Systems of privilege, imperialism, and the programming of shame

Authority: Is influence concentrated in some more than others? If so, how?


In the picture above, in the center is a turtle. Relative to that turtle, the child on the right has more influence (more capacity to focus on a specific outcome and then produce it).
Among the 3 people in the picture, we could speculate that the two adults probably have a similar amount of total influence. However, each adult will exert different forms of influence, such as one of the two might be an official member of a committee that has exclusive authority over a specific range of issues.
For each individual, their capacity for influence varies over time. The capacity for influence is not constant and it is never uniformly distributed.

A select group of people may have identical privileges within a particular system of influence. If that select group exercises identical forms of exclusive influence (that people out of that group do not have), then for convenience we can say that they are equally influential within that group. However, even when there is a strict voting protocol, some of those with the privilege of voting will at least attempt to exert some extra influence over others within the group, such as through logical dialogue or other forms of “diplomatic negotiation.”

For instance, when there are three issues on the agenda for voting, a person who is neutral on at least one issue may be approached by others to “trade votes.” In other words, one party can offer to vote in a particular way (on an issue that is actually not a priority to them) in exchange for someone else helping to promote an outcome that does interest them.

How does social disparity form? How does it change? Also, why do so many of the most dominant institutions promote ideals of social equality?

By controlling valued economic resources (including living resources like livestock and agricultural resources), some people then can influence other people by bribing them with some amount of the scarce resources under their exclusive control. How is the exclusive control of resources first produced? People may erect fences or other barriers to limit access to a section of land. Then, they may use violence (like security guards, police officers, and armies) to attack unwelcome visitors (trespassers/ illegal aliens/ invaders).

So physical technology is important (such as fences, weapons, and encrypted radio transmitters for secretly organizing the violence of the trained mercenaries). However, how is it that an elite group can influence some armed soldiers to defend a boundary (sometimes at great risk to the health of the soldier)?


Another factor is communication. In addition to physical domination (like through bombs and bulldozers and handcuffs) and in addition to bribery (or other offers of compensation which are effectively identical to bribery except that bribery is an ILLEGAL offer of compensation), there is another “technology” that is incredibly influential. It is the technology of language in general (and attentive indoctrination in particular).

Groups with the greatest concentrations of power (such as the central governments of imperial “superpowers” such as the USA, the USSR, or the EU) typically have extensive investment in systems for programming the attention and perceptions of the masses. These systems include educational systems for youth as well as “the mass media.”

The word “propaganda” is from the Latin language and that word is widely known because of the Holy Roman Catholic Empire. In 1622, in order to promote order and stability within their enterprise to concentrate power, Pope Gregory XV established the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith (“Propaganda Fide” in Latin).

Specific content was approved for their canon (their curriculum taught uniformly throughout the empire in rituals of teaching doctrines / indoctrination). Besides approved content, other content was either ignored or censored as heresy (criminal). Heresy was punishable by excommunication, deportation, torture, or public rituals of execution.

The innovation in 1622 was rooted in prior innovations relating to the persecution of heretics. In 1231, for the apprehension and trial of heretics, Pope Gregory IX instituted the Holy Inquisition. This was presented as a replacement to the widespread practice of mobs singling out an alleged offender and then binding them to a stake and setting them on fire (burning them to death). The innovation of the Holy Inquisition was to require a ritual of reviewing the alleged heresy before killing any who were convicted of heresy. The unauthorized burning of alleged heretics could then also be punished as a crime.

So, why are ideals of “social equality” presented so widely? Some assert that by displaying advocacy for equality, those who feel guilty for their privileges can relieve their guilt (or at least distract themselves from their guilt). But how did the guilt arise?

The primary function of propaganda that promotes ideals of social equality may be to promote guilt in the masses for their natural self-interests (which can oppose the interest of oppressive systems that rely on consistently obedient human resources). Further, if the system constantly floods a target audience with messages that “inequality is shameful,” then that may reduce the target audience’s attention on how the system is rooted in inequality and systematically redistributes resources and influence by coercion, extortion, and deception (including the cultivating of hysterias and paranoias).
If “everyone knows that inequality is shameful,” then what happens when they notice some inequality? When people inevitably notice the various exclusive privileges and inequities resulting from the ritual coercions of an empire, many will respond in the outrage of the perfectionist reformer: “everyone should agree with me that our empire should not be so imperialistic, but is. We must reform the empire (to avoid the guilt of eternal punishment in hell) by making the empire less imperialistic (or the right kind of imperialistic).”

In other words, the shaming of inequality is really the shaming of the capacity to perceive inequality. Anyone who sees inequality has been programmed to respond with hysterical shame. To appease their shame at having perceived inequity, they must display social messages of their perfectionist loyalty to the propaganda ideals of equality (anti-inequality), which are ideals that have been programmed in them through the indoctrination presentations.

They are trained to be ashamed of perceiving inequity and privilege. Inevitably, they witness inequity and privilege. Jealous of those with certain privileges, they condemn certain inequities as the most infuriating. However, they will eventually get very disappointed with the social consequences of their perfectionist condemnations of inequity (which is that most others withdraw from them in shame because they are talking about topics that have been programmed to evoke shameful terror in the masses).

So, they stop their jealous raging and shift to heroic reform. They stop obsessively protesting specific cases of inequity and withdraw from the shame that such topics evoke. Instead, they find one of the popular reform campaigns and then invest their attention in achieving imperial heroism through that reform campaign. Maybe they ridicule other reform campaigns as naive, reactionary, and delusional. However, they insist compulsively that their favorite reform solutions will make the empire less imperial (just like it should be according to the ideals indoctrinated by the empire in order to confuse people about the inequities that are central to the empire). They have been ruled through the careful use of language to cripple them intellectually.

Putting it all together



Does the British Empire of today trace the roots of their system to the 4 ancient Hebrew priesthoods of the inner temple, middle temple, and the 2 outer temples? For centuries, a section of the City of London has been identified as “The Temple.” How is that related?

What is the nature of the activities that happen in that area? It is the center of the British Empire’s legal system and courts of organized coercion. There are around 8,000 members of the exclusive priesthoods, including the elite court judges and lower-ranking legal professionals who are oath-sworn agents of the court system.

“The Temple Church [shown above] is jointly administered and maintained by the Inner Temple and Middle Temple and enjoys the status of a “Royal Peculiar” (a place of worship that falls directly under the jurisdiction of the British monarch, rather than [indirectly through] a diocese). It is independent from the Diocese of London and the Master of the Temple is appointed directly by the Queen.”
 

Most people do not think of the British Empire as a theocracy, but the ruling monarch not only has absolute totalitarian authority over all other government employees (including Parliament), but over the entire Church of England. The hereditary ruler is identified as the official representative of God on earth as well as the commander of all the armed forces and is the ultimate legal authority over all the business of the Empire in all of it’s forms.

Note that a huge amount of the land area on this planet has been controlled sometime within the last few hundred years by the British Empire. Even within areas that eventually announced independence from the Empire (such as the United States or more recently India or Hong Kong), what if there are massive debts owed to the British government and other interests of the British Empire? Clearly, the governing system of the British Empire has been the foundation for huge numbers of territories and colonies.

Note the lettering over the columns: TEMPLE OF JUSTICE.

But in addition to the cultural legacy of British Imperialism, is it possible that the British elite shifted their focus from direct, overt occupation of colonies to a less obvious form of commercial relationship? If the governments that regulate billions of people all owe massive debts to British interests, then all of those governments are using organized military force to extract wealth through taxes, confiscation, etc….

But what if “British interests” are not even British? What if there are a lot of German Jews who own those British interests? For instance, my understanding is that in 1815, one of the Rothschilds used a clever deception (entirely legal apparently) to become the sole majority owner of the Bank of England (a private business). That same individual has been quoted as saying “I care not what puppet sits on the throne of the empire…. The one who controls the money supply controls the empire and I control the money supply.”

One simple thing that is clear is that governments are highly efficient operations of coercion and privilege. Another detail is that a long list of governments worldwide (including Greece and Japan) are notable for the immense debts owed by those governments to various creditors.

Billions of human resources are targeted for the efficient extraction of wealth to the local rulers. The local rulers (whether in formal British colonies or not) send huge amounts of their government revenues to other parties, such as creditors.

Who benefits from this system? Huge concentrations of wealth are redistributed to the creditors to which these governments owe massive debts. What is the source of of all that wealth? Billions of human resources provide for the welfare of the local governments that rule them, and then those local governments send their wealth wherever they send it.

Briefly, there are 3 basic groups in this system: the masses, then the governments that extract the wealth from the masses, and then the beneficiaries of those systems of systematic wealth extraction. However, keep in mind the idea that the perfect holy empire has only one official priority: to promote equality.

Anyone who notices any instance of an empire promoting inequality should experience sudden and intense shame. Obviously, if there ever is an instance of inequity (probably in one of those bad nations far away from you that deserves to be invaded so as to save you from their evil), then any actual case of inequity is probably just an isolated case, right? We can identify which person (or which political party) destroyed the previously perfect record of our empire of coercion and deception and privilege. The idea that our empire has been imperialistic from the beginning is so ridiculous as to not deserve any further attention.

So, one may react hysterically (to noticing any instance of one’s own government promoting inequity). What is the reflexive response? By openly mentioning the “alleged” inequity, that citizen is subject to being ridiculed and ostracized within one’s existing social circles, and, if the empire itself actually notices the publicizing of shameful content, then perhaps the penalties imposed by the royal thugs will be much worse. (Of course, groups of hysterical anti-imperialist reformers can gather together in isolation from the mainstream hysterical herds, but that does not make their anti-imperialist hysteria any less hysterical.)
Also, propaganda is wrong and should not exist (especially in nations that we are programmed to identify as our enemies). Reverse psychology is especially shameful.

In summary, holy empires should promote equality and that is why they do. I know this because that slogan was repeated to me hundreds of time in educational programming and I received social validation for providing that answer on a test. So, that slogan is approved by the empire. Any commentaries that directly question any of our sacred slogans are heretical.

Furthermore, extortion is not just a label for unauthorized systems of taxation. A taxation system is not just an extortion racket that has effectively monopolized extortion within a certain geographic jurisdiction. Any ideas contrary to the interests of the empire are shameful.

Rejoice in the majesty and efficiency of our empire of coercion, privilege, and deception. Why? Because failure to do so with sufficient enthusiasm can result in severe penalties.

Moses did not send the Israelite army to slaughter ALMOST the entire Midianite ethnic group for no reason. The purpose was to evoke terror in all who would question the authority of the holy empire and the chosen representatives of God on earth. Woe unto those who fail to heed thousands of years of clear warnings.

Advertisements

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: