Maximum Advantage: Inevitable Deductions 9-12

9. On Inertia
Inertia is the natural resistance to change. In this thread, the concept will be applied to cultural phenomenon. Any force for change must overcome inertia for any hope of success. Appeals to the intellect are among the most worthless. Social theories mean nothing. None have been proven valid by history and experience. A new approach is required. The left has been rendered impotent. Being the first to suffer, the stupid fear the rational, and react accordingly. Only an idealist is surprised. The path of least resistance allows inertia its due, or rather the appearance. Of course, the world does change. One fine day usually rolls along when the reactionary is brought to terms with reality. For example, with the end of the Cold War, the extreme right had outlived its usefulness and found itself purged. Few Care. The silence is deafening. They deserve it. The price for any serious dissent beyond words is great. However, nothing is eternal. Preferring to bide their time, most serious opponents have fallen silent. Useless idealists, incapable of any real pragmatism, influence no one but each other. Inertia is not overcome by words...

10. On Circular Arguments
Circular arguments are analogous to mathematical proof by example. A counter-example will disprove such claims, but how rarely the human condition appears to follow the dictates of logic. People want to believe that which makes them comfortable with their place in the world. Very few intentionally agitate themselves by de-constructing society by mentally pulling it apart. Machinery cannot be ignored. All machines begin on paper. One must know the correct questions. Unfortunately, very few seem to possess the skills and abilities necessary. Paradoxically, intelligence has very little to do with deciding the challenge. Specialization, although easier, stunts necessary broad development even when the capability exists. How many actually have time to think above the racket, let alone concentrate? Over-stimulation blunts focus. Only an exhausted hollow mental shell remains, waiting to be filled by the opportunist using propaganda exploited to maximum advantage in all things.

11. On Sanity
Sanity is defined according to herd norms which necessarily vary according to the age, culture and society. Indeed many modern human would likely be judged insane by pre-industrial standards due to our obsession regarding time. Yet by present precepts, those older notions might appear counter to apparent survival instincts. A driver in heavy, fast traffic cannot always wait to act. Horses will refuse drunken commands, but an automobile has no more intelligence than a rock. Constant attention is required. The maladaptive appears to be relative. Even extremes may vary. Yesterday's mystic or bezerker is today's lunatic. Balance depends upon circumstances. The civilizing process stunts certain traits while promoting others. However, paradoxically, certain atavistic characteristics are occasionally called upon for survival or even the supposed benefit of society. A certain level of agitation is necessary to ensure these traits are not submerged too deeply. Unfortunately, the conflicting stimuli may drive some over the edge, resulting in simmering resentment and pointless violence. For those who feel the urge to snap, a certain hope may sustain them through the dark night. In its present form, our civilization is doomed. The time for revenge must wait. The official power structure must do everything in its power to convince us otherwise...

12. On Bifurcation
Opposition may always be blunted or even negated by division. Factional rifts are easily widened by exploiting petty rivalries. The lowest stakes are surprisingly effective in provoking conflict. Academia is a primary example. Ego should never be discounted. In many cases, the opportunist need only exploit the opposition's own actions for maximum advantage. Just give them enough rope to hang themselves by their contradictions. Meanwhile, a supposed desire to find common ground may be advocated to drive a wedge between moderate and extreme appositional elements. The divide and conquer approach destroys solidarity by weakening and even dissolving common bonds. Of course, such techniques may succeed beyond even the wishes of the opportunists by creating a climate of mistrust which will never allow unity even among allies. Another strategy is to seize upon the completely unrealistic dogma of the opposition in the supposed spirit of compromise. It may then be allowed to fail on its own accord, thereby diminishing the credibility of the opposition, and necessitating the opportunist to assume the reigns of control in mitigating the consequences. "We tried it your way, and you've failed, so now it's my turn..." Defeat always diminishes prestige and saps energy. This approach works especially well with idealists who have a greater tendency to become disillusioned by failure. By refusing to bend, these types are easily broken by reality. In fact, the opportunist may generally associate idealism with sheer stupidity, because the end result is the same. Idealists will nullify themselves by allowing them to pursue idiotic courses of action. Why oppose that which is doomed? Besides, the results are amusing. Idealistic appeals to myths like innate goodness and altruism will always fail. Only a tool believes in higher motivations. Any opposition will certainly split between idealists and more realistic elements once the failure of naive policy becomes glaringly evident. The realistic desire to at least salvage something. The opportunist may then throw out a few crumbs and imply that the opposition is lucky to receive even that much consideration. Although weakened, the only remaining danger will be from those unwilling to compromise in the slightest degree. These types may be vilified, thus driving the herd closer. Splits are so easy to engineer by less than ruthless means...