An exploration of nonsense and acceptance.
This train of thought was sparked by something a friend had written (sadly, a post irretrievably lost), and this new term ‘red-pilling’.
(I’ll do that every now and then. It is important to stop and look beyond the immediate needs and newest stories, or the theorizing on what, when, who will happen next, and instead to explore some basics, to remain properly grounded. And when I do, I always realize I might be wrong, or miss other important points. But that is what the comment section is for.)
In that post, my friend had posited that human beings are status-seeking beings, and thus seek to achieve as high a social status as possible.
He he spoke of how there are master strategists, happy warriors, and great builders, albeit rare, and that the combination of those 3 in a single person was the rarest of the rare.
The tendency he observed is real: human nature does desire power, and they do seek to achieve high social status.
I will take a step deeper, and differentiate within that group a hierarchy, that gets sorted out naturally, like water sifts and sorts sediment based on its weight.
(This comes from looking at things through the eyes of an archaeologist: we tend to focus on the large temples, the forts, the palaces, build in stone for eternity. And we conclude all kinds of things based on that, all true. But often, we forget to look at the small wooden and earthen structures around those grand ruins: the homes of the common man, the workers, the poor even, and the added insight into a more complete picture. So I always try to take that step back when observing human effort and nature.)
As such, when my friend described those who hold power seek to attract and then keep subordinates, we see this sorting in action. Not all are power holders (of which there are fewer), there are those who are subordinates (of which, by necessity, there are more).
The sorting then results in this:
On top, the rarest of the rare: those who combine insight (strategic thinking), are happy (positive thinking is important) warriors (the drive and mental strength to see their goals through to the end), and are great builders (those who can see beyond themselves, beyond the ‘now’, and can inspire others).
Below, the rare: those who have strength in 1 or 2 of those areas.
And then lower, those who poses such insight, drive and inspiration in decreasing degree.
Some people are content to be a gardener, as an end in itself. They will never lead, they don’t even seek status, or riches beyond the peace and beauty of their garden. Others, also gardener, are restless, want to create, explore the possibilities of what is possible. And others, still, see it as means to status and recognition.
My main observation is that human nature also has a strong flock instinct still present. Our drive, as outlined in the above hierarchy, is determined by our skills and talents: people have a hard time dreaming beyond their understanding of self and reality.
You have those who seek to maintain and expand their power, and they use the desire for social status beyond what can be achieved on one’s own as the lure.
A simple minded person will not dream of righting great societal wrongs, or of building grand empires. His simple mind cannot even comprehend those concepts. His dreams and goals are much smaller (and thus, achievement and happiness are often closer in reach!). With added strength of mind or skill, new horizons are opened, whether they are reached for, or not.
Yet we see many still strive for social status first, almost frantically. People get in debt to buy that car, to go on that prestigious vacation, to buy certain clothes and jewels. The newest technology. Why do they strive for such social status and station in life well beyond their means and ability? This is, really, rather nonsensical.
Here is where that flock instinct kicks in: we want to be acknowledged by others, we want at least to be accepted by those with social statuses higher than ours. This could be locally: we want to be seen and approved of by the popular kid in school. Or by the successful person in our business circles.
This could be aimed at acceptance by others much further up: media stars, sports stars, the famous and the rich. That is a concept known as ‘the inner circle’.
The impact of this concept varies widely, depending on the group.
For many it is a defense mechanism. They don’t want to feel powerless, so when an idea presents itself that claims ‘hidden knowledge’, and invites them into that ‘inner circle’, they jump on that chance to leave the rat race, the rabble, and to become ‘someone’. A free-thinker, one who knows how things actually are.
For others, their ‘inner circle’ is what makes them feel better, a way to silence that nudging sense of hypocrisy deep within.
Others, still, see it analytically, and use it as offensively, actively, a stepladder to achieve influence and power.
But a constant in this concept is that people who left the rabble to join the inner circle, will always start feeling small again within that inner circle, and seek out the new inner circle within that previous inner circle.
Now, this can become a descent into madness, or an ascent into actual inner circles that don’t just accumulate ‘knowledge’, but also influence.
This influence can consist of actual knowledge, such as the media (granted, ‘actual knowledge’ at least in theory, or as it should be), or of perceived knowledge, such as flat-earthers (often misapplication of true information, based on a complete lack of proper framework/background knowledge allowing to understand that bit of info).
And this influence can grow based on the reach an inner circle gets.
Once the level of influence reaches a certain spot that begins to constitute ‘power’, a myriad of other human tendencies come into play, reinforcing this inner circle selection. One of those presents as that idea that only the inner circle can be trusted to make the decisions for the group, further separating the inner from the outer circle.
The inner circles that have actual influence and power usually are constructed by those already possessing influence and power, only occasionally does one grow through from the bottom, such as Zuckerberg, who was on the ‘inner circle’ of Facebook, which grew in influence through the increase in users, and then, through the accumulation of information (from the users), influence or control (through the vast number of users), came also into power (info + influence + money).
Since people like Zuckerberg are now on the ‘inner circle’, high up in that cascade of inner circles, they now believe that they are special, and should use their power and influence and knowledge to steer not only their own lives, but that of others.
Now, that is the negative take: people can also strive to use their position to actually help (and often, this distinction is in the eye of the beholder. Simply put: to your friends you are strong-willed, to you enemies you are plain stubborn. What is the difference, really?). Being in an inner circle is thus not an intrinsic negative.
My point, in all this, is simply to shed some light on this mechanism that brings people to believe what some at times would call very wild ideas. They want to be in the inner circle, ‘in the know’, and increase their self-respect and sense of worth. This is a very potent drug…
Understanding others, and ourselves, is always useful. It can help to see how others, however damaging their claims might be, or even their actions, are not the enemy, but misguided.
Then again, the misguided masses, the useful idiots, as all those that carried out the revolutions of history, are still the enemy, and still to be neutralized or freed.
This desire to be part of the inner circle is a very strong desire, as well. Being ostracized is worse than a death penalty.
This brings the realization that many of those who become ‘subordinate’, in whichever degree, do so out of the strong desire to conform, to be part of the group, the inner circle. To be ‘accepted’ and ‘acknowledged’. Seeking a higher social status is but one way that is expressed (as an active expression of human nature), fear of exclusion or dishonor/embarrassment is another (as a more passive expression).
Besides the material things that are coveted in this drive towards social acceptence, there are also the immaterial things we say or think or give up on. Ideas, positions, support or attack this or that group,…
Why else would one accept as true what his eyes can clearly see as wrong? It brings us back to the fairy-tale of The Emperor’s New Clothes (by HC Andersen). Why did the courtiers, and the emperor, dare not call out the weaver for his obvious fraud?
“Because the swindlers had told they were weavers, and they said they could weave the most magnificent fabrics imaginable. Not only were their colors and patterns uncommonly fine, but clothes made of this cloth had a wonderful way of becoming invisible to anyone who was unfit for his office, or who was unusually stupid.”
It feeds on our pride, in essence, whatever form that takes for any given individual. Which points to the antidote: humility.
Today, the new clothes are invisible to those who are not woke, or unusually bigoted or hateful. You see a biological male MMA fighter fracturing the skull of his biologically female opponent in an official match, but you have to tell yourself, and others, that you just saw two women fight. Because, you know, you cannot be seen as a transphobic/sexist bigot, now can you?
Or very recent in our memories: we have to wear masks to be allowed inside a restaurant, but can take it off when we sit down. And put it back on when we stand up to go to the restroom. We all know, right, that the virus only attacks us when we stand around each other, and not when we sit?
Or when churches were limited to 10 people in attendance, regardless the size of the building. So you could have a large cathedral, and 10 people spread out inside, for the 1 hr or so the service would last. With masks, of course. Yet it was allowed to sit shoulder to shoulder with hundreds in a metal tube for hours on end, in airplanes! But you kept your tongue, as you surely didn’t want granny to die!
This is nonsense, and it is highly effective because it plays to our desire to be accepted and acknowledged. The emperor, his courtiers, even the townspeople all fell for the swindle. This is not just about social class or status, or level of wealth or intelligence or education. None wanted to be seen as stupid or inept, whichever status or group they were in.
Now, the idea of nonsense, as a loyalty test, is profound. It disconnects the subordinate from their own roots, rationality and even morality, to become a blank slate where obedience and loyalty is valued higher than individuality, truth or integrity. This test is applied subconsciously in some cases, but in others, as a very deliberate tactic.
After all: it IS a very powerful deprogramming tool.
Look at the book “That Hideous Strenght” by CS Lewis, from his Space Trilogy.
In it, the main character Mark is being groomed to become member of N.I.C.E., a group that seeks to transcends humanity and has sinister plans. As part of his training, he is led to a room that is just ‘off’: a door with an arch that is just off center, dots on the ceiling that suggest a pattern, but are random, paintings that betray expectation, etc.
In the conversation with Frost, his trainer, we hear the following:
“And that,” continued Frost, “is why a systematic training in objectivity must be given to you. Its purpose is to eliminate from your mind one by one the things you have hitherto regarded as grounds for action. It is like killing a nerve. That whole system of instinctive preferences, whatever ethical, æsthetic, or logical disguise they wear, is to be simply destroyed.”
But after a while, it had the opposite effect on Mark:
“He understood the whole business now. Frost was not trying to make him insane: at least not in the sense Mark had hitherto given to the word “insanity”. Frost had meant what he said. To sit in the room was the first step towards what Frost called objectivity — the process whereby all specifically human reactions were killed in a man so that he might become fit for the fastidious society of the Macrobes.”
He realized this: “As the desert first teaches men to love water, or as absence first reveals affection, there rose up against this background of the sour and the crooked some kind of vision of the sweet and the straight. Something else — something he vaguely called the “Normal” — apparently existed”
And a last quote: “And day by day, as the process went on, that idea of the Straight or the Normal which had occurred to him during his first visit to this room, grew stronger and more solid in his mind till it had become a kind of mountain.”
We have this point where we make that choice: accept the lie, the nonsense, or not. We might have gone along with it, but this choice is made the moment we become aware of what is going on. When we did or did not dismiss a nagging unease with something we heard or saw. One might have supported transgender ideology out of an honest desire to be kind and to do good. But the moment it is realized where that leads to, a choice must be made.
For many of us, the elections and the surrounding events (media censorship, overreach by DNC and Biden administration, the whole Covid, jab and mask madness, etc.) has been such awakening point, making us realize something is ‘off’.
We have to realize and accept that this point of awareness is different for each of us, and allow others to come to terms with that question, so they can make their own decision: accept the nonsense, or reject it, and embrace what they knew to be good and true and undivided (unity: an understanding that things have a positive perfection, and not simply a negation of division).
Very importantly, we also have to accept that realizing the nonsense on one point, doesn’t mean that EVERY instance of what we consider nonsense will also be realized. We OURSELVES might still be caught up in some sort of lie or nonsense idea. And on top of that, there are actual honest disagreements that do NOT fit in this ‘nonsense’ category.
Yet very often I see people attack others when they don’t toe the line 100%. As if complete conformity in ideas and beliefs is the only acceptable outcome!
Such 100% identical agreement with me, is only possible if everyone became exactly like me! But even then, which version of me? Todays? Or last weeks, when I hadn’t realized or learned or given up certain things yet? Or tomorrows, when perhaps I’d fall for a clever argument and get mislead? Or think about this: put me in a room with 10 ArnGrimRs, 10 clones of me, and we’d still argue over at least 12 different answers to the same question! (That contrarian urge to be different and unique, too, is a rather intrinsic human tendency as well, if we’re honest with ourselves.)
A network of wise and good leaders can only be effective if sufficient numbers of the rest of the people have made that right choice: embracing the bonum, verum, unum, instead of the nonsense (if not, they need to work to inspire others to make that choice! And notice: inspire, not ‘convert’ or ‘force’ them, as we can’t and shouldn’t).
We don’t all need to aspire to be leaders on the grander scale of things, in some next level inner circle, but each of us should aspire to live a life of truth, of goodness, of unity, of beauty, and lead at least in the circles we are in.
And that would be, for each of us, a very worthy and honorable cause to live for, with an attractive force that would be a red-pill on its own. Sometimes, it is not about ‘what’ we say, but simply ‘how’ we live.
With this, I am not saying we shouldn’t spread truth and proper insight to others. Far from it. Big moments of truth are coming, 2000 Mules seems to be the first to arrive, for example. At some point, that kid needs to start laughing and yell how naked the emperor actually is. And others need to join in the derision and mockery of the nonsense. Absolutely necessary.
But do we want to have others join is because it is the next new group they want to be ‘in’ on, or because they really saw just how stark naked and ugly the emperor they had followed actually is? Short term, it doesn’t matter. But long term? To actually rebuild America, and prevent the last few years from being repeated in the near future, we need people awake, not just following us or Trump or whomever.
Think about this, and find, person by person as you engage with them, that fine line between bringing the info they need, knowing when to openly mock or when to quietly point at an inconsistency (or that sneaky question that undermines their peace of mind), and giving them the time and space to come to that discovery and make that their own.
So they don’t become followers of the newest fad, but active participants, wide awake, with their own stake in the future of their country they are helping to rebuild, each in their own life and reach.
All is well.
A most excellent read! Teenagers should be required to read annually this to realize "peer pressure" is kayfabe!
Even adults need to realize sometimes it's better to be on your own than around people that are doing you harm.
It was the same with the cliques in my elementary school and high school. Though pretty upset when I was in middle school, by high school had little use for them.