Unrealized Arrogances

What takes more maturity?

To treat someone how you project he should be or to overlook *how* oneself is treated?

Both concepts have to do with this little thing called self-fulfilling prophesy. This little thing has dogged me my entire life. Especially the disconnect thereof. The way people read me is vastly different from the way I am. I am beginning to think that it will never get any better. I know others have this problem, but I think my case is one of the extremes. It is almost impossible to ignore. I don’t think there is a single person on earth who comes anywhere near close to ‘knowng me’.

On Political *Polarity*

I wonder if anyone will find this quote as jarring as I did when I first read it (because of who said it):

“We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions” – Adolf Hitler 1927.

Analysis of extreme politics on a two dimensional ‘continuum’ has already led me to abandon the 2D political model. There is ‘wraparound’ from all directions, like geodesics on the globe. At the time prior to his capture of head of state, Hitler probably was still a political ‘leftist’. However, in his ascendancy to and consolidation of power, he moved further and further ‘north’ (totalitarian) on this global scale, literally ‘crossed the pole’ and his politics went from totalitarian left to totalitarian right (he was moving rightward the whole time). How did this happen? I would argue that the tendency toward totalitarianism has a natural rightward ‘spin’ (call this a fourth dimension – so even 3D model is somewhat inadequate). Why? Because social purity as opposed to social diversity is inherently a right wing concept (Stalin moved rightward as well, just not as quickly). The reason Hitler moved more quickly rightward, is because he doubled down on the social purity (adding in the instrinsic purity of race) and was far more disciplined and less whimsical about it (he increased his rightward spin, much like Fox News does for us today).

By contrast, you could see that a tendency toward anarchy or extreme diversity as ‘leftward’ spin. The tea party movement was a preemptive attempt at diffusing true leftward spin (like a leaderless, spontaneous, increasingly diverse OWS), fully conceived and grown by wealthy oligarchic totalitarians. The Tea Party is the virtual mirror image of Hilterist or Stalinist totalitarian rightward spin, not an actualized counterpart. The same oligarchic group/mentality which generated it awaits its acceptance as real, whereupon it stands ready to assume power (contemporary libertarianism doesn’t claim power for itself) in a curious coup, where all they need to do is flip the spin (from leftward to rightward). This is why it is so important for a movement like OWS to remain ‘real’, and reject all attempts to infiltrate and ‘purify’ or dogmatize it (this both disrupts it and seeks to flip its spin bias) and increase its diversity; it needs to remain leaderless and somewhat disorganized. It needs to increase its confidence. It needs to remain spontaneous. Perhaps most importantly, it must not be dogmatized in any conventional way (this includes any conventional leftist  ‘non-violent’, ‘feminist’, ‘statist’, way). I know this gives many who identify with the movement hemorrhoids, especially the dogmatic feminists, dogmatic egalitarians and dogmatically non-violent, but it is the only way to keep it alive and on the move. There are simply times when violence *is* called for or times when anti-feminism is called for, for example. And these need to be organically grown within the movement, or the ‘other side’ which knows full well how to utilize and wield their power (they have been doing it for centuries and are fully aware of where all political poles lie, because they created them in most cases!), will simply keep creating *virtual images* of these to derail the movement, creating and overall impression or belief that true libertarian leftward spin is always illusory.

It really must be realized that dogma itself is a political ‘pole’. Its complementary pole is thus un-dogma. It is the powers that be that seek to eliminate this undogma pole. It wants to be a monopole, for which there never has been a viable precedent (either virtually or physically). This is done in myriad of ways. Exacerbating the uncomfortability and uncertainty of un-dogmas. By intensifying its own dogma. By forcing a hierarchical organization of dogmas based on their strength (capacity to impose virtual order). False associations are generally used to accomplish these aims as they not only impose a kind of order and to force a hierarchical showing of hands, but to generate the most ‘confusion’ at the un-dogma ‘pole’ (it should be noted here that un-dogma is probably the closest synonym to political freedom conceivable). False associations are ‘transmitted’  by so-called conventional wisdom (I regard ‘convential wisdom’ as a kind of Nietzschean herd-animal mentality) most would accept without reflection: equating socialism to totalitarianism, religiosity to freedom, atheism to militancy, freedom to wealth, feminism to equality, inflation to employment, communism to evil, terrorism to dissent, finance to faith. Political theory holds that If enough of these false associations can be generated, it doesn’t matter if they are accepted in totality so long as a critical number of subjects accept a critical percentage of them. This is why there is no difference first between the major parties and even secondarily to the ‘third parties’. Even third parties tend to hierarchic-ize or re-hierarchic-ize (re-order) already false associations.

I hereby publicly reaffirm and claim my right to free-think, and to reject false associations and dichotomies wherever possible and necessary. Only from free thought can free actions follow. My only wish is to be more of an example of that to others. I intentionally attempt to disassociate things I consider to be misassociated. I also have the tendency to re-associate, but I try to let this happen organically, naturally and personally, and because raw dissociation is ultimately a schizophrenic worldview. I suspect most consider this intention to re-associate as a kind of will to power of my own, but I doubt they read it as it truly is: a will to power of myself. I have no delusions of a potential cult of personality around myself; in other words, I have no assumptions of others re-associating in my individualized way or crediting me for anything. If you understand me you are already enough like me. If you don’t, you are probably somebody’s unwitting drone, which is not to say I want you as mine (I try not to surround myself with drones of any kind).

Obscure Titles, Fundamentalist themes

Despite my obscure title, I really want to deal with the concept of energy and all the various forms of it. This may sound like trite subject matter, but I believe it to be the root of all things. There exist more forms of energy than the traditional physical ones. There is real people energy, that is through political movement. There is psychic energy both causal and acausal. Of course there is overlap with these. I am pretty big on coining new phrasing and terms so if anyone has suggestions for succinct coinages I am open to them and of course you would be credited.

There exists negative energies which can also be leveraged into useful energy. For example, ‘efficiency energy’ could be viewed as a kind of negative energy. Couple it  with some form of psychic energy and you can leverage both positive and negative energy. The economy of Occam’s Razor might be an example of such an energetic or epistemological leveraging.

I am really not concerned if the reader accepts my semantics or vernacular. As I mentioned in my welcome post, I enjoy a good dialectic, but I am not disposed to rejecting my own semantics nor to be easily induced to self-loathe (serious self-deprecation I would consider to be the the psychoenergetic analog to heat loss or ‘wasted’ physical energy. It is the readers right and prerogative to interpret anything they read using their own semantic Gestalt, but given the inherent free will of human beings it ultimately it is futile to pigeonhole coerce another to adopt some subset of your own semantics.

That said, I have worked on my own gestalt a long time, which is not to say it is universal but it does approach universality in semantic form. Psychic energy for example is real energy. So is people energy. The premise of the film The Matrix deals with exactly this concept. Many religious and political themes and positive arguments for the same also deal with this concept. The Cosmological Argument and its varous permutations basically argues that there has always existed some psychic energy and that this is a primal energy source.

Needless to say, that I will touch on many various traditional topics and will move freely between them. The Taxonomy of Energy represents a continuum with little or no boundaries; IOW, there is no Taxonomy of Energy. I hope my views will become more clear with more posts, as I will attempt to deconstruct all topics into component energies, material and immaterial and everything in between.

Welcome to my blog

I tend to prefer the dialectic as opposed to the broadcast as far as formulating and maintaining my subjective opinion, but I believe I have logged enough hours on this. Thus my long-preempted blog is born.  I frequent mostly rapid-fire real-time forums like Y!A, but have been known to go after a challenge and seek out those who disagree with me and have a great deal of history or intellectual backing. Some of you may know me as Diethyl Ether Dinner Candle or Chloroform Dating Services on those sites.

I suppose there are even more advantages to blogging besides broadcast vs. dialectic. There is more freedom and no need to be subjected to silly forum rules. I suppose more adult content could be included as well, for children and others (mostly others, i.e. adult-aged children) who can’t handle the material presented here have even more choice not to stay; they can go find another blog. I have never been one for dumbing down or censoring for the purposes of making a G ( General Audiences) rating. I know this is the American way, that is to pander to ever-expanding audiences but I really don’t like it. Over the years, this trend has ruined most media forms of entertainment from TV to Movies to Literature to Music. Look, some material is made for a target audience and it is the duty of such an audience to conform to it and not visa versa.

Well, that is my official welcome message. Be advised that the material contained herein may not be suitable for all, may not always be interesting, but I guarantee it will be a novel synthesis. Enjoy.