Our Species' Final Bastion Against the Onslaught of the Demoniac Neolithic Cult Called The Great Reset
"You will own nothing, and you will be happy." — World Economic Forum, Great Reset advert 2016
The madness of a world free from the burden of freewill, private property and individual responsibility is nothing new in human history. The Great Reset, a global cult which wishes to transfer all economic power and thus all decision making processes to a handful of families at the head of those corporations which already control nearly every means of production and every instrument of distribution of wealth on the planet, is nothing new. This fanatical totalitarian cult is merely the revival of Neolithic ideologies that split up societies throughout the world into merely two classes of human beings: the living gods who ruled over everything and their servants. At most these tyrants could concede tokens of privileges to a body of tribal elders selected in order to inflict punishments on servants on behalf of the living deities. It would seem far fetched that such a social structure could hold any form of appeal to the modern man, and yet, the option of surrendering any thought process, any responsibility and any sense of gravity or consequence that can result from one's actions as well as the ability of possessing the authority and capability to determine one's own fate, has become extremely desirable amongst the inhabitants of the world's most advanced societies. We are all burdened by the implications of our choices and the exercise of our freewill, and an alarmingly growing number amongst us, wishes to opt out, and return to a time when our ancestors had no say or authority over their fate. Along the same lines of 'ignorance is bliss', not having to bear responsibility for one's own life is also a novel form of bliss far too many in our post-modern society aspire to. These individuals fantasise about societies where no one is responsible for their own mistakes, no one is accountable, and no one has to cope with their own shortcomings. Furthermore having lived in comfort away from genuine hardships, and refusing the burden of responsibilities, modern man now seeks refuge from meaning and purpose in material pleasures and shies away from matters of genuine purpose or meaning. Alas, this dwarfed worldview is then reflected in our understanding of our rights, our identity and our natural role in society, while feeding in turn the greedy aspirations of our rulers. It is modern man's intrinsic lack of individual willpower that is overturning the rights and liberties achieved by our advanced liberal societies.
The freedom modern man aspires to is not that of a free man, rather that of a slave on a feast day. Nicolas Gomez Davila — Escolios a un Texto Emplicito, 2001
Our governments leverage his weaknesses and celebrate failure, apathy, licentiousness to the point of promoting gender dystopia even in the earliest years of our children's education. These are the instruments by which those in power believe they can numb the flames of the human soul and quell our desire to know, grow and evolve. The oligarchs of the Great Reset are convinced they can erase our innate drive to learn and evolve by feeding our lower instincts, our lust and similar cravings for temporary pleasure. And by doing so, they are convinced they can enslave the entire human species, coerced into a novel form of authoritarian socialism, devoid of private property. This time around though, it won't be the state that shall own every means of production, rather a global oligopoly controlling all of the world's monopolies, even those under the facade of free market competition, where brands competing against each other are in reality all owned by the same small group of families. This novel global social, political and economic model, which for the sake of simplicity we shall merely call 'corporatism', wishes to acquire a form of control over all the means of production of goods and services, ownership of all possible assets, and finally ensure a system that controls every instrument for the distribution of wealth on the planet. Indeed, today already, corporations behave far more like state controlled companies of the past, where obedience and stability are far more desirable traits than the type of intelligence, dedication and creativity that allowed the private enterprises of the past to thrive and become giants in the first place. This degradation of the private enterprise into corporate lethargy and the subsequent collapse of capitalism into a novel form of socialism controlled by the corporations that stifled free markets, was entirely predicted and thoroughly described by the brilliant Austrian economist, Joseph Schumpeter.
In 1942, well before the tides of war had shifted in favour of the allies, Schumpeter published his milestone Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, where not only he took for granted the forthcoming defeat of Fascism and Nationalsocialism, which in itself is already a formidable prediction, but he also foresaw the collapse of Communism, and even more strikingly he predicted the end of Capitalism as a social model driven by free enterprise and the rise of a novel form of socialism in the hands of a few handful of corporations. All predictions have thus far come true and the Great Reset wishes to become the crowning jewel of the last one.
We must bear in mind though that Schumpeter was by no means an advocate for socialism, he merely foresaw the replacement of free market capitalism with corporate socialism as something ultimately inevitable. In fact, still today Schumpeter is celebrated as the utmost paladin of entrepreneurship, which he upheld as the cornerstone of capitalism:
The function of entrepreneurs is to reform or revolutionize the pattern of production by exploiting an invention or, more generally, an untried technological possibility for producing a new commodity or producing an old one in a new way, by opening up a new source of supply of materials or a new outlet for products, by reorganizing an industry and so on. – Joseph A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, 1942
This process first defined in similar terms nearly a century before by the French economist Jean Baptiste Say who coined the term entrepreneur, according to Schumpeter not only improved the instruments for production of goods and services as well as the creation of wealth, but was the forge of the storms that applied natural selection to human economy through the process of creative destruction. Innovation in the hands of entrepreneurs would constantly improve the quality of life of the people by doing away with inefficient systems of production through a process of creative destruction
The essential point to grasp is that in dealing with capitalism we are dealing with an evolutionary process … Capitalism, then, is by nature a form or method of economic change and not only never is but never can be stationary … The fundamental new impulse that sets and keeps the capitalist engine in motion comes from the new consumers’ goods, the new methods of production or transportation, the new markets, the new forms of industrial organization that capitalist enterprise creates … the same process of industrial mutation … that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one. This process of Creative Destruction is the essential fact about capitalism. It is what capitalism consists in and what every capitalist concern has got to live in … Every piece of business strategy acquires its true significance only against the background of that process and within the situation created by it.– Joseph A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, 1942
The bard of entrepreneurship also held entrepreneurs in high account as something more than mere cogs in a evolutionary machine, but as individuals driven by deep passions:
First of all, there is a dream and the will to found a private kingdom, usually, though not necessarily, also a dynasty… Then there is the will to conquer: the impulse to fight, to prove oneself superior to others, to succeed for the sake, not of the fruits of success, but of success itself…Finally, there is the joy of creating, of getting things done, or simply of exercising one's energy and ingenuity. Joseph Schumpeter – The Theory of Economic Development, 1911
The extroverted and brilliant economist, in his own words set himself for high expectations: "I set out to become the greatest lover in Vienna, the greatest horseman in Austria, and the greatest economist in the world. Alas, for the illusions of youth: as a horseman, I was never really first-rate." No matter how modest a horseman, or how formidable a lover, there can be little doubt on the achievements of his economic analysis. The forthcoming collapse of capitalism intended as a system of free markets, is now obvious even to the most untrained observer of contemporary events. The concentration of economic power and the rise of monopolies are clearly stifling the spirit of entrepreneurial creative destruction. Thus, Scumpetrer's analysis was gloomily accurate. As was accurate his forecast regarding the vital agency intellectuals would play in delivering mortal blows to free market societies. Needless to say Schumpeter did not hold intellectuals in the same high esteem as the protagonists of creative destruction. Schumpeter observes that the pressure to force ever larger scores of individuals into higher education forms the premise for this decaying role intellectuals play in eroding and suffocating the vital function of creative destruction. His short take on the ill effect of forcing into higher education people who would've been better suited for the fields is quite an eye-opener.
The man who has gone through a college or university easily becomes psychically unemployable in manual occupations without necessarily acquiring employability in, say, professional work. His failure to do so may be due either to lack of natural ability—perfectly compatible with passing academic tests—or to inadequate teaching; and both cases will, absolutely and relatively, occur more frequently as ever larger numbers are drafted into higher education and the required amount of teaching increases irrespective of how many teachers and scholars nature chooses to turn out. The results of neglecting this and of acting on the theory that schools, colleges and universities are just a matter of money, are too obvious to insist upon.– Joseph A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, 1942
Consequently he adds rather contemptuously, though albeit completely accurately:
All those who are unemployed or unsatisfactorily employed or unemployable drift into the vocations in which standards are least definite or in which aptitudes and acquirements of a different order count. They swell the host of intellectuals in the strict sense of the term whose numbers hence increase disproportionately. They enter it in a thoroughly discontented frame of mind. Discontent breeds resentment. And it often rationalizes itself into that social criticism which as we have seen before is in any case the intellectual spectator’s typical attitude toward men, classes and institutions especially in a rationalist and utilitarian civilization.– Joseph A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, 1942
An old Italian saying refers to the intellectuals described by Schumpeter as "braccia rubate all'agricolture," literally 'arms stolen from agricolture'. Unfortunately the end result of forcing into academia people better suited for the fields is showing its results as more and more students and teachers go through higher learning convinced that the horrors of the great Socialist genocides of the 20th Century are acceptable ills to counter the perceived abuses of capitalism in our advanced liberal democracies. Either way Schumpeter's conclusion that intellectuals and corporations would stifle the process of creative destruction and usher a new era of corporate controlled socialism is now a self-evident reality for anyone to bear witness as long as one has eyes to see.
I have tried to show that a socialist form of society will inevitably emerge from an equally inevitable decomposition of capitalist society. ... (but) while most of us agree on the result, we do not agree as to the nature of the process that is killing capitalism, and as to the precise meaning to be attached to the "inevitable". ... I felt it my duty to take, and to inflict upon the reader, considerable trouble in order to lead up effectively to my paradoxical conclusion: capitalism is being killed by its achievements.– Joseph A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, 1942
Schumpeter was in fact, so certain of the inevitability of such outcome that his magnum opus, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy does not place any value judgement on the new global corporate socialist order which we now call corporatism, but rather offers a guideline of how to ensure that democratic principles be preserved in this new order where all assets, all means of production of goods and services, and all instruments of distribution of wealth are controlled by a few corporations. The driving concern of his work was the preservation of democracy in the coming onslaught of corporate controlled socialism.
Can capitalism survive? No. I do not think it can. But this opinion of mine, like that of every other economist who has pronounced upon the subject, is in itself completely uninteresting. What counts in any attempt at social prognosis is not the Yes or No that sums up the facts and arguments which lead up to it but those facts and arguments themselves. – Joseph A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, 1942
What Schumpeter could not have predicted though, is the disdain the new elite arising from such a system would feel towards Humanism and all those principles that have defined consensus societies over the course of two and a half Millennia and have allowed our species to reach our current state of well-being. Schumpeter placed little attention to what would happen when ancient illiberal imperial powers that never adopted Western Humanism, would attain immense wealth and power by adopting Western economic methodology without the framework of our Humanist culture. And certainly, he could not have predicted what would have happened when our own leaders would fall in love with the totalitarian practices of these remote regions. He merely imagined a benign society where everyone is an employee of a few handfuls of corporations, not the revival of archaic Neolithic slavery. And yet in recent decades as Western corporations have divested their interests from their lands of origin, these corporations have become increasingly keen to adopt totalitarian models, in particular those of the world's fastest growing economy, [and already the world's largest in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP)].
Just like slavery was reintroduced to Christian Europe through commercial contamination from Africa, Asia, the Americas and the Middle East during the Age of Exploration, pre-Hellenic and pre-Christian totalitarianism are now being re-introduced to Western societies through contamination from practices Western corporations gleefully adopt from their pre-Hellenic partners and allies, especially amongst the heirs to the Ottoman Empire and even more-so from the heirs to the Manchurian Empire. Even more appalling is the corporate exploitation of intellectuals to camouflage these totalitarian, and even genocidal, social models not as the barbaric dictatorships they are but as virtuous collective social systems, so virtuous as to be far more desirable than the models of Western consensus societies founded on individual freewill. Thus the term totalitarian has been euphemistically replaced in universities and corporate media by the more gracious expression, collective, and the masses in the West are constantly reminded of all the shortcomings of liberal democracies and how much better off life would be in collective societies. We are being bombarded day in and day out on the merits of Confucian styled collective societies as opposed to the perceived horrors of our consensus societies founded on individual freedom. Obviously far too few in the West actually know what these perverted corporate sponsored intellectuals are actually hiding under the term collective. Certainly, those of us that still recall the collective models adopted by the likes of Hitler, Stalin or Mao, are less easily fooled as we have developed healthy antibodies of scepticism, but the problem is actually far deeper than the horrors of 20th Century socialism. The Great Reset proposes a social order that eludes even the worst genocides of the last Century. The ambition of the Great Reset oligopoly, is far greater than those of Hitler, Stalin and Mao put together. Their aspiration is to revive a pure Neolithic global society, the kind that thrived long before Athens stoped Persia's Westward expansion at Marathon. A modern day Leviathan of absolute power that need not be accountable to anyone, least of all the powerless and economically dependent people it rules over. Thus, when asked to abandon all civil liberties, all property, all rights, in favour of a utopic collective society where we shall no longer be burdened with choices and responsibilities, we should at the very least analyse whether or not such illiberal models are indeed sustainable or even minimally desirable.
There is no better work to study to understand the mind of the archetypical pre-Hellenic emperor then the Book of Lord Shang, still today regarded as a milestone representative of Chinese legalism. Lord Shang was advisor to Duke Xiao, ruler of the kingdom of Qin and responsible for the reforms that would lead to the kingdom's conquests over the course of a century, culminating with the crowning of Shi Huang Di, the first historical emperor of China. Still today the ruling party of the People's Republic consider themselves direct heirs of this first dynasty, responsible for the Great Wall and for the monumental Terracotta Army buried in the dynasty's capital Xi'an. Shi Huangdi was also responsible for giving China its current Chinese name of Zhongguo meaning the Middle Kingdom.
Unlike Confucius, who elaborated a social model where individuals, while always subordinate to the collective interests of the society through concentric circles of authority emanating from the innermost circle being the emperor, did attribute roles of subordinate authority to all of the emperor's subjects, Lord Shang was far more concerned with the exercise of power over the emperor's domains and showed little concern on the social life of the the emperor's subjects. In this respect, the Great Reset, this modern day Leviathan inspired by the rising Confucian nuclear and economic superpower that has captivated the imagination of Western corporations who are already asserting themselves on the sovereign governments of advanced liberal democracies, is far more akin to the teachings of Lord Shang than those of Confucius. Just like Hobbes in the West two thousand years later, Confucius assumed the emperor was accountable only to heaven from which he received his mandate to rule over the earth. The concept of Tianxia, which literally translates to All Under Heaven, is so deeply engrained in Chinese culture that it is still being proposed today by Chinese intellectuals as a desirable form of global society. In 2005 the concept was formally reproposed by Zhao Tingyang through the Chinese Accademy of Social Sciences under the title The Tianxia System: An Introduction to the Philosophy of a World Institution (obviously under Chinese rule acting on behalf of the heavenly mandate on earth). Both Hobbes and Confucius like the modern version of Tianxia, assumes the model to be guided by a benevolent ruler, that desired the well being of his subject. In this respect therefore the Great Reset is far more ruthless as it is more akin to Lord Shang, who showed no concern for the opinion or well being of the ruler's subjects, but was merely concerned with their exploitation by eliminating all forms of trade and property. In his view everything had to be forbidden other than the army, and farming to feed the ruler's soldiers. Much like today's oligarchs, Lord Shang believed that individuals should possess no assets whatsoever and merely serve either one of the two purposes of the state: serve in the army, or feed its soldiers:
Do not allow merchants to buy grain nor farmers to sell grain. If farmers may not sell their grain, then the lazy and inactive ones will exert themselves and be energetic ; and, if merchants may not buy grain, then they have no particular joy over abundant years. Having no particular joy over abundant years, they do not make copious profit in years of famine, and making no copious profit, merchants are fearful, and being fearful, they desire to turn farmers. If lazy and inactive farmers exert themselves and become energetic, and if merchants desire to turn farmers, then it is certain waste lands will be brought under cultivation. — The Book of Lord Shang
The prohibitions carried forward by Lord Shang's reforms were not limited to commerce and property, everything that was not war and agriculture needed to be erased. Music, art, poetry, history, nothing should be allowed to survive.
But now the people within the territory all say that by avoiding agriculture and war, office and rank may be acquired, with the result that eminent men all change their occupations, to apply themselves to the study of the Odes and History and to follow improper standards; on the one hand, they obtain prominence, and on the other, they acquire office and rank. Insignificant individuals will occupy themselves with trade and will practise arts and crafts, all in order to avoid agriculture and war, thus preparing a dangerous condition for the state. Where the people are given to such teachings, it is certain that such a country will be dismembered. — The Book of Lord Shang
We must not forget either the sheer brutality of this early kingdom and first dynasty that serves as inspirations to the world's fastest growing superpower and those Western corporations that are imposing foreign totalitarian models on our sovereign governments. For while indeed Shi Huangdi succeeded in conquering vast territories and subduing all his neighbouring kingdoms, the brutality deployed for his conquests was probably the most gruesome ever recorded in human history. Soldiers in Qin's army were remunerated by the number of severed heads each soldier brought back from battle. And since a dead head is just a dead head, it didn't really matter much who that head belonged to. No one could trust their own fellow soldier, nor could a soldier hope to leave his heads at the camp while charging into battle. So soldiers of the Qin army would charge into battle against neighbouring armies with as many severed heads as they could cary on themselves at all times. Certainly a gruesome sight to bear witness, even in dehumanised pre-Hellenic and pre-Christian societies. And yet, all this power without reflection, without thought, without wisdom, without, joy, must have left a deep void even in the heart of the Emperor himself. The most ironic aspect of this radical dehumanised society is Shi Huangdi's desire for an army to accompany him in the underworld. A man who had dedicated his life to eradicating any form of culture, music, poetry, art or any such musing of the human mind, human soul and human heart, built one of the most impressive collection of statues from all of antiquity, the Terracotta Army. Forebodingly, having eliminated over the course of generations any form of craftsmanship that was not singularly committed to either war or agriculture, Shi Huangdi had to depend on Greek artistry, that had by then spread to India with Alexander, in order to have his inanimate companions guard his burial mount. What the emperor experienced within himself proved to be true for his society as well. Devoid of meaning humanity cannot flourish, and history would rapidly prove the teachings of Lord Shang utterly wrong. After nearly a century of ruthless conquest since Lord Shang's reforms, the Qin dynasty was extraordinarily short-lived, lasting only 12 years from Shi Huangdi nominating himself Emperor of the Middle Kingdom. To add insult to injury, for much of its history China would be ruled by the very barbarians Qin's rulers had build a wall to keep out of their land, further proving the grave limits to a worldview which wishes to enslave all its inhabitants under despotic centralised rule. We should think twice, trice, four times, ten, hundred, a thousand times before surrendering our autonomy and our individual authority to the dystopian maniacs of the Great Reset.
While Qin may have been one of the most brutal, other pre-Hellenic empires did not differ much conceptually. The structure was simple. Authority was bestowed on the rulers by divine grace, and no one had any rights other than the divine rulers. Until Marathon that is. Marathon forever changed the course of human evolution when authority slipped from the hands of divine rulers, stolen by free individuals who learned to work together to defend their lands. Humanity would never look back as the near totality of all social and technological progress in the course of our evolution were henceforth to be born from those civilisations that defied the powers of divine rulers and forged the core of consensus societies, the very same core that defines our modern advanced liberal democracies, and the very same core that the Great Reset aspires to annihilate.
The Athenians that fought at Marathon to stop the mightiest army the world had ever seen were the antithesis of Lord Shang's binary subjects. They were not reduced to being either soldiers or farmers, because they were also citizens of Athens. By virtue of being free human beings defending their own property and sharing their responsibilities with a common stake in the affairs of their state, they were both soldiers and farmers. And when they fought, they did not fight for a ruler that would remunerate them according to the number of severed heads they carried, they fought for themselves, to defend their own land, and they fought together with other free citizens, who like them were also farmers, soldiers and citizens of Athens. This model of consensus society would prove so formidable that within a few generations a free citizen soldier in Alexander's army could easily overpower ten slave soldiers in Darius' army. Nor should the reader make the foolish post-modern mistake of believing that this immense superiority of power was merely technological. On the contrary, Humanism, the Western world view that each and every human individual represents a sovereign entity of authority and that societies must be forged through the consensus of those sovereign entities participating in the society, is the key to Alexander's triumph over the Bronze Age empires of Asia. As he famously said:
The people of Asia are still slaves because they never learned to pronounce the word, 'no'. — Alexander the Great
Athenians learned to say 'no' and learned to speak with one coordinated and united voice spoken in unison by free and independent individuals who owned their own land and had full authority over themselves. The success of Western civilisations lies in its ideas not in its skills. Or rather the skills are a consequence of the ideas. By the time European explorers reached the Celestial Empire's Forbidden City, much to their surprise, they found unused cannons and muskets.
... the Chinese never learned to make modern guns. Worse yet, they had known and used cannon as early as the thirteenth century but had forgotten much of what they had once known — David Landes, Why Europe and the West? Why Not China? 2006
There is a profound difference between invention and innovation, and this difference accounts to a fundamental reason why nearly all human innovation for the last two and a half Millenia was the product of consensus societies.
Innovation is the market introduction of a technical or organisational novelty, not just its invention. — Joseph Schumpeter – The Theory of Economic Development, 1911
Human progress over the last two and a half Millenia has been almost entirely circumscribed to Western civilisations not because of any mysterious biological anomaly that distinguishes inhabitants of the West from other people, nor because of the physical characteristics of the land masses inhabited by Westerners, as Jared Diamond mistakenly suggests in his eloquent Guns, Germs and Steel, rather this extraordinary role the West has played in the historical stage of human evolution is the direct product of the invention of consensus societies, and their formidable superiority to previous social models, because there cannot be innovation without a market and there cannot be a market without free individuals who come together consensually.
For two and a half Millenia children in the West have been raised to exercise authority over their fate and be accountable. That is at the root of the success of consensus societies and the success of Western Humanism.
Furthermore, as Hellenism relied on the rational observation of the Universe, this idea of individual authority in the Western mind became immediately universal. Since Hellenic times we are taught to interpret the world rationally and seek the common nature of all things. Thus it was inevitable that we would learn to view all human beings as equal before the Creator.
Only one task is left for them now if their fate must not be turned and they become the vanquished: to honour solemnly the gods and temples of the defeated — Aeschylus, Agamemnon
The Greeks knew what it meant to be slaves and viewed the world rationally, thus they practised compassion. Humanism was born at Marathon, as farmers brought to life a feat worthy of the story of David and Goliath, though this time a collective group of Davids, through consensus, refused to be subjected into slavery ever again and learned to work together to defeat Goliath. This idea of consensus society spread rapidly and held immense appeal in the hearts of any human being exposed to it because of the intrinsic truth it carries. Each and everyone of us is indeed host to a sacred divine authority. The idea that each and every human being hosts within themselves divine authority and must be respected as such, is the central idea of Western Humanism. But what would the world look like if today's global oligopoly were to succeed in imposing the Great Reset and doing away with Western Humanism.
We can get a preview from an unlikely source, the Unabomber and a far more authoritative one, the great 20th Century sage, Bertrand Russell.
Due to improved techniques the elite will have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless they may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving the world to the elite. Or, if the elite consists of soft-hearted liberals, they may decide to play the role of good shepherds to the rest of the human race. They will see to it that everyone's physical needs are satisfied, that all children are raised under psychologically hygienic conditions, that everyone has a wholesome hobby to keep him busy, and that anyone who may become dissatisfied undergoes "treatment" to cure his "problem." Of course, life will be so purposeless that people will have to be biologically or psychologically engineered either to remove their need for the power process or make them "sublimate" their drive for power into some harmless hobby. These engineered human beings may be happy in such a society, but they will most certainly not be free. They will have been reduced to the status of domestic animals. — Ted Kaczinsky, The Unabomber Manifesto, 1995
Kazinsky was no role model. He was a terrorist and I cannot blame the authorities for having refused to advertise his manifesto out of fear of copycat effects. But Kazinsky was no fool either. His logic has been taken seriously by illustrious minds such as the futurologist Ray Kurzweil and Sun Microsystems' former CIO, Bill Joy. The threat of a world where technology allows very few individuals to exercise absolute power over all other human beings, reduced to soulless enslaved masses is very real. And it was a genuine concern for one of the most prominent philosophers of the 20th Century, certainly the most prolific, Bertrand Russell:
Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so.
The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen
Russell elaborates further the horrors that are now materialising through the Great Reset.
Sires will be chosen for various qualities, some for muscle, others for brains. All will have to be healthy, and unless they are to be the fathers of oligarchs they will have to be of a submissive and docile disposition. Children will, as in Plato's Republic, be taken from their mothers and reared by professional nurses. Gradually, by selective breeding, the congenital differences between rulers and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organized insurrection of sheep against the practice of eating mutton. (The Aztecs kept a domesticated alien tribe for purposes of cannibalism. Their regime was totalitarian.) — Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society, 1953
But the great English philosopher did not limit his forecast to phenomena that have been widely observed and the subject of an entire genre of dystopian cinema and literature, he also forecasted events eerily similar to what we are witnessing today with a virus that has a paper trail of 20 years of research documented through deposited patents.
If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full. There would be nothing in this to offend the consciences of the devout or to restrain the ambitions of nationalists. The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of that? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people's.— Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society, 1953
The Great Reset, a global society shaped along the lines of the modern Chinese surveillance state, reviving Neolithic models where rulers are not accountable and subjects have no property and no authority, not even over their own life or their own bodies, is certainly not a desirable world, nor can we expect it to be sustainable. The aspiration of acquiring divine authority over other human beings, the desire to erase Aristotelian practices of reason, truth and compassion (logos, ethos and pathos) that have defined the last two and a half Millenia of human evolution, the desire to snare humanity with promises of superficial pleasures and blissful ignorance, free from responsibility and choice, the desire to eradicate freewill from the human soul, the desire to enslave every human being, cannot be defined in any manner other than demoniac.
The truth and virtue of Humanism is inherently understood deep within all of us and the Great Reset's aspiration to annihilate Humanism is a demoniac construct because it goes against the very nature of humanity and its evolutionary path. Let us recall that not too long ago another demoniac madmen aspired to put an end to Western civilisations:
Our strength lies in our quickness and in our brutality; Genghis Khan has sent millions of women and children into death knowingly and with a light heart. History sees in him only the great founder of States. As to what the weak Western European civilisation asserts about me, that is of no account. I have given the command and I shall shoot everyone who utters one word of criticism, for the goal to be obtained in the war is not that of reaching certain lines but of physically demolishing the opponent. And so for the present only in the East have put my death-head formations' in place with the command relentlessly and without compassion to send into death many women and children of Polish origin and language. Only thus we can gain the living space [lebensraum] that we need. Who after all is today speaking about the destruction of the Armenians? — Adolf Hitler, Obersalzberg Speech, 1939
Anyone who shall succeed in erasing Western Humanism from the face of the Earth will not usher a new era of blissful socialist ignorance, well on the contrary they will only open the gates of tremendous horror and suffering for all human beings.
Rest assured that the Great Reset will not succeed, because it is against human nature, against our intrinsic desire to learn, grow and evolve, against the very essence of life on this planet, but in the meantime, do not let yourself be lured by the temptation of a world where you need not think or reason. Do not let yourself be seduced by a Godlen Calf that exonerates you from the responsibilities of freewill. You may choose to surrender all your liberties to a handful of demoniac cult worshipers, and let them own everything on your behalf, but by doing so you will never be happy. You will merely be forced to claim you are happy to avoid punishment from those perverted beings who claim to be gods on earth.
You are called today to chose between continuing the path of human evolution through the practice of your own individual freewill and the exercise of your authority or succumb to a novel Neolithic barbarity the likes of which would surpass the nightmares of any of our human ancestors. Anyone who wishes to abdicate their responsibility over themselves and surrender to the illusion of a benevolent tyrant that knows what is best for them, without ever requiring being accountable, anyone who believes that governments wish to expropriate their properties and businesses out of kindness, anyone who believes corporations wish to inject new experimental drugs into their children's bodies every 3 months for the good of their child, must immediately grow up. Those who refuse to grow up in the face of this global spiritual battle between good and evil, between the light of truth and the darkness of deceit, are condemning future generations to a slavery as profound as that of sheep incapable of conceiving an "insurrection against the practice of eating mutton."
In order to preserve the freedom won by our ancestors and bequeathed upon us from one generation to another over the course of two and a half Millenia, we must learn once again to be scholars and warriors. Only thus will we in turn be capable of handing over liberty to the next generation.
In the words of Alexander, we must learn once again to say "No" and work together like good citizens to defend our sovereignty and defeat this new demoniac global Goliath.
Copyright © Carmelo Pistorio 2021
References
Aeschylus, Agamemnon - http://people.uncw.edu/deagona/LIT/Agamemnon.pdf
David Landes, Why Europe and the West? Why Not China? 2006 - https://web.stanford.edu/~avner/Greif_228_2006/Landes%202006%20Why%20Europe%20and%20the%20West%20JEP.pdf
Adolf Hitler, Obersalzberg Speech, 1939 - https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/hitler-obersalzberg.asp
Bill Joy, Why The Future Doesn't Need Us, 2000 (Unabomber Manifesto) - https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2/
Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society, 1953 - https://ia902909.us.archive.org/0/items/ImpactOfScienceOnSociety1953/1953%20-%20Impact%20of%20Science%20on%20Society%20-%20Bertrand%20Russell.pdf
Lord Shang Yang, The Book of Lord Shang - https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.283023/page/n17/mode/1up?view=theater
Joseph Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 1942 - https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.190072/page/n6/mode/1up?q=invention
Joseph Schumpeter, The Theory of Economic Development, 1911 - https://archive.org/details/theoryofeconomic0000schu/page/92/mode/2up?q=innovation
Kommentare