All the Rest Is Propaganda

By Mike Hockney

The world is always forcing its propaganda on you. Everyone is "selling" you something. At the least, they're selling you their story, their version of events, their view of the world, the way they want things to be. You're at it too. Facebook and Twitter are not social networking platforms. They're personal propaganda vehicles, which is why people lavish so much time on them. They're cyber self-portraits, and people will endlessly keep airbrushing them.

What's the secret of making money? Pander to people's narcissism. Make it all about them - their favourite subject.

We're saturated with propaganda. The media and advertising industries have no other function than to mass produce propaganda.

Where is the truth? What and whom can you trust? What propaganda techniques should you be looking out for? How can you protect yourself? This is the gospel of anti-propaganda, the exposé of all the propagandists out to get you.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Lulu.com
• Release date: Sep 12, 2014
• ISBN: 9781326016388

Mike Hockney

Mike Hockney invites you to play the God Game. Are you ready to transform yourself? Are you ready to be one of the Special Ones, the Illuminated Ones? Are you ready to play the Ultimate Game? Only the strongest, the smartest, the boldest, can play. This is not a drill. This is your life. Stop being what you have been. Become what you were meant to be. See the Light. Join the Hyperboreans. Become a HyperHuman, an UltraHuman. Only the highest, only the noblest, only the most courageous are called. A new dawn is coming... the birth of Hyperreason. It's time for HyperHumanity to enter HyperReality.

Book preview

All the Rest Is Propaganda

All the Rest Is Propaganda

by

Mike Hockney

Published by Hyperreality Books

Copyright © Mike Hockney 2013

The right of Mike Hockney to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the author, except in the case of a reviewer, who may quote brief passages embodied in critical articles or in a review.

Quotations

All I’m out for is a good time – all the rest is propaganda. – Alan Sillitoe, Saturday Night and Sunday Morning

If people in the media cannot decide whether they are in the business of reporting news or manufacturing propaganda, it is all the more important that the public understand that difference, and choose their news sources accordingly. – Thomas Sowell

Moral passion without entertainment is propaganda, and entertainment without moral passion is television. – Rita Mae Brown

It is well known that in war, the first casualty is truth – that during any war truth is forsaken for propaganda. – Harry Browne

All over the place, from the popular culture to the propaganda system, there is constant pressure to make people feel that they are helpless, that the only role they can have is to ratify decisions and to consume. – Noam Chomsky

The goal of modern propaganda is no longer to transform opinion but to arouse an active and mythical belief. – Jacques Ellul

Propaganda is that branch of the art of lying which consists in nearly deceiving your friends without quite deceiving your enemies. – Frances Cornford

Table of Contents

All the Rest Is Propaganda

Quotations

Table of Contents

The Illuminati

The Ancient Question

Where is Heaven?

The Desert of the Real

Atlas Shrugged

The Dictator Manifesto

The Sin Delusion

The Triumph of the Cockroaches

Immanentize the Eschaton

The Maniacs

Gnosticism

Why Do People Believe Nonsense?

The Madmen

The Love Delusion

The Suicide of Jesus Christ

Original Sin

The Harvest

Dangerous Knowledge

The Plot To Kill God

The Drunkenness of Noah

The Unrevealed God

The Revolution is Here. The Revolution is Now.

The Silent God

This is Sparta!!!

The Sin Business

Gnostic or Slave?

Hawks, Doves and Retaliators

The Real Illuminati

The Will to Power

Panopticon versus Synopticon

The Temple of God

The School for Scoundrels

Christianity: The League of Brainwashers

The Lizard Invasion

The Wages of Sin

Kairos

What is the New World Order?

The Bicameral Brain

How the Rich Became Good

The Banality of Evil

The First Eichmann

The Ape of God

The Jewish Schism

The Wolves

The Dead Ruling Over the Living

The Gothic

Who Guards God?

Behind the Gilded Curtain – A Hollywood Insider Blows the Whistle

The Passover Murderer

The Angel?

Leviathan

The Lost Temple

Gandalf

Holy War; Holy Murder

The Hieratic Conspiracy

George Washington and the Illuminati

The Illuminati

This is one of a series of books outlining the cosmology, philosophy, ontology, epistemology, politics and religion of the ancient and controversial secret society known as the Illuminati, of which the Greek polymath Pythagoras was the first official Grand Master. The society exists to this day.

The Moment of Truth

The most important moment in religious history was when Pontius Pilate asked Jesus Christ, What is truth? This was the ideal opportunity for God to finally explain reality and truth to humanity. What, then, was Christ’s answer? Er, nothing. That dreadful silence reveals everything about mainstream religion and its inability to explain anything.

You won’t find the truth in the Torah, Bible, Koran, or any of the sacred texts of the East. What you will find is plenty of commandments, prohibitions, rules and instructions for ways of living. You will be told what to wear, what to eat, even which hand you should use to wipe your ass. You won’t find any science, mathematics or rationalist philosophy. Neither God nor prophets nor popes nor gurus can define the truth. That’s a fact.

The world is awash with lies, interpretations, conjectures, opinions, beliefs, hypotheses, deceptions, illusions, delusions, bluffs, cons, manipulations. How can you possibly know what is true amongst all of this noise, this eternal babble?

Should you rely on your feelings (faith), or the evidence of your senses (science), or your intuitions (mysticism), or your reason (rationalist metaphysics)? How do you know which approach is right when they frequently fatally contradict each other? How do we escape from subjectivity and find something objective upon which we can all agree?

There are two opposing paths: truth and propaganda. Anything that is not true is propaganda. This book is the story of the relentless propaganda to which we are all continually subjected. It’s the story of grotesque religious, political, economic, social and psychological lies.

Yet there is absolute truth – it really does exist – and we shall conclude this book with the answer that Jesus Christ would have given Pontius Pilate had he truly been God.

The Ancient Question

Ancient religion and philosophy were ultimately concerned with just one thing: how does an ordered universe (cosmos) emerge either from primordial disorder (Chaos) or from nothing at all?

Religions invoked the gods. Even Chaos was a god and it could give birth to other gods, and, from them, order could emerge.

The philosophers of ancient Greece replaced anthropomorphic gods with natural forces.

Abrahamism said that all that initially existed was God and he made everything else out of nothing whatsoever.

Plato used an eternal Demiurge to create the cosmos from Chaos (unformed matter) by sculpting it into a copy (simulacrum) of the domain of eternal, perfect, immutable Forms.

Aristotle posited a cosmos that was finite in space but eternal in time, sustained by a First Cause (God) that continuously caused the Universe to exist. (In Abrahamism, the First Cause brings everything else into existence in a Creation Event, whereas the Aristotelian First Cause sustains everything eternally). In Aristotle’s universe, there’s an implication that a process of evolution occurred infinitely long ago, but, once it ended, it resulted in an unchanging, perfect order – a great chain of being – in which everything had its allotted place and there was no scope for anything to appear in, or disappear from, this settled Order. Thus, further evolution long since became impossible: every conceivable vacancy was already filled.

The most remarkable thing is that modern scientific materialism has in no way improved on the thinking and speculations of the ancients. Scientists talk about space, time and matter erupting out of nothing in a Big Bang event but can provide absolutely no sufficient reason, cause or explanation for such an event and simply invoke randomness – whatever that is! They then go further and state that any possible random event can happen (Anything that can happen will happen; Anything not forbidden is compulsory) and invoke a Multiverse – an infinite set of universes – to cater for every conceivable eventuality. We just happen to live in one of these infinite universes that supports life (the vast majority don’t).

Is the Multiverse the answer to life, the universe and everything, or does it horrifically reveal the inability of science to explain anything in any ultimate sense? In Multiverse thinking, explanation is replaced by the non-explanation of randomness. Causality is abandoned. The principle of sufficient reason is rejected. Science asserts that we do not live in a universe that has a sufficient reason, a sufficient cause, a sufficient explanation. Instead, we live in a meaningless, pointless, purposeless universe that is nothing but a bewildering random accident.

In science, things don’t happen for a reason. They happen because they are possible and have a certain probability associated with them. Improbable things are less likely than probable things, but certainly aren’t impossible, hence the most fantastical outcomes are compulsory – just like magic. It’s hard to see how scientists can legitimately exclude God unless they can show how such a concept is strictly forbidden in their ridiculous Multiverse of all conceivable possibilities.

To be a scientist means to absolutely reject reason and embrace irrationalism. Scientists might as well agree with Luther that reason is the Devil’s whore. Scientists have contempt for reason and prefer non-explanations involving randomness and statistics over explanations involving precise cause and reason. Compared with the ancients, they have actually regressed! With science, we are further away than ever from a valid, rational explanation of existence. We are now expected to shrug our shoulders and simply say, Shit happens: every possible shit, infinite shit in a Multiverse of all conceivable shit!

If science’s claims are rationally investigated, what science states is that there’s an unreal, unobservable, immaterial, eternal and universal abstract mathematical entity outside space and time known as the wavefunction. This wavefunction is the true Multiverse since it contains everything that’s possible. We might say that this wavefunction is nothing but the ancient concept of Chaos (pure potential but no actualisation) given a modern, glossy mathematical makeover.

This wavefunction – via a process that can only be described as magic (since science doesn’t attempt to offer any credible explanation) – miraculously and mysteriously collapses into an actual reality, i.e. from all the infinite possibilities, certain ones become real and form the world of our experience.

Frankly, if you believe science, you’ll believe anything. You might as well believe in God since he’s no more ridiculous than the answer (or non-answer) science gives.

Abrahamism says an inexplicable being called God is responsible for everything. Science says an inexplicable non-being called randomness is responsible for everything. Both notions are as silly as each other.

All of this nonsense is swept away by ontological mathematics, which enshrines the principle of sufficient reason, is a system of absolute deterministic causality (but in an extraordinary way that permits free will – see the rest of the God Series for precise details), which provides an exact explanation for everything, and which wholly rejects randomness as playing any role at all in reality.

Mathematics is the one and only explanation of reality. Science, like religion and mythology, offers no explanation. It relies on magic and miracles – on rabbits popping out of top hats for no reason.

It’s time for rationalism. It’s time for causality. It’s time for explanation. It’s time for ontological mathematics in which the universe is literally made out of mathematics. We inhabit a 100% mathematical universe and we ourselves are mathematical monads – souls!

In ontological mathematics, nothing is an entirely mathematical concept and corresponds to an immaterial, dimensionless, frequency domain of mathematical energy outside space and time, defined by Euler’s Formula (the God Equation). Positive frequencies are exactly balanced by negative frequencies, leading to a universe of net zero (the state we know as nothing). This is Descartes’ unextended universe of mind.

By way of Fourier mathematics (which is a logical, mathematical application of Euler’s Formula), mental frequency information can be presented in terms of a dimensional, spacetime universe (the universe of matter). The Cartesian problem of how unextended mind interacts with extended matter is entirely explained by Fourier mathematics. It’s all in the math!

The Big Bang was a Fourier mathematical event whereby the Fourier frequency domain of mind gave birth to the Fourier spacetime domain of matter. Nothing random took place. Nothing sprang randomly out of non-existence, unreality or out of mathematical abstraction.

The mathematical universe is immortal and indestructible – exactly the same as the soul. As above, so below.

Ontological mathematics embraces all numbers including negative numbers, imaginary numbers, zero and infinity. Spacetime is defined by complex numbers, not real numbers (as in science). Time is simply imaginary space. The mathematical universe is a dynamic universe of becoming. Everything is in permanent mathematical motion – this is the true First Law of Motion. There is absolute conservation of energy, and the total energy of the universe is always zero due to negative energy perfectly balancing positive energy.

Ontological mathematics explains everything precisely, without any need for faith, magic, mystery, mysticism, miracles, a Creator God, or scientific randomness. Crucially, ontological mathematics is idealist, rationalist, and panpsychic. It’s not materialist, empiricist and observation-based and defined, i.e. ontological mathematics involves mathematical rationalist unobservables: mathematical entities that will never be accessible to any Large Hadron Colliders. Above all, ontological mathematics is founded on the mathematical monad – the immortal, uncreated, autonomous soul. Mathematics, and only mathematics, explains religion and grounds it in the evolving soul, not in any perfect God.

Religion is not about God. It’s about the self-solving, self-optimising soul. Religion is Evolutionary, not Creationist. God does not make souls. Eternal souls metamorphose into Gods! God is simply the Omega Point that all evolving souls eventually reach. God is the meaning of life because God is what we are all becoming ... some of us much faster than others!

This is an equal opportunities universe, but not a universe of equal outcomes. Some souls – a few outliers – are way ahead of the curve. They are close to gods while most others are mere beasts.

Satanists

There’s a catastrophic conceptual error at the heart of the supposed war between good and evil. God rewards his followers in heaven, while Satan punishes his followers in hell. How does it make any sense that Satan, who wants to recruit the souls that reject God, should adopt the policy of torturing these same souls rather than embracing them? Imagine how different Abrahamism would be if it was said that Satan liberally rewarded everyone who rejected God and that hell was full of joy and merriment, of eternal delights.

With Satanists, no one imagines that they worship Satan in order to be eternally punished by him. Clearly, they worship him because they see him as a better God than God and they want to be with him and rewarded by him. It would be perverse and indeed insane if those who follow the Devil expect to be tortured by him.

In Abrahamism, the Devil is actually an employee of God. He’s in charge of God’s torture chamber and his task is to test all souls and see whether they are faithful to God. Those virtuous souls that cannot be tempted by Satan go to heaven and those souls that are successfully lured by Satan are then punished by Satan, which seems somewhat ungrateful!

Why shouldn’t Satan be completely independent of God rather than his torturer and tester? Why shouldn’t Satan reward his followers and punish his enemies, just as God does? And, in fact, isn’t that exactly what we see in the real world? Every side offers pleasure to its supporters and pain to its enemies. No side ever says, We’ll punish you if you reject the other side, our hated enemy. It’s ridiculous and wholly unnatural.

So, what we have is a bizarre system whereby God’s sworn enemy is actually helping God by torturing everyone who rejects God and chooses to come over to his side. Why would he do such a crazy thing? No one ever punishes his own supporters.

Do you see what’s really going on? In Abrahamism, Satan and God are actually one and the same person. Specifically, Satan is God’s Shadow. If you do what God wants, God admits you to paradise. If you don’t do what he wants, his Shadow punishes you in hell. That makes perfect sense, doesn’t it?

Consider the Bible. Isn’t the Old Testament all about God’s Shadow (Satan) rather than God himself, while the New Testament is about God rather than his Shadow? The Old Testament God is about power, hate and violence while the New Testament God is about powerlessness, love and peace. Plainly, they cannot be the same God, but they can be God as Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde: two opposite aspects of the same God.

In this light, the baffling Islamic tale of Abraham and Ishmael suddenly makes perfect sense. The evil version of God orders Abraham to perform human sacrifice, and the good version of God pleads with him not to. What we are encountering is an internal struggle between God’s two sides – good and evil – not between two different beings.

Doesn’t the whole of Abrahamism become much more logical if it’s seen as a titanic struggle between a fractured psyche – a schizophrenic God, a lunatic deity? This God of course reflects humanity’s own inner conflict between the Freudian id and superego.

Abrahamism is about the human psyche and its problems, and this is manifested in the bizarre God of Abrahamism who usually seems more like Satan than God, just as humans are usually cruel and selfish rather than decent and altruistic.

If there were a being called God and a polar opposite, independent being called Satan, God would reward his own followers, and punish any of the enemies that he captured, while Satan would do exactly the same in reverse.

This produces an entirely different religious picture. Heaven is where God rewards his supporters, and he has a torture chamber in it called hell where he punishes the supporters of Satan.

Exactly the same is true for Satan. He rewards his followers and punishes any of God’s supporters he captures.

Doesn’t that provide a 100% demolition of Abrahamism? Even if you are a perfect follower of God, you could end up in the Devil’s torture chamber (if he captures you), rather than God’s heaven. It would make religion totally different if no one were guaranteed a place in heaven for doing God’s bidding; if hell and eternal punishment were still a real possibility no matter how good you were. Why shouldn’t Satan capture good souls? Why shouldn’t God capture evil souls?

Of course, Abrahamism is set up in such a way that God cannot punish anyone, only reward them with heaven. Someone else has to do the punishing, hence Satan. But if Satan is God’s sworn enemy why would he do God’s punishing for him? Why wouldn’t he reward those who rejected God, exactly as he’d done? They’re on his side. They’re allies, not souls to be punished.

Abrahamism promotes a notion that the good guys can never punish anyone, but Abrahamism is also based on the eternal punishment of the bad guys. So, the logic, or rather illogic, of Abrahamism requires the bad guys to organise their own punishment. But why would they? What’s in it for them? Moreover, the bad guy head honcho is supposed to be the punisher in chief. But why would he punish people who had disobeyed God? Why wouldn’t he have a party with them?

Abrahamism is wholly devoid of sense. It uses God’s enemy to do God’s dirty work even though there’s no conceivable reason why he would. It’s God who does the judging and Satan who does the punishing. Why doesn’t God have the guts, honesty and integrity to do his own punishing of those he has judged? It’s God, not Satan, who sends souls to hell, so why should Satan punish them? That’s incomprehensible. They haven’t done anything against him. In fact, they have shown that they share his sacred anti-God cause.

Consider how different Abrahamism would look if you could support either God or Satan and be rewarded by either with eternal paradise. There would no longer be any overriding incentive to worship God. People would be faced with a genuine choice. Perhaps Satan would offer a far more enjoyable paradise than God.

Abrahamism is entirely predicated on being horrifically punished for disobeying God and, insanely, it’s God’s chief enemy Satan who does the punishing. What if, instead of punishing you, Satan rewarded you with every pleasure conceivable? What if you were actively incentivised for rejecting God?

The logic of Abrahamism is that you are rewarded for obeying God and punished for disobeying him. But that all changes if you are instead rewarded for disobeying God. Why wouldn’t Satan reward you? Why would he help out the being (God) he hates more than all others? It’s God that hates the souls that have disobeyed him, not Satan. If anything, Satan loves these souls. The last thing he would do is torture them for rebelling against God (following his own example and leadership). Satan doesn’t punish his demons and devils and his fellow fallen angels, so why would he punish fallen souls?

Abrahamism is a ludicrous, irrational story that people don’t laugh at simply because they have been so heavily brainwashed by it.

Abrahamism is like the Spanish Inquisition. The Inquisitors didn’t kill anyone. What they did was judge heretics and find them guilty, then hand them over to the secular arm to do the actual killing and burning. But no rational person can deny that the Inquisitors were morally responsible and accountable for the deaths. The secular arm would have done nothing without the judgment of the Inquisition. Moreover, the secular arm were in complete cahoots with the Inquisition. They were enthusiastic advocates of the work of the Inquisition. With God, he passes judgment on souls and then passes them over to be punished, and he gets none other than Satan – his sworn enemy – to carry out the sentence. God is as guilty as the Spanish Inquisition. He’s a monster and torturer claiming that there’s no blood on his hands, and he even gets his enemy to execute his dread sentences for him.

If God judges then he himself must punish. Anything else is immoral. Anything else is cowardice. And the very last person the True God would hand over any soul to is Satan.

Apparently, 98.7% of the human race are sentenced to hell. Why doesn’t Satan simply make them his army and attack heaven? What we know for sure is that if Satan doesn’t punish anyone then no one else will. Punishing is apparently against God’s religion!

*****

But, if Satan punishes bad people, does that not make him good? – Anonymous

So, if Satan rewards bad people that does make him bad? Here’s the logic table:

Satan punishes bad people, so Satan is good.

Satan rewards bad people, so Satan is bad.

Satan rewards good people, so Satan is good.

Satan punishes good people, so Satan is bad.

Well, which is it?

Why on earth would Satan punish people for disobeying God when that’s precisely what he did himself? If you hate God, why would you punish everyone else who hates God?

*****

It’s essential for Abrahamism to deny that you have a choice. After all, if choosing Satan over God had no adverse consequences, you would then have to seriously ask yourself why you should choose God. You would have to read the respective manifestos of Satan and God and decide which you preferred, and that’s no good to Abrahamism.

The tale of the Tree of Knowledge is a classic Abrahamist choice scenario. If you eat the fruit of the tree, you go to hell. If you don’t, you go to heaven. So, logic says you shouldn’t eat the fruit. However, if eating the fruit makes you a God and has zero adverse effects, you’d be insane not to.

The Abrahamic test of faith is another classic. If Abraham doesn’t agree to make a human sacrifice of his own son, he has defied God and will go to hell. If he agrees to carry out the horrific deed, he goes to heaven. But what if Abraham earns his place in heaven precisely because he refuses to carry out God’s order to murder his son? Abrahamism would collapse if disobeying God was the right thing to do!

What Abrahamism is determined to say is that you win if you obey God and lose if you disobey. But what if you win by disobeying God? If that idea were ever to take hold, Abrahamism could not survive. The whole intent of Abrahamism is to rule out the possibility that disobeying God can ever have good outcomes. If it can, Abrahamism is automatically finished.

People are Abrahamists because they are terrified of not being Abrahamists. They are petrified of the hellish consequences. If that threat is removed, Abrahamism loses its trump card. Who in their right mind would obey God if they didn’t have to, and if they could get to paradise anyway?

The Anarchy Fallacy

The world consists of three types of people: hawks (predators; dominants), doves (prey, submissives) and retaliators (autonomous; capable of responding extremely aggressively to hawkish attacks on them).

According to anarchists, the natural state of people is to be dovelike, and government is inherently full of hawks wickedly preying on the people. The solution, they say, is to overthrow government and thus get rid of the rapacious hawk predators.

In fact, it’s government that keeps the hawks in check and prevents a world of brutal warlords ruling over everyone else, as is seen in many failed states in the Muslim world (such as Somalia, Afghanistan and Pakistan).

However, it’s true to say that government historically has never been just, fair, rational, honest or moral. All governments have been bad, yet few of them have been worse than the chaos anarchy would certainly deliver.

Governments have always taken the side of a hawkish elite – be it oligarchs, a priest caste, optimates, patricians, nobles, aristocracy, royalty, knights, bourgeoisie, capitalists, the owner class, entrepreneurs, bankers, the super rich. These have always preyed on the poor and average. However, they have done so within a system of laws, albeit an unfair system, and there has never been an anarchic free-for-all where pure jungle violence has reigned.

The world has been unfair and unequal forever but it has not been continuously bestial – which is what anarchy would provide since anarchy has no means at all to stop or curb the hawks.

The task is to establish good, just, fair, rational government by retaliators rather than hawks (doves, it must be noted, are incapable of governing; they are followers, not leaders). Hawk governments (or weak puppet governments established by hawk puppetmasters) support hawk elites. Only retaliator governments will ensure that hawks do not take over. What is 100% inheritance tax? It’s retaliation against the rich hawk elite. What is rebooting the world all about? – retaliating against the privileged elites who have always run the world in their own interests.

There will never be a world of doves, and of the dovelike love and light of which the left wing anarchists absurdly dream. They have never addressed the hawk problem, and they never will. The central issue is how to deal with the hawks, how to control the hawks, how to utilise their energy for the general good rather than for their own particular good. Only government can solve that problem, and only government by retaliators rather than by hawks.

Left wing anarchists live in a fantasy world. They have failed to understand human nature and that makes their naive, simplistic ideas incredibly dangerous. As for right wing anarchists, they themselves are the hawks. They want all rules, laws, regulations and governments to be removed, precisely to allow them to feed on the weak and poor at their pleasure and leisure, with total impunity.

Only two types of people want anarchism – the right wing hawks, and the mad left wing doves that imagine that government itself is the source of hawkishness. It’s not: hawks are the sole cause of hawkishness. Government is the only possible antidote, government, that is, that’s not tied to the interests of hawks.

Capitalism is a wholly hawk economic system. Communism, in theory, is a dove economic system. Democracy is ostensibly a dovelike political system, but when it’s combined with capitalism, the capitalist hawks seize control, exactly as we see in countries such as America and Britain where democratic politicians are puppets for the rich controllers (the puppetmasters). Communism ought to be a dovelike political system but in practice is controlled by a cynical, self-serving hawk elite. Fascism, Nazism, nationalism and patriotism are extremely hawkish. Theocracies are extremely hawkish. Monarchies, dictatorships and oligarchies are extremely hawkish.

Meritocracy and social capitalism are not dovelike in the slightest, but nor are they hawkish. They are retaliatory. Meritocracy supports a position of neutrality in the public space and equal opportunities for all, and will retaliate against anyone who tries to break neutrality (such as religious fanatics imposing their religious symbols and standards on others), and anyone who seeks to subvert equal opportunities (such as privileged elites and their system of inheritance to perpetuate inequality across the generations).

Ayn Rand’s anarcho-capitalist libertarians are out-and-out hawks. Incredibly, in Atlas Shrugged, Rand tried to portray the rich elites as the good guys being put upon by a nasty socialist government defending looters and moochers. Rand’s capitalist elite advocate the virtue of selfishness, and they believe this makes them admirable! All free-market capitalists are hawks. All privileged elites are hawks. Most conspiracy theorists see themselves as retaliators but are in fact hawks seeking to destroy government and establish a hawk anarchy, in which they (so they imagine) will have the advantage, the whip hand.

Hawks see government as something that unfairly curbs them. Mad doves see government as something that hawkishly oppresses them.

Government is in truth the one and only defence against the hawks. Government needs to be extremely strong and extremely retaliatory against the elites (and this is exactly what happened in the French Revolution where many thousands of rapacious hawks were executed, including the hawk chiefs: the king and queen).

Left wingers are always doves or retaliators. Right wingers are always hawks. Centrists tend to be liberal hawks.

Hawks are on the side of the Freudian Id and the Pleasure Principle, and doves on the side of the Freudian Superego and Morality Principle. Retaliators are rationalists on the side of the Freudian Ego and the Reality Principle.

Hawks are religious, economic or political fundamentalists while doves are religious and spiritual, but not much interested in politics or economics. Retaliators are atheists, agnostics, skeptics and Gnostics. They are interested in mathematics, science and philosophy.

Hawks are inner-directed, doves are other- and tradition-directed and retaliators are autonomous.

The master-slave dialectic is all about hawks (masters) and slaves (doves). Retaliators are either outside the master-slave system, or former slaves who have at last decided to fight back with extreme force against the masters. The French and Russian Revolutions were about lethal retaliation against the hawk elites.

The hawks are secretly terrified of the retaliators, and encourage dove morality as much as possible. The Christian notions of turn the other cheek, love thy neighbour and render unto Caesar are pure dove ideas, and music to the ears of the hawks who know that the doves will never oppose them while they believe such nonsense.

Retaliators, on the other hand, say, An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. No retaliator is apologetic about the French Revolutionary Terror. After all, it was exactly what the French hawk elite deserved.

The retaliators don’t weep about the Holocaust given that the Jews themselves worship an exterminatory God, who, by his own account, ordered fathers to kill their children, wiped out almost the whole world in the Great Flood, slaughtered the Canaanites and stole their land from them, and butchered the firstborn of Egypt without a second thought.

Judaism and Islam are two extremely hawkish religions because they seek to ally themselves with the ultimate hawk (Satan). Satan is the god of hawks, while Christianity (according to its own propaganda) is the religion of doves. Gnosticism is the religion of retaliators and explicitly says that the world is ruled by servants of the Demiurge (evil hawk archons).

So, what are you – hawk, dove or retaliator? There’s no point in lying to yourself. Your whole worldview is predicated on the type to which you belong.

In essence, the world is and always has been ruled by hawks (masters; extraverted dominants) and it’s the task of the retaliators (introverted dominants) to overthrow the hawks and rule fairly, justly and rationally in the interests of all. The slaves (extraverted and introverted submissives) are incapable of saving themselves and often actively support the hawks that prey on them (as in Islam, free-market capitalism and monarchy).

*****

What is the function of good government? – to optimise each and every citizen under its care and give all of them the best possible chance to lead the most fulfilled lives of which they are capable; to retaliate to maximum effect against all forces that seek to subvert and prevent that aim. Good government is always for the General Will and against particular wills.

What is the function of bad government? – to support the elites that currently run society, and to control and regulate everyone else. Everyone outside the elite is given a sub-optimal education, a sub-optimal living environment and sub-optimal chances of doing well in life. Bad government enshrines inequality and unequal opportunities and panders at all times to the rich elites that fund and lobby the politicians. Bad government always wants to regulate the people but to remove all regulation from the rich elites. Cui bono? Bad government is always for particular wills (of the elites) and against the General Will of the people.

What is the function of no government (anarchy)? – to indulge a ridiculous dream that human beings are self-regulating and self-organising and achieve this only when government is removed.

Anarchism and libertarianism are intimately related and are opposed to any central authority (Leviathan) that all must obey for the common good. They believe that the common good comes about spontaneously when there is no central power. History has not shown a single shred of evidence that this belief is anything other than mad.

*****

The Republican Party, the Tea Party, the 9/11 Truth Movement, Randian anarcho-capitalist libertarians, free-market capitalists and Protestant Fundamentalist are all evil hawks. They have utterly ruined America and made it ungovernable.

*****

What is the optimal world? It’s one with zero hawks, zero doves and 100% of retaliators. A world purely of retaliators can act like a world of doves (and have all of the benefits of that), and yet have the capacity to instantly root out and suppress any hawks that appear in the population (that would run amok if they had only doves to contend with).

Faith

What is faith? It’s the power of the heart. It’s all about feelings. What is science? It’s the power of observation and experiments. It’s all about the senses. What is Eastern mysticism? It’s the power of inner visions. It’s all about intuition. What is rationalism? It’s the power of reason. It’s all about thinking.

Feelings, the senses, intuition and thinking are not equal partners. They don’t all lead to the same truth. In fact, they lead to totally different and frequently opposite truths. Feelings (faith) can tell us about truth only if we inhabit a universe of emotion, which we don’t. The senses can tell us about truth only if we inhabit an exclusively sensible world, without any hidden variables or rational unobservables. We don’t. Mysticism can tell us about truth only if inhabit a world of visions and intuitions and Eureka moments. We don’t. The truth is that we live in an intelligible world, and reason, intellect and thinking are our means for investigating it. Intuitions can be highly useful, the senses can offer us vital clues, but feelings are absolutely useless.

Humanity, being in thrall to feelings, has created a world of faith and Mythos (emotional stories). This is a wholly false world, a world or fantasy, delusion and wishful thinking. Humanity can progress only when all human beings are rational first and emotional second rather than emotional first and rational last.

Abrahamism – the most powerful religion in the world – is all about the heart (faith; feelings; identity). It’s the absolute enemy of reason. It’s driven by ancient stories (Mythos) long since refuted by science. Of course, what science can’t do is refute feelings and delusions. How can you use scientific arguments to stop a Jew wailing in front of the Wailing Wall, a Muslim grovelling on Hajj at Mecca, or a Christian blessing himself and weeping when he’s presented with a plank of wood of the true cross? Science is without a voice in the mad world of feelings.

Capitalist consumerism is all about feelings: Oh I want this, I must have that, it will make me feel better. Advertising specifically targets feelings: With this product, you will be more popular, more successful, have better sex, have a better life, have higher status, feel better.

So, irrational feelings are at the root of the global economy. Irrational feelings are at the root of religion. Irrational feelings are at the root of identity. Irrational feelings are at the root of art, music, entertainment. Hollywood is a feeling factory. It tells you nothing about Logos.

People crave feelings. Love, romance and flirting are all about feelings. Heaven and hell are all about the notion of maximum pleasure (desired) and maximum pain (feared).

Nepotism, cronyism, privilege and inheritance are all about feelings. They are about helping your family and friends over everyone else, about harming the people you either don’t know (hence have no feelings towards) or actively hate (hence are happy to do them harm).

Feelings – the power of the heart, the power of faith, the power of the blood (of family or tribe) – is the axis around which the world revolves. And that’s the whole problem with humanity. We live in an irrational world of the heart (Dionysian) rather than a rational world of the head (Apollonian).

Religions and conspiracy theories are laughable, idiotic, irrational drivel, but they have an immensely powerful emotional core. Conspiracy theories are a perverted version of Gnosticism. The Gnostics explained the existence of evil by saying that the world was created and ruled by the Devil (the Abrahamic God). Conspiracy theorists explain the existence of evil by saying that our world is created and controlled by Jews, Jesuits, socialist elites, the European Union, Reptilians, the Illuminati, Washington D.C. – take your pick.

Of course, the truth is that the world is ruled by feelings, and reason is wholly absent. It’s reason that will solve humanity’s problems, not stories and tears.

Adults

Adults are just children who have learned to mask their emotions. Remove the mask and they revert to hysterical, terrified children. The purpose of religion – of God – is to offer them fatherly, parental protection and reassurance. The monster hiding in the dark closet can be defeated, so says God.

Isn’t it time adults grew up and lost their fear of the dark and of the scary monsters?

The Heroic Age

The Golden Age involved the humanity created by the first gods (the Titans). When the new gods took over (the Olympians), the golden human race was replaced by silver humanity, a far inferior race. Zeus later replaced them with Bronze humanity. These destroyed themselves in savage wars. Then came the Heroic Age and the Homeric men of great deeds. But finally Zeus made the humans of the Iron Age, the worst humans of them all, and the ones that still exist today. To get back to paradise – the Golden Age – we must have a rebirth of Heroes, who will then overcome the vile Iron Age men who rule our world.

Where is Heaven?

The ancients conceived of hell as beneath the surface of the Earth, and heaven as an inaccessible island of perfection across an ocean impassable to the living, but still very much on Earth. Eventually, heaven was raised to the celestial plane, but was still a physical location. Hell too was relocated to some cosmic abyss. Still later, heaven and hell were conceived as non-physical, beyond the reach of science. Science has relentlessly hounded religious conceptions of heaven and hell away from Earth and into other dimensions, or to no dimension at all.

To have any credibility, religion must be able to explain different dimensionality, or dimensionless existence. However, if you pick up the Torah, Bible or Koran, you will find not one reference to the problem of dimensionality. You will find no mention of mathematics, science or metaphysics. Instead, you will hear tales of primitive desert tribes and talking asses, you will hear parables, psalms, songs, poems, prayers, prophecies, commandments, religious customs, prohibitions and permissions – all pure Mythos. What you won’t hear is one word of Logos – reason.

Is God allergic to Logos? He must be ... because he never mentions it once. What kind of God expects his worshippers to be satisfied with Mythos and no Logos? Why does God refuse to mathematically and scientifically explain anything? Why isn’t the Bible an infallible book of quantum mechanics? Who cares about Jews and Jewish prophets?

Are mathematicians smarter than God? All the evidence says they are. Any moron can understand Mythos. Only intelligent people can understand Logos. We have plenty of Mythos Gods, but where is the Logos God?

God has never once employed Logos rather than Mythos. Why not? Because Logos means that rational arguments must be deployed and the last thing that Gods, priests, popes, preachers and prophets want to be dragged into is having to defend their beliefs rationally.

God hides behind Mythos because all charlatans and con men do. Faith hides every rational error. I believe means I don’t acknowledge reason. I believe means I live my life according to stories (Mythos) rather than reason (Logos). I believe means I am a feeling and sensing type; I am not a thinking and intuitive type.

Followers of Mythos religion are always stupid, and have much lower IQs than atheists. The only people with higher IQs than atheists are advocates of Logos religion – based on mathematics.

The Elite

Our cognitive map is how we arrange the world around us, how we imagine it, how we interpret it, how we talk about it, how we relate to it. It’s what we take for granted. It reinforces a common mindset and facilitates groupthink. It goes hand in hand with tunnel vision, the inability to see a wider picture.

An elite stays in power not just by controlling the means of production and capital assets, but, especially, by controlling the way we think, by shaping our cognitive map to reflect their ideology. Our cognitive map is so deeply internalised that it’s rarely commented upon (except by philosophers and sociologists). The cognitive map controls our unconscious mind as much as our consciousness. It controls not just what we talk about in public but what we don’t talk about, i.e. the social silences, the areas that lie outside the public discourse, things that don’t need to be said because they are taken so much for granted.

Understanding

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it." – Upton Sinclair

It is difficult to get people to think when their position in life depends on not thinking. Religion requires you not to think. That’s the only way in which people can retain their faith.

Social silence is all about that terrain where we are required not to understand things, not to think too deeply about them. The moment you are against the social silence, and opposed to its conclusions, you are an outsider and rebel, and life becomes tough. You simply don’t buy the propaganda anymore.

George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four is a fantastic exploration of how the elite control the social silence. In Orwell’s book, the elite invented a new language called New Speak, the purpose of which was to reduce the vocabulary and grammar so much that it enormously limited the amount of concepts that could be thought and spoken. This language was intended to make it literally impossible for people to think heretical thoughts since there would be no words and grammar to reflect such thoughts. That’s what the elite’s relentless campaign to dumb down everyone is all about. Stupid people can’t be subversive. They can’t formulate revolutionary ideas. Clever people, people who can think, have led all revolutions.

Orwell’s concept of doublethink goes to the heart of totalitarianism. You must understand what is being said and what is not being said and accept both even when they directly contradict each other. It’s necessary, for example, to swear your allegiance to democracy and have total faith in it, while knowing that you have no say over anything and no power to change a single thing, and that everything is always run by an entrenched rich oligarchy, as it always has been.

The elite control the silence. They control the unspoken. They control the subtext. They control the unconscious. They control the cognitive map. They control how you think and the framework in which you think.

If you want to be free then you must control the way you think. You must control your own cognitive map. You must get involved in what people don’t say as well as what they do. The unsaid is even more important than what is said.

The Desert of the Real

We feel free because we lack the very language to articulate our unfreedom. – Slavoj Žižek, Welcome to the Desert of the Real

At all levels of our life we seem to live more and more with the thing deprived of its substance. You get beer without alcohol, meat without fat, coffee without caffeine ... and even virtual sex without sex. Virtual reality to me is the climax of this process: you now get reality without reality ... or a totally regulated reality. But there is another side to this. Throughout the entire twentieth century, I see a counter-tendency, for which my good philosopher friend Alain Badiou invented a nice name: ‘La passion du réel’, the passion of the real. That is to say, precisely because the universe in which we live is somehow a universe of dead conventions and artificiality, the only authentic real experience must be some extremely violent, shattering experience. And this we experience as a sense that now we are back in real life. – Slavoj Žižek

...there is passive nihilism, what Nietzsche called ‘The last man’ – just living a stupid, self-satisfied life without great passions. – Slavoj Žižek

"I do claim that what is sold to us today as freedom is something from which this more radical dimension of freedom and democracy has been removed – in other words, the belief that basic decisions about social development are discussed or brought about involving as many as possible, a majority. In this sense, we do not have an actual experience of freedom today. Our freedoms are increasingly reduced to the freedom to choose your lifestyle. You can even choose your ethnic identity up to a point.

"But this new world of freedom described by people like Ulrich Beck, who say everything is a matter of reflective negotiation, of choice, can include new unfreedom. My favourite example is this, and here we have ideology at its purest: we know that it is very difficult today in more and more professional domains to get a long-term job. Academics or journalists, for example, now often live on a two-or three-year contract, that you then have to renegotiate. Of course, most of us experience this as something traumatising, shocking, where you can never be sure. But then, along comes the postmodern ideologist: ‘Oh, but this is just a new freedom, you can reinvent yourself every two years!’

"The problem for me is how unfreedom is hidden, concealed in precisely what is presented to us as new freedoms. I think that the explosion of these new freedoms, which fall under the domain of what Michel Foucault called ‘care of the self’, involves greater social unfreedom.

Twenty or 30 years ago there was still discussion as to whether the future would be fascist, socialist, communist or capitalist. Today, nobody even discusses this. These fundamental social choices are simply no longer perceived as a matter to decide. A certain domain of radical social questions has simply been depoliticised. – Slavoj Žižek

*****

We have been bombarded with the illusion of freedom. We are told we can freely choose our government, and yet all governments in democracies are more or less the same, bar a few minor policies. They all subscribe to free-market capitalism and it is this, not government, that dictates the economic health of a nation and the employment rate. Governments tinker with trivial details while the big picture is completely out of their control and in the hands of the corporations and banks.

We can do what we want on the internet. We can say what we want. We can choose whatever consumer items we want that are in our price range. It all amounts to a strong feeling of freedom, and yet we all know that everything that really matters – the nature of the world we live in – is completely out of our control and under the control of others. They are free – meaningfully free –while we are not. Their genius is to give us the simulacrum of freedom, and that is sufficient for most. As with Cypher in The Matrix, the fake steak tastes so much better than the real food on offer.

Radical freedom means taking control of your own life, accepting full accountability and responsibility for it. Freedom is hard. For most people, freedom-lite, virtual freedom, phoney freedom – the freedom to consume and choose from the menu of bread and circuses offered by the elite – is all they want. They are content for the elite to remain fully in charge, and, in effect, to be their slaves. They are not free, but unfree.

Success

The elite seek not to be scrutinized by others. All of their business affairs are hidden. There is no transparency concerning their assets and what taxes they pay. Money is regarded as the proof that they are successful and that they deserve to be powerful and influential. Anyone who opposes the is labelled envious and socialist. In the American cognitive map, almost nothing is worse than being called a socialist or communist, hence these labels are frequently applied by political mischief-makers.

The Free Market

Free-market capitalism is supposedly all about trading in open markets. Yet, by 2008, many free-market financial products had become so complex that they could not be traded in any conventional way at all since no one knew how to value them in straightforward terms. Instead of being valued in terms of the price traders were willing to assign to them, these products had to be valued according to extremely baffling mathematical models and then traded on that basis. Such valuations were only as good as the models, but the workings and assumptions of these models were wholly opaque to almost everyone, including those who devised them in the first place (much as the quantum mechanical wavefunction is baffling to scientists, even though they rely on it).

So, the financial system became valued according to incomprehensible models that no one understood. Is that sane? Guess what – nothing has changed! We’re still at the mercy of these financial instruments that no one can meaningfully grasp. It’s more or less true to say that the world economy has an entirely fictional value since no one anywhere can validate any valuations produced by mathematical models that are based on the absurd assumptions of economics (the dismal science, which is no science at all).

The free-market is no such thing. It’s way beyond any person’s ability to understand. No ordinary people can participate in the game. In essence, a group of middlemen – the free-market’s priest caste – have appeared, and all market participants have to take their word for it that they know what they are talking about. However, if you were ever to meet these people, you wouldn’t accept that their word that the Pope is a Catholic. That’s how unbelievable, immoral and downright dishonest they are. Like all capitalists, they will say and do anything to make a profit. If they need to screw over the whole world to enrich themselves, so be it.

The free-market, like everything else, has become all about the unspoken subtext, the unseen workings and assumptions of the market and its participants. For the free-market to be valid, it should involve no subtext at all. Everything should be visible, comprehensible text. Everything should be easy to value by the man in the street, just as if he were at a fruit market in his high street.

As soon as a professional priesthood appears, with its own arcane practices and jargon, you know trouble is sure to follow. Free-market capitalism is now a kind of religious cult that worships Mammon and the profit principle and regards evil as not making a fast buck. All participants in the market are geared up for only one thing – making money no matter what.

And all of them engage in a complicitous silence. They all practise omerta – just like the Mafia.

No one can regulate this system. No one can control it. That makes it unacceptable. It’s like a nuclear reactor without any control rods, i.e. it’s a catastrophe waiting to happen, and it has already happened several times, most especially in the Wall Street Crash of 1929 and the financial meltdown of 2008.

We have to root out social silence, complicitous silence, and subtext. Everything must be visible, transparent, comprehensible, with its appropriate control rods.

The global economy should be treated exactly as if it were a nuclear reactor, and should have the same level of supervision, regulation, safety standards and controls. Our livelihoods depend on it.

Atlas Shrugged

Bafflingly, many libertarians regarded the 2008 financial crash – caused by unrestrained, unregulated free-market capitalism (exactly the system demanded by Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged) – as "Atlas Shrugged happening in real life." Presumably, what they meant by this was that, in order to save the economy, the government was forced to rely on socialist bailouts of the financial system.

In fact, what happened was the precise inverse of Ayn Rand’s mad book. In that book, socialist moochers and looters try to steal the profits of the wondrous entrepreneurial capitalists. In 2008, it was the moochers and looters who were forced to pay up to keep the reckless, irresponsible capitalists in business.

The socialists saved the capitalists’ bacon – and got no thanks or reward for it whatsoever!

That’s anarcho-capitalist libertarianism for you!

*****

Remarkably, even though 2008 formally refuted all of Ayn Rand’s doctrines, her supporters viewed the same facts as a triumphant vindication! It just shows how powerful cognitive dissonance is.

The Old Formula

The elite once said, From those to whom much is given, much is expected. Now they say, From those to whom much is given, nothing is expected – except to be get even more.

The elite like to see themselves as noble. In fact, they are utterly self-serving and care nothing for anyone else.

*****

From those who take much, you cannot expect much back. This is the grubby reality, the truth of the matter. Why should much be given to the few? To be more precise, why do the few want so much? So that they can spend it on themselves and indulge their every whim, and revel in the feeling of power? What’s noble about that?

It’s time to take much from those who have much – 100% inheritance tax!

The Psychology of Control

Imagine you want people to go along with your plans, to never defy you or challenge you. How would you achieve it? People securely in prison can pose no threat to those outside, so what you do is construct a prison – a psychological prison – from which those inside can never threaten your power.

Let’s look at some of the things, a psychologist of mass control might come up with.

No.1: How about Turn the other cheek. So, if I’m relentlessly hurting you, stealing from you, and abusing you then you don’t fight back. You simply turn the other cheek and let me keep doing it. Cui bono?

No.2: How about Wait for the kingdom of heaven to enjoy the rewards of your struggle. In other words, don’t enjoy the rewards here and now, on this earth during this life of yours. Keep rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, i.e. let the rich keep taking from you. All the while you have your eyes pointed at some future state (heaven) rather than the state of things right now. Cui bono?

No.3: How about the American dream? If you work hard, you will get your rewards. If you’re not getting rewards then ipso facto you’re not working hard enough. So, the tens of millions of Americans who work incredibly hard but come home with scarcely a cent in their pocket are at fault, whereas the investment bankers who walk off into the sunset with tens of millions of dollars obviously fully deserve it for all their hard work. (Hasn’t anyone noticed the economic meltdown? Who caused it? Who’s paying for it? – Well, you are.) Cui bono?

Do you see what you’re up against? Who needs concentration camps when people will believe whatever self-serving line you sell them – the one that maximises your wealth and power.

Welcome to the Old World Order.

The Old World Order’s Favourite Slogan?

There’s a sucker born every minute – P.T. Barnum

Distraction

We live in a world where we can be permanently distracted if we want to be. We are surrounded by endless opportunities for short-term pleasure. The only people who can succeed are those capable of resisting the pleasure of the moment.

Why doesn’t the West rise up in righteous revolt against the elite? Because the people are too busy being distracted and pursuing instant gratification – exactly as the elite intended.

Revolutionaries are either desperate people or people of principle. They are never comfortably off consumers, last men and Ignavi, with their eye permanently turned to their petty comforts and joys.

Capitalism fights revolution by corrupting all would-be revolutionaries, by ensuring that they’re always too distracted to get off their asses and actually do anything significant with their lives.

The capitalist elite are the ones who do important things. Everyone else just consumes and distracts themselves until they die.

Professional Liars

Politicians are professional liars. They refuse to answer straight questions, and they would lose their jobs if they did. Along with lawyers and advertisers, they are the modern successors of the sophists – people who will do anything to be rich, influential and in the limelight, using their rhetorical skills to manipulate, deceive and exploit.

Why would any honest, decent, moral person want to be a politician? It’s one of those jobs that no one of integrity would ever take. So, what’s the point of politicians? It’s time to get rid of the whole rotten lot of them.

Political parties should be outlawed. Anyone in a political role should be an independent, elected for their skill and merit in a particular field, not for joining a political party in order to wallow in bullshit.

Politicians are not people of honour. There is no honour amongst thieves and liars.

The Dictator Manifesto

All dictators have always said, Do what I want and things will go well for you. Oppose what I want and things will go very badly for you. However, given that dictators were mortal, this simply didn’t have enough oomph. So, they changed the message to, "Do what God wants or he will send you to the most terrible place of suffering conceivable. If you obey him, he will reward