Thursday, 19 June 2014

Illusionnistes, aboyeurs et barons...

How did the United Kingdom survive the destruction of the Working classes, organized Labour and Labour Party during and after the reign of Margaret Thatcher? What trickery has enabled the ruling classes in the UK to prevent a revolutionary uprising, or the disintegration of society in response to the ever widening income and education gap between rich and poor? Is it the same mystical force which ensures our submissive fascination while the Conservative Establishment is increasingly seen to be the fat little maggot at the rotten heart of the British State?

The Conservative establishment, ---typified by esoteric organizations like "the Order of Bath", "Order of the Garter, Thistle, St Michael & St George etc,.", "Pilgrims Society" and "Monday Club", peopled by various old World Nobles, countless Lords and Dames, industrialists. tycoons and numerous "old money" multi-millionaires, constantly operating exoterically through the influence, their private dealings, personal fortunes, and financial calculations exert on the Conservative Party (particularly it's back bench, and newly emerging Libertarian/Nationalist Right Wing outfit; UKIP)---- has been successful in conserving the gains from anti-working class, neoliberal reforms enacted by Margaret Thatcher and her successors in the Conservative Party, even channelling their victims ---in true 'pastoral' fashion--- towards the Conservative establishment's favoured ideological response to various 'economic' problems.

As in business, image and reputation is everything, PR is paramount, focusing the masses attention on manufactured problems which the Right Wing dominated media outlets constantly portray; "Immigration"; "erosion of Sovereignty"; "control of Borders";"benefit cheats", "Law and Order" etc,. and away from consciousness of the deleterious effects the Monetarist policies of the last few decades is essential if their reactionary agenda is to go unnoticed.


The Free-Market reforms of the dark years during Thatcherism, particularly wage suppression, and subsequent privatization of public utilities, saw the formerly nationally owned industry giants; Jaguar, British Telecom, Cable & Wireless and British Aerospace, Britoil, British Steel, British Petroleum, Rolls Royce, British Airways, British Gas, water and electricity, being auctioned to private, often foreign investors, the dismantling of the Coal industry, privatization of the railways and de-regulation of the financial services industry, enabling property prices and speculative investments to increase wildly, benefited exclusively the managerial moneyed classes, coporations and wealthy private individuals, who then became the owners of these formerly publicly maintained services & industries, raised prices and dropped wages in order to increase private profit margins, at the expense of the British general public.

Yet since that period and the various confrontations this wholesale betrayal of the working class provoked, the Poll Tax Riots (1989-91), Battle of Orgreave (1984) and Battle of the Beanfield (1985) (being some of the more prominent amongst many others), the majority of Briton's have been extremely compliant, willingly conformist and suspiciously docile to the continuing advance of Capital, towards a position of absolute dominance over organized Labour. The inevitable inequalities formed by this arrangement provoking little more than the occasional protest centered on piecemeal economic demands.

Was the defeat of organized Labour, their subjugation below a managerial class to the tools their own hands had built, the expulsion of new age travellers from their ancestral spiritual heartlands, and the violent repression of the masses of poor people lashing out against the Poll Tax under one of the most unequal, class divided societies the world has ever known, enough to convince the people of Britain that actually Big Brother and his financial backers do know best?

Was it Thatcher's police state reforms and premeditated attacks on worker's rights, or the strategically deployed display of military ruthlessness with which they were enacted, that convinced us of the need to 'defang' the Unions as a political force?

As unpopular as it may be my theory is that Thatcher was right, which is to say she knew very well the concept of trickle down economics would serve to seduce the dispossessed masses, blinding them to their increasing dependence on the market, even if it was through factitious contrivances based on the booming industry of market research, the data yielded there serving the creators of fashions, fads, trends and numerous constantly emerging commodities enabling you to obtain consumer satisfaction.

If the economic forecasters predicted a problem it would be in the interests of this plutocratic over-class to oil the gears of wealth -through commodity- production.

The development of consumer commodity markets, fed by the increased availability of industrial resources and off-shore labour markets, required by the owning classes for their 'cost efficient' production, facilitated the huge leaps made in technology over the last few decades, and widescale availability of consumer electronics (to the level whereby most homes in the developed world have more than one television), this has coincided with the development of the production methods of the various entertainments and media fetishes derived from them (fed by psychological, neurological advances, derived from market research, etc,.), and enabled the Church of the Market to 'freely' distribute it's propagandistic imperatives to consume, to fashion the acceptable channels for expression of desire, putting into it's priesthoods hands a tool for propaganda that make those constructed by the Fascist propagandists of Nazi Germany seem insignificant.

In fetishistic terms privatization, or to use the famous slogan: "trickle down economics", has created an [illusion of] abundance, and availability of everything for all [with an adequate credit rating], which makes it very easy to convince oneself when looking, that we've never had it quite so good, that we've never been better off and that the Lord of the church of the Market really does provide to His faithful servants.

This illusionary, temporary but constantly enlivened sense of satisfaction, endlessly reinvigorated through the production and consumption of it's symbolic forms, is facilitated in no small measure by the over-availability of 'consumer credit', the small plastic cards in your wallet are tools which enable you to service any particular impulse or desire, conceived, manufactured, marketed then implanted in your head by the multi-billion dollar advertising industry. Credit entitles you to enjoy the products and objects of success, regardless of your socio-economic status, even if it is just a transient joy amidst the more prevalent, arduous moments undertaken to attain it.



Capitalizing on the requirement for the objects of success to be widely available to those not using credit, the market for imitation brands being mass produced and sold to mass market, at a fraction of the price of exclusive brands, creates a class system of representation. One's station is still determined by one's ability to pay for the status symbols required to make a show of it, or not as the case may be, but these lesser brands in various fields whether furniture, clothing, automobiles or perfumes superficially appear the same as those hand crafted, limited edition or customized luxury items available to the moneyed classes, so their owner can play at pretending to have attained that level of individual 'success'.

The proliferation of the consumerist ideal where 'one is what one owns rather than what one does', through the constantly disseminated advertising propaganda, which, while affirming the righteousness of consumerism determines the values our consumption reflects, renders us all susceptible to the shop displays of designer brands which we're exposed to on a daily basis in our towns, which having long since been infiltrated by numerous multinationals, are a cacophony of constantly competing private interests vying for our attention, their sole intention to appeal, to stand out and entice us into a financial transaction in their establishment.

The optimum mode of transmitting the most desirable cultural fascinations, are those spectacular representations of human beings known as celebrities, these apparently sentient lifeforms, despite being no different, infact often more banal, monotonous and uninteresting than the most insignificant Human life, are elevated above the general mass of people as an idealized object for them to identify with and imitate, the sublime object of a particular consumerist tendency, or lifestyle.

Much has changed in the forty years since the libertarian reforms of the economy under Thatcher began, the influence of money has re-assumed it's dominance over British life. The sparkling abundance of distractions, fantasy and illusions presented by increasingly empty emissaries of banality, command their own moments of fervent exaltation. They herald tidings of the newest forms of enslavement, a cult of blind adherence to economic logic and the presumed objective value of objects of devotion.

Against the backdrop of a rigorous and prolonged government attack on our collective heritage, culture and self respect, the waning of the ability of the working class to convince themselves they have a voice, through Unions and the Labour party, renders them easy targets for the seductive conveyor belt of consumerism, and more insidious 'opiums' conceived by the dominant ideology, in order to undermine the last vestiges of resistance to the ongoing privatization of the Education system, NHS and destabilization of Democratic societies...








Tuesday, 13 May 2014

On "Baser Forms" of Truth

The width and breadth of knowledge available for mass consumption since the advent of the digital age, lends itself well to the reproduction and dissemination of this abundant raw material in the form of various competing "truth fetishes", principally because of it's coinciding with the individualistic Neo-Liberal global revolution in economics, (demanding the colonization and subjugation  to the market of every aspect of human existence)

This excerpt from the website of aspiring truth fetishist Charles Veitch highlights the use of this valuable raw material to advance his agenda, which is given as the attempt to "place Statism in the history books", but is more likely to be eeking out a living through his production of a particular type of marketable commodity.

In bold I have highlighted the truth fetishes, which is to say factitious, seemingly intelligently deployed but overall empty words, conveyed to make them seem to be "the embodiment of a potent spirit" (of truth), underlined are various explicit contradictions that it is Mr Veitch's aim to introduce to the reader:

"The Hegelian Dialectic between the "rational" and "moral" West and the "hysterical" and "superstitious" East provides the perfect setting for the evolution of humanity. The work of Indigene is to place statism in the history books alongside religionism and the baser forms of control."

Ignoring for now the erroneous cultural stereoptypes, in order of occurrence let's look more closely at these reified concepts, factiously constructed to provoke "unquestioning reverence" in their target.

The Hegelian Dialectic
As though highlighting specifically for our benefit the inadequacy of this practice, whereby a small piece of a far more intricate subject, ie a Cross, the Swastika, etc,. can become a fetish object of fascination, superficially appearing as immediately tangible, but actually abounding in habitually ignored metaphysical and theological subtleties.

Mr Veitch has constructed, or more accurately appropriated a reified concept, from information reproduced devoid of content in superficially appealing and fetishized form, "The Hegelian Dialectic" is taken as some all encompassing general truth emerging out of the void, forming the basis of the misunderstandings Veitch seeks to impart.

His use of the term is clearly intended to construct the facade of an intellectual or philosophical substance to his words, still it is ambiguous, does he mean for instance to refer to the "Dialectic" as ascribed to Hegel, in the conspiratorial literature of David Icke, a three-fold process of "problem-reaction-solution", utilized by a hierarchically estranged elite to control the attention of the populace, the world and course of their history?

If so he makes an elementary and fundamental error by listing only a thesis and antithesis, with no trace of synthesis to the various distinctions he has made, indeed Icke's theory is that this hypothetical elite use false dichotomies, duality or false "paradigms" to divide and control the populace, if we look deeper at this text from his Indigene website, we can see it is nothing other than the introduction of dialectical antagonisms, contradictions, false dichotomies and confusion, expounded in the most hyperbolic fashion.

"Indigene is a self-affirmation of Being - taking the best of quantum mechanics and applying it to subjective a-priori sentience that we all have. Somewhere between reductionist materialism and outright idealism lies the truth. We can help you explore these questions."

I think it's more likely he alludes in a veiled manner, to the Hegelian concept of the dialectic between consciousness that considers itself Master -through recognition of the slave as an object- and the Slave who considers himself thus through his conciousness of the master -a separate, antagonistic, self consciousness.

In Hegelian philosophy there is no "thing in itself", no sheltered consciousness free from dependence on the other, the otherness of the Master to the Slave creates a totality of which both are part, but the unity of which is negated by the subjugation of the other by the master. To substantiate his tenuous, idealistic self affirmation of being, he must put the other into a position of object which can be owned, grasped and used; a self delusion of "being in itself" derived from the treatment of the other as an object of his will devoid of independence. This totality of which both are part is like a potential for a "genuine humanity" beyond exploitation of itself "as another", but it contains an inherent contradiction, the sublation of the "Master's" dependence on the other to the other.

It is to the Slave to overcome this by asserting his self mastery, to obtain through his consciousness of "being for another", the realization of the other as self consciousness, to the Master the slave is merely object, an aspect of his will from which his sense of "being" is derived, the process of exploitation has equipped slave consciousness with the tools required to transcend it's subservience, if only it would use them instead of remaining fixated by the mystificatory aspects of them.
 
In encountering the consciousness of Hegel expressed through the "Dialectic", Mr Veitch has attempted to deprive it of it's existence, to recreate it as an object for Mr Veitch, now it's self asserted "Master", any independent character it may have had is negated, even misrepresented, it's reified form consumed, assimilated and put to work in constructing the facade known as Indigene.

Bringing me back to the original point, the inadequacy of this semi-mystical, pseudo-profound reproduction, having being stripped of it's content and meaning Hegel's logic symbol becomes a reified concept, an empty vessel for the reception of 'subtle fluids' and fetishization ascribed with values in accordance to the will of it's master.

'Fetishism' is about relations among people, rather than the objects that mediate and disguise those relations.

Perfect [Setting]
The term "perfect" is fetishism prima facie, but implicitly contains an inherent subjective relevance, combined with any object ie; meal, weekend, spouse, child etc,. it evokes a particular meaning for each self consciousness that uses it, taken in the context of the paragraph it's use actually may well contain a degree of truth, he posits the "perfect setting for the evolution of humanity", to be "between the "rational" and "moral" West and the "hysterical" and "superstitious" East", between is a strange position to be in here, one is either in one sphere or the other, it is in this interplay that development becomes necessary one sphere consuming and extinguishing the other, otherwise there are three spheres with one between, but is this non-position in a false dichotomy not, although descriptive of nothing but error, paradoxically indicative of the reality that "perfect settings" would actually inhibit "evolution" in any natural sense of the word, and that in an evolutionary universe such reified concepts as the perfect, transcendent truth, environment, lifestyle only exist as imperfect, abstract "Hegelian" 'certainties'.


Statism
Statism is an unusual term taken here as some general truth emerging out of the void, it has no meaning beyond it's derogatory implications, which is to say a term was required with which various diverse forces could attack and undermine the concept of checks and balances, in order that they may substitute a liberal-parliamentary government for the regime of personal rule, hoping thereby to divert the advancing revolution that threatens the remaining privileges of the western, white European patriarchy and property owning classes.

Religionism
This is another negative fetish object akin to "statism", just an abstraction of various things Charlie dislikes to a degree of inhibiting coherent thought about them, termed Religionism it acts as a voodoo doll into which he sticks the figurative nail he considers Indigene to be, "The work of Indigene is to place statism in the history books alongside religionism and the baser forms of control", but if we take him at his word, does the negative interpretation of these terms actually stand? Being that neither term actually exists in the history books, should we take this as his attempt, rather than neutralize them actually to ascribe to them some concreteness, some form of recognition as "viable" but infact meaningless designations?

Quantum Mechanics
Stringing together series of terms and phrases from quantum physics, and asserting that they explain something in our daily experience, is something people like Icke or Veitch spend a lot of time doing in their various theoretical presentations, in the words of American Physicist Richard Feynman*; "I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics.", neither, being as they are serial "truth" (and love) fetishists, would be quite as honest, or in all likelihood as self aware as Prof. Feynman.

Truth
In truth all of these aspects could be far more excessively elaborated upon, I mean the actual coherent message Veitch attempts to convey is not yet clear, that may be as I think his overall aim, one should not as he said in a recent video "mistake the map for the terrain", are the words just a means of cementing the Consciousness of the bondsman in his audience, what he does whether knowingly or not is reproduce the hierarchichal scheme of revealed truth, in the manner of all reactionary ideological cults appealing to the 'least' among us, they know their dogma is cynical, irrational, defeatist and often illogical, but "We can help you", they avidly assure us with hungry smiles...





______

There are numerous copies of Hegel's original text online to learn more about the development of Self Consciousness, Hegel's view of being for itself and being for others, and the Master<>Slave dialectic read; section B, chapter IV, paragraph 166 and onwards.

* in The Character of Physical Law (1965)

Thursday, 8 May 2014

Magic and Fetishism excerpt

"The superficial  observer
is  apt to  regard the
medicine-men or
sorcerers as cheats who

deliberately humbug their  
neighbours;  but it  is 
probable that most of them 
really believe themselves
to be possessed of occult
or supernormal power 

Doubtless they do many things
for mere effect, in  order
to  enhance the respect 

they desire to have paid
to  themselves personally, as 

well as to  put the subjects
or spectators into a proper
frame of mind; but this
is  precisely what is  deliberately 

done by the organisers
of all ceremonies by all  peoples.   

Doubtless, also, many acts  are
performed which are intended to  

impose upon the credulity of others;  
but this is a device which
is  not unknown among
cultured people, as,  for
example,  the  liquefying  of  the  blood
of St. Januarius in Naples. "
.
Magic and Fetishism, Arthur C Haddon
1906