Maximum Advantage: Inevitable Deductions 1-4

1. On Law
Law exists for protection, restraint and settling disputes. Its implementation is dependant upon a system composed of many separate institutions and individuals all collaborating with the common purpose of maintaining its unquestionable legitimacy. Justice is besides the point. No other possible alternative is even conceivable. Morality and ethics alone are incapable of restraining a mass society. Consumerism does not promote loyalty. All individuals are isolated from society to varying degrees, yet always tuned in to something, and influenceable due to their lack of appropriate references. Sometimes surreal, the endless media barrage penetrates even the thickest skulls. Rather than assaulted, the will is worn down. Radicalism is damped in favor of safer approaches. Violence becomes merely destructive with no appreciation of its cleansing potential. Life is too secure and comfortable. Real revolutionary tendencies will not emerge. Empty rhetoric is all that remains. Fat and stupid, the Western intelligencia blabbers on about nothing. Meanwhile, lacking direction, the lower social stratas will simply eat themselves rather than actually pose a direct threat to the power structure. The growing prison population is evidence of this assertion. Note those conspicuously absent from its ranks... This indicates where the true threat lies. Only an idiot would assert otherwise. The anti-establishment intellectual community invested too much prestige in authoritarian Marxist doctrine. The resultant void has yet to be filled. Lacking direction, revolution and upheaval have proven to be atavistic, at best, or extremely reactionary, at worst, taking such forms as religious fundamentalism. Only clueless idealists currently look forward. Based on a reality which doesn't exist, their useless babble is discredited even before it leaves their pens and mouths. Completely harmless, one could expect no less of idiot-intellectuals. The only real danger is believing their bullshit. Witness the complete lack of empathy or focus toward the working proletariat by the environmental movement. Labor is the backbone of industry and society. Nobody respects spoiled whiny children incapable of connecting with the vast international working classes and lumpen-proletariat. In a true revolution, these sort would prove easy targets and be the first against the wall. Their ideals and ideas mean nothing in a world beyond such things. Only the coldly pragmatic, exploited for maximum advantage, means anything. Laws were made to be ignored, not petitioned against through their own avenues of propagation by professionals who are part of the loyal opposition. Until realizing otherwise, no true anti-capitalist ideology will ever emerge to direct and provide a moral authority, leaving only reactionary violence (in the broadest sense) as an alternative. Pacifism is dead, but the alternative need not be mindless. There are two 'asses' in assassination. Unfortunately, the intelligencia provides no alternative. Even while espousing otherwise for maximum advantage, the opportunist would be ill-advised not to take its obsolescence seriously. The threat has neutralized itself. Hence, the opponent should not even bother. Their war will not be fought on this front.

2. On Science
Science has many definitions and meanings. It creates pure power. Given the will, technological superiority wins wars and establishes empires. Interpreting the meanings and ramifications of scientific advancement is another kind of power. Modern physics has shattered the myth of the neutral observer. Scientific debate occurs upon both the intellectual and emotional planes. Human interests and concerns will necessarily intrude upon any discussion regarding scientific achievement. Even a flawed theory will find adherents based on convictions and perhaps even the pride of its founders. Even discarded theories may be revived in an attempt to salvage one or its more components for non-scientific reasons. In fact, the adherent might be at least partially correct, but their motivations are hardly scientific. Drive is never dispassionate or unclouded by human emotion. Of course, the general lay public need not be aware of the details in its assigned role as passive observers. Many defense contractors have made billions of dollars by playing upon scientific ignorance and the fear engendered by all means necessary. Deliberate stereotypes, like mad-Arabs with nukes, are exploited for maximum advantage to justify the developments of defense systems which are technically unfeasible, like the Strategic Defense Initiative.[1] They have seen it on the movie screen... Hence, the populace and ignorant elected officials bleat their acceptance and acquiesce to wasted resources. The herd will believe anything spoken in the scientific or technical tongue. Misconceptions and ignorance may always be manipulated by pseudo-science. Interestingly, this authority appears to extend toward other concerns, some not even remotely scientific. Experts may always be trotted out. A string of initials after a name has some sort of mystical weight among the populace. Capable of being bought, the scientist makes an excellent mouthpiece for spewing garbage. The tobacco industry proves this assertion.
[1]Many Articles have been written in Scientific American supporting the view that SDI is unfeasible and easily circumvented. Our stupid political leaders would rather believe their propaganda concerning American technical invincibility. Money breeds ignorance.

3. On Leaders and Followers
Despite our social nature, a tendency exists for the individual to desire his or her own way, even at the detriment of others. The fittest must survive. The entire civilizing process suppresses this inclination. Differences between individuals eventually leads to societal divisions. In turn, those on the higher tiers encourage still more segmentation. The strong enjoyed advantages over the weak but still needed them for mutual survival, or so it appeared (which amounts to the same thing). Eventually, the reality of a pecking order became dogma. The only remaining disputes concern the arrangement. The entire system is taken as a given. The existence of leaders and followers is questioned by so few, that the remainder is an irrelevant curiosity exploitable to maximum advantage as a threat to order. The present age is culminating in an end with increasing categorization and ever narrowing specialization. The hangman's noose tightens. Definitions are beyond any order of rank. However, the propagandist must portray otherwise. Even in the face of increasing cynicism, enough believe in the necessity of leaders and even systems. Social conditioning is strong. In addition, a desire for possessions has been instilled thus requiring longer working hours to pay the bills and debts incurred. The populace is too busy to question. Behind superficial reform, idle musings are all that remains. Depending on prestige, various roles are more esteemed. Hence, we have presidents who won't take a crap without consulting an opinion poll. The legislative branch is as hogs at the trough. Hands tied by law, only the judiciary remains. The old virtues are extinguished. The hollow appears solid. Very few would (or could) admit their entire lives a lie. Reinforced by society, the top classes believe the loudest mouths. In capitalist countries, money is the only power. Inflation is a disease. The rich do not often fight their own wars. The workers of the world will never unite. Herd instincts are forceful. The will to follow is greater than the will to power. Propaganda reinforces this relationship. The reality is challengeable but indisputable. The idea never seems to fade away. Economics is the base myth of our society. Following is the reality of our civilization. One might be tempted to ponder where the line ends...

4. On Money and Economics
Money has always represented the exchange of wealth and a symbol of power. A worthless wealthy inbred is held in higher esteem over a strong, intelligent but poor man. The standards have changed. Once money was a more concrete concept. A coin was worth its value as a metal. Later, script represented reserves of precious metals. However, the impulse to print excess paper money eventually made it necessary for a divorce from reality. The gold standard was dropped. Based on a mix of production and perception, money represented national clout. At least in theory, this allows economic stability to be better maintained and controlled. Unfortunately, this situation means none comprehend the actual state of the economy. Its mechanism are too complex. As a physicist, I have always found it amusing when economists claim their mumbo-jumbo a science. It reminds me of alchemy. Saying a material body may move faster than the speed of light does not make it so, but the equivalent seems to be possible in economics. It would be amusing if it did not impact the world in such an invasive manner. Economists have promoted a con job. Different forms of economic schema under broad classifications are made equivalent. The resulting perception is an unbroken progression rather than a series of highs and lows, necessitating alterations which somehow are accepted as natural. Today's capitalism has very little in common with the same moniker fifty years ago. Market Capitalism represents the greatest achievement and triumph of modern propaganda, and never would have been possible were it not developed in response to competing systems. In a sense, state capitalism, based on Marxist-Leninist philosophy, created the present situation by its inability to compete. Some economic systems are more anti-natural than others. Future generations will marvel and shudder at our memory, but understand it could have been worse. At present, the opportunist would be ill advised to swim against such an over-powering current, but this will change. Damage control and mitigation need only fail once... In this environment, an economic downfall might prove a disaster. Currently, the perceived value of many products is completely disproportionate to actual worth, resulting in a very real skewing in the world economy. The sneaker industry proves this point. The waste is not sustainable. Only an idiot believes otherwise. Absolutely none comprehend the extent. Interpretations skew perception. Propaganda utilizes the most favorable point-of-view and interpretations of data to promote stability in these economic systems. However, the good times are not going to continue indefinitely. Economic faith is not religious faith despite the similarities. The bill will come due. Eventually, a systemic correction must occur. The rug may be pulled out too quickly. If another Great Depression were to occur, the populace would be unlikely to pull together as was done prior to World War II. If systemic failure occurs (and no one knows if it will or when), both opponent and opportunist must seize the moment to maximum advantage. The technical morality will still be respected. Clout must be seized. Unity is power. The propagandist must be flexible, and never become emotionally invested in any system, lest a bad horse be backed for sentimental reasons. Of course, most will make this mistake...

The Unibomber Manifesto 1-32

This feature will periodically post a portion of all 230 Paragraphs and footnotes.
For the record, I do not endorse his methods. His attempt at propaganda by the deed was bizarre. However, attributable to the publication of his work, he is a second tier Master of Propaganda. Others have followed his lead. Unlike a religious fanatic, he has made people think. Although relatively extreme, his cause is sympathetic. Only a CHUMP wants to destroy the environment.
-SRL

INTRODUCTION

1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in "advanced" countries.
2. The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy.
3. If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later.
4. We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system. This revolution may or may not make use of violence: it may be sudden or it may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. We can't predict any of that. But we do outline in a very general way the measures that those who hate the industrial system should take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against that form of society. This is not to be a POLITICAL revolution. Its object will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis of the present society.
5. In this article we give attention to only some of the negative developments that have grown out of the industrial-technological system. Other such developments we mention only briefly or ignore altogether. This does not mean that we regard these other developments as unimportant. For practical reasons we have to confine our discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which we have something new to say. For example, since there are well-developed environmental and wilderness movements, we have written very little about environmental degradation or the destruction of wild nature, even though we consider these to be highly important.

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM
6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.
7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by "leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)
8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th century.
9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.

FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY
10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strictest sense but a whole spectrum of related traits: low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.
11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights advocates have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftist anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)
12. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual, white males from middle-class families.
13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals), or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit it to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not suggest that women, Indians, etc., ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology).
14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.
15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.
16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative", "enterprise," "optimism," etc. play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.
17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftist intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.
18. Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly.
19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. [1] But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.
20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait.
21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principle, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred.
22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.
23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.

OVERSOCIALIZATION
24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are over-socialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem.
25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use the term "oversocialized" to describe such people. [2]
26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feel ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of HIMSELF. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized person are more restricted by society's expectations than are those of the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty thefts, they break traffic laws, they goof off at work, they hate someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded trick to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do these things, or if he does do them he generates in himself a sense of shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to confirm to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that oversocialization is among the more serious cruelties that human beings inflict on one another.
27. We argue that a very important and influential segment of the modern left is oversocialized and that their oversocialization is of great importance in determining the direction of modern leftism. Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or members of the upper-middle class. Notice that university intellectuals (3) constitute the most highly socialized segment of our society and also the most left-wing segment.
28. The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists are NOT in conflict with the accepted morality. On the contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle. Examples: racial equality, equality of the sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression, kindness to animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. All these have been deeply rooted values of our society (or at least of its middle and upper classes (4) for a long time. These values are explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the material presented to us by the mainstream communications media and the educational system. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, usually do not rebel against these principles but justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some degree of truth) that society is not living up to these principles.
29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion against it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools; the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African American culture consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque. In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In all ESSENTIAL respects more leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are as good as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible." they want black gangs to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial-technological system. The system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it, the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him adopt its values.
30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.
31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumb-nail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism.
32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our society as a whole. Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society. And today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent than any previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to exercise, how to make love, how to raise our kids and so forth.

1. (Paragraph 19) We are asserting that ALL, or even most, bullies and ruthless competitors suffer from feelings of inferiority.
2. (Paragraph 25) During the Victorian period many oversocialized people suffered from serious psychological problems as a result of repressing or trying to repress their sexual feelings. Freud apparently based his theories on people of this type. Today the focus of socialization has shifted from sex to aggression.
3. (Paragraph 27) Not necessarily including specialists in engineering "hard" sciences.
4. (Paragraph 28) There are many individuals of the middle and upper classes who resist some of these values, but usually their resistance is more or less covert. Such resistance appears in the mass media only to a very limited extent. The main thrust of propaganda in our society is in favor of the stated values.
The main reasons why these values have become, so to speak, the official values of our society is that they are useful to the industrial system. Violence is discouraged because it disrupts the functioning of the system. Racism is discouraged because ethnic conflicts also disrupt the system, and discrimination wastes the talent of minority-group members who could be useful to the system. Poverty must be "cured" because the underclass causes problems for the system and contact with the underclass lowers the moral of the other classes. Women are encouraged to have careers because their talents are useful to the system and, more importantly because by having regular jobs women become better integrated into the system and tied directly to it rather than to their families. This helps to weaken family solidarity. (The leaders of the system say they want to strengthen the family, but they really mean is that they want the family to serve as an effective tool for socializing children in accord with the needs of the system. We argue in paragraphs 51,52 that the system cannot afford to let the family or other small-scale social groups be strong or autonomous.)

Concerning Character and Archetypal Behavior Patterns (Part 4)

8. The Archetypal Politician:
The Archetypal Politician, not always a professional politician or lawyer, is a mindset concerned with power and influence. However, as opposed to an opportunist, the Politician genuinely possesses convictions and principles. Indeed, the Archetypal Politician would be ineffective without internal justification. The Politician really believes in the system and the policies advocated and formulated. Wielding power is less important than its implementation. The Politician understands the herd mentality and understands it may only be pushed so far before bucking. The Politician understands the mechanisms of debate and therefore takes nothing personally or to heart. The resulting argument and rhetoric may be quite clever and serves as the building block for propaganda. Hence, the Archetypal Politician will often appear as shallow extroverts to those who are not familiar with the resultant mentality. The Archetypal Politician is the product of two centuries of political technique. Certain types are more masterful at its intrigues. It beats fanaticism...

9. The Survivor Archetype:
Although superficially similar to other archetypes, the Survivor Archetype has lived through tragic or traumatic circumstances and found strength in it. The will to self-preservation is strong in these types and may withstand adversities which would kill or emotionally cripple others. The Survivor Archetypes thrives on struggle, and often finds security as stagnant and stifling. Hence, the Survivor will often seek out risk rather than be contented with having hitherto survived. The Survivor Archetypes are both heros and victims. The Survivor is a product.

10. On Professional Archetypes:
Occupations and professions mold archetypal behavior patterns. Below are six brief observations.
i. The Archetypal Doctor is a modern manifestation of behavior patterns probably first exhibited by tribal shamans or medicine men. The Archetypal Doctor is an applied scientist who is looked upon as all-wise. The profession confers mystique (from directly saving lives). The result is an inflation of the ego. Hence, The Archetypal Doctor has the farthest to fall.
ii. The Teacher Archetype enjoys being looked up to as the repository and conveyor of knowledge. The ability to influence other minds can be rewarding. On the other hand, sub-categories exist depending upon the level taught. Elementary through Secondary School Teachers largely enjoy their authority. College professors prefer their status as experts. All enjoy seeing the lights are on. However, many Archetypal Teachers do suffer from some degree of myopia concerning the world. The map is not the territory.
iii. The Scientist Archetype is illustrated elsewhere.
iv. The Archetypal Engineer is a variation of the Scientific Archetype, but focused toward applications. Knowledge is not interesting unto itself. Engineers are masters of technique. Hence, the paperwork...
v. Archetypal Police and Criminals are difficult types to differentiate. Obvious contact vectors create cross infection. They stare with the same eyes and sometimes act no differently. Both look upon one another and think, "There, for the grace of Fate, go I..." However, their motivations are polar opposites. Cops have a mission. Yet all crave respect, believing it innate, even when not deserved. Intelligent police and criminals (those which do not get caught) are not this archetype.
vi. This discussion will avoid bill collectors.
vii. The Archetypal Computer Nerd is just too easy.

10. Of Criminals and Genius:
The intelligent criminal element respects genius since it spawns aberration. Genius exists in many forms. The uncertain is fearful and easy to exploit. Hence, organized criminal drug sales pay off for everyone, compared to unorganized turf wars, except possibly the victims. Profit may be had by both authority and their criminal adversary, and the neighbors are left alone. Capitalism has to exist somewhere. The police are happy as long as all is quiet. Some even control it. It beats un-organized crime. Nobody likes armed lunatics. Provided the residents are left alone, they come to expect it. The alternative is worse. Hence, the drug war continues. Hence, society is said to progress. Pure genius, if any one person defined it. Mass media influences and popular culture unifies through mediocrity. The lowest-common denominator ascends. Archetypes are spread through the resultant contact vectors. Only blandness remains. The personality solidifies with practice and technique. Pure genius, if anyone could conspire to make it happen. No wonder true genius is dead even as the populace grows sharper. The collective herd mentality submerges everything. What allows the passive reaction and effect? The morality of maximum advantage makes all things possible. Some paths are just unlikely. Mediocrity is causal. How could it be any other way? Luckily, understanding the underlying value system allows avenues of attack to be identified. Revolutions can be bloodless.

1996 - January 1, 2001

Concerning Character and Archetypal Behavior Patterns (Part 3)

5. The Modern Intellectual Archetype:
Although certainly a higher order of rank than those cases discussed above, the establishment produced Modern Intellectual Archetype still rarely exceeds the mediocre. The occasional insight is built upon unto exhaustion. Therefore, the following rhetoric is best ignored. As a result, the Modern Intellectual generally finds no public. The cliche dead horse is beaten excessively, ground into meat, consumed and defecated. This archetype is a primary victim of the establishment trend toward over-specialization. Rather than knowing the time to quit, the Modern Intellectual Archetype has been reinforced by stimuli and university employment. Past accomplishments are the currency upon which the Modern Intellectual subject banks, hence living vicariously on his own product rather than advancing beyond. Their ego would deflate without continual support and affirmation. Although not always affected, the Modern Intellectual Archetype is the most propagandized as a by-product of exposure necessary for presenting their product. The vector is transmitted by handling the infected media, and no vaccine will prevent it. The shear level of contact makes susceptibility inevitable. The Modern Intellectual Archetype will deny it. Although their verbal world does have a few cracks which afford some light, engrossed by self-importance, the Modern Intellectual Archetype will fail to even notice their enclosure. Their egos are a prime obstacle against accomplishing much anytime soon. The Modern Intellectual Archetype is a pale shadow. The once-threatening is now a matter for sad laughter. Preconceptions and arrogance have withered their senses. This elite class will pretty much swallow anything deep, regardless of content. Only the disagreeable is questioned. At least, the Modern American Idiot knows its own individual inferiority. The Modern Intellectual runs toward the opposite extreme. The Modern Intellectual absorbingly calls it his own through rationalization or objects through backlash mechanisms. The Modern Intellectual personally identifies with causes and issues outside their actual experience. Although far better substantiated than the inferior Idiot Intellectual, the Modern Intellectual must always have an opinion. Context is everything, but understanding suffers.
Perhaps the Modern Intellectual Archetype understands its own stupidity the least by failing to embrace it. The sublime creates; the Modern Intellectual absorbs like a sponge; bottom-feeding Idiots scoop the crumbs and devour the remains. The Modern Intellectual Archetype is hampered by its own idealism which simplifies the world through making it difficult. Their personalities intertwine with the abstract concepts inherent in unreal worlds. Discarding the ideals would render these little emperors naked. Otherwise, the Modern Intellectual Archetype must better learn to be small and satisfied with this lot. Unfortunately, their egos will not be easily circumvented, rendering the intelligencia impotent. The anti-natural will never produce life, because it denies or becomes completely blind to natural requirement. The best Modern Intellectual Archetype subjects can hope to achieve are moral victories which mean nothing. Their ideologies are inept. The Modern Intellectual has no choice, except stagnation or ceasing to be.
The Modern Intellectual is a lesser symptom of decay than their Idiot kin, but their failures are more tragic because some truly inherent qualities exist. Despite pretenses, all their intellectualism points toward the same direction. The subject deliberately latches onto an archetypal identity by accepting constraints. This archetypes is an anti-natural by-product of a decadent environment for almost all believe strongly in the myths of progress and freedom.

6. The Backlash Archetype:
A generalized condition, this archetype may apply to many different personality types. Basically, the binding characteristic is a rejection of the status quo and any of its manifestations and representations. Alienated from the greater culture and society, many feel themselves prisoners. Having found little or nothing in their realities to sustain them, some move toward decadent or nihilistic extremes. Others fight. The Backlash Archetype is not just a pose. Simmering resentment is often unarticulated. External manifestations vary from artistic expression to the destructive. Usually, when internalized, the backlash sentiments produce depressive effects. The Backlash Archetype is identification with the mentality of rejection. Revenge is the motivator.

7. The Fanatic Archetype:
The Fanatic Archetype is highly impressionable, perhaps borderline-pathological, possibly paranoid, but still functional. The Fanatic Archetype has seized upon a religious, political cause or notion with excessive and obsessive zeal. Unless driven by vengeance, the Fanatic Archetype has a higher calling and often suffers from some inadequacy that is better ignored. The Fanatic Archetype lacks doubt. Their hatred is virtuous. Heretics are always more detested over simple non-believers. At best, the Fanatic Archetype is myopic to reality, and at worst blinded by their own light. This archetype is best avoided. The Fanatic is dangerous.

Concerning Character and Archetypal Behavior Patterns (Part 2)

3. On Censorship and Artists:
The greatest artists, those whose work may be regarded sublimely, develop their art from internal passion developed by life experiences and influences. Suffering often plays a large, if not exclusive role. Their art proves interesting and inspires, because these artists left behind a piece of their personalities. Lesser creators are artisans and craftsmen, whose technical abilities may even be superior--yet something is still lacking in comparison. Craft work is functional and should not be disparaged. Skill may abound, and should be respected. However, it rarely leads to the sublime. The raw can be very powerful. The evoked emotions may be the prime element, and therefore undefinable. A scream moves through more than mere noise. Great shocks generally occur but once. Their repetition reduces their impact to a lowest common denominator status, and eventually rendered affectively meaningless. A boundary envelope may only be pushed outward once. All too often bubbles becomes filled by imitators with no new vision. The next challengers will often be repressed by the incapable, and therefore effectively censored. Unity is the bad part of the artistic community. Mediocrity flourishes. Their decadence dulls. Their leisure class pretensions produces nothing but pampered idleness. (What else can be expected from veal?) People who know nothing, speak nothing, and certainly think nothing are the worthless product of their environment. Only idiots would try to vindicate their useless lives with concepts like innate worth. Usually through drug overdoses or other amusing antics, their all-too-rare premature deaths are funny. Unfortunately, most so-called artists are too gutless to kill themselves before middle age sets in a comfortable suburban existence. In their semi-isolation, these so-called artists vote, attend PTA meetings and bore their middle class friends with their mediocre product. These lumps will fade by their own complacency. The so-called artist cannot even produce interesting propaganda. Their mean, embraced by this generation at the behest of self-righteous, post-granola, lame professorial edicts, is a politically-correct program failure. These kind often possess some very dull inner angst which causes them to flagellate themselves and their class. They actually like losing, thus vindicating their liberal value system. Inbreeding always ends in a successive generational sterility. Inertia is exhausted. By holding back any onward rush, this sort preserve the status quo. Discouraging the new, their behavior may be considered to produce a kind of censorship. Hence, business always finds a stable pool of applicants for the advertising industry. We get hip, which has not been for 40 years. We are shown cool by conformity. Their formal training is geared for this direction, and prepares them for their formal submissive role. Using a tool does not mean being one, or finding which tool to be. The choice can be made not to be innate, nor be inane. Skill is not necessarily art, and art is not necessarily skill. Talent is irrespective. Institutions and hard working idleness do not produce creativity. Dollars and decadence are more profitable than the truly creative. Mindless expression is easy. The idiot intellectual and so-called artist will sometimes curiously merge. Where did such walking rubbish get the idea that painting or playing music conferred any right to spew? By believing their own innate worth, this implies that any thought is as good as any other. Therefore, care is not taken nor heeded, and their babble drowns out everything. The internet will only make this situation worse. The coinage is completely devalued: problem solved. The mass media will also contribute by espousing a popular culture which will eat itself. Poetry is a bad example. Luckily, this joke will someday be completely spent by exhaustion, and the annoyance will end. Spoiled children could do no more. These sniveling dullards will put anyone with a brain to sleep. Where else would one see work shirts worn by people who do not work? These trendy lumps see themselves as wolf among sheep, but are no more than grass. However, somebody does buy this crap. Market forces have co-opted all media, which nullifies opposition expressed by these means. Large corporations have sanctioned rebellion, thus gaining sustenance like a large sucking tick and rendering the remains criminal. Money can buy anything, including perception. Who could take an irate millionaire seriously? The real opposition is swamped by noise and lights. Association is a powerful tool utilized for maximum advantage for maintaining the mean. The steady stream washes everything down the drain. Suppression is now gentler (a euphemism for castration), but probably no more kinder. Real trouble will not be caused by previous methods. The FBI does not need bother kicking down doors nor even wiretapping opposition, because all play roles demanded by efficiency, if only through providing a safety valve for internal pressure relief. The issues are irrelevant. Witness the energy wasted on either side of such issues like abortion. The so-called mediocre artist will not lead, nor support anything but the entertainment and advertising industries. This kind is best ignored.

4. The Modern American Idiot Archetype:
This archetype may be considered more general than the preceding examples. Culturally white, the Modern American Idiot is found everywhere, being not exclusive to the United States. Via complete integration with the subject personality, this archetype has swallowed the spooned mainstream completely. The Modern American Idiot believes himself streetwise and hip, but also paradoxically terribly afraid of crime. He assumes a world-weary pose, subconsciously projected from his overworked life, while actually never having done anything except toil. A medieval peasant worked less, but the Modern American Idiot believes themselves to be free. The distorted, vicarious and even completely fictional converges to form opinions and even self-image based within socially acceptable limits. Moreover, the Modern American Idiot will deny with his last breath having been externally influenced, thus preserving the myth of freedom. The Modern American Idiot just happens to think along party lines, and may be lead by the nose easier than cattle. No prods are even required, because these herd animals are motivated entirely by the virtue of their own freewill. Note the behavior manifest in traffic flow patterns. The automobile culture is a decadent creation of an anti-natural herd instinct manifestation.
Unfortunately, this archetype does not always benefit by its majority. The subject may be insecure, bordering on the paranoid or suicidal. The personality is based entirely upon cognitive failures regarding the all-defining environment. Standards are seen as absolutes. Of course, concerned parties inevitably manipulate such erroneous tendencies for maximum advantage. Criminals lurk on every corner, thus passively discouraging the subject stepping out of line. Interested parties may encourage the voter to accept political impotence in favor of increasing reliance on technique-driven approaches. The motivation are profit and stability, which are considered virtuous. The Modern American Idiot lacks substance and embraces the shallow. A certain cowardice instinct exists in this supplied verbal world. Passivity produces unity far more efficiently than organized religion. Corruption is more easily stomped out. Fears are whipped onward then subdued. Passive agitation rarely boils over. The exceptions are opportunities to be exploited to the hilt. Unless system shattering, rioting serves the power structure far more than the participants. Solid opinions regarding law and order will form from media exposure, which inevitably focuses on the sensational or violent. Blatant propaganda campaigns are unnecessary. Pretext offered by current events are all that is needed. Modern techniques need not resort to clumsy and inefficient extremes. The Modern American Idiot enables the surest approach by being specifically targeted and groomed for maximum effect. Well fueled, the machine just trudges onward. Corporate news outlets speak in the dialect of the Modern American Idiot. Even exceptional coverage will be dulled by editorial demands for reaching the largest audience. Options are buried under a massive onslaught, but still afforded their rights, thus maintaining the myth of freedom. Alternative media, less beneficial to the official power structure, are denied access. True investigative journalism is stunted. The roots may lie in the Vietnam War. Once reporters were allowed into war zones, despite spin, conflict was brought home in something less than a total positive light. Now, live satellite coverage could prove disastrous where Americans blown to bits on live national television. The edit would be impossible to influence. Security considerations are the only justification required to prevent appositional investigation. A backlash could occur (see below). For the Modern American Idiot, promotion is prime.
Although others might exceed this archetype in stupidity, none can compete with the abject mediocrity which defines its existence. Their transitional nature does not allow them to focus abstractly upon issues, integrate with concrete realities, nor allow any abilities for reflective contemplation to develop. Work and paying the bills consume all attention outside subject personal life. Relationships are tailored to fit preconceived social roles. Many marriages fail due to boredom. The jaded squander energy through excessive drama. Perhaps, the stabilizing effect is itself in an unstable equilibrium...
The Modern American Idiot prizes conformity. The Modern American Idiot waves flags in unison to the drumbeat, but only the loudest will suffice. The background is fine. Only the moment matters. Any load may be borne, provided the duration is short. Old weights are long forgotten. At least, like any good peasant, this lower order of rank knows its place and steps out of the way.

Concerning Character and Archetypal Behavior Patterns (Part 1)

Draft 5.0

1. Introduction:
The Psychologist Carl Jung first identified the formation and emergence of archetypal behavior patterns in early western 20th Century culture. These archetypes would necessarily change with time and society. Personalities are somewhat malleable to external forces, pressures and trends. This treatment should not be confused with stereotypes, which are concerned with the perceptions of others, rather than the self-image of the individual. An archetype concerns group and personal identification. Although the metaphorical world was shrinking, Dr. Jung could not have accounted for the effects which global mass media would play in the formation of archetypes. Before, the more immediate surroundings enjoyed maximum impact. Now, that once given assumption might not indeed be the case, existing only in a verbal or virtual world. Conformity and maladaptive extremes could readily become more common. Media reinforcement can outweigh all others. Conflict between intentional conditioning and deliberate socialization provides opportunities for profit. The individual chooses a role but not without reinforcement. Controlling media interests have a stake and a share. Truly anti-establishment archetypes will not be promoted.
In North America certain behavior tendencies are imprinted on a high number of individuals. Roles are both conditioned and chosen. All are still products, some just more so. Those "apparently" less impacted have strong personalities, anti-social tendencies, affect a rebellious stance or have negligible influence in society. Those contesting this assertion need only witness the extent and pervasiveness of popular cultural subgroups and trends.[1] Commonalities run along generational, class, religious, racial, ethnic, gender or a combination of lines. The all-inclusive is limited to the largest unity. Patriotic, nationalist and capitalist sentiments are reinforced by strong cultural myths like progress. Lesser unities are inconsequential. The following are examples of current archetypes in the United States. Some digressions concerning their formation and contributing influences regarding character are included. The first several are axes the author wishes to grind for his amusement.

2. The Idiot Intellectual:[2]
The least worthwhile archetype, and therefore best gotten out of the way, is the Idiot Intellectual. Tragically, these windbags have almost superseded the genuine article. This type has learned the affectations and appearance, even ability, to intellectualize, but rarely blabbers anything worthwhile or intrinsically valuable. The occasional gem is probably plagiarized. The drivel spewed forth is simply not worthy of respect or consideration. The messenger deserves even less. A point-of-view based upon garbage warrants internment in the deepest landfill. A parrot is not a thinker. Intellectual rubbish is actually more worthless than trash, because it consumes all while leaving nothing. Generally, these parasites are brats of upper middle class and higher upbringing.[3] Many prove themselves walking poster children for abortion. These simpering idiots are simply attempting to deny their own mediocrity and innate worthlessness by sounding intelligent. The Vietnam war enabled this creation by lowering standards in academic institutions, especially within liberal arts and fine arts departments. A professor was faced with the prospect of failed students being drafted into the military, or passing the incompetent[4]. The semantics became more important than real intellectual content. This downward slide has continued unabated through the present. Substandard products have no alternative. Universities and colleges need tuition money to make up for shrinking funding of higher education. After paying up, these bores have their egos stroked and coddled before being thrown out into the indifferent real world. This process might be contemptuous, but this kind does not deserve any better consideration. Few tears would be shed over their point blank execution against the wall. These people are taught analytical skills based upon feelings, which affectively reverses emotional response. The resultant imprint is mostly inappropriate to the external world. The Idiot Intellectual will believe anything they are told spoken in an academic tone, and are too stupid to question any of it. Even a rebel is more respectable. A verbal world is created by projecting fears and emotions. Some merit may exist in a limited sense, such as artistic critiques, but applies little elsewhere. The Idiot Intellectual sees no boundaries except those duly absorbed or instructed. Emotional demands require too much identity. The Idiot Intellectual becomes entrapped in the surreal by having a false personal stake based upon emotion. Individual self-concept is buried beneath a mountain of pseudo-logically derived inanities. The resultant blindness is consistent inconsistency. Objectivity is always questionable in those who view their emotions as sacrosanct and unquestionable. Open mindedness is for dullards and Idiot Intellectuals. All their pronouncements are equivalent and worthless. These people suffer a need to be stroked. Their worthless mental void is filled so as to allow them to feel better about their idiocy. Sensitivity is often used as a veil to cloak deficiency. The sensitive just has not been beaten enough. Their artificial environment cloisters and smothers. Reality is viewed through narrow confines by slugs whom produce nothing for nothing. Their empty minds may be filled with anything, and not even quickly. NYU Physicist Alan Sokol illustrated this observation extremely well with his spoof article at the expense of the Duke University journal Social Text (see References). Passive absorption made the prank possible. The idiot intellectual will regurgitate anything presented in a prior approved format. Political correctness is a prime example. No matter the absurdity, anything masquerading in those terms will receive automatic acceptance. Creativity, despite mediocre attempts and pretenses, does not exist for such mental blobs, whose main use is fodder. Unlike others, the Idiot Intellectual has begged to be meat, and deserve no other use nor consideration. By discarding their intrinsic worth, the Idiot Intellectual is doomed to ignite like a two dimensional paper cartoon[5]. Death to the stupid[6]!

[1] Including rebellion.

[2] This de-constructionist piece, among others, was written in lieu of outright violence. It beats jail and unemployment...

[3] Which shows that the wealthy also display a tendency to breed with their own kin, not unlike others from lower socioeconomic strata often vilified for it. A great many blue blood family trees, especially those descended from European royalty, don't fork much.

[4] Meanwhile, the scientific and technical fields succumbed to a different mediocrity through overspecialization, although other departments would later catch up. Academia fosters the same results in standards, via institutional reliance on methodology. Technique is prevalent across the academic spectrum.

[5] You know who you are...

[6] In other words, fuck you.

Lazy Critique of Popular Psychology (Part 3)

5. On Rage:
Popular psychology views rage as an aberration even though it has proven a sustaining force for much of human history. Only the decadent have no need for its potential survival value. Situational appropriateness is discounted. Rather than the result of fight or flight instincts, rage is often portrayed by cowards as a kind of insanity. Their despicable weakness needs justification. In reality, level depends upon self-control. Rage has its time and place. Until relatively recently in human history, most battles were fought hand-to-hand. The warrior actually had to crush skulls rather than pull a trigger. An adrenalin fueled state is necessary. Coolness is not as prized. When killing is necessary, rage supplies the will to power. The enemy in war are not personal enemies. A powerful motivator is required to kill with one's hands. Although admittedly somewhat atavistic, rage still has a place in a world where violence is a possibility. Suppression has many consequences, particularly depression and feelings of victimization. Many would not feel so scared, alone and threatened otherwise...

6. Often popular psychology castes aggression and violence in the same light by erroneously equating both in the common perception. Neither qualities are merely deviant. Violence is far too often necessary for survival. Self-defense is always acceptable. A related major error is made by equating mental and physical instances. Thinking about killing someone is not the same as actually performing the deed. Indeed, fantasizing about beating someone into mulch might provide enough of a release to prevent one from impulsively carrying out the act. Often knowing one is capable is just as emotionally fulfilling as actually doing the deed. Repressing aggressive tendencies will sometimes build internal pressures to the breaking point and we often see the horrible resultant violent reality. The decadent is incapable of seeing the positive aspects of aggression. Fear becomes the over-riding emotion rather than objectively considering the survival benefits of aggressive drives. Some obstacles in life may not be overcome any other way. Aggression requires an outlet, rather than its suppression. Athletics are a primary outlet. Athletes do not perform based on physical prowess alone. A mental component is also necessary. Aggression is positively harnessed for maximum performance. Violence is an entirely different matter. Unfortunately, too many watch rather than participate. Although sometimes necessary for the sake of survival, much violence is the result of frustrated aggressive drives. Seeing no other option, the only seeming alternative is to strike and the body count increases. Baring outright mental illness, popular psychological attempts to drive aggression underground might be the cause of so many explosions, especially among the young. Aggression builds to a point where it becomes self-destructive and perceived enemies die. Passivity seems to be the goal of the repression of aggressive instincts. Instead, the result is an explosion. Many are simply ill-suited to the civilizing process. A healthy society would have real outlets.

7. Popular psychology appears to discount the possibility of lying except in pathological instances. Human behavior is filled with dishonesty, but popular psychology would seem to espouse the opposite. In reality, falsehoods may be far deeper than any truth. An example is faith in a higher power, which has managed to sustain many through hard times. Although God is dead to this culture, its replacements have proven to be rather shallow. Perhaps it is time to find an apt and equally sublime replacement...

8. Popular psychology views a failure to adapt as resting solely upon the shortcomings of the individual. The environment provides the reasoning. By this reasoning, a perfectly sane individual would be maladaptive in an insane environment. The herd dictates right and wrong without any external references. Except for the
strongest personalities, many adopt second rate archetypal behavior patterns based solely upon inflated mediocre herd expectations. Where the environment to change drastically, these sort would not survive. The molds must be broken. Discarding popular psychological notions is an excellent first step.

1996 - January 1, 2001

Lazy Critique of Popular Psychology (Part 2)

3. On Dreams:
i. Dreams are symbolic representations of the mind's subconscious clearing house mechanisms. Issues are considered and even dealt with by dreaming. Dreaming allows the expression of inhibited instincts, urges and thoughts. Often repressed or forgotten, dreams are not generally remembered. Dreaming may preserve sanity, which certainly flees when sleep is continually interrupted. Fleeting dreams may be important or inconsequential. The misty recollections may be incomplete or edited by the conscious mind. Many dreams have no real end, instead repeating or just stopping. Some dreams are redundant from previous sleep cycles. The subconscious communicates in a fundamentally different manner from conscious language. Even the waking mind can dream. Fantasy is guidance. Reductive descriptions of dreaming often prove little more than educated guesswork. Understanding may always be incomplete. Dreams are not very well fathomed.
ii. Day dreams are often popularly attributed to idleness or a short attention span. These seemingly mental musings are regarded as empirically unproductive, and better replaced by something more industrious. The mind always has something better to do, like focusing on work. Possibly a grave error, the economic view attaches little significance to daydreaming. The wanderer might stumble upon the unseen by poking and probing where the fully conscious mind could not even tread. The lightning may only strike once, and the moment is lost. In addition, day dreams may be more logical and realistic than REM sleep dreams, being closer to the conscious mind but less concerned with concrete details. Lest one explode, the shadow may actually find appeasement, allowing some release of inner stresses, through daydreaming. Hyper-stimulation may be defined as excessive deprivation of dreams. It must wait until the night, when the moment is over. Sleep becomes less restful, and the individual grows tired. Tempers grow short. The maladaptive rarely only affects the individual. Ultimately, day dreaming allows one, and possibly others, to survive.
iii. Dreams are not ideals.
iv. Suppressing natural coping mechanisms always entails consequences. Unmitigated, the thwarted response will either be repressed or expressed through other mechanisms. The resultant behavior may be neurotic, decadent or even nihilistic. The anti-natural kills culture, sometimes quickly. The human intellect may be boundless, but it must view itself as boundless. The threaded dreamer may never realize it.
v. Sentience and self-awareness are over-rated concepts. Their meanings are esteemed less and beyond their potential: a by-product of our sentience and self-awareness. Imagination allows a certain type of immortality. Monuments live beyond their years. Memory is the only assured path to immortality. Lasting legacies are ignored for supposed ever-lasting life. Priorities become skewed when combined with technique. Image is a guide. The subconscious is discounted on all fronts. The ideal is embraced and grasped with the promise of dreams fulfilled. The world grow slowly insane, and nobody knows why.

4. On Revenge:
Revenge is a powerful motivator and coping mechanism. Although popular psychology would espouse the instinct for revenge as destructive, vengeance need not be carried to decadent or nihilistic extremes. Indeed, some require enemies as obstacles to be overcome. Their downfall can be especially satisfying. Revenge is beyond the morality of sheep. Forgive and forget means nothing. Vengeance can be quite cleansing and even healthy. Very little emotional baggage is left behind, only consequences. Form and extent are different matters. Lest one loose oneself, revenge must be appropriate. Justice is based upon this premise. Only a weak mind or society would kill over a verbal insult. Slander may be countered by a lawsuit. Hence, dueling is frowned upon. On the other hand, execution of a mass murderer is completely suitable and fitting. A justified campaign of terror instigated against an annoying neighbor might be looked down upon by others. Often implied threats are far more traumatic and stressful toward a target than actual physical violence. The object invents all sorts of possibilities and becomes paranoid whenever facing the instigator. These fears may be preyed upon with nothing more than a malevolent gaze. Police are kept out of the situation when the conflict is kept in the abstract. Eventually, the target cracks and the goal of revenge is fulfilled without raising a finger. Deflated.

Lazy Critique of Popular Psychology (Part 1)

Draft 4.0

1. Concerning Armchair Psychological Analysis:
Popular culture has produced many off-shoots and by-products. Popular psychology is no exception to the bland mediocrity produced by all such dull common denominational appeals. This pseudo-science abounds with fraudulent and shaky claims. Causal and effectual analysis has been confused to he point where legitimate scientific psychological investigation has had aspersions cast upon it. The masses cannot tell the actual item from its popular shadow. The underlying trendiness inevitable blinds those looking for easy answers. Much causality is inferred from little data. The underlying motivation of the advocates of popular psychology is pure profit. Loaded phrases and popular expressions combine to form the bulk of popular psychological notions concerning such things as empowerment, anger management and deviant behavior. A common mean standard is always implied for maximum effectiveness in reaching the largest possible audience. An entire industry is built accordingly, but not a science. Superficialities and surface traits merge. Shallowness appeals to the largest cross sections of society and culture. Commonality is a cheap coin.
All too often, lame explanatory attempts are rendered to analyze motivations and personality based solely upon written material. Although a professional sphere exists were such endeavors might be valid, most armchair analysts subscribe a popular psychological basis for their suppositions. These notions are mostly superficial. Product and producer are defined as synonymous. An intentional lie is different from a misconception or a shadow, but popular psychology would represent all as identical. Although actually different, a piece written for specific effect might be unrecognizable from a supposed spontaneous outpouring from the subconscious. The author knows the difference. However, the audience may only analyze based upon certain assumptions, which may be incorrect. Most written works are developed through a secession of drafts and notes. The initial conception might differ from the actual product. Be assured, especially in the age of word processors, most written material is different in conception from its final presentation. Each sentence might be carefully constructed for a specific purpose, which is not easily discerned by a casual perusal. Being written for the author's own reasons, the point might not always be obvious. Meaning is malleable. Motivations are not always an easy matter. Very little insight might exist without first hand information, but the popular psychological analyst will never admit it. Truth may be impossible, unless the actual author can verify the claims. Rote dogmatic acceptance does not make the work under scrutiny easily determined. No firm foundation may exist, sometimes purposely or even for the sake of twisted humor. The best jokes are not always shared. Symbolism may be taken at face value, or re-interpreted thus lacking important considerations. The worst impact may be the emergence of a tendency to accept and validate all written material. In actuality, very little warrants much consideration. A detective thriller may prove entertaining, but is usually not worth analyzing for deeper meaning other than its amusement value. The mediocre and formulaic is elevated to the same plane where only the greatest works were hitherto located. Mediocre authors write mediocre books, reviewed and analyzed by mediocre critics, which allows the formation of mediocre standards. Perhaps the tediousness spawned by this process is the real reason people do not wish to invest the effort to read. The television is an easier substitute, offering bells and whistles rather than the simple boredom affected by the printed page. The perception is supplied by the external production, rather than the internal creative mind. The mean stagnates, or rises according to the definitions supplied by the myth of progress. Potential is exhausted on tired formalism. The universal valuation of drivel is worse than nothing, or at least more annoying. Rapaciousness has little appeal. Writers and publishers have created apathetic readerships. Consumerism encourages unreadable quantity over quality, especially with the means of electronic propagation spreading boredom far and wide. Rather than the greatest works, only the best formulas receive consideration. Dullness pervades everything. A mountain of data buries everything thus making even censorship unnecessary. It only draws attention to undesirable material.
In analysis, emotion should be noted. The correct inquiry is the utmost priority, which differs for every piece. Unity exists only where perceived, except the most fundamental levels where most verbal worlds do not touch. All told is not truth. Propaganda is disguise.

2. The fallacy of the Constant State: A Digression Concerning Personal Growth
Stasis is an erroneous assumption. A consequence of living within the moment, the present is eternal. Only the quantifiable can be used for measuring progress. No other comparisons are valid, thus leading to a constant and therefore anti-natural verbal world. Growth or decay is simply not considered. Amounting to little more than crossed fingers, policy is often retarded by the resultant mindset. Naturally occurring cultural inertial forces are reinforced. An opportunist could exploit this situation to forestall change for maximum advantage. Abiding perceptions are less questioned. Eventually society and culture stagnate. Strong myths bind like concrete. Like any parasite, distorted verbal synthesis may endure where little else will survive. Often the individual will become infected through cultural disease vectors, thereby blunting their own personal growth by clutching and adopting static verbal components as their own. An example, without offering any solution, being the pop-psychological belief which advances victim mentalities. Many people would have discovered coping mechanisms without wallowing in their misfortune. The real picture is far more complex.

Full transcript of bin Ladin's speech

As far as I know, the Mainstream U.S. media will not carry Usama bin Ladin's speech. I do not endorse his agenda or actions, but I will comment that I believe he is a modern master of propaganda. Unlike the anarchists of one hundred years ago, al-Qaida has actually managed to pull-off propaganda by the deed. In part, I suppose it illustrates the profound difference between atheists and Muslims.

"Praise be to Allah who created the creation for his worship and commanded them to be just and permitted the wronged one to retaliate against the oppressor in kind. To proceed:

Peace be upon he who follows the guidance: People of America this talk of mine is for you and concerns the ideal way to prevent another Manhattan, and deals with the war and its causes and results.

Before I begin, I say to you that security is an indispensable pillar of human life and that free men do not forfeit their security, contrary to Bush's claim that we hate freedom.

If so, then let him explain to us why we don't strike for example - Sweden? And we know that freedom-haters don't possess defiant spirits like those of the 19 - may Allah have mercy on them.

No, we fight because we are free men who don't sleep under oppression. We want to restore freedom to our nation, just as you lay waste to our nation. So shall we lay waste to yours.

No one except a dumb thief plays with the security of others and then makes himself believe he will be secure. Whereas thinking people, when disaster strikes, make it their priority to look for its causes, in order to prevent it happening again.

But I am amazed at you. Even though we are in the fourth year after the events of September 11th, Bush is still engaged in distortion, deception and hiding from you the real causes. And thus, the reasons are still there for a repeat of what occurred.

So I shall talk to you about the story behind those events and shall tell you truthfully about the moments in which the decision was taken, for you to consider.

I say to you, Allah knows that it had never occurred to us to strike the towers. But after it became unbearable and we witnessed the oppression and tyranny of the American/Israeli coalition against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, it came to my mind.

The events that affected my soul in a direct way started in 1982 when America permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon and the American Sixth Fleet helped them in that. This bombardment began and many were killed and injured and others were terrorised and displaced.

I couldn't forget those moving scenes, blood and severed limbs, women and children sprawled everywhere. Houses destroyed along with their occupants and high rises demolished over their residents, rockets raining down on our home without mercy.

The situation was like a crocodile meeting a helpless child, powerless except for his screams. Does the crocodile understand a conversation that doesn't include a weapon? And the whole world saw and heard but it didn't respond.

In those difficult moments many hard-to-describe ideas bubbled in my soul, but in the end they produced an intense feeling of rejection of tyranny, and gave birth to a strong resolve to punish the oppressors.

And as I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon, it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and that we should destroy towers in America in order that they taste some of what we tasted and so that they be deterred from killing our women and children.

And that day, it was confirmed to me that oppression and the intentional killing of innocent women and children is a deliberate American policy. Destruction is freedom and democracy, while resistance is terrorism and intolerance.

This means the oppressing and embargoing to death of millions as Bush Sr did in Iraq in the greatest mass slaughter of children mankind has ever known, and it means the throwing of millions of pounds of bombs and explosives at millions of children - also in Iraq - as Bush Jr did, in order to remove an old agent and replace him with a new puppet to assist in the pilfering of Iraq's oil and other outrages.

So with these images and their like as their background, the events of September 11th came as a reply to those great wrongs, should a man be blamed for defending his sanctuary?

Is defending oneself and punishing the aggressor in kind, objectionable terrorism? If it is such, then it is unavoidable for us.

This is the message which I sought to communicate to you in word and deed, repeatedly, for years before September 11th.

And you can read this, if you wish, in my interview with Scott in Time Magazine in 1996, or with Peter Arnett on CNN in 1997, or my meeting with John Weiner in 1998.

You can observe it practically, if you wish, in Kenya and Tanzania and in Aden. And you can read it in my interview with Abdul Bari Atwan, as well as my interviews with Robert Fisk.

The latter is one of your compatriots and co-religionists and I consider him to be neutral. So are the pretenders of freedom at the White House and the channels controlled by them able to run an interview with him? So that he may relay to the American people what he has understood from us to be the reasons for our fight against you?

If you were to avoid these reasons, you will have taken the correct path that will lead America to the security that it was in before September 11th. This concerned the causes of the war.

As for it's results, they have been, by the grace of Allah, positive and enormous, and have, by all standards, exceeded all expectations. This is due to many factors, chief among them, that we have found it difficult to deal with the Bush administration in light of the resemblance it bears to the regimes in our countries, half of which are ruled by the military and the other half which are ruled by the sons of kings and presidents.

Our experience with them is lengthy, and both types are replete with those who are characterised by pride, arrogance, greed and misappropriation of wealth. This resemblance began after the visits of Bush Sr to the region.

At a time when some of our compatriots were dazzled by America and hoping that these visits would have an effect on our countries, all of a sudden he was affected by those monarchies and military regimes, and became envious of their remaining decades in their positions, to embezzle the public wealth of the nation without supervision or accounting.

So he took dictatorship and suppression of freedoms to his son and they named it the Patriot Act, under the pretence of fighting terrorism. In addition, Bush sanctioned the installing of sons as state governors, and didn't forget to import expertise in election fraud from the region's presidents to Florida to be made use of in moments of difficulty.

All that we have mentioned has made it easy for us to provoke and bait this administration. All that we have to do is to send two mujahidin to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al-Qaida, in order to make the generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic, and political losses without their achieving for it anything of note other than some benefits for their private companies.

This is in addition to our having experience in using guerrilla warfare and the war of attrition to fight tyrannical superpowers, as we, alongside the mujahidin, bled Russia for 10 years, until it went bankrupt and was forced to withdraw in defeat.

All Praise is due to Allah.

So we are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy. Allah willing, and nothing is too great for Allah.

That being said, those who say that al-Qaida has won against the administration in the White House or that the administration has lost in this war have not been precise, because when one scrutinises the results, one cannot say that al-Qaida is the sole factor in achieving those spectacular gains.

Rather, the policy of the White House that demands the opening of war fronts to keep busy their various corporations - whether they be working in the field of arms or oil or reconstruction - has helped al-Qaida to achieve these enormous results.

And so it has appeared to some analysts and diplomats that the White House and us are playing as one team towards the economic goals of the United States, even if the intentions differ.

And it was to these sorts of notions and their like that the British diplomat and others were referring in their lectures at the Royal Institute of International Affairs. [When they pointed out that] for example, al-Qaida spent $500,000 on the event, while America, in the incident and its aftermath, lost - according to the lowest estimate - more than $500 billion.

Meaning that every dollar of al-Qaida defeated a million dollars by the permission of Allah, besides the loss of a huge number of jobs.

As for the size of the economic deficit, it has reached record astronomical numbers estimated to total more than a trillion dollars.

And even more dangerous and bitter for America is that the mujahidin recently forced Bush to resort to emergency funds to continue the fight in Afghanistan and Iraq, which is evidence of the success of the bleed-until-bankruptcy plan - with Allah's permission.

It is true that this shows that al-Qaida has gained, but on the other hand, it shows that the Bush administration has also gained, something of which anyone who looks at the size of the contracts acquired by the shady Bush administration-linked mega-corporations, like Halliburton and its kind, will be convinced. And it all shows that the real loser is ... you.

It is the American people and their economy. And for the record, we had agreed with the Commander-General Muhammad Ataa, Allah have mercy on him, that all the operations should be carried out within 20 minutes, before Bush and his administration notice.

It never occurred to us that the commander-in-chief of the American armed forces would abandon 50,000 of his citizens in the twin towers to face those great horrors alone, the time when they most needed him.

But because it seemed to him that occupying himself by talking to the little girl about the goat and its butting was more important than occupying himself with the planes and their butting of the skyscrapers, we were given three times the period required to execute the operations - all praise is due to Allah.

And it's no secret to you that the thinkers and perceptive ones from among the Americans warned Bush before the war and told him: "All that you want for securing America and removing the weapons of mass destruction - assuming they exist - is available to you, and the nations of the world are with you in the inspections, and it is in the interest of America that it not be thrust into an unjustified war with an unknown outcome."

But the darkness of the black gold blurred his vision and insight, and he gave priority to private interests over the public interests of America.

So the war went ahead, the death toll rose, the American economy bled, and Bush became embroiled in the swamps of Iraq that threaten his future. He fits the saying "like the naughty she-goat who used her hoof to dig up a knife from under the earth".

So I say to you, over 15,000 of our people have been killed and tens of thousands injured, while more than a thousand of you have been killed and more than 10,000 injured. And Bush's hands are stained with the blood of all those killed from both sides, all for the sake of oil and keeping their private companies in business.

Be aware that it is the nation who punishes the weak man when he causes the killing of one of its citizens for money, while letting the powerful one get off, when he causes the killing of more than 1000 of its sons, also for money.

And the same goes for your allies in Palestine. They terrorise the women and children, and kill and capture the men as they lie sleeping with their families on the mattresses, that you may recall that for every action, there is a reaction.

Finally, it behoves you to reflect on the last wills and testaments of the thousands who left you on the 11th as they gestured in despair. They are important testaments, which should be studied and researched.

Among the most important of what I read in them was some prose in their gestures before the collapse, where they say: "How mistaken we were to have allowed the White House to implement its aggressive foreign policies against the weak without supervision."

It is as if they were telling you, the people of America: "Hold to account those who have caused us to be killed, and happy is he who learns from others' mistakes."

And among that which I read in their gestures is a verse of poetry. "Injustice chases its people, and how unhealthy the bed of tyranny."

As has been said: "An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure."

And know that: "It is better to return to the truth than persist in error." And that the wise man doesn't squander his security, wealth and children for the sake of the liar in the White House.

In conclusion, I tell you in truth, that your security is not in the hands of Kerry, nor Bush, nor al-Qaida. No.

Your security is in your own hands. And every state that doesn't play with our security has automatically guaranteed its own security.

And Allah is our Guardian and Helper, while you have no Guardian or Helper. All peace be upon he who follows the Guidance."

On Governments 1-2

Draft 1.0

November 1, 2004

1. The Electoral College System is a big joke to the rest of the world. However, it does ensure stability. Rigidity is a definite form of stability. Change is impeded for the benefit of the few. All republics are structured to impede substantial systemic modification for the benefit of the power elites. The key for successful maintenance is the proper (weighted) balance. In America, the power elites are mostly forgetting the old rules: you must occasionally allow a (broad spectrum) few admitted. Certain obligations are expected. If the power elite do not live up to their obligations, they will fail as power elites and be swept aside for a new chosen class. Generally, with China a notable historical exception, the new power elites will mostly hail from a disenfranchised educated elite.[1]

In the 19th Century Dostoevski, in his works like “The Idiot,” warned of the consequences for the Russian noble class in failing to act nobly. In America, the consequences would unlikely be as drastic, but one never can tell. (Then again, the American aristorcracy is rarely noble.)

[1] This observation does not always apply in a long term sense. A Lenin can always be succeeded by a Stalin. The educated elite are not always ruthless enough. Their idealizations can lead to generalizations. Hence, they fail to recognize their enemies.

2. Skull and Bones
If you are planing on voting for either Kerry or Bush, you will be voting Skull and Bones. See some results from a Google Search Here, Here, and Here.
Their family trees don't fork much. What other example best illustrates mediocrity in government?

Against AI - My Idea of a Joke (Part 3)

iv. Beyond Positivism:
Artificial intelligence is a concept held-over from the purely mechanistic world view that gained a philosophical ascendancy during the 19th century. The roots extend to Calvinist absolute determinism and the works of St. Augustine. The positivist world view states only that which we observe, or measure, exists. This philosophy inevitably spawned associated technical and scientific moralities. The limited is universal. The technical morality, Maximum Advantage, is just a higher genealogical branch of the same old tree. The uncomprehending computer, a concrete manifestation of positivistic thinking, could not discern this context from quantum mechanical interpretations. We know these concepts conflict in the sense that we know the world of the very small and/or the very large behaves differently than our everyday experience, including measurements by extension. The positivist regards actual physical reality as irrelevant. In addition, most macroscopic behavior is nonlinear, whereas quantum superposition is linear. During the course of the 20th Century, scientific advancement only partially dispelled deterministic positivism by replacing it with a reductionist scheme. The larger culture still embraces deterministic concepts, especially progress through economic development. Stability is the motivation. Hence, research must show results. We are limited by our tools and different. Our tools are limited by their makers and different. Our perceptions are limited and different by extension. Kurt Godel's Theorem states a system can neither be proved nor disproved by means allowed inside the system, which is equivalent to the whole being different compared to its parts. Insight is necessary to move beyond. The recent proof of Fermat's Last Theorem would not have been accomplished otherwise. The assertion is obvious, but not provable within its system. Hence according to the positivist mindset, all such conclusions are distrusted by an ultra-irrational demand for reality to behave and heed to the demands for reduction. Absolutely everything must be capable, at least in principle, of being exploited for maximum advantage in all things. Artificial intelligence will not spring forth from an algorithm, which is a human mathematical tool and by definition an order of rank lower. The reductionist pursues nothing but technique.
Of course, the above dispute with Strong AI beliefs does not absolutely discount artificial intelligence. Something different has been overlooked. The positivist contact vectors must be ignored with maximum priority. The dead end may be avoided. However, more than just scientific egoism is at stakes. Computer hardware and software manufacturers benefit from these misconceptions. Additional resistance will be found from societal forces. Myths are strong. The present stay eternal by promoting positivism. A primary cause for cultural stagnation is the belief in progress, which attempts to quantify of all aspects of living, including life. Lasting monuments are assigned a lesser value by the priorities of the present. Decay slowly spreads across the social fabric with little seen inside our subsets. The remedy exists beyond the societal system, but may never be realized because the only apparent avenues exist within that very system. The same argument applies to machines. The afflicted beast mindlessly thrashes about, but never seems able to scratch that itch. Eventually, a limit will be reached and anything seen beyond is an illusory creation of our irrational complex minds, manifesting as either strength or weakness. Instead, any walls may be sidestepped, at least in our minds. We have the irrational. We have insanity. We have war. We have death. We have concrete fears. We have faith. We have love. We have conflicting drives and emotions. We are alive, and certainly all a touch insane. The herd stampedes, and may be prodded. The herd follows statistical distributions. The herd has abstract fear exploited for maximum advantage. The herd has no mind being different than the individual. A machine is efficient. A machine rusts. A machine feels nothing. A machine processes information, but does not think. True artificial intelligence exists elsewhere within the imagination. Of course, the opposite anti-natural world view will inevitably be promoted and exploited to maximum advantage, thus supporting the myths of the established order. Our technical morality demands it.

v. On Consciousness
A new science of consciousness, with a non-computational basis, has been advocated elsewhere by Roger Penrose. It would require a revolution in scientific thought and, as argued above, probably a social revolution as well. Scientific thought is too intertwined with the established order, which says nothing about science itself. Positivism is a tool that has become a philosophy, but its aspects may be divorced from one another. Specialization must end, or rather be considered a career alternative among many. Perhaps, scientific journals should include articles written for the specialist, but complimented with well written articles in the style of Scientific American for the benefit of the non-specialist scientists. Someone might actually read the articles. Perhaps, as a result, inter-connections between diverse fields might be identified and followed. The following discussion, a synthesis of the quantum psychology of Roger Penrose with the work of Carl Jung, is an example of the result of such a pursued course of thought.
Consciousness may be considered individually or as a mass phenomena fundamentally different from one another. The latter approach might be a better place to start, thus taking advantage of as much reductionism as possible while acknowledging its limits. Jung identified instances of collective consciousness, where a shadow falls across an enraged mob, therefore allowing the affected individuals to commit atrocities none would ever consider on an individual basis. Now discarding Jung's mysticism, some physical basis must exist and may perhaps be explained by quantum superposition of individual wave states to form a collective whole. Perhaps similar emotional states may "resonate" and produce a greater and different result from what would be observed individually. Perhaps imagery techniques, often utilized by the advertising industry, might prove a possible starting point without actually provoking a riot. These approaches obviously work, or else the enormous amounts of money spent on advertising and propaganda would be all for nothing. Although this effort is not the place for it, the above speculation might be worth investigating. At least it represents an attempt apart from the usual technical specialist drivel concerning consciousness. It does require taking a chance at being unverifiable or proven incorrect.

vi. Conclusion:
The positivist disease vector has found its mark. Speculation concerning artificial intelligence is no better than popular psychology. Only the forum is different: PBS v. Oprah. Babble is all the same. The true science has not developed. A non-reductionist revolution is required. Although, the reader might be tempted to shake their head or strongly disagree with the above arguments, the premise is still valid. A machine will never write anything so silly. Condemnation proves the opposite. QED

1996 - January 1, 2001

P.S. I'll only believe a machine has attained consciousness when it can talk out of its ass.