Opponents

Opponents are not necessarily playing the same game. Victory may have different meaning. Maximalism is a weakness to be exploited for maximum advantage. Set a trap before setting back.

Limits

Maximum Advantage represents limit upon thought and action. When every action must be justified by efficient gain, very little humanity remains in the process of decision making. Real choices disappear in favor of essentially predetermined response. Humanity is discarded; the culture becomes base and stagnated under general apathy. Society is poisoned by the cultural decadence "Decadence" spawned when the population, as a whole, becomes so disconnected that it no longer cares. Pointlessness rots the spirit all the quicker. Eventually, Things Fall Apart on their Own. Maximum Advantage can only be abandoned by letting go of intangibles. (Of what?)

On Circular Arguments

Circular arguments are analogous to mathematical proof by example.  A counter-example will logically disprove such claims, but it may not receive a balanced hearing.  The dictates of logic are rarely followed by the human condition.  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.  A damaged machine seems to be preferable to one that is known to be broken.  One can accommodate cultural fact, or pretend that logical appeals mean something to the majority.

Destruction

Destruction requires witnesses for the follow-up exploitation.

The Unpopular

In a mass media capitalist society, as often noted, the unpopular is unprofitable.  Niche markets exist, but the real money comes from mass appeal.  Unsurprisingly, mass appeal is not as important as mass tolerance.  Accepted backdrops, which develop into verbal worlds, are exploitable for Maximum Advantage in all Things.  As the same response is promoted on all occasions, by nature (or anti-nature if you prefer) all responses are reactive and mediocre.  Even fear may be stretched and strangled.  The latest terror alert ceases to have meaning.  One would think a failing propaganda campaign would cease in favor of a different tact.  It often does not.  Those caught in their own verbal world have abandoned reality.  Who is to say what is reality?  A kick in the teeth!

Stating the Obvious

Stating the obvious is often a destabilizing force greater than any actual event.

High-Tech Sociopaths

From Stars and Sewers:

Online anonymity has created what the computer scientist Jaron Lanier calls a “culture of sadism.” Some Yahoo comments were disgusting. “She got what she deserved,” one said. “This is what happens when dumb sexy female reporters want to make it about them.” Hillbilly Nation chimed in: “Should have been Katie.”

The “60 Minutes” story about Senator Scott Brown’s revelation that a camp counselor sexually abused him as a child drew harsh comments on the show’s Web site, many politically motivated.

Acupuncturegirl advised: “Scott, shut the hell up. You are gross.” Dutra1 noted: “OK, Scott, you get your free pity pills. Now examine the image you see in the mirror; is it a man?”

Evgeny Morozov, author of “The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom,” told me Twitter creates a false intimacy and can “bring out the worst in people. You’re straining after eyeballs, not big thoughts. So you go for the shallow, funny, contrarian or cynical.”

Nicholas Carr, author of “The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains,” says technology amplifies everything, good instincts and base. While technology is amoral, he said, our brains may be rewired in disturbing ways.

“Researchers say that we need to be quiet and attentive if we want to tap into our deeper emotions,” he said. “If we’re constantly interrupted and distracted, we kind of short-circuit our empathy. If you dampen empathy and you encourage the immediate expression of whatever is in your mind, you get a lot of nastiness that wouldn’t have occurred before.”

Leon Wieseltier, literary editor of The New Republic, recalled that when he started his online book review he forbade comments, wary of high-tech sociopaths.

“I’m not interested in having the sewer appear on my site,” he said. “Why would I engage with people digitally whom I would never engage with actually? Why does the technology exonerate the kind of foul expression that you would not tolerate anywhere else?”

Why indeed?

Technology is not amoral.  It is a machine morality.  The technical morality promotes efficiency above all else.  For example, omitted from the above op ed piece is any mention as to why a MSM organization would allow these posts to be placed on their site.  They could easily moderate.  If Internet trolls are so despicable, the why allow them to post in the first place?  The controversy attracts and holders readers, of course.  Hence the technical requirements of technological commercialism may only equate "good" with more eyeballs.  Although hardly a revelation, it is part of a pattern that imposes itself on the human technological society and culture.  Of course, humans are not machines, and therein lies the conflict.  Technological society may materially elevate.  As a result, expectations are raised and cannot be met.  Well being ceases to be a factor.  Survival instincts grow decadent.  One must grow hard against nothing.  Sociopaths lash out.  So might everyone else, but who really wants to be like a sociopath?

And the mass stays in line a little longer.

Maximum Advantage: Global Codes of Conduct

On Global Guerrillas, John Robb points out the following:

Globalization has brought about an age when the only tests used to judge anyone's behavior are:

• Does it make you money or its equivalent? The corollary is that the greater the amount of money acquired, the better the behavior is.

• Did you get away with it? This test is merely based on legal enforceability (were you caught in a place that matters) and the degree of punishment (will the punishment negate or exceed the benefit of the behavior). Morality, virtue, ethics, shame, actual legality, etc. aren't considered factors. 

Why is this so? It's the only set of behavioral tests that are globally portable. As in, we can't agree on anything at a global level except the minimal rules needed to interconnect (which is similar to how the Internet and the Web spread).

This is another example of the impact of the Technical Morality, where efficiency becomes the only consideration for guiding human behavior.  It may be explained by "global portability," but that says nothing about why it is considered acceptable in the first place.

School Reform = Nothing

When it comes to talk of educational reform (or any other for that matter), it pretty much is meaningless.  As pointed out in School reform's meager results:

The larger cause of failure is almost unmentionable: shrunken student motivation. Students, after all, have to do the work. If they aren't motivated, even capable teachers may fail.

Motivation comes from many sources: curiosity and ambition; parental expectations; the desire to get into a "good" college; inspiring or intimidating teachers; peer pressure. The unstated assumption of much school "reform" is that if students aren't motivated, it's mainly the fault of schools and teachers. The reality is that, as high schools have become more inclusive (in 1950, 40 percent of 17-year-olds had dropped out, compared with about 25 percent today) and adolescent culture has strengthened, the authority of teachers and schools has eroded. That applies more to high schools than to elementary schools, helping explain why early achievement gains evaporate.

Motivation is weak because more students (of all races and economic classes, let it be added) don't like school, don't work hard and don't do well. In a 2008 survey of public high school teachers, 21 percent judged student absenteeism a serious problem; 29 percent cited "student apathy." The goal of expanding "access" -- giving more students more years of schooling -- tends to lower educational standards. Michael Kirst, an emeritus education professor at Stanford, estimates that 60 percent of incoming community college students and 30 percent of freshmen at four-year colleges need remedial reading and math courses.

Against these realities, school "reform" rhetoric is blissfully evasive. It is often an exercise in extravagant expectations. Even if George W. Bush's No Child Left Behind program had been phenomenally successful (it wasn't), many thousands of children would have been left behind. Now Duncan routinely urges "a great teacher" in every classroom. That would be about 3.7 million "great" teachers -- a feat akin to having every college football team composed of all-Americans. With this sort of intellectual rigor, what school "reform" promises is more disillusion.

This ultimately stems from the fact that too many parents except the school systems to raise their kids for them.   There are other reasons beyond parental laziness.  For one thing, too many parents are forced to work rather than raise their kids.  It's difficult to motivate kids when both parents are exhausted from work.  (True, they could chose not to have kids but the world does not work that way.)  In addition, the U.S. as a whole has come to expect something for nothing, and education is no different.  In addition, due to the Technical Morality pervading every aspect of society, the only conceivable solutions are punishing teachers and principals, and/or throwing money at the problem in hopes it will go away.  No other way is conceivable.  As public policy dulls to the point where nonsense like the "great teacher" drivel quoted above actually is given credence, it's not surprising that school standards remain stagnant.  In other countries, where education is considered a privilege rather than a right, anyone spewing such garbage would not be taken seriously--even to mock.

For any so-called reform to work, what is needed is a reevaluation of values concerning eduction (and economics as well for that matter), and that is most certainly not going to take place in this Age of Mediocrity.  Like suicide, the "Something for Nothing" mentality is so much easier.  Actually attempting anything requiring intellectual rigor is beyond the products some call leaders and academicians.  A toxic environment nurtures stupidity at all levels.

Is Life Necessary

Is life necessary for the perception of time?

Does entropy happen?

Is entropy experienced?

Will a rock know itself?

Can concrete be abstract?

Discovery may abound, but do you really want to know?

Did you really think it would not be exploited?

Are the depths really worth the price?

Do all great things have a hollow core?

Sometimes a revolution is not worth the price?

Then again, what is?

Unity?  Please.

(I'll be moving and without internet for a time.)

Technological Mesmerization

Technological mesmerization is a useful tool for occultation of economic reality.  It can be especially useful in the generation of spectacle at the expense of those believing themselves to be a majority.  A minority within a minority may always focused upon in an effort to delegitimize the  offending cause or movement.  Kooks love the camera.  You can always find enough of some objectionable idiot to focus upon.  The news comment sections abound with it.  Laziness is easy.

Although often successful, and for that very reason is always exploited to Maximum Advantage in all Things, this approach degrades national cohesion by sowing long term divisiveness for long term gain.  As an end product, something is objectionable to someone, and society therefore writes itself off.  Fragmentation is a failed identity.  Even as it isolates further, people will try otherwise.  Crisis may create real change, but nothing else will.

Maximum Advantage is...

Maximum Advantage is doing everything the same.

Maximum Advantage: Exploiting Shame

The world is full of Chumps ripe for the picking...

I recently happened upon an Arizona Legal Studies discussion paper called Underwater and Not Walking Away: Shame, Fear and the Social Management of the Housing Crisis.  These emotional states are clearly being exploited to Maximum Advantage.   The Technical Morality manages crisis through reinforcement.  Being technical, its tools are inherently limited.  Efficiency is never total.  There is always some loss.

For managing crisis, simple themes are propagated.  Examples include:

• Things aren't really all that bad.  There are a lot worse places to live.  (Hence, we fall farther.)
• The economy has been bad before, but it will get better again.  It always does.  House prices will rise again.  Just stick it out.  You won't lose money if you don't sell.  (Even though you may not be able to maintain it.)
• We (whomever) are in control.  Everything is normal.  Do not panic.
• If you don't pay you bills your friends and neighbors won't be able to get a loan.
• Interest rates will go up if you don't pay your bills.*
• Capitalism is wonderful.**

Instilled notions may promote systemic stability, for a time, but repeated use blunts the effect.  Eventually even the dimmest will stop buying it.  Jobless and living on the street trumps the virtual world any day.  What will be the final crisis?

* Yes, I wrote this after paying my bills.
** Only communism is worse.  It was a feat, but they managed...

Ignorance and naivete offer very little choice.

Slopes and Poisons

From Wanted: Iconoclasts:

Historically, iconoclasm was an 8th-century Byzantine movement in opposition to the religious icons central to Orthodox worship. By smashing icons, the iconoclasts hoped to restore the purity of the church and focus religious belief on the spiritual - they appear to have had similar impulses to those that later inspired Martin Luther to revolt against the decadent Medici papacy. Their opponents, the "iconodules", did not just love images, they were regarded as enslaved to them.

(It's a concise definition.  Nice job.)

Unfortunately, in a mass society driven by its systemic necessities, iconoclasts will be media products.  They will therefore become formulaic and therefore only capable of appealing to the faithful.  Thus divisions are enforced and ghettos are created where none need exist.  Some slopes are steeper than others.

The article continues:

The US mortgage market is even more hopelessly compromised than it was a year ago, with the combination of the home-buyer tax credit and the Federal Housing Administration's lax requirements for only a 3% down-payment producing a new US$1 trillion pile of mortgages that appear to be toxic.

Other damaging policies that were improvised during the crisis are also still in place and show no signs of being reversed. Interest rates are still close to zero; indeed bank "window dressing" was reported on Friday to have driven interest rates on short-term Treasury bills to below zero. The monetary base was doubled in late 2008, a sharper increase than ever before in the history of the Federal Reserve, yet there is no sign of its decline, while the banking system's excess reserves pile up at over $1.2 trillion.

The above illustrates the danger inherent of stressing short term gain over long term considerations.  Resources are limited.  Pretend money only goes so far.  Eventually, after throwing one too many life lines, one runs out of rope.  Maximum Advantage would have it no other way.  And that is its poison.

Chumpfish Home Has Moved

Due to Yahoo Geocities imminent closure, Chumpfish Home has moved. Although I have not done so during (not to before) the move, I'm going to be updating and adding a few links in the next few weeks.

Meanwhile, I'll link to something that does not need to be updated (even if part have), here's the The Maximum Advantage Collection.

I don't aim to inspire...

Winning Hearts and Minds?

The video came to my attention a few years back. It is a US gunship attack video from Afghanistan in 2002 or so. In this type of war, where non-state forces fight state forces, sometimes referred to as 4th Generation Warfare (4GW), it's been said that the moral component of war is the most vital to win. Is so, then this is not the way to do so.

Download Video. (Includes an extra minute at the beginning that was cut to keep the blogger upload below 100 Mb.)

Intellectual Inbreeding: Achievetrons

The latest issue of Harper's has an article called Achievetrons by Lewis H. Lapham, which describes the consequences of intellectual inbreeding when influenced by Maximum Advantage. The resultant products all thing the same: Me First.

Excerpt:

It also illustrates The recommendation deserves to be ranked with the ones until recently in vogue at the Palm Beach Country Club among the members acquainted with the achievetron Bernie Madoff. For the past sixty years the deputies assigned to engineer the domestic and foreign policies of governments newly arriving in Washington have come outfitted with similar qualifications—firstclass schools, state-of-the-art networking, apprenticeship in a legislative body or a think tank—and for sixty years they have managed to weaken rather than strengthen the American democracy, ending their terms of office as objects of ridicule if not under threat of criminal arrest. The Harvard wunderkinds (a.k.a. “the best and the brightest”) who followed President John F. Kennedy into the White House in 1961 hung around the map tables long enough to point the country in the direction of the Vietnam War. Henry Kissinger, another Harvard prodigy, imparted to American statecraft the modus operandi of a Mafia cartel. The Reagan Administration imported its book of revelation from the University of Chicago’s School of Economics (“privatization” the watchword, “unfettered free market” the Christian name for Zeus) and by so doing set in motion what lately has come to be seen as a longrunning Ponzi scheme. Take into account the Ivy League’s contributions to the Bush Administration—Attorney General John Ashcroft (Yale), Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld (Princeton), director of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff (Harvard)—and I can imagine a doctoral thesis commissioned by the Kennedy School of Government and meant to determine which of the country’s leading institutions of higher
learning over the past fifty years has done the most damage to the health and happiness of the American people.

The higher educational system has sold itself to capitalist ideology (as opposed to ideas) and the military-industrial complex. Although the people and examples cited above hail from different academic backgrounds, the most corrupted reside in the intellectually bankrupt economics departments whose theories and models where large contributors to the looming financial disaster. As was the case with Marxists, these sort too readily believed their own B.S.* Science is not about building a model and calling it reality. Ideology has been mistaken for fact. A real science would recognize the inherent limitations in its models. Assumptions are not laws; their economics has none. Complexity has more potential for instability. Constraints almost always exist. Standing on the Earth's surface, one does not float up. Perhaps they forgot where they were? Achievetrons indeed.

As such, the "best and brightest" can be described thus:

1. In advertising law, best means as good as any other.
2. The brightest create by burning.
   

When these sort promise to "fix" something, expecting the worst is completely justified.

* (The initials are not coincidence.)

Addendum
From Hope latest victim of economy (Seattle PI):

"Right now, more than a crisis in mortgages or in housing, we have a crisis in confidence. That is the biggest problem in trying to analyze the current market," said James Stack, president of market research firm InvesTech Research in Whitefish, Mont. "You cannot analyze psychology."

The lights are on, but nobody's home...

Maximum Advantage in all Things: Bailout #2

Propaganda, as disseminated through the press, often seeks to convey unity and consensus, even where none exists. Scare tactics are also employed to sway the doubters.

More lies:

“This entire proposal is about benefiting the American people because today’s fragile financial system puts their economic well being at risk,” Mr. Paulson said. Without action, he added: “Americans’ personal savings and the ability of consumers and business to finance spending, investment and job creation are threatened.
-Link.

Yet, most Americans have no savings! The motivation is simple: the rich crooks certainly do want to unload their investments before the inevitable crash, and they want you to pay for it. And a stupid, distracted public will likely let them. This measure will buy some time (and a whole lot of Swiss Francs). Meanwhile everyone else pays to bailout piracy. In a service economy, as pointed out by Paul Craig Roberts and numerous others, little or no savings is to be expected. Also we learn from our crooked, lying, warmongering "Dear Leader" that looting the treasury is noble, and that we must rise above politics in doing so. It also appears the slimy, craven congress will go along with some changes. Meanwhile, everyone else gets to experience massive inflation or even hyperinflation. (Of course, the books are cooked to make inflation appear lower, and therefore keep wages low by lying with statistics. But that is another story.) One way or another, their system will fail. The only question is whom it will fall on. If it falls on you, just don't forget who pushed it down.

Maximum Advantage in all Things: Bailout #1

Now that the initial shock has worn...

This Bailout could never be possible were the US, as a technological nation (note: I do not say society), not beholden to the technical morality. Thieves are bailed out, because, we are rationalized, doing so would be worse. And who are we supposed to trust, at their lying word, but the very same politicians who enabled these crooks in the first place?!? It's a simple a looting of the Treasury, but we should be reassured that it could be worse! Traditional and/or opposing moralities would find the notion repugnant. Yet, Federal Government Officials and the big money press, see no shame as their moral framework is that of the hollow machine. Their precious system might fail quickly rather than slowly. Thus they retain their position at the expense of everyone else. In an alternate moral scheme, many responsible would see serious jail time, instead we see golden parachutes and big Federal Pensions. They have created their own anti-natural Verbal World, and may therefore be counted upon to almost always aspire to the greatest errors.

Probable Result:

The Moral Authority of the Federal system is truly bankrupt. A government that robs from its citizens to pay thieves has sunk below the level of a Kleptocracy into outright banditry. As a result, respect for the law will be eroded until it crumbles. Consequently, they destroy their legitimacy.

For robbing me, I can at least be consoled that they will suffer far worse in the end. (As long as I never kid myself that it will mean justice.)

Hopefully, I can spit at them as they lie in the gutter (and tell them to go get a Job).

See Also & Also.