Masterful Enslavement

By: Jonathan Seidel

Shepherding another’s cattle: to be a slave and master simultaneously (Fromm, 162) 

Nietzsche’s master morality implies the return to the aristocratic vein yet in doing so he inspires subjugation to the order. The nazis misconstrued his work but at the same time exhibiting slave morality internally.  

The object of master morality is seemingly freedom. It is to be in control of one’s destiny. To decide one’s fate rather than be controlled. Yet, the marker of aristocracy is to be in control of others. To be duped into the system of control. To control while at the same time being controlled by one’s own power. Master morality is but a sideshow to authority as submission. Hitler promoted such authority yet was a slave to his antics. A slave to his goals. In the end, he diverted trains to Auschwitiz rather than protect his men. His goal of exterminating Jews was at the cost of the war effort. He not only brought the war on his shoulders but further agonised the world in his insidious torture. He had signed his fate to his ordeal. He was a Jew hunter and could not stop his addiction. To the point of sealing his defeat instead of re-empowering his troops to defeat the allies. A man consumed by his arrogance and stubbornness. 

The aristocracy while in control had to also appeal to the peasant. He had to be working for them. The peasant didn’t have a choice but without an inkling of assistance or grace the peasants would revolt. Even at the behest of their life, sometimes killing your worst enemy beats out decaying. The aristocracy were provided status as a duty to fellow man. The divine right did not imbue exploitation but responsibility for the unprivileged. Peasants though were not provided the lectern of grace were still deserving of assistance. They enjoyed the fruits of aristocratic mercy. From the aristocracy’s point of view, assisting the needy was an obligation. A duty embedded in their social status and political favour. When lords began exploiting sailors even if it was for their countrymen, sailors looked to monarchs for help. The monarchs only became absolute with the aid of the citizenry. The citizen’s gave the monarchy more power if they returned the favour with opportunities. To some extent, the nature of the American revolution did have its legitimate grievances but it cannot be denied its ideological inspiration. Since many peasants weren’t concerned and it was more the wealthy who wished for their independence. In this way, war was a product of wealthy incitement for independence. Master morality preferred to be masters themselves which lead to a deadly war and a difficult beginning which almost folded. 

Master morality is led by ambition but ambition of self growth against self preservation. The colonial peasantry were happy with where they were. The downtrodden weren’t entirely exploited by the British. In many ways, the mid nineteenth century factory workers were not exploited by their bosses. There are horrific stories and grievances that led to unions and governmental intrusion but these were based on misconceptions about medieval life. That farming was somehow simpler and charming than factory work. There were problems and there was exploitation but that wasn’t every factory as not every contemporary business is villainous. One CEO charged with embezzlement doesn’t make all of them the devil incarnate. Rather the gradual development of better lives continued to increase with poverty declining steadily as the years have drawn on. Master morality is to seek one’s own ideals at the expense of the national or global mentality. Such a mentality, in practice did not lead to the best conclusions for all the masters. They became servants to their ideals. The marxists who established the Soviet Union ended up suffering under the regime as Stalin murdered all those who opposed. 

Nietzsche makes slave morality incomplete and derogatory. Yet given his psychosis he was unable to write a critique of master morality and praise slave morality. It cannot be inferred what he would say but this is a potential response using his frame. The slave morality is content with where he is. He accepts his position in the world and is unfettered by external glory. He has a way and he is principled about it. He accepts his fate without trying too hard to alter the unalterable. He is not passive nor quiet. Yet he is calm and passionate. The slave is hired and he does his job. He follows the rules and climbs the corporate ladder. He may voice a request for a rate or promotion. He is not silent but he is patient. He is grateful for the opportunity of life and work. He blesses his god and his employer. He now has the ability to provide for those he loves. He may be a rebel but he is no revolutionary. The slave is not one who sits back when all is failing. There is a limit to anyone’s patience. One must stand up when it gets too far. Everyone has a breaking point. There is a sense of content and weighing the options. The slave distinguishes between a rough season and exploitation. He is aware and honest.

The master either becomes a slave to his ideals or a slave to a new master. So he is ambitious and gets a new job or he gets a new house. More material doesn’t mean more joy nor more solace. The master is fake. Even someone as polarising as Andrew Tate is a slave to his work. He works non stop despite his hundreds of millions. While this is just conjecture he may be a slave to his social media presence. Hoping to inspire but really hoping people notice. Influencers are all about having fun but being noticed and acknowledged. To be a master is to be acknowledged but that masterfulness isn’t always acclaimed. The “do you know who I am” phraseology is an insecurity based on anticipated acknowledgement. The master doesn’t run away to the woods forever but hopes to come back and inspire. Nietzsche’s Zarathrusta returns to give his message. He is a preacher hoping for notice. Unlike the biblical prophets he seeks to acclaim while they wished to be far away from the action. Pharaoh is a slave to his own pride. The Hebrew slaves accepted their fate until Moses came along to free them. They pleaded with God to save them but were confined to their status. The leader no more than the slave himself was imprisoned by his will. 

To some extent the question remains if anyone is truly free. Even the mystic who flees to the forest is hoping to be protected. He relies on nature to provide sustenance and shelter. Freedom is an illusion as the only true liberty is directional and contextual. To be free from something or someone is to become a slave to a new idea. Fromm relates the freedom achieved from monarchies only to become new slaves to democracy. A new elite order demanding the citizenry around. So you were embedded with natural rights does not take away from the slavish power of the system. The law remains the law whether under a king or a president. Under a council or congress. Yet this does not take away from the preservation of liberty nor is it necessarily an issue. Hobbes’ Leviathan is the concession of rights for order. The foundation of human civilisation even tribalism is dismissed freedoms for the whole. The illusion of master morality is having reached the pinnacle to be a master yet deeply cursed by so much incompletion. A tiresome agony that never fades. There is no peace with ambition and no summit of tranquility. Once reaching the top of Everest need to then descend. 

There was a music video that came out years ago by Jake Miller called “Im Alright”. The video narrated a beggar collecting coins to buy better clothes to then finally cash it in and join the workforce. He excels and grows busier with the workload multiplying with his success. It becomes too overwhelming he breaks everything and returns to his simple beggar life. There may be many messages to gather from this. Yet identifying the chorus with the prose portrays the simpleton of poverty. It is tough but it is routine. A song recognising the harshness of toiling in the workforce. No matter what happens all will be well though the narrative demonstrates that working is hellish. It seems to advocate two various aspects. Though to some degree it is a reminder that work is not easy comes at price with a reward. The more work the more focus the more reward. Yet doing less may lesson anxiety begging for some cash each day but maybe people won’t give and clothes are tattered in the freezing winter. In both cases he is slave but his slavish life is economically better as an employee than his potential mentality as a beggar. The beggar is the master who has fled the corporate ladder but has also lost all the privileges of homeostasis.       

How masterful is a master who is dependent on other? Who seeks approval and acknowledgment. He agonises over his faults and dead dreams indefinitely. Slave mentality is not an economic status but a mentality. It doesn’t matter where one is on the economic ladder but how steeped there are in their own head. How much does their pride and arrogance affect them? How entranced are they are in their monolithic vision? To be a slave is to be stagnant and unreasonable. The slave mentality is to be content and tranquil. Concerning religion, it may seem uneventful and archaic but it is peaceful. It is acceptance and communal. The slave is not alone nor lonely. He has corresponding brethren and those who care for him. A slave has much in common with his friends. The peasants are all friends with one another but the lord lives alone his kids shunned by their mental superiority. Such arrogance begins as a group but slowly deteriorates as arrogance flares. The master can be a lone individual. One who charts his own path with antagonism brewing behind him. Discontent with his life hoping for change that will never satisfy him. 

Master morality is a hoax. It is a single person bent on control. Insecurity and fear presses him to press his feelings to the public. Hoping his charisma attracts and convinces them. All that partake are slaves to this master. Yet worse is the master’s blazing insecurity that leads to his own downfall. That causes such destruction because he couldn’t accept otherness or faults. Incapable of seeking peace and only monism. Such masterful intent is its own undoing. 

Sexualised Society

By: Jonathan Seidel

Bikinis and mini skirts: are woman causing their own demise? Are they partially to blame for sexualising themselves? (Barthes, 84)

Self-sexualisation is a dominant theme in contemporary culture. Following media tropes and beauty standards, a desire mounts to be validated by sexuality. Yet it may also be self-defeating in male reaction further harming the problem.

Men do act viciously concerning women but the desire for the woman is not out of nowhere. It is spawned by her beauty. Her beauty enshrines his mind. Capturing him in a psychotic hypnosis. He feels connected to her. He wishes to have her. Her beauty is overwhelming. His lust increases with each passing second. Her image pleases his neurotic foundation. He ponders the fun. Fantasising of the jolly endeavour. He is deeply attracted to her appearance. It tingles his body and his body reacts. Urges creep into his mind. He musters up the confidence and heads her way. He wishes to chat her up and charm her. Hoping she’ll reciprocate his infatuation with her. A surface level feeling fleeting as he converses with her. Rejection angers him breaking his expectation. Acceptance mellows his heart. Her beauty applauds the direction of the hall. 

Her beauty is contagious. Her epidermis showing. Her curves potent and dress tight around her waist. Her depiction to the crowd alarms the spectators. Her beauty gleans through. A ray of light seducing the crowd. An unintentional consequence but one that occurs. A display of planned innocence is corrupted into devilish lust. Her image is the same as billboards. The slogans have male pleasing fulfilment. She is dressed like those posters. She is sending lustful energy. A sexualising effort to attract mates. She is calling to me. Her movements are all too clear. Her messages are easy interpreted. She hasn’t turned my way but she is looking at me with eyes behind her head. The back of her head is ridiculous. Her ponytail shines under the purple light show. Swaying her hips to the music as she attempts to sing out of tune. Her smile is genuine and her laugh irresistible. The male gaze is only apprehending the situation, not stalking. Enjoying the show. She is performing for me. A spectacle for my taste.    

Look at her clothes she is asking for it. She is giving me those fuck me eyes. Is liberation really a form of undress? Free the nipple is only refuted by the religious. Return to the pre-sin paradise. Nudity in public is the lustful man’s dream. Yet its false medium between dress and undress is overtly appealing to the eye. More skin showing. The outline of cleavage is pronounced but it is still behind closed doors. Her boobs are covered, her nipples not shown but her indent is revealed. A striptease spectacle. She has decided to undress just slightly. She has decided to display her body openly yet with some restrictions. She refuses to permit the rest of her body to be unveiled. The tightness of her dress does make out her figure. Her butt is only fattened by her high heels. The observer sees this spectacle of undress. She is dressed but at the same time undressed. Unlike the stripper, she is not intending to put on a show. She does not begin dressed and slowly remove articles of clothing but enters the scene in such garb. Her openness does give off an aura of teasing. Look at my body but only what I permit you. 

The perspective of the male and the female is different. Is she wearing this dress to say something or does it feel good to wear less clothing. The feministic liberation point may have some truth to it but their taint of patriarchal exodus is misused in the context of heightened libido areas. To dress in such attire under the guise of liberation yet attending a promiscuous dance scene seems to be a little hypocritical and an idiotic tactic. Though the beach may be different. A bikini is fitting for the hot sun. Men go shirtless and wear swim trunks. If men are maximising their epidermis to the hot sun women may as well. The same can be said of joggers or at the gym. A sports bra is akin to shirtless. It is implementing the best clothing for a workout. Hell I workout in my underpants because I find it to be the most liberating and the easiest to manoeuvre (I also then do less laundry, everything is less smelly—it’s all about productivity). To avoid problematic male stares, the sexes could be divided up but that is not easy in the park or on a beach. People just need to behave themselves. The option is either to force women to cover themselves up and endure the vibrant heat or men just keep it in their pants. Staring is not the biggest problem it is the advances made afterwards. 

Men may stare more than women but the staring should not be overblown. Beauty is contagious. It can’t be helped. It is hard to avoid the luscious skin and figure of the opposite sex. Women stare at men with jaw dropping consistency. Men like the attention. Though unwanted advances are made frequently and society cares little. Potentially because of the lacking negative consequences or because male issues elicit unconcern. The imbalance works one way. Nevertheless, the former conclusion is a dangerous one. A man may be able to fend off a few stares and even unwanted advances. He is stronger and faster. He can be emotionless and ignore them. Women on the other hand can feel threatened and afraid to escape. Their emotional outbursts are credibly disastrous. The glances may be equal but the advances not. The ego may also play a detrimental role. As a rejected advance may result in an assault. Rejection isn’t a problem it is the frustration that builds up from the expectation. The social phenomenons of deathly male glances are a product of the tragic cases of egoism gone awry. 

To differentiate the club scene and the beach scene is to recognise a difference in methodology. The function of less clothing on in an intoxicating atmospheric dance floor may be of patriarchal liberation but also may be to swoon men. To look sexy on the dance floor for the observers. While they may not want unwanted attention they may indeed desire wanted attention. If a hot guy approaches them no big deal. It is the other ninety percent. The statistics are blurry but look like a stripper is to intentionally do so. The scene calls for objectifying oneself in a colosseum. A spectacle on display. Modest clothing veils the prized objects observers wish to glance at. It is a tease. Swaying to the music with cleavage showing is an indicator to onlookers to engage. Look at my body sexualise it from afar. It is a subconscious expression. It isn’t about liberation nor dance clothing but to exhibit in an image of sexiness. It is in this type of scenery that such dress is pounced upon. Whether the intent is simply for boggling there is an exposure for attention though selective. 

The beach scene is to undress in the heat. To be comfortable in the blazing sun. It isn’t to arouse attention but to enjoy the moment. Applying this to everyday wear may also be of enjoyment. Dressing openly for the breeze of its simplicity. There is a certain modelling to it. Yet there is also a strata of desiring that others look. Why put on makeup to look presentable? For self esteem as well as complimentary looks from others. Attempting to enjoin respect from others. Whether wearing a button down or a t shirt. Looking at oneself in the mirror before heading out, making sure hair looks clean and the outfit fits right. Comfortable and ready to seize the day. Feeling good but also wishing for positive gazes. Both sexes strive for admiration and acknowledgement. Dressing in a particular way to evoke desire. Desiring gaze but solely a glance of approval. Though there is an aspect of the beach body that is aspired. Going to the beach undressed to show off the body. The abs the curves the butt. It is not all in hopes for fawning attention but there is an interest in attention grabbing eye popping suckle blinking. The extent of desire is limited but is warranted.

Absent the advances the gazes may not be too problematic. The staring is the issue not the temporary glance. Catcalling and hollering at women is disturbing. The catcalling suggests lewd intentions. It isn’t harmless and cute, it is with grave intent. Catcalling in a club may feel good but not on the way to work. It is annoying and bothersome. The situational element is instructive. Its frequency in the wrong setting is cruel and tedious. It also depends on the terminology. Yelling nice tits versus you eyes shine are two different things. There is an enjoyable Key and Peele skit on this.  Yet even the simple neutral compliment can come off as derogatory. While this is entirely subjective, the sexual innuendos do hold up to scrutiny. As well as the whistling followed by the intimidating technique. Their harassing aspect is where it goes too far. Speech may not be violence but it is hurtful. It is demeaning and may precede a physical encounter. At the heart of the hurtful comment is the hurtful rejection. A catcaller ought not to be offended when he has offended her. If you give it you got to take it. There is a way to swoon if it is in good faith or if can be backed up and taken like a man. 

The catcalling issue speaks to itself. Catcallers may frequent those women with more cleavage showing but that isn’t always the case. A favourite barista may be hounded or a businesswomen in a pant suit. It isn’t always about the exposure. It may be more likely with more cleavage showing but necessarily so. The arousal higher shooting darts through the neural framework. Horniness spits out in a conjugated rhyme that is ignored in disgust. Catcallers may be themselves victims of a seductive society. The free porn, the half naked models. Women walking the streets in tight clothes. Film has them believe that women will prey to their needs. With one call they will be possessed. Hypnotised by their charm. It isn’t necessarily about power but about expectation. It is about self esteem and acknowledgement. No wonder they take rejection so hard. In their minds, this was the female’s intent. She was seducing him with her clothes. The fictional character was able to do the same. Men are also victims of a sexual matrix. A hyperreal mantra that attempts to feature film as reality. Translating those techniques ends in failure. There is malicious intent in certain circumstances but also may be a psychosis that believes in a predestined outcome. 

There is an imbalance between men and women. Missed communication and thus misinterpretation. The catcaller is paying a compliment but the female feels objectified and belittled. The harassment is unidentified in the catcaller’s mind. The same can be said of clothing. Are women wearing it to say something to men? Is their intent to tease them? Who knows. The issue is the assumption in the affirmative. Maybe she is so take the chance. Yet the passivity is not an admission of activity. Her clothing is not an admission of approach. Yet it is luring and seductive. The social apparatus condones the dress but not the verbalism that follows. The self-objectification is to be dismissed. Feminists have argued that men need just keep it in their pants. They need to shut down their libido, female autonomy is the most important. Yet this also works on the other side. Women ought not catcall they ought not to approach men in the same lewd manner but they do and nobody says anything. The imbalance is also a model of power. The equality heuristic must be applied evenly. Just because the threat is less frightening does not make the action equitable. Their male indent is scary yet the fault ought not to be the seduced alone but the seductress as well.

The hope is reach a point where this is unnecessary. Women need not cover up because men can’t keep it in their paints. Their arrogance seeks to win the female over by domineering. Yet she has made herself vulnerable but wearing such desirable attire. The fact it happens out on street in average gym clothes is parcel of the issue as well. Meaning that catcalling is greater than just a change of dress. The nudist colony may be the sole solution to habituate to the nude. To be desensitised to the vulgar. The tight dresses with a low cut pressing the breasts and butt out are intoxicating. It is a message to observers to look. Even if that isn’t the intent, the flawed deduction does so. Maybe some women are intending this but it would be misguided to group all women into such a group. To some degree it is just the style. Yet the frequent exposure of the sexualised areas does spell otherwise. Harassment must be voided. Rejection must be taken stoically. There is fault on both sides of the aisle. Responsibility must be applied. Knowing that this is the male response whether it be biological or sociological. Erasing such behaviour is implausible. Instead, compromise and protection is necessary. Yet accountability cannot be denied for some so-called liberation. 

Beauty is the hallmark of this problem. The cognitive function sees the beauty and responds lustfully. His neural network is seduced and he acts in a desirable manner. The psycho-sexual matrix is magnified by the societal tease. To want and be wanted is a dialectical binary that each is reflective. Both sexes wish simultaneously. They wish to be noticed festively. To be acknowledged purely positively periodically. Beauty is the seductress. The hypnotic label that is embedded in the ontology of a person. A spellbound locative presence. A flirtatious design to strangle the autonomy of neural function. The aesthetic is enticing and compelling. The subjectivity of beauty does arouse the endorphins by more sexual action than others. It is the pleasure seeking enjoyment that raises the emotional high. Dostoevsky proclaimed through the Prince that Beauty will save the world and there is a certain acknowledgement that raises self esteem. Yet beauty is also the riding dimension to hell. It is beauty that is prized and grasped with force. Beauty is desired. Verbal assault is either the first step or the cathartic attempt to shut up. A desire so powerful and so difficult to close. How to end this abhorrent harassment. 

Looking ugly wouldn’t change. Beauty is subjective but it is also relative. Modest clothing works when immodest clothing is in fashion. Yet for those sucked into the modest world, the hint of an ankle showing is seductive. Beauty is dangerous since it is desired. This desire becomes objectified and thus grasped. The mind has shamed man to struggle. A sin of the unalterable. Yet for all this disaster is the illumination of being. Beauty is an acknowledgment of the self. While the ogling and sexual innuendos are burdensome it is an acknowledgment of the other even if inverted. Beauty is contagious and it is difficult to suspend the compliment from the critique. The better version is to marvel from afar. To perceive beauty like a painting. The painting is to be observed complimented but not touched. The same with a queen. Women need to reclaim this regal charm. Does this occur in the feminine worldview? It remains to be seen. Yet the queen exists in a masculine society. A strong-willed women at the top of the food chain. It isn’t about strength or character but status. It is a respect. The sexualised comments became beauty assessments.  

       

The shift is not in dress or censorship but in attitude. Does the dress prompt less respectful attitudes? Potentially. They are perceived as a piece of meat because they are exposing their sexuality to the world. Yet there is also a sexualised matrix that doesn’t care for the dress insofar as the social attitude cultivates it. Whether in antiquity or medieval or modern. The libido is heightened not so much by beauty but by the aura of sexualised motif. A mass hypnosis of psychotic entrapment. To see beauty for its genuine purity, men need to break the spell and rise from the slumber to soak in the sublime beauty. The dress isn’t helping and only feeds into the struggling libido but it isn’t at total fault nor should it be the objectification. Instead of subjecting is the real need. Encountering the beautiful experience in affirmation. A respect for the tantalising appearance in complimentary form. It is not a legal but social outburst. A need for a new societal realisation for routine. 

Convenience v. Control

 

By: Jonathan Seidel

Technocrats and ease: bureaucracy and more difficulty.   

The digital community is so engrossed in the ease of living. Technology has advanced so fast enabling the youth to develop in comforting attire. The close aids of the internet and cell phones has brought the global world closer. It has also provided simplicity in living. Paying for goods with a bank card or purchasing a bus ticket on an app. The ease of technology also fuels a fear of latent control by nefarious means. A danger that is often overlooked in the presence of comfort. 

Recently, a video popped up about an Australian bank going digital. While this may sound futuristic and cool to youngsters it is has a whole host of problems. The first being older folk who are incapable of operating technology. The elderly as well as middle aged adults are foreign to this concept. Many do not carry around credit cards and even those who do prefer to shop in person. There is a disconnect between the youth immersion in digital culture and the adults who cannot keep up. The homeless, those who live in remote areas or backwater communities may not have the digital access. Just because a bank goes digital doesn’t mean everyone has the means to do so. It creates an asymmetry between citizen and government. The bank holds their money and yet they have no way of purchasing. An elderly individual could pick up a bank card but it won’t help if they do not understand how much they are paying (though many youngsters also struggle with this). Another issue is privacy. Hackers can easily steal private information and money which happened recently with little compensation. The bank didn’t even realise the fault until months later. Digital currency puts everyone’s money openly on the web for the taking. It not only hurts those unfamiliar with the concept but puts everyone at risk. 

Such an example also occurred today. My wife was unable to enter the weight room because her face had never been scanned. The face scanner guy wasn’t coming in till ten. Her frustration resonated with a lack of sleep and an expectation foiled. Having to wait to use the weight room because there was a miscommunication for someone to get their face scanned. Yet beyond such logistical failures, the face scan is a technological imperfection. If it doesn’t work one cannot get inside. Not only is the face cam on the door of the weight room but on the front door as well. If the door is locked and the face cam doesn’t work, you’d better hope there is someone at the front desk because there is no way one is getting in. For an apartment complex it is quite high on security. Though it is seemingly trivial to spend so much money on scanning when a key would do the trick or even a code. The obvious pitfalls have already been experienced and it calls into question the efficacy of such fancy utility just to save a few seconds. When it doesn’t work there is no safety net. The overt reliance is not just a bureaucratic nightmare but a night out in the cold. 

The youthful attitude towards technology is simplicity of its utility. Only paying with credit card is so easy. The discomfort to put in any effort. To swipe a card carelessly instead of walking over to the ATM to pull out cash to then spend a few minutes waiting in line. Fast pace high octane digital society wishes to move at the speed of light. Why wait? People have places to go and people to see. Why spend hours scouring through a book when the internet can search it quicker. Why write a research paper when artificial intelligence can do it for you. Control over time and able to manoeuvre swiftly. Technology truly has simplified life subverting to servitude. Technology works for humans. The further spread to the advancements the more optimal results. Who wishes to return to the grinding archaic ages of old. Yet with all the booming enlightenment is still fears of control. Data can be stolen and technology erased. Life is eased but also placed in the limelight. It is placed in a dangerous public sphere for anyone with the skill to grab at it. Too invested in the joy of simplicity that the dangers are ignored. 

Where the line is drawn is indeterminate. What is too much technology? What is too far? The issue isn’t whether life is too easy. Psychologists can experiment how such ease affects society. Moreover the issue is a political step into the abyss of slavery. Digitalising only provides more access to governments and media companies. It places more and more emphasis on governmental regulation and dedication to ensuring its own agenda. Digital power is placing the anonymity and ignorance in the immaterial world. To take just one example from the previous year, Bill Gates' digital ID is an artificial intelligence that assists the government in connecting with citizens. While it may sound easy and hip as it reminds and acknowledges human pitfalls, it is a mindless system attempting to control your life. It may sound good but it is a manipulative trick. It is efficient but it also has a nefarious network. Biometric scanning ascertains the legitimacy. It can receive a passport or pay taxes. Protects credentials and supports the citizenry. Though beyond the imperfections of the technology itself and what could go awry is also those who are pushing the charge. The WEF and banks who suspiciously have a horrid record of protecting citizens and their data. 

Convenience is the central point of preferring digitised apple wallet over carrying a handbag around. The issue with digital identification is that the WEF hopes governments federate it. The aspiration is that it is compelled on the public. Not whether one decides to use their apple wallet but that they must. The government may never lose anyone. People won’t fall through the cracks so there is a plus but they will also know where you are what you buy and who you contact. Denial of the potential disaster and the nefarious nature of the elites utilising this for their own regard. At the end of the day, even if the government never hones in on some shopkeeper in Boise Idaho doesn’t mean that it is right or that they have legitimate stand. Privacy is an ontological category not a practical one. In the same respect, surveillance is wrong even if there is nothing to hide. Concerning the government, nothing should be ever taken for granted. Any attempt to force digitisation is placing the citizenry at a deficit. It is prorating convenience to trick everyone into publicising their information. It is a spectacle. A way of inducing simplicity for vital content. Exchanging personhood for ease. No sooner will humanity be forced to say I told you so. 

Digital identification is a radical extreme and has not made it into the consumer market yet but the move for enhanced digitalisation is a dangerous road. Unable to enter the premises without biometric scan. There have been countless issues with passport scans as well as other identification programs. Shifting to digital programming whilst replacing the archaic models is genuinely dubious. No keyhole or cash fare for busses. If people prefer the older models they are left out forced to adapt. To so many it makes life miserable while the young are quite happy with the change. Time is saved but how many lives are? Efficiency must account for the large population that does not fit into the scheme. The majority does not but their experiments are skewed. They represent fringe or a minority of people. Yet even if the inverse were true, is it ethical or even permitted for an institution to push something at the expense of its own constituents. There is no free trial nor is there assistance to ready for the new change. It is thrust upon the public. Those who have the means are saved but those who lacked are screwed. Skynet is the not the fear nor any robotic ascension. The fear is the digital vulnerability that is overlooked for convenience. A genuine fear that gullibly rings in the mouse to the trap. Control is the name of the game, don’t forget it. 

Ew Otherness

By: Jonathan Seidel

Otherness as a symptom of chaotic disorder

Humans have a history of hunting one another. Unable to deal with the grave difference emerging from varying opinions. While the human nature argument is usually defined in this sense as ethnocentric certainty, it also possible there is more a tangible merit than an abstract generalisation. Control is manipulated for order more than superiority complexes.

Routine brings comfort. Consistency habituates the self to the accumulated norm. The routine offers orderly fashion and the correct method of expression. Falling in line under the code of social acceptance. The master ethic acknowledges the hierarchical system. In order to maintain tranquility, uniformity is required. No room for otherness. That which does not appeal to the accepted norm misfires as a threat to the sacred peace. Hierarchy establishes a top-down refined matrix. Bottlenecking the public into a monolithic outlook that is necessary to thrive. This top-down organismic construction is not necessarily an oppressive intent but an ideological preservation. Those may go hand in hand but the order is sought for all the people even at the bottom half. Fearful tactics are promoted to ensure this and passive routine culminates in the sheep aimlessly wandering after the shepherd. 

While the hierarchy generates inequality it is to maintain social stature and control. The selfish ideological push creates an in-group and an out-group. An out-group is a priorly invested group with unaligned beliefs. Much at peace with their status, their difference is marked as dangerous. A threat to the order. Their difference may spark questioning and rebellion. They must be ousted to preserve the current order. Hierarchical establishments through ideological or practical means seek to ensure control that becomes routine. In time, the unilateral inequality is seen as normal. The questioners, the ponderers are rebels. Seeking to do away with the peace of the system. Order must be maintained without others present demystifying the classical system.

Control is manifested from top till bottom. The ability to retain a systematic operation must be honed by participation. Groups must accept their place in the pecking order. They must position themselves in the organic layout under representation. Yet the system can only operate smoothly if all are in line. There are no exceptions to their organismic framework. Openly masquerading against the grain is an offence to the hierarchical peace. The master ethic is exposed to insurgents. These insurgents are violently urging the disavowal of the system. The state must take charge to eradicate this poison before it affects anyone else. The poison is an ideological difference manifesting in a divergent reaction. This is a weak effort to poke the bear. Yet, with enough exposure will topple the mighty beast. These individuals hold to these beliefs ever so tightly. They cannot be swayed and their exile is imminent. Their cancerous influence is voided by the state’s security policy. 

Objects are identified as manageable ticketed. Objects can be controlled in their right. While they may emerge from varied areas of the world. This otherness is minute to the sentient spatiality. Inventions even diseases can be conquered and mixed to personal ability. The lack of mindfulness of the object magnifies the capability to consume as much object otherness in the world. Playing with these forces as they cannot wilfully object to experimentation or sale. They are the possession of the the owner. Their lack of intelligence and discord forcibly undercut their difference. It is obvious to us but remains a controlled substance. An early reluctance to the newfound substance is quickly conquered when its maximum capability is realised and amassed. 

Concerning sentient beings whether animals or children, there is resistance but domestication is a motor of control. The otherness of habitation is bringing animals or raising children in a privatised environment. A hierarchical society whereby the continued living of these organisms is dependent on their allegiance. Dogs who act out are put down and children who shout back at their parents are put in timeout. In the home, there is a hierarchy where the parent demands action from the child or the pet and they must oblige. The intimacy created from extensive  experiences unravels with a mistake. The house rules are obligatory. A child who breaks curfew will be punished and forgiven in the long run. As an extension of the parents there is an empathy passing on but not the same for students and teachers. The hierarchy does not contain the natural biological intimacy. Empathy is neither built nor a given. More time is spent apart so a few wrong moves and patience is gone with a suspension looming for the distraught student. 

Wrestling with considerable care is consequently avoiding competent callousness. Those differing will become bugs in the overall array of disgruntling youths aiming to undermine the hierarchical mastery. The impending danger arising from the conflicting visions impairs the looking glass. Sheer clarity is muddled with grease and stains. No longer the shiny cup. Cleansing the grease is the sole way to reuse the glass in its finest aura. The cleaner grabs the glass with his hands and with a soapy sponge pecks away at the grease erasing it from existence. The grease is unable to evade the cleansing and disappears. There is little resistance. Absolute control and force applied with zero reluctance. Though people cannot be silenced so easily. Those making a ruckus must be exiled to maintain the social peace. Their voices must be drowned out. Yet shutting them up is easier said than done. Removing them from the spatial equation removes the threat from exposing the issue and the hierarchy retains its hold.

Even passivity calls into question. The voice is not necessarily a verbal assault but an external supplication. Crossdressing is a fashion choice but a public statement nonetheless. Demonstrating the crude appearance exposes the public to a rude awakening. Words are not the sole violent attack on the public forum. A presentation halts its unique enterprise. Actions are varied whether by clothing, marching or striking. Retorts come in all shapes and sizes. Yet it is less the direct assault and more the insidious indirect action that stirs the most mischievous conflict. Acting differently to the norm is an unintentional unharmed expression. Yet it marks the master ethic with abuse. Contrary to the hierarchical institutionalism is an affront to the orderly framework. It is a matter of great hostility by the perceiver. Outlandish actions can be mimicked and lead to disarray. Children can be influenced into such futile behaviour. An ingenious though insidious proposal. 

Unable to control such persons, their actions deemed unwarranted and corruptible are removed from the equation. Seen as a threat they are induced to another region. Extermination by means of exile or death. They cannot be controlled nor monitored sufficiently. Permitting their private correspondence may leak into the public circle. Catching a whiff of this stretch may cause the poison to spread and create newly embodied zombies. The extermination squad is called to remove this skank. The state takes responsibility to ensure the protection its citizens. Pests cannot be reasoned with. Their beliefs are central to their identity. This identity is foreign to the foretold framework. Placing the citizenry in a frenzy of apocalyptic level destruction. A rallying cry against the satanic invasion of lustful insurgency. An uncontrollable substance passing through the air with intangible cessation. 

Disconcerting uncontrollable aspects are fearfully eerie. Incapable of meshing with the monistic framework constructed extinguishment becomes a necessary evil. The foreigner cannot be compelled beyond reasonable doubt. Various tactics have attempted to subdue otherness. Enslavement, exile and extermination are the most effective. Yet each had their flaws. Enslavement marks the other as inferior to control their difference as futile. Yet long term can backfire either through a revolt, sympathy or mere influence. Exile rids the issue but their absence does not mean their influence is gone. Tales of their heroics or returning as traders empowers their status. Extermination seemingly is the chief of eliminating entirely. There is no return from death nor real sympathy after death. Yet the hastening of said extreme measure raises self doubt and internal revolt. Rebels emerge from within the system. While slavery and exile are moral ills, genocide his different. Ridding an other must be highly specific strategised and cunningly executed. 

An otherness plague may compel national self interest but the other rallies itself so long as it internally exposes its will. The other martyred continuity is criminally inspirational. While the state wishes to quash disorder, overreaction can lead to pushback. The state acting for the people’s interest may not be interpreted along the same lines. The inability to control otherness sparks mayhem, its ferocious reaction undermines its goal. Unsung heroes emerge from the shadows. Providing safe haven for the other. The excess is too much to bear and they act against the order as well. Cracking the battered walls. The hierarchical order itself is no longer impenetrable. Unable to control its own citizenry otherness prevails even in death. Defiance and guilt overwhelm the system’s credibility.         

Noble as it may to maintain a specific aura, it does not hold up in the longing fortitude. Control is a measuring ideal. Desiring singularity is a hope not a reality. Otherness will march forth and repulsion will erupt. An incidental yet intentional correspondence. A method of deep entrenchment. Otherness is inevitable, response is not uniform. Phobia will exhibit chaotic overtones. Disallowing any further variance.  

Manipulative Medication

By: Jonathan Seidel

Illich overmedication and add/adhd medication 

RFK Jr has garnered much admirations and criticism from his views on vaccines and medication. As a lawyer suing big corporations for years it is no doubt that he knows his stuff. Yet as a presidential candidate his positions have reached centre stage. His arguments of overmedication are met with pessimism. Is the rise of allergies unprecedented? Is there a problem with the drinking water? Is ADHD medication overdone? Or is he overreacting and this is scientific advancement? 

Illich argued half a century ago that modern medicine causes more harm than good. Causing illness rather than antidotes. Rightly so, advancements have been made to cease suffering but have also caused tenuous disasters. The problem of big Pharma and its profit margins are a deep source of medical inequality. Pharmaceuticals move through drugs like Apple does iPhones. The great hope of capitalist competition is a stalinist hierarchy with one group holding the the rest of the country by the balls. Charging them ridiculous rates for simple drugs like insulin. An easy drug to produce and provide. People don’t receive the medical assistance necessary because they cannot afford it. People are dying because they cannot pay to live. For all the hate of the communist ideology, the medical monopolisation is crudely fascistic in its tedious monistic singularity. There is no competition and the so called democratic government fails its mission and its citizens.

Yet beyond big pharma’s reach is the medicated excess they provide. Though it may be they’re bidding secretly or coincidentally marketing so many drugs to bring in enormous profit. The FDA and other governmental agencies suck their thumbs and simp their dignity to the medical overlords. Yet it is also the doctoral inefficacy that leads to this issue. Why are physicians proscribing medication to every child? Why is every child on adderall? Why are so many Americans allergic to peanut butter? What happened in the past decades? Did people get weaker or did drug companies get greedier? Mainly a move of better hygiene and higher purity enables dangerous foes to attack the weakest link namely children. This is a cause of human petrification not any villainy hiding in the shadows.

ADD/ADHD is a reduced stigmatisation. A stretch in the psychological disorders. Just as homosexuality and transgenderism have been conceived as disorders so to the former (yet can also be revoked in the long run as an ontological production). The presence of adderall is a testament to finding medication for those impaired. They are diseased and need to be cared for. Mental diseases have always been overlooked. Men’s mental health only became relevant in the 90s and is still undeveloped and stigmatised. Men are strong emotionless hallow trunks. It is if anything to admit emotions let alone cry publicly. Research would have you believe it is genetic. A part of human nature only recently accepted. Playing on the mental health insecurities but then again the research is done by big pharma. How trustworthy is the profit-centred lobbying billionaire. 

Is there any truth to this? There are predictions. While pointing to the covid debacle may place me in hot water. People will call me a anti-vaxxer for even questioning the legitimacy and flip flopping obvious political ploy of the vaccinations. The it should not be named lab leak and gain of function origin sponsored illegally by Fauci. Yet all that is conspiracy. Fauci said you would try to burn him at the stake. The man who flip flopped so much feeding false details to the media base. Whose politicians legislated by failed to abide by their own orders. Oh and quadrupled down on how many vaccines were necessary because the science changes but yet won’t debate it because it is a fact. Well apparently not if you keep changing it. Newton would disagree with such dubious jargon. Covid was handled so improperly with so much deception and yet still cannot be honest with the mistakes. 

Tuskegee was a single bad moment in American history. It was the one time, the government experimented on people. The one time government lied and deceived the public. Dr. Redfied of the CDC is an idiot apparently. It is only a conspiracy if the public is duped into believing the matrix. Big pharma that has helped no one and politicians who openly lie are telling the truth on national television. They published their findings on the morning news cause CNN fact checks the medical analysis. None of the vaccines are compromised. People presenting sickness following vaccination are lying. They are conspirators out to destroy democracy. Do not listen to their lies. They are commies and trumpers. They hate Joe Biden and love Putin or maybe they are poor democratic black folk who do not trust the government.

Purdue pharma is single handedly the culprit behind the opioid crisis. Out for profit they pushed the drug to market. Convcinging doctors it was the correct manner. Only the other year were they convicted. OxyContin killed thousands while approved by the FDA. The obvious government failure in their taxpayer dollars wasted and compensated with American deaths due to lacking oversight. While the CIA played their own role in the cocane crisis, their corruption is evident. While big pharma is the agency to provide adequate medical care, the CIA’s is to fuck things up. It was an intentional effort of the Purdue pharma to make money and they killed people for it. Cash for death. Oh great democracy. The DEA and pharma in cahoots. Lobbyists able to persuade congress away from actually saving Americans. An elitist playbook that kills the average citizen.

The government has been complicit in the drug war. It calls the war on drugs and yet the current president is responsible for incarcerating a germination of black people for an ounce of weed. His son got off easy because daddy was important. A hypocrite to the core. Flooding harsh neighbourhoods with drugs and then ironically jailing those who touched it. Not too shabby for an inside job. They need to be more stoic. Resist the drug temptation. Well when its flooded the neighbourhood intentionally to incarcerate, it will happen one way or another. The CIA corrupted black communities with crack. There’s a new Netflix doc about it. The CIA are the good guys who topple regimes and boost up dictators. Anything for America. Even if its to dismantle coloured communities. Racism much? 

Where is the disease mongering? Halitosis, a synonym for bad breath, was conceived in the 1920s as a pathology. A crisis emerged that people were sick and could be cured by Listerine. A normative condition heightens to hysteria for marketing purposes and profit. Exaggerating simple conditions to the absolute maniacal. While erectile dysfunction is the real deal, more context is necessary. The extensive viagra commercials blow the problem out of proportion as if it’s an epidemic. Showing a forty year old man as a typical patient. Though the tallying study undermined its own image with less than 3% struggling. The deceptive advertisements were funded by the manufacturer for viagra, Pfizer. The data is manipulated by the drug creator to scare the public into overestimating their own conditions and placing them in further harm while making the drug company money. It is not so much the lies insofar as the side effects. 

Everyone has extra time for test taking. Everyone is on adderall or ritalin. Apparently, nobody can concentrate anymore. This cannot be a revelational revolution. There are too many subjects. The technological promiscuity allies with lax parenting. Yet it is a problem significant to America. The grand narratives to justify are global but the problem is national. Only America has these ridiculous rates. Young children pre-puberty are placed on life altering extensive side effective drugs. They aren’t warned. Simply told, their kid suffers from ADHD and must be medicated for his sake. These powerful drugs are assigned to even those who do not meet the requirements of ADHD. Doctors proscribed with little afterthought. Drug companies shoved past the FDA’s nose. Too busy playing Mario Cart to notice. Established professionals in the psych community deny the epidemic. The CDC is lying. Correct about covid, wrong about ADHD. Only 5% safer but 15% receive and its way up since the last census. It is not the capitalist that is the problem but the fascistic elements that prevent proper competition and oversight. 

Media smearing conspiracy tropes of long discredited claims by pharmaceutical specialists does not ring authenticity in my ear. What does the conspiracist have except an inkling of truth. Scientists showing up on MSNBC to discredit to calm liberal hysteria is no way of honouring the truth. Just as the climate craziness is senile. Quantity over quality apparently emerges victorious. 100 bad scientists pale in comparison to 1 good scientist. It is the prodigy, the Newtons, the Einsteins not the other random folk that nobody remembers. Bad science is bad science no matter how many people say it. Elijah stood alone against hundreds of Baal prophets, God lit his on fire. The false prophets were left standing with their dicks out. Everyone recognised Elijah was correct and then the next day planned to assassinate him. Truth does not go the right way when political hegemony is controlled by a devilish queen. 

It is worth investigating the rise of allergies. Failing to even properly investigate the disease mongering facilities is a crime. Making up bullshit just to appease the public is direly unstable. It works on the meek. Those who fall into the herd mentality. They just fall in line desiring the answer to be a natural disaster instead of a concocted plague. Unlike the Middle Ages, this is not a plague by the enemy but our faults. Trusting authority too much. The Leviathan is a danger. It repeatedly lies and deceives. It fails to even provide basic homeostasis. Branding itself a democracy without following its principles. Where is the competition? Where is the market supply and demand? Where is the separation between industry and state? No. It has gone full blown fascistic. Private companies monopolise and government agencies twiddle their thumbs praying to these paranoid mortals as some fake Jesus. No backbone and no heart, just a manipulative useless piece of junk.