Return to Table of Contents | Next Chapter
This is perhaps the most difficult and "archaic" of the books of this series. Politics is, by its nature, a thing that defies rational explanations that are easy, because human beings have primarily used lying, deception, violence, cruelty, sadism, and that which impedes reason as their means to secure "the political" for a class or an interest. Many have written on political thought, both from the perspective of the rulers and from the middle classes who aspire to claim power. Rarely, writings from the lower orders enter the encyclopedia of human knowledge to spit on the very concept of the political, but this is usually a mad effort to score some cheap points and revels in cynicism. I wish to do more than mock the political. I wish to describe it as a lost cause for most of humanity, so that the political intrigue can be discounted as something we could change or struggle for. It is not enough to ignore the state or pretend it doesn't exist. To accomplish this task, anyone wishing a way out would have to see the political conceptually, rather than denounce it as aristocratic lies and refuse to examine the innards of such a creature. Since the regime of medical experimentation, and in the past century, the very concept of "experiment" have been politicized and held by a pernicious monopoly, this makes the analytical view of politics and philosophy problematic. It is well known to those who look into the matter that "philosophy" has been moribund for roughly 100 years, and shows no signs of life. It is a field best left dead, its findings cannibalized for better purposes by some future generation that may possess freedom in a genuine sense that will allow us to consider a world where we did not do what I write about here.
For the reader, I want to make clear that these "concepts of the political" are nowhere near a total system or accounting of all that politics can be. My aim, as in the previous book, is to isolate core mechanisms at work that are necessary to speak of "politics". In the discourse called "politics" in the late 20th century, there is very little we can call "politics". What is referred to as such is a peculiar institution and understanding, which either concerns the topic of the fifth book of this series - technocratic rule which displaced "the political" for the depoliticized multitude - or the sixth book, which concerns eugenics, eugenism, and the true "ruling idea" that dominates those institutions, having successfully cannibalized any other path technocratic society could have taken by the end of the 20th century. Part of writing this is to make clear some of the things politics is not, by referencing some of the mechanisms that were at work when the fascist political norms were stated and violently recapitulated. By doing so, the aspersions of ideology and kulturkampf may be seen as the contemptible statements they always were, and we may stop referring to such tripe as "politics". Ideology is for slaves.
There is not in politics a single thing we can consider "the good" or even morally valuable for anything other than what politics pertains to. It is politics which is the true "miserable science". Economics as a field is miserable largely because of political insistence, rather than any material or spiritual necessity for decisions regarding value. In short, political economy make clear the values to be sought were human toil and suffering, so that the intercine competition within the human race could be exacerbated. This was also understood in sane formulations to be a highly undesirable state of affairs. It was what humanity inherited. In the prior book, in this book, and in the next book to follow, I want to make clear that, for the sane formulations of political economy, not one of the authors claimed this was "natural" or "ordained" in the way the culture war and ideology asserted. Marx's statements to this effect were, on the surface, an effort to show such a claim was pseudo-scientific, rather than a belief that nature actually worked in this way. It was called a critique of political economy, rather than "this is the unvarnished and trans-historical fate of humanity, and greed is eternal". It was with Marx that the insane and malicious invented "ideological capitalism", which was really a defense of monopoly and the most vicious political conceits of humanity. The German ideology - itself a thing Marx wrote about as a wholly negative influence on the world - would fester and create, by fusing opportunistically with the imperial way of life, the closest thing to Abomination yet known for the human race. By Marx's own thinking, nothing could really stop this. Marx discounted moral agency altogether, mocking it with delight, and likely this was an intended course of human development - to eliminate that guide. It just so happens that without such a core, humans were consigned to fascism, eugenism, and the fate of this century. He and his followers knew better, whether they cared for "better" or really wanted this outcome for opportunistic and crass reasons. In any event, ideology has been proven to be a dead end, and with it, the last part of canonical Marx is dead. It remains as a historical artifact - a necessary artifact to explain why the 20th century turned out as it did - but as a guide to solving anything, it is less than useless. Unfortunately, the intellectual class was never interested in anything else. From the moment the masses and lowest class the intellectuals hated could be tortured maximally, there would be no new ideas regarding this, and the institutions the intellectuals filled and used as their power base primarily exist - and always existed - to ensure that such a liberation never applied to the lower orders, unless they came to love the religion of the masters and despised the slaves.
I do not believe an "other system" or "other idea" is possible, unless humanity really wants it to be different. It does not end otherwise, and those who simply do not want the world to be different will not be convinced or aligned with a different world by any moral persuasion or education, and have no reason to regard force or violence to be good or do good. Of those that refuse such a thing, the true believers and beneficiaries of the ritual sacrifice and terror of the human race will never surrender an inch, and never have once in their existence. This is not a small portion of the human race, which was always given over to such a proclivity, and then naturalized their status with the Pareto principle, or the "80/20 rule", which they chant as a koan. The ratio is an effective ratio of slaves to masters that fulfills the caste system at work. There are, as referenced in the past book, five castes, and these castes are rooted ultimately in a concept of knowledge. The one caste that really "rules", aristocracy, essentializes the other four as purified purposes of human beings, assigning them to their place eternally. There is no reproduction of the ratio in nature, but it is reproduced in institutions for this reason alone, rather than any need of it. It is reproduced by willful thrill of torture, until it is made true by imperious assertion. The ratios in nature like the golden ratio or pi are not difficult to find in nature, but the 4:1 ratio is a representation of an idealized caste system - the master, the loyal slave, the technological cattle offering tribute as a faithful paypig, the menial slave reduced to a machine, and their torture magnet whose humiliation powers the entire rotten cycle and is the most necessary part of this cycle. This caste system may be reformed along new lines, especially once the paypig no longer has the accumulated wealth to extract and must be made a technological slave of a different sort. The slave's function is overtly glorified, yet the auxiliary of the aristocrat is visibly seen doing little, to demonstrate the efficiency of the fascist political norm and its seeming natural function. The purpose of the auxiliary "fighting slave" is to be a living exemplar or model of force, projecting the will of aristocracy without thought - the idealized version of the proprietor of the Nazified world-to-come. The function of the menial slave is not difficult to see - the barking, maniacal Delta, whose lust for simple thrill of torture is its lifeblood. Because the lowest class is expected to be stripped of all other utilities, its true labor and value, if any, is entirely elided in the preferred model of society, and claimed as the spurious moral worth of the "Delta". The "Delta" has a true function of being the mafia exploiter of the lowest class, who does all of the actual "work" or "substance", and to fill in because the conditions of life are so denuded that, to the other orders, labor has made itself a slave by the vices of their own proclivity.
We can see that this caste system is ruinous and pointless, and never truly exists. It is instead a projection of unlimited violence, and this is inherent in every such "cycle" - not just the caste system as a "natural" form, but every form of the superstitious religion cycle, even if they were cycles which seemed innocuous and fit our perceptions of stability. The state, and the superstitions which are "the state" for humanity, are never passive things. They are actively enforced. There are superstititons which serve us well - the rationale behind this is found from Chapter 14 on, as to why superstitions are not always things we throw away because we value "truth" or "reason" for stupefying reasons. Even the faith in "rationalism" of this crass sort - making claims rationalism and its forebears never actually made and superimposing them on history to naturalize the eugenic creed - is highly superstitious. It is telling that the superstition of 21st century "rationalism" is far worse than anything Christianity ever proposed, and I hold that Christianity was a profoundly evil and monstrous religion in humanity's history compared to the norm. For reasons that may be clearer, all human religions are in some way evil and not one of them can be redeemed, and so I could deliver scathing rebukes of the Roman religion, Islam, Hinduism (origin of this caste insanity), Buddhism, ancestor-worship (which probably comes off as the least objectionable of these precisely because the Chinese people were the civilized example which specifically rejected god-abasement; where the principle of the Satan was not made a spiritual authority but was instead invested in particular men and understood to be a bad thing through and through; but still, like any religion, the Chinese religions are in the main evil and celebrate evil and shall be judged guilty accordingly)... I could name the crimes of Being of every religion humanity has ever professed, and none of them are forgivable. It is not really possible for a "good religion" to exist, or to break from the origin of religion generally which is a requirement for a religion to be a valid and credible one. Scientology and new cults harken back to the same monstrosities religion understood as the evil, often deliberate exercises in promoting the evil instead of keeping it contained and in a limited purview as religion of the past did, so it could wield the evil as a tool for its purposes. Some may accuse me of undue leniency towards Judaism, but the teachings of that religion and hatred of it are available from sides which hate each other far more than I care to recount. This is not about me picking which god is good or the least evil, but about describing religion adequately for the purposes I have. So far as I have my own beliefs, I decline to elaborate on them too much here, since they frankly have little to do with this world or anything I could communicate. I believe humanity's religion and spiritual understanding will never be sufficient to account for their actions, nor is such a goal inherently worthwhile or an ulterior motive to seek. Someone will either find it in them to seek a world apart from this madness, or they won't consider such a thing desirable or would consider it a mark of insanity to be purged at all cost. Nothing I write can guide the reader to that condition, or make the reader agree with my position, and that is not even the purpose. I write this as description about certain things, and the reader can make of that description what he or she may.
My hope is that the reader can see that the caste system I describe in this book is merely the lowest form of the political - that it is aristocracy's preferred "laws of motion" rather than what is actually contested. In reality, the political is a contest of interests and actual entities which can participate. The true interests of rulers have little to do with a class or its native interests, and more to do with things which are held to be substantial. This includes superstitious institutions. Command of the church or the printing press are granted value beyond anything that they materially produce, and yet, for many of us, it is religion or knowledge that motivate us more than wealth or promises of such. The wealth and property required to exist in a real sense is not that much. It is the cost of security against other humans, and the danger the political presents, that allow ruling institutions to extract a pound of flesh as part of the protection racket. If not for that, our problem with the political is not really a problem of material necessity or the necessity of ideas struggling for dominance in a real competition. It is rather a moral one; that certain of humanity have made clear that under no circumstances will most of us be allowed to live, without a ritual humiliation and passage through the degrees of shame and failure that have defined our existence for so long. If that ever ended, the political problem is both one that mostly vanishes, and at the same time, the prospect for its re-emergence would remain - unless humanity really wanted it to be different. I cannot prove beyond a doubt that it was only the lowest class that really wanted it to change. Members of the higher orders did indeed envision that it could be different, if only so they could better secure their rule in a real world rather than by the laws of motion they would prefer to believe.
One note for the reader before reading this is that, in spite of the ease that looking at people as vectors of a social class brings to explanation of the political, the entities contesting the political are never purely "aristocrats" or "commoners" or "laborers" or "lowest class". These distilled forms elide entirely - and purposefully - all of the qualities that make a human recognizable and a worthwhile proposition. There is not a good way in which this can be destroyed as thoroughly as ideology requires it to be. Many of the qualities of the lowest class which are favorable or right can be found in the higher orders; but in all cases, the mechanisms at work will require a member of the higher orders to not act against their "pure interests", which are not really "their" interests but the interests of institutions asserting those classes must be dominant. So too is technology not condemned to its fate. Usually, members of the "technological interest" are never pure managers, which would be the distilled form of the commons - that of someone whose sole purpose is to manage and dicker over the minute business of society, rather than anything productive or useful that technology would offer. Very often, technology was made by labor, who once upon a time owned tools of their own when those implements were simple. Parting a farmer from their plow and all of the tools which allowed them to subsist largely apart from institutions would not just have been madness, but highly counter-productive for the extractive economy. In modern times - and this point will be made more explicit in the fourth through sixth books of this series - the presumption that rulers wouldn't cannibalize this is a fatal error, and in the past, culls and great waste of potential were normalized. The worst aspects of barbaric society would be distilled and reproduced, branded as the height of civilization, and this is a new development. In the past, culls were momentary, and wars had some ending, which was little comfort to the enslaved since peace only granted the masters a freer hand to crack the whip. Nowhere though was the rot of torture for torture's sake so glorified until the rot of the German ideology was imposed on history, and fellow travelers who saw the utility of such a monstrosity adapted it to become a global concern - the global concern above all, the last religion of humanity which stalks the Earth today. Eugenics and Nazism were never particularly German or European or "White" projects. They were always a global cause which demanded impunity and assimilation of anyone who would tell them no, and found collaborators and the most foul of enablers from all races, all nations, and all classes. In the sixth book, the doctrine and ideology and practice of fascism deserves greater detail, for eugenism without fascism is impotent, and fascism without eugenism appears like incoherent horseshit - faggotry, as I have relate the concept throughout the book I have written here for your interest.
A proper understanding of the political and economic requires a better grounding in history. That is better described in the fourth book of this series, which will begin by revisiting the first book and re-establishing what has been written, with a better grasp of the influence of economics, the material basis, and politics, the ideas and imperatives which affect the understanding of systems that was briefly critiqued. Originally the first book of this series was not going to be written, but since it made the perfect framing device for understanding why these concepts evolved, it escaped its original purview as a stand-alone article and became the introduction to this series. It would be impossible to recount systems without first making clear the "ideal form" so to speak of the economic and political, before placing them in a historical context where they are truly meaningful to us. Without history, the concepts at work and the very idea of a system appears to the human mind as a monstrous assault on every decency they once held dear. For those of humanity who want that, to destroy the humans they deemed unsightly and revel in their terror their orgy has created, this has been their understanding of history - that it is reduced to a story and a religious cycle, most often a Satanic Cycle, and nothing can exist outside of it. "There is no world outside of society", such a thinking imparts on slave and master alike. There has always been a world outside of society, of course. If nothing else is learned by the reader, I hope that lesson - for which the 21st century has produced ample evidence to most of its members - is taken to heart. There is a world outside of a society that did this to us, and the sooner those stuck in that thinking leave the intellectual trap and the trap of institutions, the better they will fare, whether they agree with me or not.
-"eugenics-kun"
July 2024