rebellions is dominated by those history still casts back into the shadows. A history which reads as Thomas Carlyle’s “Biography of Great Men” and inexorable industrial progress is a cover for endless battles and insurrections and powerful networks of horizontal collaboration.

Europe in the early part of the second millennium saw the rise of centralized power under the Catholic church coinciding with ongoing turmoil between peasants and those who sought to enclose and control their land use and acquire their labour. Slavery had evolved into serfdom and many had far greater autonomy, their own land plus the commons, solidarity and community. Martin Luther and the Protestants preached spiritual freedom. The peasants had diversity and society and were fighting to maintain autonomy. The entire millennium saw the commodification of society under centralized control to remove the peasants’ autonomy. Silvia Federici[1] calls the heretic movements of the 11-13th centuries the first “proletarian international” and she describes the heretics “liberation theology” which “denounced social hierarchies, private property and the accumulation of wealth” and disseminated “a new revolutionary conception of society that … redefined every aspect of daily life (work, property, sexual reproduction and the position of women) posing the question of emancipation in truly universal terms.” The Cathars saw the spirit as being sexless and gendered roles as illogical.

The Beguines of the 12th century also created a society of horizontal collaboration among women, devoted to prayer and good works but free of subjection by the church or any other hierarchy as did the smaller male Beghard communities. The Mirror of Simple Souls[3] by Beguine Marguerite Porete in the early 14th-century was written in the more accessible French and intended to make the teachings accessible, unlike the church’s Latin. During a time when the Catholic church acted as the sole NGO, collecting money for the poor and keeping it for themselves, these women were threatening the church coffers. Women were also, according to Federici, a major force behind the later peasant revolts during food shortages and other troubles as they seldom had the option of leaving and were responsible for the caretaking of children and others. Women who were part of the families and communities they were healers in were also less likely to act in the interests of the powerful over the health of their families. Isabel Pérez Molina writes[2] “… witches-healers … advised people to control their consumption of sugar, since they had detected illnesses related to such consumption. However, for the Church, which had interests in the sugar industry, it was in its interest for consumption to increase, not the other way round.”

The church and capitalists responded to the rising egalitarian threat by creating a hierarchy which demonized women to divide the previously united peasants. Where all had previously worked together in a society, waged labour created class warfare and a new master-servant relationship between men and women. Men had autonomy through land replaced by autonomy through wages and women were now unpaid slaves or, sometimes thanks to new abolition of laws against rape of the lower classes, prey.

The power of life and death was largely the domain of women in Europe at that point as they were the keepers of medicinal knowledge and the medical practitioners. They were also the midwives and the people who performed abortions and taught contraception so they controlled the production of labour at a time industry was demanding more workers. Women’s bodies, no less than foreign continents, became the site of a capitalist war for resources. By 1484 when Pope Innocent VIII issued a papal bull[4] approving the Inquisition, women were clearly defined as capitalism’s first terrorist threat accused of having “slain infants yet in the mother’s womb … hinder men from performing the sexual act and women from conceiving”.

Between the twelfth to the seventeenth centuries the witch hunt which raged over Europe and the Americas killed untold numbers of women who practiced medicine or had medical knowledge at the same time that the institution of all male professional medicine was being established. The medical knowledge taught in the universities established in the twelfth century was primarily a study of the works of Galen and Hippocrates and included little to no practical experience. The professional practice consisted of little more than blood letting and incantations by the church with confession required before treatment.

The universities commodified care for society members into a product to make the Catholic church more wealthy, much as the medical industry has continued to put corporate wealth over medical care today. The execution of all women practitioners and forbidding of all old knowledge was to establish a monopoly over the most important societal knowledge, the power over life and death. Institutionalization and professionalization allowed control of the sources of knowledge by the men of the dominant social classes, a situation still true today. What is billed as The Birth of Modern Medicine was really the death of all women’s knowledge and most importantly, the death of women’s control over their own reproductive destinies. The creation of officially sanctioned knowledge removed ownership of knowledge from women and indigenous societies and placed it all under rigid capitalist control. Practices which had been used and tested for centuries were not considered official or tested until the Great Men approved and claimed ownership of them.

The demonization of women was greatly helped by the teachings of their professional rivals who brought back such Hippocratic favourites as female hysteria (still a very popular diagnosis for any woman who speaks in public) and the wandering womb, described by Aretaeus: In the middle of the flanks of women lies the womb, a female viscus, closely resembling an animal; for it is moved of itself hither and thither in the flanks, also upwards in a direct line to below the cartilage of the thorax, and also obliquely to the right or to the left, either to the liver or the spleen, and it likewise is subject to prolapsus downwards, and in a word, it is altogether erratic. It delights also in fragrant smells, and advances towards them; and it has an aversion to fetid smells, and flees from them; and, on the whole, the womb is like an animal within an animal.[5] It’s hard not to be reminded of US politicians today who claim that women’s bodies are full of hundreds of tiny dead babies.

The first step to creating a patriarchal society was removing matrilineal power from women. In 1680 Robert Filmer’s Patriarcha decreed that power was naturally the domain of men since it was men that contributed the most to childbirth. This authority was based on the rewriting of the obvious physical fact of all humanity emerging from a woman’s uterus into a fairy story about man being created in God’s image and women being created from man’s rib. Since men were held to be the ones most concerned with birth, control over women’s sexuality and uteruses came under men’s domain. The women healers also used sedatives and other drugs to assist in childbirth which the church decided was against God’s will that women give birth in pain and die frequently in childbirth. As of 2012, almost 800 women die in pregnancy or childbirth every day. The Catholic church today still spends far more time objecting to abortion than to murder.

At the same time that women saw their own bodies turned into workhouses to enslave them and lost autonomy over their own bodies, the trade economy made all work not traded to the powerful for a wage unrecognized. The World Bank today still speaks of women ‘entering the workforce’ and ‘contributing labour’ when they enter the trade economy. Worker’s movements centre around waged workers and men’s rights activists insist more men die on the job because the occupational hazards of childbirth and marriage aren’t considered jobs. According to the World Health Organization 287 000 women die in childbirth every year. All US combat casualties in all wars ever come to 848,163. Laws protecting against forced labour and slavery do not include motherhood. While a capitalist who invests in anything that produces income is entitled to a return on investment, women who produced the entire work force are entitled to none.

With the destruction of peasant society women lost their communal support network. Women had to either manage a job in the trade economy while being also solely responsible for societal support or accept work as a slave to her own husband and family, with even her wages from the trade economy often being paid to him. Frequently there was no choice of independence from marriage. Men were reduced to working all day away from their family to purchase their admittance into it. Family relationships which had, once established, been purely social were now monetized and deeply humiliating and divisive to all. In order to create a class war against a population which was not an abstract thought but the family members and social structure men lived with daily, differences between men and women had to be exaggerated and presented as the result of evil.

The division of men and women was the most important class division, the one which enabled the commodification of all the most basic dependencies and destroyed the possibility of horizontal society.

Terrorism by witchcraft

In an interesting parallel to today’s terrorism laws, witchcraft was deemed a crimen exceptum with far less rights for prisoners, interrogation under torture, death sentences for suspicion of offence and inquisitions which sought new names to prosecute. Then as now, the new medical professionals played a significant part as ‘expert witnesses’ for the prosecution against their professional rivals. Current history describes the Inquisition as primarily religious persecution despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of victims were women of all faiths. The popularly known victims who were persecuted for their beliefs, the ones taught in schools today, are scientists such as Galileo and Copernicus who both lived to very old age and continued to work. The hundreds of thousands or millions of women and indigenous and enslaved South Americans killed are unmentioned. All of the texts at the time made clear the primary target was women (and in South America indigenous and slave cultures) and their professional knowledge. The Inquisition was not, as it is depicted today, an attack against men of science, it was an attack for and by men of science.

A heretic who recanted was made to embroider a bundle of sticks (a faggot) to their sleeve in reminder of the fire they had escaped and may yet suffer. The term once used against argumentative women is now used as a pejorative against homosexuals, the other targeted practitioners of non-reproductive sex. It is still not acceptable to today’s corporations to mention the gynocide that put them in control or the dissociated structure that exists more than ever today as medical knowledge is not just centrally controlled but also copyrighted and patented. A search for the history of western medicine will jump straight from Hippocrates to the twelfth century with all of the intervening knowledge photoshopped out, dismissed as old wives’ tales with no recognition of the fact that it provided health care for all of Europe for centuries.

As medical education in Europe became regulated and restricted to men, the women previously known as wise women who travelled and taught others became condemned as gossips. The word which once meant friend was turned into a vice and churches warned of women’s idle tongues. In the words of the Malleus Malleficarum[6], “they have slippery tongues, and are unable to conceal from the fellow-women those things which by evil arts they know”. Soon entire networks of learning were dismantled as these women were named witches and tortured to reveal their networks of trade and knowledge sharing in an apparent attempt to genetically cull daring or intelligent women. Daughters were made to watch their mothers burn and sometimes received lashes in front of their mother’s fires in warning. The networks had also been used to spread information between villages so in centralizing control over medicine and education and isolating women the church also controlled horizontal communication. Traveling healers were replaced by traveling priests and professional doctors. Peasant rebellions would find neither a sympathetic conduit for information.

Screen shot 2014-04-27 at 8.45.29 PM

In 1486 the printing press began its illustrious career as a disseminator of mass hate propaganda for centralized power with the publication of the Malleus Malleficarum which saw 29 printings before 1669, second only to the Bible.[1]. Among the many edifying chapters in this extraordinary work are the following:

Concerning Witches who copulate with Devils. Why is it that Women are chiefly addicted to Evil superstitions?
Whether Witches may work some Prestidigatory Illusion so that the Male Organ appears to be entirely removed and separate from the Body.
That Witches who are Midwives in Various Ways Kill the Child Conceived in the Womb, and Procure an Abortion; or if they do not this Offer New-born Children to Devils.
How Witches Impede and Prevent the Power of Procreation.
How, as it were, they Deprive Man of his Virile Member.
Of the Manner whereby they Change Men into the Shapes of Beasts.
Of the Method by which Devils through the Operations of Witches sometimes actually possess men.
Of the Method by which they can Inflict Every Sort of Infirmity, generally Ills of the Graver Kind.
Of the Way how in Particular they Afflict Men with Other Like Infirmities.
How Witch Midwives commit most Horrid Crimes when they either Kill Children or Offer them to Devils in most Accursed Wise.

Screen shot 2014-04-27 at 8.46.19 PM

Malleus Malleficarum then offers remedies for witchcraft including some of the most disturbed sexually deviant practices ever written, dressed up as law and order. It is however made clear that the power of witches was not their own, but rather came from a sexual act with the devil, women being far too weak of mind to have ideas of their own. “For as regards intellect, or the understanding of spiritual things, they seem to be of a different nature from men; … Women are intellectually like children…. No woman understood philosophy except Temeste.” As a model of professional sabotage the Inquisitions and Malleus Malleficarum remain unequaled and the control they established over medical knowledge remained complete until the Internet allowed women and others to once more begin their gossip. Interestingly, one of the first and most panicked cries for Internet censorship was to prevent dissemination of medical knowledge by any except professionals.

Women were sexually terrified, driven from science and knowledge based fields and left with no purpose after menopause. The most powerful traditional careers for old women in Europe were forcibly stolen, taken over and commodified. Women were allowed back much later, delegated into the role of nurses and forbidden to act without permission from a male doctor in a continuation of the fear that women with no male supervision would conspire to kill babies. Women who want to enter science now must enter a field controlled by Great Men and act according to their rules. They must study and accept that caucasian men have been responsible for every innovation in the world. They must attend a university full of subjects whose histories teach they are inferior, imbecilic and inherently evil alongside the heroic Great Men who reputedly solved all of the world’s problems with one Nobel after another.

Even when a Great Man such as John Stuart Mill states that his wife, Harriet Taylor Mill, co-wrote his essay and it includes the same arguments she published years earlier, male scholars decide that he was lying and he wrote it all himself. Women must excel in their belief of this history. Their acceptance is contingent on their proof that they are in all respects, identical to men. When the empires expanded outside Europe, medical and other knowledge was again taken from the men or women who held it by their colonial masters. Science was there to steal knowledge for Great Men to patent and universities were there to control access to it. Knowledge ownership and cultural assimilation followed the identical pattern used previously on women.

For centuries, women and all collaborative cultures have been afraid to share knowledge outside official sanction. Photoshopped history and the centralized press have entrenched the dominance of Great Men and laws regarding official certification, patents and copyrights have kept stolen community knowledge from community use. The ridicule of every woman who speaks in public as a big mouthed woman, the endless complaining about the sound of women’s voices, and the instant sexualization of any woman who speaks in public is still used to prevent women from escaping the role they were assigned by capitalism.

Women are now accepted as token Great Men if they come from the approved demographic and are fully accepting of the teachings of the other Great Men. Acceptable roles are as representatives of all womankind under the label Feminism, that affiliation which is used as a club to push corporate strategy under the guise of helping women, or as promotional tools for Great Men, citing, interviewing, speaking about and generally acting as a reflective moon to their suns. Unless women see a great need to distribute their own point of view they probably will not as there is no benefit, it will not be heard and it usually leads to ostracization. They have generally learned to fear mobs, economic survival and social acceptance depends on acceptance by the Great Men and communication is too difficult without support. They will rarely if ever see their vision come to fruition in the way they wished anyway and they will nearly always see their ideas co-opted for the glorification and empowerment of a Great Man.

Women very frequently offer work anonymously to parasites to get their ideas heard through group work, or as ‘assistants’ to Great Men, partners or children. As Nietzche instructed, the greatest achievement women should strive for was to produce an Übermensch, not be one. Centuries of women’s work unacknowledged and used freely by the commons has made it habitual for Great Men to pick it up and market it as their own. The narcissistic nature which creates Great Men means they will attempt to kill, or at least erase, the goose that laid their golden eggs as soon as they have attained the position they wish. Any group that produces great content will also attract people who will attempt to use the content to become Great Men. In either case, control of the power created by the ideas will not be wielded by the originator and it is very unlikely it will be wielded in the manner she intended, one reason so many Great Men act in ways completely opposite to their original promises. As in medicine, where women were subservient nurses providing care and men were doctors providing authority, women have traditionally been permitted action based paths while men take the roles with titles, authority and media attention. A horizontal system of action based governance would remove the misplaced authority.

Stories about everyone are linked to western men for newsworthiness, the implication being no one will read a story without their picture. The great power of Anonymous in amplifying the voiceless has been their ability to get stories about everyone in the news with a picture of a western teenage boy on top of it (regardless of what demographic those behind the action are really from). ‘Thought Leaders’ explain revolution they have never been near with as much authority as men commenting on ‘women’s issues’. Hilariously, Great Men are now lecturing women and indigenous people on how to live without money or credit, anonymously and horizontally and explaining the evils of living under constant surveillance and having all their communications monitored.

A revolution which observably looked like this becomes edited in real time to be marketed like this. When those seeking power from revolution then universally look like Ken dolls, it can be explained by saying they were the only ones participating in the fight and observers can shake their heads sadly and wonder what it is in the nature of women that keeps them from ever contributing. Anyone concerned more with promotion of an idea than personal fame is reminded of Alan Turing’s syllogism “Turing believes machines think. Turing lies with men. Therefore, machines cannot think.” Nothing happens till a Great Man says it happened. A western man can obtain international news coverage by tweeting that he is being repressed, a middle aged Asian woman can stay up a crane for 309 days with almost no coverage at all. Content producers are reminded of the acceptable revolutionary slave morality by aggregators: ‘I am just spreading the knowledge, it is the information that is important not your ego.’ .

Corporate media and corporations attempt to ensure that all women seen in public are under 30 in a continuance of the demonization of women past childbearing age. Women must do everything men do, with all of the above obstacles, before they are 30 and then be compared with men at the end of their careers. Men are shown billionaires in the media, women are shown plastic surgery. The token women in Hollywood films, half the age and exponentially more attractive than the men, are echoed in technology conferences and elsewhere in the business world.

Booth babes and women as display appear to serve no purpose other than a warning to women much as hanged cadavers once warned travellers away from city walls. The picture below illustrates, as does nearly every tech conference, that while fat bald old men are welcomed everywhere in IT, women over 25 do not exist and women do not exist except as an attractive display of body parts in any case. Since women were once equal in technology, writing the first programming language, the first compiler and filling more technology positions than they did other STEM fields, the current demographics are not the result of ability or interest but the result of the drastic increase in power associated with the field.

It would not be acceptable in IT to have a headline like ‘How to explain the new data-leaking ‘Heartbleed bug’ to your mom’ directed at an ethnic group instead of a gender, neither would it be acceptable to have a conference full of caucasian men decorated with naked bodies of men from another ethnic group.

Screen shot 2014-04-28 at 3.29.25 PM

Photo from Consumer Electronics Show 2013 via Mashable

Defending the Witches against the Trolls

Centralized power has entrenched their right to continue to dominate discourse and coerce society with endless lobbying for freedom of the press, freedom of their centralized hate propaganda. The powerful centralized press has acted consistently against women and people colonized by capitalists since it was created. It has coerced populations into wars, coup d’états, persecution of minorities, and all forms of hate directed against each other while shielding the powerful. It shows women as fools and naked bodies when it shows them at all.

Decentralized communication has returned power to women, minorities and everyone locked out of power by the corporate media for centuries. Women and local communities have once more begun to gossip, this time on a global scale. Women have also begun to network and collaborate, a development viewed with shock and horror by many of social media’s Great Men who object to the ‘mob’ responding to hate speech they have never been criticized for before. The online version of the Gulabi Gang has free speech loving libertarians calling for controls and limits to free speech when the wars caused by the centralized press never did.

Suddenly the corporate media which has terrorized women since its first printing is rushing in to Save the Women from free speech. Corporate media which has libelled, ridiculed and demeaned women for centuries, even killing off a Princess of Wales when she got too powerful, has suddenly initiated a campaign to save the witches from the trolls. While there are certainly people online who follow corporate media’s lead in upskirting and threatening women and punching down at all who speak without power, the real problem is obviously those who punch up, the only observable difference between the press which has unlimited NGO money dedicated to its freedom and the vilified trolls. As usual, corporate media has enlisted its professional Feminists to deliver its message in the name of all womankind and attack the first medium women have had for their self defence in a millennium.

Satire that attacks the powerful is far funnier than that which attacks the weak and is one of the most effective ways to question power. This satire is much more important to protect than the corporate press which should be destroyed. Considering what women have been through, they are very well able to protect themselves from Internet trolls. In centralized media, comedy can be restricted to Great Men punching down. On the internet it has the potential to be equalized. Trolling, the Internet version of cutting yourself by attracting rage and making your attackers look ridiculous, is made to order for attacking Great Men, particularly by those with no status to lose.

The fight against trolls was well illustrated by a pair of bomb threat jokes on Twitter directed to airlines. The first, by a caucasian man who was actually ready to board a flight and angry, became a media and Internet cause célèbre, a test case for Freedom of Speech. Media recommended that “The law … change to reflect the changing ways we’re using technology.” The second, by a genuinely hilarious 14 year old girl who was nowhere near the airport and very obviously joking was met by a barrage of online hate and corporate media discussing how 14 year old girls should not be allowed on the Internet. Any law against trolling will be a law outlawing satire by the powerless while retaining hate speech to lock people out of positions of power.

Trolls and witches are both enemies of the powerful and are natural allies.

The perils of diversity

A Jewish story describes Adam’s first wife Lillith as created before or at the same time as him and from the same earth. She refused to lie beneath Adam and flew away to become the baby eating, man raping, snake loving demon she appears as in many writings (under various names). Her appearance in the Alphabet of ben Sirach in the 8th – 10th century as a foil to characterless Eve entrenched the moral that women who were not completely subjected to men were pure evil.

The Malleus Malleficarum was there to remind women what this belief meant to their safety and convince men of its truth.

“Ecclesiasticus xxv: There is no head above the head of a serpent: and there is no wrath above the wrath of a woman. I had rather dwell with a lion and a dragon than to keep house with a wicked woman. And among much which in that place precedes and follows about a wicked woman, he concludes: All wickedness is but little to the wickedness of a woman. Wherefore S. John Chrysostom says on the text, It is not good to marry (S. Matthew xix): What else is woman but a foe to friendship, an unescapable punishment, a necessary evil, a natural temptation, a desirable calamity, a domestic danger, a delectable detriment, an evil of nature, painted with fair colours! Therefore if it be a sin to divorce her when she ought to be kept, it is indeed a necessary torture; for either we commit adultery by divorcing her, or we must endure daily strife. Cicero in his second book of The Rhetorics says: The many lusts of men lead them into one sin, but the lust of women leads them into all sins; for the root of all woman's vices is avarice. And Seneca says in his Tragedies: A woman either loves or hates; there is no third grade. And the tears of woman are a deception, for they may spring from true grief, or they may be a snare. When a woman thinks alone, she thinks evil.”

So a woman was neither permitted to think in the company of other women or in solitary, all her thoughts must be guided by men. Network censorship in the name of terrorism is not a new thing.

Both Lillith-type legends and Malleus Malleficarum warn of the dangers of women’s carnal natures:

But the natural reason is that she is more carnal than a man, as is clear from her many carnal abominations.

And of their natures in general:

And as to her other mental quality, that is, her natural will; when she hates someone whom she formerly loved, then she seethes with anger and impatience in her whole soul, just as the tides of the sea are always heaving and boiling. Many authorities allude to this cause. Ecclesiasticus xxv: There is no wrath above the wrath of a woman. And Seneca (Tragedies, VIII): No might of the flames or the swollen winds, no deadly weapon, is so much to be feared as the lust and hatred of a woman who has been divorced from the marriage bed.

All of the above opinions are reinforced by philosophy, in which Aristotle calls women “a misbegotten male”, science, in which Darwin wrote “males are more evolutionarily advanced than females” and by almost every other authority of the day. Darwin also warned that “unchecked female militancy threatened to produce a perturbance of the races” and to “divert the orderly process of evolution”. It is little wonder that feminism as it exists now and in the past spends all of its energy trying to convince both men and women that they are alike in every respect and denying any differences no matter how physically apparent.

In actual biological fact, women are obviously not equal to men though they certainly are equivalent. Whether or not men deviate more from the normative range (in both directions) due to their more vulnerable Y chromosome, women deviate from their own norms through both a monthly cyclic cocktail of hormones and a lifetime of changing, personality altering hormones. Again, this is not a weakness, it is a gift. Women are capable of far more diversity of thought within their own minds and lifetimes. “Hampson (1990) found that, at the mid-point of the cycle, characterized by high levels of oestrogen and progesterone, women obtained higher scores on verbal, but lower scores on spatial tests, than they did when menstruating.” Mackintosh (105) [7]

We are not even beginning to understand the full effect of hormones on women (or men) because difference is not a topic of popular study in a world where safety and societal acceptance are found only in equality. One thing is certain; there are cognitive differences in women on the hormone altering pharmaceuticals sold to women worldwide as Feminism, their keys to acceptance into a male world. “17 women taking oral contraceptives (combined preparation of estrogen and progestin) served as age-matched controls… During the preovulatory phase, creativity was in general improved when serum concentrations of estrogen (E2) and luteinizing hormone (LH) were highest whereas motor perseveration decreased. In control women, there was no preovulatory improvement of divergent thinking and no preovulatory decrease in motor perseveration.” Mackintosh (105) [7]

No one can seriously think in this day and age that the best method of birth control we can come up with will necessitate women the world over being subjected to extremely dangerous pharmaceuticals that do everything from destroying the aforementioned carnal lust to eliminating the aforementioned natural will which these men found so frightening. The birth control pill is not about birth control, it is Dolby sound for women’s hormones, a way to control that legendary fury which hell hath no greater than and a sacrifice of women’s own genius to make them a little closer to the masculine ideal. The fear of women’s hormonal changes is ancient and pervasive. It is predictable that it was women suffering post-natal depression that were a favourite target for brainwashing by Canadian intelligence services. What would be hilarious if it were not an environmental catastrophe is those same hormones that are being used to declaw women globally are of course returning to the earth and combining with the simulated estrogen in plastics to create an excess of women’s hormones the world over.

Centralized medicine brought the industrialization of childbirth and removal of breastfeeding. The pharmaceutical industry has managed to conflate the pill with birth control almost completely and further conflate the pill with feminism. Feminists who feel their role consists of convincing the world that women are identical to men and preaching complete assimilation would rather deny that natural hormones exist and embrace any pharmacology that minimizes them. It is interesting that the exact same pills when provided to an ethnic group are a scandal but not when provided to an entire gender.

The war between women and men is the war for control over chaos. As chaos rises, a small but effective percentage of men seek to control women. Pythagoras wrote, “There is a good principle that created order, light and man and a bad principle that created chaos, darkness and woman.” The desire to remove any variation in character from women goes back to earliest writings. In European mythology women are frequently powerful wild cards with a passion for vengeance such as Nemesis, Nyx, Lilith, Eris, Calypso and many others. In science fiction women are most often robots (frequently literally), predictable and characterless with child bearing function removed or industrialized. The hoped for transition in character is hard to miss. In societal norms women must be heavily moderated, use endearments instead of cursing and any negativity or assertiveness is attacked as ‘hysteria’ or ‘unacceptable anger’. The need to constantly train women to be passive and subservient partly results still from a very real terror instilled by the relentless propaganda of the last millennium.

In matrilineal societies women controlled the home and were responsible for all of the child rearing as well as most agriculture. As descent could only be proven from women, they were the heads of families and men could be banished from the home and even shunned from the village if they offended. This shunning could equal a death sentence if the man had nowhere else to go. The terror of women’s anger may have had something to do with this traditional fear in some cultures. Centuries later the same concerns about women’s property ownership and maternal rights and the same complaints about women’s ‘natural character’ are being repeated by the masculinist MRA (men’s rights activists) group. Conversely, they also complain if property ownership is not available to women as they then are considered ‘gold diggers’, seeking possession of men’s property.

In today’s society any reminder of female physical attributes comes with a perception of lesser intelligence. Women are described as ‘a mom’ as a demeaning dismissive. Respect and perception of intelligence decreases with the number of children born while for men more children still adds to the perception of leadership. In the technology fields currently hailed as our future in every aspect of society, ‘mom’ is a euphemism for ‘imbecile’ and some self-proclaimed feminists still sneer at other women as ‘breeders’.

In the fight to regain their power the witches have lost themselves. Their personal stories and professional pride have been erased, their own bodies have been used to enslave them and their economic and social relationships are removed from the structure we live in. The only current path to autonomy for women is to become a lesser Great Man and the primary path to being a Great Man is through mind and body altering pharmaceuticals, politicized access to health services and obsequious service to existing Great Men. Witches need to stop playing a game which was designed for them to fail. It is less logical to join an economy rewarding those who serve Great Men than it is to design one rewarding those who serve society. Instead of standing outside begging for admittance to power, witches need to reclaim their own power, on their own terms.

Hail Eris.

Witches and neurotypical intolerance

In a world where systems are governed by highly specialized epistemic communities of elite knowledge, it is essential that there is broad diversity in those communities.

It is common to point out that men score more highly in math and abstract areas than women to account for their prevalence in STEM fields. By that logic we would also expect almost all public speakers to be women since they score significantly higher in verbal areas. There should also be far more older women in all professions than older men since mental faculties in men deteriorate more quickly. Since both fields are completely dominated by men, especially as they become older, we can concede that there are plenty of both that are qualified for both areas but something is still sending far more men to the top in every high status field.

In 1996 Ellen Winner wrote[8]: gifted girls have much more trouble socially than do gifted boys. For example, in one study, academically gifted boys were shown to be more popular than average ones, while gifted girls were less popular than average girls. In fact, the most popular of all four groups were the gifted boys, and the least popular of all were the gifted girls. The gifted boys were perceived as funny, smart, and creative, while the gifted girls were classified as moody, melancholy, self-absorbed, aloof, and bossy. What is seen as leadership in a boy is seen as bossiness in a girl. (Winner 230)

Girls with high grade-point averages report more depression, lower self-esteem, and more psychosomatic symptoms than do boys with such grades. The conflict between intimacy and excellence is also felt acutely by children from minority groups in which it is not "cool" to excel at school. (Winner 231)

the striking decrease in the number of girls in gifted school programs in later grades. Girls make up about half the population in these programs in kindergarten through third grade, but by junior high school they make up less than 30 percent. Girls show lower self-confidence and lower career aspirations than do boys of equal ability. The ambitions of bright girls decline in high school, even though they tend to get higher grades than boys. And girls are more likely to hide their abilities in order to be socially accepted. (Winner 298)

If you ascribe to the theory that the extra X chromosome brings women an extra resilience from neurotypical deviation we can speculate that the very rarity of women who stray very far from the mean is grounds for their persecution. There are many factors yet to be eliminated before we can accept any such theory, such as the effect of poverty and chronic stress on iq testing, but whatever the cause, less deviation in women could lead to less tolerance of diversity. You may also consider that persecution of witches, whether women or minorities, may create a greater need for solidarity against a common enemy elite. It could be a cumulative rage against the idea of survival of the fittest in a trade economy which was designed specifically to exclude them that causes hostility towards elitism. Equality may evoke memories of the Commons, an idea which for women represents the last time they were recognized as contributing members of society entitled to their share, not just parasites dependent on charity or pale reflections of men. Or perhaps societies in which women were beaten and killed for incompetence and burned at the stake for attaining skill or knowledge have created a culture where pulling attention is taboo.

Whatever you choose as the cause, it is impossible at this point to deny the hostility the majority of women feel for women who excel too far beyond them or lag too far behind them. Since this hostility is shared (although far more impotently) by the average man, it seems safe to say neurotypical intolerance is probably at least a significant factor. Studies describing the social behaviour of women seem frequently to be describing the faults of neurotypicals, not necessarily all women.

If girls are now in some cultures more accepting of higher achievement among girls it is only as a mass movement. There is still no support for relative excellence or originality or the independent thought that would lead to radical creativity. Feminism, like all group affiliation, preaches solidarity not individualism. While neurotypical men resent the ‘elites’ it does not produce the hostility it does in women when other women excel. Men generally accept some sort of ranking as unavoidable, even if they resent it. Women will vehemently deny that relative attributes even exist or believe if they do exist they should be compensated for. ‘Feminism’ is a celebration of ‘normal’ or average where everyone is pretty, smart and just the right fitness, a neurotypical paradise. These women will never promote another woman to relative superiority. They will choose someone who is relatively disadvantaged and promote her as the one that ‘deserves’ to be promoted in compensation for the weaknesses. Any woman that is already seen as advantaged will not receive the support they require to attain a higher role. Indeed if they begin to achieve success, the pack will attack and attempt to bring them back down. Neurotypical women are fighting for the inclusion of neurotypical women in places requiring elite expertise.

Even with no further attack, shunning is one of the most effective punishments humans have devised for each other. It is possible that the effects of shunning are felt more by women if you believe they are more socially developed and inclined and biologically dependent on creating society. They are the ones most in need of support and encouragement from each other, both because of vulnerability to outside threats and a greater biological and cultural workload to share. Shunning and lack of approval from the vast majority of other women and a lack of peers is enough in itself to strongly discourage women and minorities from offending the pack with any attempt at excellence or achievement. Women with superior ability either accept inferior roles or learn that women are their mortal enemies. Women at the top are the ones picked to be there by men and not eliminated by women.

Witches, whether women or minorities, usually never realize they are intelligent, as they are more likely to be told they are arrogant. While potential Great Men will be hailed as leaders, witches will be destroyed by their peers. If witches excel they must downplay, apologize, minimize and hide it. Women and minorities are consistently criticized for not promoting themselves but the risks in doing so are too great.

Dependency and parasites

The root of society, the first dependence, is created when a woman gives birth to a child. The nature of society depends on how it is built out from that core, whether all share in responsibility for the first and all other dependencies or whether the strongest are pulled away to isolate caregivers and commodify dependency.

In the capitalist society we live in corporations are people and people are means of production. The rapidly escalating international industry of human trafficking is a picture of a society which has reduced people to dissociated bodies. Men object to a society which gives them responsibility for childbirth without authority or choice and women object to a society which gives them responsibility without choice, support or acknowledgement. Men and women, old and young, able and infirm have been forcibly ripped apart in an attempt to destroy and commodify society and halt the creation of a horizontal network of inter-dependencies.

The master morality considered appropriate for workers in the trade economy is replaced by slave morality for anyone working as caregivers or in service to society. No human achievement would have been possible without the caregivers that raised and enabled those achieving. Mothers receive instant blame for failure as seen in the media coverage of tragedies like the Newtown massacre or the Boston bombing, but no credit for success.

Women are depicted as parasites on society. The term single mom today is as derogatory as unwed mother was in the past, the morality offended being not in the lack of marriage but in the dependency on social support. Parasites are hated as they weaken society instead of strengthening it. In all of the talk of dependency as parasitism, it is not recognized that all men and women parasited off of women in a very physical reality in order to exist. Women who hate those parasiting off of them are considered an abomination, but a mother presented as a parasite on society is openly derided and hated. Who gets to decide when dependency becomes evil? The line that infants did not consent to being born so are exempt from judgement is disingenuous, no one chooses to be dependent on society and unlike every other dependency, society would not exist without infants. Dependency is a natural part of the human experience and mothers are not creating dependency, they are relieving society of the vast majority of responsibility for it. The propaganda depicting them as parasites is coming from the true corporate parasites, deflecting blame onto their victims.

The continual humiliation of living in a society which views them as parasites leaves women vulnerable to even more capitalist scams to force more free labour from them. “The AP investigation and internal reports showed just how brutal the SKS microfinancing program was, how women were particularly targeted because of their heightened sense of shame and community responsibility.” For women conditioned through generations to believe they are parasites and expect slavery it is harder to recognize and fight off these predators. Most women with dependents pride themselves in their ability to survive in the system while obeying all the ridiculous rules, and condemn other women who refuse.

Women and children are the last unit of a social structure to be dissociated and the most physically and socially difficult to separate. Corporations regulate reproduction with propaganda and hard coercion regarding the social acceptability of reproducing or not reproducing. China forces abortions while Ireland refuses them. People are a commodity but there is no return on investment for producing them, just coercion in one direction or another. Industry no longer needs the population growth we are experiencing so both motherhood and children have experienced a sharp devaluation in society.

Women’s reproduction can be regulated by limiting access to birth control and forbidding its use, as well as making it impossible for women to survive without a family structure which includes heterosexual sex, but this only serves to increase reproduction. A society that wishes to decrease reproduction typically needs to make it disastrous to reproduce, historically by making it impossible to protect yourself while pregnant or to protect small children once they are born. This has continued today, where children are killed constantly and very publicly and dismissed as simply ‘collateral damage’. A very short time ago, the death of a child was considered by western society to be a non-debatable tragedy, an evil so pure and complete its evil was never questioned. This mindset was first altered by a persistent campaign during the US war against Iraq to depict Iraqi children as bomb carrying subhumans created by their parents only for the purpose of death. ‘They do not value life’, ‘they would rather die than live’, and ‘Iraqi children are not like ours’ became the new truths that society was convinced to accept.

As always, the minority persecution then spreads much more easily to a societal truth. Israeli soldiers are taught to kill anything that moves and murdered children are referred to as ‘collateral damage’. The US military boasts of new guidelines that “opened the aperture” to considering children of any age legitimate targets. The children lose their humanity and become objects. This change in society is probably illustrated nowhere better than on the US police targets depicting ‘non-traditional threats’ including children. Societal dissociation is complete with the police officer who stated he enlarged images of his own children for target practice “so that he would not be caught off guard with such a drastically new experience while on duty.” If not his own children, what society is it his duty to defend? The message is clear. People are paid to kill people. People are not paid to give birth. It is more socially acceptable to kill people than to give birth to people. Genocides are being fuelled the world over on the premise that populations are growing too quickly and women are under particular attack as the source of population growth.

The famous modern example of seductive coercion against childbirth are the incentives under China’s one child system but the increasing amount of slave labour involved everywhere works as well. The state only wishes more workers for knowledge industries so caregivers are directed by the state to train their children to a far higher level, still with no compensation for their labour and at great expense to themselves. No longer will these children be destined to provide for their parents, they will be labouring instead for corporate shareholders. In a world where society has been commodified, the return on investment is highly discouraging. Economic freedom is more available now (although unequal) for women but not for children and dependents who are still left unaccounted for by the economic systems imposed on society.

Women as mothers are also derided as coercion to stop reproduction. Mothers, like prostitutes before them, are expected to not participate in society. Mothers have their children threatened if they disobey power as Pussy Riot members and many others have discovered. Western media have gone from a frenzy of approbation for the Dionne quintuplets in the 1930’s to death threats for a US mother of octoplets. In an interestingly medieval turn, the ‘Octomom’ appeared in a strip show labeled “The Final Humiliation” to pay the bills for her children. Industry has gone from punishing contraception, abortion and especially infanticide by death to trying to forcibly sterilize women.

Historically, ownership of women’s bodies is frequently explained as an issue of property ownership. Not just the women themselves but also any offspring were considered assets to be disposed of and therefore a source of power. In current society there are far easier ways to control people than by reproducing them. The current most popular method around the world, is the dissociation of people from any form of society. This ability to control others with no social relation to them combined with rapidly increasing overpopulation of the world mean motherhood is increasingly not just unsupported but targeted. Women are caught in a war between those that would dictate that women must have children and those that dictate that they must not. Choice is lost and children are pawns in a system instead of part of a society. At neither side is the support of motherhood or childhood considered at all, only the power to reproduce or not.

Since commoners will always follow, it is only the witches in outcast societies that need to be conquered. As always, group affiliation is used to create a cohesive block that can be easily controlled. Feminism is packaged and controlled, dressed in pink t-shirts and producing op-eds on the women’s pages. All topics like the massive economy of human trafficking are labeled ‘women’s issues’ and cast into the special interest ghetto. Feminism speaks for all womankind and provides the token official voice heard to cover for the lack of witches in every forum. Feminism has been used to lobby for women’s inclusion into the trade economy instead of the abolition of it, to lobby against free speech in the only forums that actually have a female majority and to tone police women everywhere. It is used as a club to bash witches into conformity and designate approved group views. Since Feminism has become a large part of the NGO economy, there is great lobbying to establish and control turf and real activism is co-opted by corporate astroturfing. Support for Feminism co-opts progress for women and puts it under corporate control.

In the debate over how much of Albert Einstein’s work was collaboration with his wife Mileva Marić, a lot of men decided she did not actually have anything to do with his work, pointing largely to the fact that she did no work after they separated. After they separated she was a single parent of one schizophrenic son and another angry fatherless son, was responsible for a sister suffering pyschotic episodes and two parents and had no professional encouragement. Einstein had all of the time, resources and expert colleagues at his disposal and he also produced nothing comparable to their work in 1905. Even during their marriage the relationship was obviously unbalanced enough that he felt the list of demands he presented to her were reasonable. Great Men are usually given a huge amount of time and resources to sit and think and study. Someone offering to take over Mileva Marić’s unpaid work while she thought is laughable even today. Witches, like everyone else, wish to be of service to society and reach their full potential. Considering the dimension the few who have been heard have brought to our knowledge, we need them.

The solutions for women will not be found in parity in a trade economy. The answer is not that women should be paid, it’s that men should not. All money comes from the powerful and we need to build a society that benefits the powerless. If service to society becomes the measure of worth we will have parity overnight. If we reject the economy based on trade to the powerful neither men nor women will have to buy their acceptance into their own families and support of those who need it will enrich the giver instead of impoverishing them.

State education takes responsibility for indoctrination of selected history and worldview and preparation for the work force, frequently a compulsory educaion that parents will go to jail for resisting. Propaganda dictates that the same parents who were capable of teaching nutrition, health, hygiene, speech, safety and so much more to their children are incapable of teaching reading. Social child rearing is needed as support for both parent and child, not state propaganda but the actual care of the child should be the responsibility of the society. If the child is to love their society they must be welcomed by it. Revolution will come when old women claim their rightful share of the economy. When both witches and wretches are welcomed back into the protection of society, when those for whom living itself is enough work to endure are not expected to contribute more, we will have autonomy, diversity and society.

Where there is society there is no need for charity.

[1] Silvia Federici, Caliban and the Witch: Women, the Body and Primitive Accumulation, 2004 Brooklyn, NY: Autonomedia.

Russell, Jeffrey Burton (1972 repr. 1984). Witchcraft in the Middle Ages. Cornell University Press. ISBN 0-8014-9289-0. (bibrec)

[2] Isabel Pérez Molina, Knowledge and Powers, Duoda, Women Research Center, University of Barcelona

Monica Helen Green, The Trotula: An English translation of the medieval compendium of women’s medicine University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002

[3] Marguerite Porete, ‘Le Mirouer des simples âmes anienties et qui seulement demeurent en vouloir et désir d’amour’, circa 1300

[4] Pope Innocent VIII, Summis desiderantes affectibus, December 5, 1484.

[5] Aretaeus, The Causes, Symptoms and Cure of Acute and Chronic Diseases, circa 1st century CE

[6] James Sprenger, Heinrich Kramer, Malleus Maleficarum, 1487

[7] N. J. Mackintosh, IQ and Human Intelligence Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1998

[8] Ellen Winner, BasicBooks, New York 1996 Gifted Children: Myths and Realities

Great Men and how they are upheld

Part of a series, Autonomy, Diversity, Society. Posts about our roles, relationships and governance. No article in this section is meant to stand alone, there will be a lot more coming soon that will clarify the current posts.

—-

According to Thomas Carlyle, “The History of the world is but the Biography of great men.” and the accepted histories certainly agree with him.

Since change does not and cannot come from the masses who conform and those who may initiate radical change are shunned by society, leadership of change is taken over by Great Men, demagogues who interpret the thoughts of radicals for their own benefit and steer society in the directions most suitable to them. Great Men are accepted by the majority as they are not actually radical or unusual. They are instead a glossy version of the average, just attractive and superior enough that they can lead but not so different that they would be unaccepted by the majority. Truly radical ideas cannot be directly accepted by the majority, they must be interpreted by knowledge bridges as must highly specialized innovation. Great Men have the education, understanding and access to appreciate and intercept new ideas and package them, or easily palatable pieces of them, in an attractive and widely accessible format. They also have the ability to suppress the ones dangerous to themselves.

Today’s Great Men (and occasionally women) are the politicians, Thought Leaders and CEOs and they are incessantly promoted by their own media as the source of all solutions for all of society. They still, through celebrity influence, financing monopoly and reciprocal promotion, drown out all other voices appealing for mass acceptance. They still are made up almost entirely of able, caucasian, educated men from privileged families. Whether they have achieved their self proclaimed superiority by birth, the 30 iq points above average intellect recommended to lead the masses or just the appearance of a Ken doll, these are the men and occasionally women who lead society. The state of society today is evidence of their complete lack of real qualifications.

The exceptionalism in social media coverage of this population is even greater than that shown by old media. Purchased followers and influence sharing complete the return to Aristotle’s age of demagogues. They demand and are awarded the main spotlight, relegating the commoners to the corps while berating them for being untermenschen, sheeple, or whatever the term of the day is. The dual spotlights on the majority and the Great Men blind anyone from seeing those in the shadows who must rely on the Great Men to deliver their messages.

These Thought Leaders are able to perceive, use and destroy radicals in their community and they are employed as the voice of the voiceless, standing between those outcast and the society which outcast them and acting not as bridges but as walls. A trade economy based on popularity brings a huge amount of power to celebrities. Few would disagree that the massive global audience given to Bono and Bill Gates, Craig Kielberger and Russell Brand is rightfully theirs. Even where their incompetence and lack of knowledge is proven they are commended for using their voices to bring awareness to issues. Pointing out that they deny a voice to those they are speaking for is considered ingratitude.

The endless speakers at endless TED talks, panels and forums, the motivational talk circuit, the powerful amplifiers and aggregators, all help create a new structure of control and access to power, far more easily manipulated and powerful than those in the past. While politicians had to acquire some level of knowledge and bear some responsibility for their advice, there is no such pressure on celebrities. Mia Farrow can declare that Blackwater is just what is needed in Darfur with no electoral consequences or accountability. Journalists win Oscars, Oscar winners are journalists and both have audiences at the highest level of governance. Africa has become the Hameau de la Reine for Hollywood and Silicon Valley where the wealthy now play at governance as Marie Antoinette once played at farming. Creation of political parties and reform lobbying at the highest levels are also the latest celebrity / tech industry pastime.

Screen shot 2014-04-25 at 1.30.35 PM

Map from Mother Jones, Dr. Clooney, I Presume? An interactive map of the celebrity recolonization of Africa. — By Dave Gilson

The Great Men create a clearly defined caste system of who are the saviours and who are the saved and the gates to ever escaping assigned status are carefully guarded. Our right to communicate is usurped by those with the access to audience. Aggregators and amplifiers marginalize creators and those in need. NGO’s established to aid those most marginalized proclaim they are equal opportunity and inclusive employers and then demand PhD’s and elite work experience irrelevant to ability. Silicon valley awards ‘startups’ vast sums of money based on the founders matching the demographic of those already in power. Official blue checks of authority established by Twitter are awarded to US bloggers and random personalities and not to African heads of state. The obsession the powerful have against online anonymity is because they rely on identity to determine who they will engage with.

Great Men intercept knowledge between epistemic communities and the majority. Because they control the majority, they control the resources and they control the audience. They decide what information is dispersed through the media, what people are credited, and access to funding, development and research. The power of the Great Men is used against anyone outside the circle of obedient followers. These followers turn against any enemies of the Great Men and refuse to stand for the rights of their victims. Direct support or communication for those in the shadows, those with original ideas or in need of assistance, is blocked and the Great Men gain in followers, wealth and power by acting as gatekeepers.

Great Men interpret messages into easily digestible soundbites created to trigger acceptance or rejection by the mob. They rarely innovate and their knowledge is almost never at an elite level. As every field becomes more advanced this is increasingly true. Where once a Great Man could actually be the one with the best overall knowledge, it is now impossible. Knowledge at an elite level requires constant study, research, and association with those at the same level and cannot be readily explained to lay people without knowledge bridges. Thought which challenges established ideas cannot be expressed and accepted in an 18 minute TED talk to a lay audience as entertainment. Neither can solutions to the world’s problems be presented to screaming children at a WE day rock concert. The trivial solutions marketed are at best distracting attention and resources from real solutions, at worst they are harmful.

The Stratfor leak provided by whistleblower Jeremy Hammond showed how the ambitions of the Great Men are used against efforts to reform. Radical activists “want to change the system; have underlying socio/political motives’ and see multinational corporations as ‘inherently evil,’” explained Duchin. “These organizations do not trust the … federal, state and local governments to protect them and to safeguard the environment. They believe, rather, that individuals and local groups should have direct power over industry … I would categorize their principal aims … as social justice and political empowerment.”

The two easiest subtypes to join the corporate side of the fight are the “realists” and the “opportunists.” By definition, an “opportunist” takes the opportunity to side with the powerful for career gain, Duchin explained, and has skin in the game for “visibility, power [and] followers.”

It doesn’t matter to their followers whether the Great Men have any expertise or not. In the majority of the world that would rather examine personality than events or ideas, a complete lack of knowledge or credentials is seldom even questioned. If it is questioned the followers respond as though it was a personal attack on their Great Man, with comments such as ‘he is doing the best he can’ or similar. They do not question why he should be called upon to do so. When it is pointed out that there are other opinions vastly more qualified, the ability of a Great Man to lead the masses, to ‘raise awareness’ is presented. The unease most should feel at this barrier to real knowledge and this misplaced power is apparently overcome by a conviction that some day we will prop up a Ken doll who will do more than act like a Ken doll, despite the fact that that is the sole criteria that made him a Great Man in the first place.

A group of Great Men never simply follow and promote the best ideas. Ideas have owners and the fame and power of the Great Man is tied to the fame and marketing of his ideas. According to the language, one does not simply endorse anarchy, one is an anarchist. The person becomes the ideology. An anarchist must by definition oppose all ideas in opposition or evolution to anarchy or they would, by their own self-definition, cease to exist. This extreme association of people to ideas as well as the apparent need to adopt all facets of an ideology in order to become the associated person creates a rigid environment incapable of unemotionally examining, accepting and rejecting ideas on their own merits.

The Great Men seek to lead or control a group or an ideology. They don’t evolve well. They attempt to hold onto ideas long outdated and their energies are spent protecting their own positions from progress. Since mass acceptance, power, money and fame arrive at the peak of the acceptance bell curve it is unlikely Thought Leaders ever spent much time on the innovation end and they certainly don’t remain there. Once living ideas collapse into dead hyphenated ideologies, patents, copyrights and schools of thought, they are no longer responsive to the changing needs of their communities. Thought Leaders become Thought Owners.

Endorsements are passed around a clique of mutual citations, mutual promotion, and mutual financial and reputation increasing opportunities. Ideas are never radical enough to be in opposition to those whose approval is required to promote them. Great Men and their followers dominate reddit, Wikipedia and LinkedIn and reference each other on every topic. They run all the conferences and put each other on every panel, they control funding which they allocate to each other and they control boards they appoint each other to. If your authority comes from without circles of power it is unciteable. Instead of a true epistemic community of user promoted expertise and original thought, ideas are promoted from stagnant pools of academia, echo chambers of homogeneous thoughts citing each other into oblivion.

Knowledge comes from participation in the user group. Governance by those who have never been in the position of the governed is not going to be knowledgeable. Political science taught in the halls of Harvard instead of the streets and homes of those most dependent and vulnerable to bad governance was always going to be disastrous. Governance theory is never tested, there are no sandbox villages created to test different forms and monitor results. It is simply theory plucked from the echoes of dead white men and imposed arbitrarily on populations as ‘governance by the people’. This governance is not from the community being coerced by it. Women are not interested in politics, say the studies which define politics as male politicians and ignore the fact that women are the backbone of real action based governance the world over. Economists who have no knowledge of how the economy is practised, especially in those parts outside the trade economy which are not recognized to exist, and governance theory by those who have no knowledge of how people form dependent societies to survive is increasingly being ignored.

The slave morality of selfless brotherhood which begins revolution and teaches that egos should bow to the greater good quickly reverts to master morality when the Great Man is credited with everyone’s labour and uses it to entrench his power. While it must have once been gratifying to be a Great Man behind closed walls, or a Thought Leader on stage with a canned (and often stolen) speech, authority today is more and more required to present themselves to the mob on social media. A social media account with a 7 or 8 digit follower count and absolutely nothing intelligent to contribute is revealing. Neither is it any longer wise to steal content in public or take credit for the work of others. A few short years ago giant accounts were built from stolen content, as giant careers frequently are offline, but it is increasingly a source of general contempt. There are marauding bands of bored trolls and curious autodidacts on social media who seek out new sources of information and find out quickly enough if the best known account is not the source of any expertise.

The anger and frustration of many Great Men today, convinced of their own myth but unable to fulfill it, desperately citing each other as proof of their credentials but still unable to produce any interesting content, is something new. The transparency and individualism of social media is leaving those acclaimed as Great Men a few years ago appearing now as empty shells. It is becoming more apparent that tools like Klout measure popularity, not influence, and real influence happens long before the broad acceptance of popularity. The only thing sadder than being a Great Man with nothing to say is being a satellite of a Great Man who has nothing to say. The parasite economy of followers dining out on proximity to the Great Men who act as a personal army propping up a shell of unreasonable fame appear increasingly disillusioned with their role.

The Internet has enabled user groups to create resilient networks with paths to bypass the access control of Great Men. Those in need of assistance and those with ideas to be audited no longer need to be performing bears or be fronted by an acceptable proxy to be heard, a small group of amplifiers can bring their voices directly to a wider audience. No one online is trapped behind one gate of controlled access to an audience. While the wider public is still fascinated by Great Men and unwilling to hear voices from the shadows, those that do hear them are no longer willing to accept Great Men blocking access. Transparency has allowed the Great Men to be seen for the empty shells they are and allowed the right to communicate directly for all. With no ideas to steal and market as their own, the celebrity intercept class may no longer be motivated to promote ideas. Transparency may force dissemination from the source and Great Men may lose, if not their popularity, at least their influence.

Our only hope in creating a world without oligarchy, a world where expertise is used effectively and all voices are included is to stop reaching up to celebrity for power and start reaching down to the voices still being excluded. The voiceless all have their own voices, they just need a community that will let them be heard directly.

Carlyle, Thomas. On Heroes, Hero-Worship and the Heroic in History, Fredrick A. Stokes & Brother, New York, 1888. p. 2.

White, male startup companies get funding for being white and male. February 10, 2010 Restructure!

Zur Genealogie der Moral, Friedrich Nietzsche, 1887

Commoners and how they are coerced

Part of a series, Autonomy, Diversity, Society. Posts about our roles, relationships and governance. No article in this section is meant to stand alone, there will be a lot more coming soon that will clarify the current posts.

—-

Commoners, the middle class, the peasants, the workers, the lumpenproles, the rabble, the hoi polloi or as Nietzsche so kindly described them, the ‘superfluous ones’, by any name, every society must have a large segment that are either locked into or content to make up the stable majority. Most people are now commoners for the majority of their participation in society as no one has the time to be at an elite level of participation in more than one system and few have time or ability to be elite at any. Keeping this large segment roughly equivalent in all obvious measures was key to peace and solidarity. Where significant difference among them occurs there is a threat of what is recognized as deep societal division or civil war. These elements are always in place in society but they are only recognized as such when they occur among the common majority.

Keeping this group distracted or content was always essential, as seen by political appeals exclusively to the middle class, a monarchy’s concern for the mood of the peasantry or media’s focus solidly on the masses. If roused, this group becomes a mob and could destroy an entire society by force of numbers or at least would need extreme repressive force to contain them. At many times and places in history this group has been executed in large numbers as they resisted change. At other times they have managed to slow or even divert change by their opposition. When controlled, this group is used as a club to enforce the prevailing oligarchy and their interests and block any attempts at change. During ‘revolutions’ they can be swayed to follow a new demagogue and topple the existing one. This is not a group that ever initiates radical change. Commoners are the 99.99% that follow in any given system. They do not spend a great deal of time questioning the workings of society, they just get on with their lives within it. When change occurs they resist and are persuaded or resist and are crushed.

During times of peace, this group is the mutually cooperative and sharing society. Their world is built on an ease of communication, a presumption of equality. They are the most likely to be content members of society as it is designed for them and they are comfortable and included in it. They are able to work co-operatively and share commons property easily. They are seldom inclusive of any not equal to them and are coerced to believe anything not their equal is wrong. If they work in fields then field work is invariably presented as the most real or valuable work, if they aspire to work in other areas those are presented as most desirable, even labeled as the only ‘professions’. Work they don’t understand is considered lazy and self-indulgent. They provide stability by a coercive peer pressure on what society should consider normal. Although they usually resent being called average or common, their normalcy is presented to them as a virtue above any diversity.

A great deal of effort is spent in creating solidarity and removing diversity in this group, largely by instilling common goals and fears. A goal of aspiring to the ‘upper class’ motivates them to uphold the upper class and a fear of the outcasts motivates them to persecute the enemies of the current oligarchy. Although they are frequently called ‘the middle class’, commoners are not middle as much as they are separate. They live in a society designed for their own coercion. Laws, governance, education and media are all intended to influence this block of people to move in the direction they are pointed. Those called ‘upper’ and ‘lower’ classes are really just those outside the realm of this coercion and in many ways they have more in common with each other than they have in common with the coerced.

Busywork, stress and incessant seductive coercion from all societal institutions keeps this majority from looking outside the paradigm they are reacting within. They are taught to mistrust ‘the elite’ who have greater knowledge than them and the Dunning–Kruger effect allows them to deny greater ability in anyone. They believe in the myth of their own independence and free will and believe they participate in their governance. As long as coercion is unrecognized, directing this majority has been simple. In Flatland, Edwin A. Abbott wrote of the difficulty an entity from Spaceland, which is aware of three dimensions, has in communicating with the king of Lineland who is only aware of a line. In a world where everything was set up to reinforce their conditioning, commoners were as certain of their reality as the king of Lineland.

The art of government is the organization of idolatry. The bureaucracy consists of functionaries; the aristocracy, of idols; the democracy, of idolaters. – George Bernard Shaw

The will of the majority creates and upholds oligarchy. Commoners have little real interest in governance, they only desire to be part of the spectacle of governance. They do not want revolution, they are happy with their messiahs and interfering to protect them can be as hazardous as interfering with domestic violence. Without this block of protective majority, oligarchies could never be created much less stand. A system which assumes that all people are equal is imposed on society to appeal to the conceit of the masses. Since people aren’t equal, a centripetal force will create oligarchy in every society set up with this principle. Governance structures did not create oligarchy in spite of democracy, they have slowed it as seen by the far faster and larger oligarchies created in the more purely egalitarian structures online. “The middle class have disappeared!” cry the middle class as they swarm to support ponzi schemes of celebrity, wealth and power.

“Historical evolution mocks all the prophylactic measures that have been adopted for the prevention of oligarchy,” wrote Robert Michels. “Who says organization, says oligarchy.” Faced with this frustrating reality and “the incompetence of the masses”, many reformers will eventually turn, like Michels, to fascism to implement what they see as ‘the greater good’. The fact that no dictatorship is possible without the support of the democratic will proves his point.

Whether the government is openly fascist or not, the masses are openly manipulated. From the coercing of public opinion in the lead up to the Iraq war to the current astroturfing, TED talks, Thought Leaders and the WE Day phenomenon there is a climate of secular evangelical frenzy we haven’t witnessed since the last widespread rise in fascism. The escalating coercive force applied on those designated as commoners is a reaction to their increasing tendency to disperse and follow divergent paths and interests. The crack in the monopoly on education and media has created a surge of independent thought which may finally dissolve the club of cohesive democratic power which has kept Great Men in power for centuries. With no middle class there will be no oligarchy.

The masses are not and have never been as apathetic as their reputation depicts them. They are otherwise engaged or their interests lie elsewhere. The idea that everyone ought to be fascinated by and highly informed regarding governance systems is ridiculous, especially as the puppet show on display has little or nothing to do with our real governance. As long as governance is peer-promoted, transparent, permeable and easily challenged there is no need to force people to have interests other than those they choose. There are plenty of people who are interested in governance that can sound an alarm to the broader public in cases of concern and plenty of people interested enough to keep an eye on the workings.

If each system was managed by a permeable and transparent concentric circle everyone could follow their own interests and acquire their expertise where they chose instead of making part of an uninformed mass set up to provide power to an oligarchy. Real involvement does not come from listening to advertising and making a necessarily uninformed choice to legitimize a dictatorship with consent. Governance should come from all participants in a system under advice from peer promoted epistemic communities open to all. Epistemic communities should be under no obligation to speak directly to the masses or earn support from the entirety of an uninformed public. Their work should be audited and transmitted by those users with the interest in doing so to those users with an interest in learning about it.

The purpose of a cohesive block of commoners has always been to use them as a weapon in support of oligarchy. The diffusion of the middle class into autonomous individuals removes the weapon. The full participation of all in their systems of interest enables self-governance and removes the need for governance by oligarchy. We need neither democracy nor fascism. The iron law of oligarchy can be disproved by replacing a system of votes with collaboration.


“Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One’s Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments” Kruger, Justin; David Dunning (1999). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Maxims for Revolutionists (1903) – George Bernard Shaw

Flatland: A romance of many dimensions (1884) – Edwin Abbott Abbott

Zur Soziologie des Parteiwesens in der modernen Demokratie; Untersuchungen über die oligarchischen Tendenzen des Gruppenlebens (1911) – Robert Michels

Autonomy, Diversity, Society

Part of a series, Autonomy, Diversity, Society. Posts about our roles, relationships and governance. No article in this section is meant to stand alone, there will be a lot more coming soon that will clarify the current posts.

—-

Our most overwhelming impulse as humans is to belong to a society. The pain of shunning is the most powerful coercive tool we employ against each other. Shunning can motivate people to take their own lives or the lives of others. Solitary confinement can rapidly destroy mental health. An infant left without human contact can have all of their physical needs met and still grow up with physical and mental damage. The need to belong can be used to overpower principles, deep rooted morals and self-interest. History has repeatedly proven that the majority of people can be coerced to do anything to themselves or others by the need for social inclusion. The desire to be a part of something bigger than themselves is frequently expressed as a motivation for action and duty to society a frequent excuse for compliance.

Most people are born with ambition to reach their own full potential in the areas which interest them. Autonomy, the ability to choose ideas and society for ourselves and the ability to spend our lives in the way that seems best to us is a basic human need. A society which locks people in or out due to location of birth or ethnicity and roles which are presented as the only acceptable paths require rigid conformity which does not suit our characters and will cause rebellion. Accepted diversity is not just morally just or strategically wise, it is also necessary for a complete society to fulfill all the roles required or desired.

An overriding theme in social structures in recent centuries has been equality as an ideal. Once questioned and frequently refuted, it is now accepted almost universally, dominating political movements, political theory, and all of society’s institutions as a Holy Grail which, once achieved, will assure the better world which has so consistently eluded us. Whenever social change is attempted, the ghost of Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité comes back to drown out all other conversation. Debates on equality as a realistic goal have typically fueled attempts at eugenics, not tolerance, since societal acceptance is hinged on equality. What and who we are all supposed to be equal to is the majority, an idea enforced by democracy. Our goals are to match those of the powerful, enabling them to excel ahead of everyone and become more powerful. Liberty and equality are for the accepted fraternity, not anyone outside their sphere.

We do not feel a sense of belonging when society demands we meet an unattainable ideal. The confidence of social inclusion required to risk relationships with other people by opposing majority will is a privilege of those accepted. Those not respected as autonomous individuals with equal rights but accepted on sufferance and with their needs unmet and unconsidered will forever be an unstable fringe. A society which demands unattainable results from a few of its members is inviting rebellion and discord not only from those excluded but also from those taught to exclude.

The quest for equality is futile and prevents development of a real society. It is the reason we have never achieved tolerance, a working system of collaboration or equivalence for all. It has denied us recognition and appreciation of the power of diversity. Survival under such a system demands conformity which restricts social progress to a crippling degree and denies basic rights of autonomy and personal fulfillment. It silences radical ideas which may bring change of great benefit to all. It ignores observable reality and the real requirements of a social structure with infants, elderly and diversity of all kinds. Those projecting from the mold will be driven into wretchedness for no reason except their failure to attain an impossible and artificial goal.

The concept of equality has been used to create a trade economy which insists that all have a universally equal ability to trade. The only work valued and the only ownership recognized is that of those in power and the only acceptable goals are those that benefit the powerful. Instead of a real society which works for the benefit of all members, we have created society as a corporation where all work to benefit the self-appointed shareholders. This trade economy has been extremely successful in justifying and continuing hierarchical rule and unbalanced privilege. In every tyranny there must be a rational justification of it. The divine right of kings was usually successful in protecting a monarch’s head as few wished to act against god’s will. A secular age must appeal to the sense of fairness which most people are born with. The idea that this one group of people are more worthy as they are used as a measure of worthiness must be instilled and reinforced constantly, as it is. The only reason equality in a trade economy is considered a virtue is to allow rule by right of virtue for the fraternity, the libertarian ideal of meritocracy.

In 1792 Mary Wollstonecraft stated the root flaw in every governance algorithm used in the past or present, “Where there is justice there is no need for charity.” Her view has been overlooked by all and the image of a just society is consistently one which has evolved to be charitable. There have been societies that were ruled by equivalence regardless of ability or role but they were always few, and since the notion of equality under a trade economy became widely lauded as both an ideal and a truism they exist almost nowhere. The equality mantra is the worm at the root of all trade economy systems today and any trade economy based on an ideal of equality will produce the same result, as we have seen. Equivalence comes from an economic system in which an infant or other dependencies have an inherent right to be included without reliance on charity. Equivalence would value work which benefits the poor or a few equally to that which benefits the powerful or the majority.

We once had a chance to overthrow our feudalist structures and achieve autonomy, diversity and society. Many societies of interwoven dependencies worldwide had the potential to evolve and allow both autonomy and society for all. Capitalists used the principle of equality to create inequality, a caste system where everyone must strive for the same goals and all but the few setting the goals would fail. The current goals of knowledge based capitalism, with knowledge as a product of wealth, leisure and access, continues the progression. Silicon valley, the financial and commodity industries fill no need of greater society, they exist to create a new corporate ruling class overseeing a new age of corporate empire. What little they produce is in service of empire, not greater society. The technology industries have created a global governance system for the five eyes and other intelligence services. The financial and commodity industries are set up to rob resources and enslave the rightful owners.

The trade economy has denied the value of any work benefitting those in need of assistance and denied the value of resources in non-western countries. Both caregivers and the entire continent of Africa are depicted as being in a state of perpetual begging for handouts from the wealthy despite the obvious fact that no one needs the wealthy and everyone needs caregivers and resources. The same power that once denied ownership by the commons with the homesteading principle now denies the rights of homesteaders in favour of foreign multi-national corporations. Liberty can no longer be attained without society because society has grown too complex. Those who claim liberty with no obligation to society endorse rule by mafia and act as parasites on society.

Laws are stratified to ensure the powerful have superior versions of everything, including immigration rights at a time when much of the world will need refugee status from drought, pollution, conflict and natural disasters. Even natural life expectancy is unapologetically higher for the chosen strata. The world is being funnelled through a eugenics program of a previously unimagined scale.

This callous and deliberate exclusion of most of society, even for moral nihilists, is ignorant and ill-judged. Our only hope of a livable future is in a singularity produced not from technology created by a population of self-appointed Übermenschen but from the collaborative creativity of all of the diverse minds in the world. Where very recently a qualified tradesman could, and was expected to, understand everything related to their field, it is now increasingly difficult for one human brain to comprehend the overall workings of any complete system much less the interlocking detail of every system globally. Given the required tools and societal structure, we could create a resilient collaborative network that could act as a real hive mind, that could audit, bridge and develop complex original thought and create solutions with the speed required.

Every revolution in history has simply installed new faces on top of the same paradigm. Societies ruled by the majority create oligarchies of Great Men, those two standard deviations above the mean in every field, just advanced enough to impress and not advanced enough to baffle, always from the tiny demographic group accepted as rulers. The voices and ideas outside the circle of demagogues, the ones that need and drive revolution in every case, sink back into oblivion. It is evident that if we are to stop the endless cycles of revolution, or even survive another cycle, we will have to change the paradigm. The current corporate empire is eager to install the latest messiahs who will promise reform which will retreat to moderation and then back to the status quo or worse. As we can already see, this population is once more leading us past democracy and back to the deeper prison of fascism. This time it is essential that we go deeper and create a genuinely new system, not just new messiahs and new names for old tricks.

Free will and seductive coercion

Part of a series, Autonomy, Diversity, Society. Posts about our roles, relationships and governance. No article in this section is meant to stand alone, there will be a lot more coming soon that will clarify the current posts.

—-

Governance is a force directing actions taken by society. We began governance with small tribes arranging relationships and personal assets between themselves and authority only required to settle disputes. As populations grew, we moved to a variety of government systems with full hierarchies, official authorities and hard coercive force in the form of official military and police. Lately we have moved far beyond these forms to all pervasive and largely invisible soft coercion. While large populations have always been coerced more by propaganda than by armies, the techniques developed by global intelligence and marketing research of the past several decades have escalated this to global coercion controlled by a very few people. Unlike the churches and governments in the past, the new hierarchy controlling this coercion is invisible.

Democracy is a puppet show set up to distract attention from the real governance. Democracy and local governments provide a curtain between the true coercive power and the rest of the people. A politician or ruler is placed on stage and people are made to feel they participate in the show by voting for or against and occasionally throwing shoes at or assassinating them. Then the people leave the theatre and go to the streets where they are the targets of an increasingly oppressive war of coercion by those battling for control of the real governance. It was once possible to monitor our governance but we are now locked in an ideological maze with walls of democracy preventing us from seeing or participating in the true structures of power and debate.

Voting, even in the case of referendums, is a controlled binary input into a preordained structure and question. It is always a front to reinforce the underlying propaganda. ‘Would you like to be ruled by person A or person B?’ is a propaganda exercise and advertising blitz promoting the idea that democracy is good and the voters are in control. In this structure, ‘none of the above’ is never an easy option and doing away with democracy is not an allowable choice at all. The voters are locked out of any control over the coercive propaganda that forms our real governance by a lack of access to information or the time and funding required to participate. Influencing votes by coercion is illegal in democracies but the United States spent $6,285,557,223 in 2012 on seductive coercion proven to be more effective than any violence in influencing outcomes. Despite the obvious and proven effectiveness of this coercion, its effectiveness is denied by the very propaganda which is spending billions on it.

The most important lie those currently in power had to convince the majority of was that they had free will and individual self governance was possible, that they lived free of coercion. It is not possible to live free of coercion. It was not possible even when we were in small tribes as the need to belong, past experience and uncountable other factors influence every decision. The amount of value judgements our minds are called upon to make every day would be impossible without myriad cognitive shortcuts triggering preconceived judgements or by adopting those judgements held by our peers.

All slides of the NSA leaks from Edward Snowden as posted on the Intercept.

Screen shot 2014-04-14 at 11.50.47 AM

Screen shot 2014-04-22 at 12.41.59 PM

Screen shot 2014-04-14 at 11.52.39 AM

Language itself is highly coercive. Each word is a cognitive shortcut to a wide array of emotions and value judgements, so by a simple redefining sleight of hand people can be manipulated into agreeing with ideas they would normally reject. War is billed as peace, police states are billed as freedom, children are billed as terrorists. Few people have made the value judgements they use to assess information on their own and again, no one has the time and very few have the ability to do so all the time. Most base their judgements on emotive responses to words they have been taught to revere or revile by environmental conditioning through social circles, media or education. Reconditioning by radical groups adjusts emotional responses but still seldom results in change of more than a few principles.

People are presented with ideas, events and personalities which are calculated to trigger binary moral judgements. With the amount of judgements we all have to make every day, no one has time for continual nuance and examination of everything. Information is presented by those who have taken time and care to deliver a specific message and narrow the field of options to make the choice obvious. An overload of topics of advanced complexity has resulted in people permitting themselves to be governed by memes and slogans.

The use of memes to evoke entire bodies of knowledge or memory is not unique to the Internet, it has been used in storytelling cultures everywhere. The difference today is the story tellers are not of and from the communities they are controlling.

The vast growth in intelligence communities worldwide is not triggered by a desire to spy on our selfies for any government. The intelligence communities are the government.

Control of the Internet is control of the dialogue which is directing and coercing behaviour worldwide.

Screen shot 2014-04-14 at 11.47.50 AM

Screen shot 2014-04-14 at 11.48.11 AM

Screen shot 2014-04-14 at 11.48.48 AM

We have spent decades watching as governments, particularly those under direction of the five eyes, have experimented with brainwashing and coercion techniques. From brainwashing Canadian women with postnatal depression and secretly drugging US citizens in 1950’s and 60’s they have gone to the advanced torture and coercion techniques we see today. China’s Thought Reform Movement in 1951 was an unusually open example of the coercion practised by all governments to greater or lesser effect. The advertising industry also has invested billions into research to understand motivation and desire, stimulus and response. Non-stop propaganda from media, video games and social programs combines with game theory incorporated increasingly everywhere. All of this research, the vast reach of all forms of media, and the complete corporate control of all essential resources have combined until today we are very near governance by thought control, complete with imprisonment for thought crimes and criminalization of information counter to governing propaganda.

Screen shot 2014-04-14 at 11.51.42 AM

Screen shot 2014-04-14 at 1.10.04 PM

Screen shot 2014-04-14 at 11.49.42 AM

The portions of the leaked NSA documents that the public have been permitted to see show how people worldwide are being governed and in whose interests. Intelligence efforts are directed at coercing your behaviour and response in service to corporate interests. The people preventing you from reading the NSA documents (and every other intelligence document) are preventing you from having any understanding of your own governance.

According to the few PowerPoint slides we have been permitted to see, the UK’s GCHQ study Social Engineering, Digital Tells, Disruption, Strategic Influence, Scams and Deception. Their slides ask Can SIGDEV help us understand and shape the Human Terrain? and describe Having an impact in the real world with Complete Network Information Operations: Propaganda, deception, mass messaging, pushing stories, alias development, psychology. They specify looking for Social not technological solutions and teach “Using online techniques to make something happen in the real or cyber world.” No, these techniques were not used against just ‘the enemy’ whoever that may be.

Thanks to whistleblower Jeremy Hammond we also have insight into the activities used against activists from another source, the intelligence firm Stratfor. Stratfor recommended the following methods for dismantling any group interested in participating in their own governance. Taking advantage of the personality based interests of the majority, ideas are silenced by attacking their source. As described by Steve Horn in Popular Resistance:

Divide activists into four groups: Radicals, Idealists, Realists and Opportunists. The Opportunists are in it for themselves and can be pulled away for their own self-interest. The Realists can be convinced that transformative change is not possible and we must settle for what is possible.  Idealists can be convinced they have the facts wrong and pulled to the Realist camp.  Radicals, who see the system as corrupt and needing transformation, need to be isolated and discredited, using false charges to assassinate their character is a common tactic. …

“If your industry can successfully bring about these relationships, the credibility of the radicals will be lost and opportunists can be counted on to share in the final policy solution,” Duchin outlined in closing his speech. “What Stratfor produces is the information economy’s equivalent of guns: knowledge about the world that can change the world, quickly and irrevocably.” …

“The Pagan/MBD/Stratfor operatives are much more sophisticated about social change than the activists they oppose, they have limitless resources at their disposal, and their goal is relatively simple: make sure that ultimately the activists fail to win fundamental reforms,” he said. “Duchin and Mongoven were ruthless, and I think they were often amused by the naivete, egotism, antics and failures of activists they routinely fooled and defeated. Ultimately, this is war, and the best warriors will win.”

Those not swayed solely by personalities are coerced by events, selected by media and others in power to create an emotional response which will steer public opinion in the direction they wish. For those few who look beyond personalities and events, messages can be easily co-opted by isolating certain ideas out of context. Particularly any idea which challenges deeply held convictions and would require concentrated thought is easily deflected by distracting noise and triggering fear responses.

The manipulation is not restricted to coercing opinions online as we have seen from the many cases of incitement to criminal action by intelligence services. Participation in military horrors and even genocide are also coerced by media packaged for that purpose by groups such as the 969 movement in Myanmar. Wars are now being fought around the world with no declaration or admission of war, controlled solely by fear, propaganda and denial. Wars are declared against enemies no one can truly define as we have seen with shadowy backers behind groups such as the M23 in the Democratic Republic of Congo, various Syria rebel groups and the Boko Haram in Nigeria. Billion dollar multi-national industries such as human trafficking are kept entirely out of the spotlight by diverting interest. The battle for hearts and minds is not just real, it is the only battle that matters, the battle from which all others emanate.

Instead of religious propaganda reinforcing slave morality and obedience as in the past, master morality and free will are now promoted for all along with the delusion that all have the ability to become masters in the current ponzi scheme of power. The myths of equality and self governance have convinced the public that all are responsible for their own actions as long as they attain a minimum level of competence. That premise is as unfair as it would be to hold someone responsible who had not attained that minimum. It is the knowledge differential between those presenting information and those receiving it that matters. People are convinced to defer responsibility for the actions of their government or while deployed in the military but suddenly retain it in their everyday actions which are subject to even greater coercion and lack of alternative choice.

The originator of information also should not be held responsible for the unforeseen actions of those below a level of understanding the original information. The manipulators of information that bring it to the wider public are those that direct acceptance and rejection. These coercive agents deflect blame by claiming they have a right to free speech and all of those following their message have free will and should be responsible for their own actions. This deflected responsibility is insisted on despite all evidence of the power of coercion which the top research efforts in the world have developed over many decades.

Since all are declared to have free will and equal ability, this man is fully responsible for his actions and the media and politicians who placed him opposite his designated opponent and incessantly harassed him with a barrage of highly targeted coercion and false information bear no responsibility. These two brains are equal under the law and the one with fetal alcohol syndrome fills prisons everywhere because they are held to the same level of responsibility as the other. Presumption of equality has ensured enslavement of many to the whims of a few.

Of all the movements attempting to counter government action, intelligence leaks and releases show none are more feared than the ones the government prefixes with ‘cyber’. The public can be led in circles with laughable ease by whoever controls the dialogue and the only uncontrolled dialogue is on the Internet. The efforts to co-opt it, dilute it, discredit it and divert it have been overwhelming. Interrupting Internet collaboration is interrupting collaborative self-governance, the only real threat to the coercive governance currently in place.

That threat is still very small and is being overwhelmed by restrictions on access, spying, arrests, laws to discourage participation and most of all, a lack of independent decentralized tools for long term governance. An unending meme war is ridiculous and unwinnable. Self governance requires deep knowledge and knowledge bridges emanating from constantly audited and updated cores of information. Quick information and action must flow naturally and transparently from these cores, not just appear as confusing dissociated static. Information must be informed and audited by those on the ground, not as manufactured Kony 2012 type activist product.

Self governance by individuals is impossible in practice. There is too much information for any one person to act at all times without connection to an informed community. Without the ability to trust in transparent collective knowledge, people will be discouraged from taking any action at all. A lack of these knowledge repositories leaves fertile ground for viral hidden and uncontrollable coercion.

In the end, the solution must be to dismantle the structure that creates motivation for the current coercive power.