That’s how rocketships happened.
I am not afraid of the Globalist Technocrats fulfilling their vision: it is an insane vision, and therefor will not succeed. I am “afraid” of them- not fulfilling their vision. These are people who have lost any inherent feeling for their species, any attachment to humanity, (apropo Tab’s attitude and rhetoric) and wouldn’t really care if a nuclear apocalypse or economic global meltdown wiped the board if they can’t have it their way.
" it obfuscates the amount of control academia does have. Not having minds, not having individuals, is not a hindrance to control."
I do believe that this difference: that Plato’s Academy was run by philosophers who understood what they were doing, and our Academies are run by goons who have no idea, means that our professors and general academic institution can become co-opted by, and turned into: political instruments, pawns of the State. Which is exactly what happened. To have the actual means of educating our children under the control of the government… Isn’t there a word for that? It’s like, oh yeah brainwashing. Cultural re-education.
Aristotle is already proof of this.
Lol, cultural education. That is what it is.
“I am not afraid of the Globalist Technocrats fulfilling their vision: it is an insane vision, and therefor will not succeed. I am “afraid” of them- not fulfilling their vision. These are people who have lost any inherent feeling for their species, any attachment to humanity, (apropo Tab’s attitude and rhetoric) and wouldn’t really care if a nuclear apocalypse or economic global meltdown wiped the board if they can’t have it their way.”
That’s why I’m saying, don’t go after the financiers. Just start your own companies. Be the ocean. Have no agenda other than to become rich and enjoy the fuck out of it.
Sun Tsu baby. Always leave the enemy somewhere to go.
Give those soulless rich bastards somewhere to put their money.
“That’s why I’m saying, don’t go after the financiers. Just start your own companies. Be the ocean. Have no agenda other than to become rich and enjoy the fuck out of it.”
But that is the issue: the state insidiously manipulates the economy so as to promote the rise and fall of companies. The regulations and laws that are passed are about 50,000 pages long: nobody reads them, not even the lawyers. But in them are buried all the mechanisms needed to facilitate the rise of companies that will be inclined to carry out the desires of the state. There is no free-market, this hasn’t been a Capitalist society in quite some time.
“Before Socrates, there were no powertrips, there was only power.”
Yes, I said so myself; though from a different perspective. The structure of the Greek demos so perfectly mirrored that of the Greek psyche, and the Athenian state was so well dispensated according to the hierarchy of human virtue itself, that a fish in water scenario occurred. Man was so perfectly adapted to his social structure: that it became unconscious. He could not reflect on that structure, because he was that structure. He could not reflect on it or his place in it, and therefor; he could not reflect on himself. Power cannot be conscious; as soon as it becomes conscious of itself, it becomes will; and will must act, or it destroys itself. Yet, there is something of the Depth in all of Psyche’s mirrors, and in Psyche herself, that calls unto the winged half-God Eros. There is some datum in man, which cannot be adapted to the demos. That cannot be touched by power. It is some mysterious internal criterion, which judges itself, and only through itself; the world. It is conscience: what Socrates called his whispering daemon. Socrates used this infinitesimal particle, beyond the reach of the demos, to break Athens. That Athens could be broken, is all the proof needed: that it should have been broken. Whatever was lost in the move to Socrates and then Plato: good. If it can be lost, it should be lost, and is not worth saving. I make no call to atavism for all my reverence for the ancients.
Put yourself in the position of a truly soulless rich bastard, of the level we are talking about. You have children. Do you…
A) Train them in scheming ways you don’t actually fully have because you are insane or,
B) You notice that the last 20 years have led to a massive consolidation of government power around the world as well as global corporate syndicates with very malleable lines with global corporate criminal syndicates, and that the Fucking Treacherous Dirty Hippies have found a way to fully brainwash populations and youf (like in that Frank Zappa video zoot posted once about the music industry) that is not only 100% ideologically friendly to their profits but actually locks them in via regulation, to the extent that simply having this dirtygoddamnhippie ideology is guarantee of being able to make the whole thing function, and you decide to just get your own chilren brainwashed. Because #1 you are insane and #2 it’s all about that dinasty.
This is simply not true. And consider this: if it wasn’t, would it be more useful for them for you to think that it was or that it wasn’t?
I’m not saying it’s Adam Smith out here. It is also decidedly not what you say.
Because at the bottom it is Plato we are battling, as long as you have philosophical prowess at least equal to Plato’s, you already know more than they do. That includes strategically, tactically, situation-on-the-ground level.
That is why Nietzsche was so important.
Sure there were greater philosophers than Plato before Plato. But Plate buried them all. And nobody caught up, until Nietzsche. You can tell, because first thing he did was bring all those motherfuckers back.
Nietzsche did always understand philosophy as war, from the very beginning…
That’s also why Nietzsche said, quite comfortably, that philosophy would be counted before him and after him. Because all he had to do was be greater than Plate, which he was.
When I said there were greater philosophers before Plate, I meant in terms of the quality of the questions they asked, not their philosophical achievements.
"Sure there were greater philosophers than Plato before Plato. "
They weren’t philosophers. The other “philosophers” before Socrates represented a direct intimation of Being, and each produced an independent island-universe that I call the ONTOS; a guiding image of thought. Each of the pre-socratics appeared seemingly overnight, without precedence, fully formed. But they could not truly interact, there was no true philosophy yet. Socrates was the first. Nietzsche is a return to the ontos, and by taking a step backward, allowed us to see where a step forward could be made. Sometimes that is necessary. I do not value Nietzsche very much; only for that. But it is well known, that I am not a Nietzschean, though his personality and chronic pain and life tragedy (and life comedy) were very much like my own. I even have my own Salome.
I don’t think these super-elites are soulless, well some of them are. I just think that Option C usually prevails: I insulate myself and my family from the world and withdraw into a subculture of equally rich guys. And then I talk to these guys. And human nature takes over and we start to all kind of think the same way.
As to my remark about state-sponsored monopolization.
I wager that it is true. A company can rise to a certain point. They don’t care about multi millionaires, or even billionaires. But there is a kind of barrier embedded in the structure of both US regulations, International law, and the international banking system, that is not neutral: it has a secret political intention. That intention, is to encourage the growth of companies and organizations that will concentrate wealth a certain way, and which will help to carry out social engineering and political exercises concocted by the state. There actually is a very small, select group of people sitting around in a room with a world map and economic channels mapped on it, tied to the carefully designed banking system and international laws, as well as internal US companies. They have weaponized the economy, and transformed it into a political instrument, just as they did with Academia. The origin of it is this:
-
Free-market, classical Adam Smith capitalism led to a massive national excess-capital. But it was homogenized, that is, equally distributed across innumerable very small companies. What this meant is that this excess-capital could not be consolidated into the international channels of global trade, and exported. This excess-capital could not be translated into the system of import-export that our nation came to rely on. So that meant a massive failure economically that led to the first world war.
-
Okay so that didn’t work. But we still hate communism. So: In comes what Braudel called state-sponsored monopolization. We have to set up the system so that the excess we generate internally, in what was the expansionist era of capitalist free-trade, can actually be exported and converted into physical goods, imported from other nations. So we’re going to create an international banking system that will entangle everything in debt-obligations that ensure the channels by which import and export is conducted. This is the beginning of globalization. And oh what’s that? Germany wants to be self-sufficient and doesn’t wanna participate in all this good shit? Fuck em and just make them carry the entire burden of the first world war. Then people resort to eating each other in the streets, here comes Hitler, and boom: second world war.
3.) Fucking rekt both the communists and the Nazis, so we introduce an overly complicated system of internal regulations, set up several international systems of law, and better secure the international bank: and that has been working so far. Not for us I mean, but for the State. But it won’t for much longer. We have a third and final war. Three stages; three wars.
"And human nature takes over and we start to all kind of think the same way. "
As philosophers, we already know all possible things they can be thinking, and none of them are overly impressive.
“1) Free-market, classical Adam Smith capitalism led to a massive national excess-capital. But it was homogenized, that is, equally distributed across innumerable very small companies. What this meant is that this excess-capital could not be consolidated into the international channels of global trade, and exported. This excess-capital could not be translated into the system of import-export that our nation came to rely on. So that meant a massive failure economically that led to the first world war.”
Adam Smith Capitalism never existed.
Capitalism is and always has been in a state of constant tension with a myriad of enemies. This isn’t new, it’s constitutional. Capitalism is and always has been growth, never state.
War isn’t coming. War is already here.
I tend to think that WW1 was an echo of the Absolutist Monarchy vs Reformist wars before them.
It was about changing political structures, more than economic ones. The changing economic structures may have simply triggered it, allowing the cash needed to carry it out.
Another beautiful thing about Napoleon. He stood cleanly outside that debate. His disdain for reformists was only surpassed by his disdain for Monarchy. Also why there was no obvious immediate political transcendence from Napoleon.
Except I guess the independence of the entire American continent.
And the modern nation state.
And conscious capitalistic policies.
And total war.
Napoleon was first and foremost a war nerd. All the rest of what he did was in order to allow him to conduct war.
This is not an interpretation. This is what he openly discussed with his generals at their dinner table.