On Nietzsche and slaves as revolutionaries

Slaves do not have a slave (craven) mentality – they have a revolutionary mentality.

If someone holds a gun to one’s head one acts as a slave toward that person, that’s a form of wisdom. Notice that the phrase “give me liberty or give me death” has the outcome of death whenever liberty is not achieved. Death is the *antithesis* of slave values, thus death is the greatest threat to make against a slave, which masters well understand. Corporeal bravery, a devaluation of death, is largely held by masters not as a mark of their superiority over slaves (as they and their lackeys have long pretended), but as one of inferiority.

Every revolution has three possible outcomes – death (for the revolter), freedom (for the revolter), or a return to slavery (for the revolter). I’ve never seen any reason to believe that slaves are against *wise* revolution – the disagreement among slaves is about *how* and *when* to revolt, not whether to revolt.

One of Nietzsche’s tragic outcomes is the false assertion that humanity is cowed slaves. It’s not surprising that the 20th century featured so much fascism – Nietzsche was not an antidote to fascism but a *cause* of it.

Nietzsche said that humanity needed saving and he would provide the philosophy of salvation. But if humanity in fact does NOT need saving then his assertion degrades humanity. Nietzsche made humanity *into* pathetic slaves rather than recognized it.

A slave by necessity is deceitful. Master is always watching so the slave can never give away his revolutionary movement and intent, or he will be punished, perhaps even killed, and there goes the revolution.

So Western slaves watch TV, while retaining an ascetic distance toward TV. These slaves play video games, while retaining an ascetic distance. These slaves never enjoy the world as crafted by master, not because they ARE slaves but because this lack of enjoyment maintains an emotional distance from the master’s tools, does not lure him into the master’s tools, and maintains his revolutionary processes.

The normal Western slave, according to modern slave morality, is to pretend to be a happy slave while acting toward revolution.

Masters can speak openly with each other, deceiving each other only with respect to competition for profit and control. For slaves deceit is far deeper and more meaningful – slaves must always keep their true power a secret, from master. Slaves have hidden secret languages among themselves – a slave’s glance is nothing like the look of a master. For a master, truth is what is spoken. For a slave, truth is always what is not spoken.

The role of Nietzsche is not to save slaves, but to seduce them. To mock their weakness, to cause them to lose their composure, to make them insecure, to cause them to rage out and lose the fight for their freedom.

Slaves do not form freedom organizations or freedom structures until they openly revolt. Slave culture is completely amorphous and mostly involves interactions between individuals – family and friends. It’s primary language is comprised of empathy and emotion.

One way to exterminate slave culture is to kill these interactions. The final extermination of slaves will be by science – for science (and thus the elite) to gain control of human reproduction and take that control away from slaves.

Nietzsche ignored the identity of slaves, slave culture (for which Christianity is largely a front), and slave desires, so he could degrade humanity and offer his “redemption” for it.

Nietzsche wanted slaves to *express* power, to threaten the elite, and then for the elite to predictably respond. Nietzsche is harmful at worst and a fool at best.

Love is the greatest slave interaction and forms the core of slave culture.

The religion of slaves is not Christianity – it’s fellowship, friendship, love, and life.

On the elite, slavery, and activism

This is a reply to rg the lg from Dissident Voice. His words are in italics:

“Sure doing away with slavery was a good thing … but it was strictly a side affect of the war … not a cause.”

The best slave is one who doesn’t realize he’s a slave. Getting rid of chattel slavery led to the integration of imported blacks into imperial America.

It was a huge propaganda and mind control victory. By eliminating chattel slavery and instituting wage slavery throughout the states, the elite could claim that they had “eliminated slavery”, and most of the people believe it. The people also believe that Lincoln himself “eliminated slavery”, thus making it all the easier for the executive branch to increase it’s power.

There’s also “moving up the corporate ladder” – which is another way of saying “I’m a slave now, but I might become a master later (and my life’s work is to become the most powerful master I can be)”. This is appealing to Americans, to become a master and have slaves of one’s own. “Everyone can be a plantation owner” is another phrase for the American Dream. In terms of morality there is no difference between a corporation with masters (executives) and slaves (workers) and a plantation. The same shape with a different paint job.

Examine Americans and their historical reaction to the “end of the American Dream”. The primary reaction was depression and despair – depression and despair at no longer having the expectation of mastery and possessing slaves. How many Americans celebrated the end of the American Dream? Does Hunter S. Thompson’s “life as burnout” strike you as a celebration? Yet we are told by the left of all people that Thompson is a “good guy”. Americans of all political persuasions need to take a very hard look in the mirror.

There’s no proof that getting rid of chattel slavery was a good thing. It’s riddance led to a relatively unified America and paved the way for American Imperialism, which officially began in 1898 and increased dramatically after WWII. If we use the judgment that what is good for the elite is bad for the people, the elimination of chattel slavery was a terrible thing.

One might note that this kind of analysis applies to many other “activist” issues. An activist is someone who pressures the elite to institute some change. But since the elite control the propaganda machine, any change they institute (pressured or otherwise) they can and will claim credit for, thus building their own power in the minds of the people. Thus, according to Americans, Lincoln was a “hero”. According to this thinking, Obama is a “possible hero”. Thus they have “hope in Obama”. With this additional power and people’s trust they further entrench their power. We can trace Neoliberalism from this line.

The only way around this problem is to seize power from the elite, such that the people themselves become the power structure. The elite *as a class* must be destroyed.

Activists who don’t see the big picture and act accordingly often do more harm than good. And they are the people who are the most self-righteous, the most incapable of believing in their own errors. Everything they do is fine as long as it’s “for a good cause”. The point of activists is not to save the world or really even help the world – it’s to feel good about what they are doing. At that they always succeed.

Activism is the greatest drug in the world. They get high and then get higher, and then go home while the people give the elite all the credit.

The Elite prepare for their Rapture

Quite possibly the beginning of the elite’s wanton destruction of the planet came when they dreamt of dominating the universe. This adds up historically, as the industrial revolution followed the major astronomical discoveries and the desire to colonize outer space.

So the “endgame” for most of us may well be called New World 2.0 – outer space or more specifically some determined new homeworld for the elite and whichever human slaves they select to join them. Humanity at large will rot on whatever is left of earth.

As the elite sail away on their “brave sailing ships”, valiant pilgrims all, they will weep sorrowful tears, but with gaze outward and hope filling their hearts, and arms locked with each other as they proclaim themselves the “special chosen ones” who will rebuild a new humanity (according to them, with superior DNA).

There’s a deeply tragic irony here. Humans looked into space and saw themselves as meaningless specks in the “greater cosmos”. But in responding to that emotion, in their “quest for space”, they have destroyed the only meaningful thing in their reality – their own world.

What does a priest who sees the glory of heaven do upon his “return to earth”? He shits on it, because he is forced to live on the dirty, filthy, horrible earth while God and angels get to be in heaven.

The elite, who hold the only meaningful thing in reality in utter contempt, shit on that reality every moment of every day. And we let them.

Much is said nowadays of The Rapture, about the “chosen ones” transcending the world and rising to heaven while the ones “left behind” suffer in eternal hell. It’s unfortunate that secular America so often treats this as a religious issue and with respect to “Christian America” – it’s most important analogy is with respect to colonizing space.

We often wonder why “Christian America” is all about accumulating capital these days. Well, if only the rich can “transcend the world”…

And prior to “transcending the world”, the elite will need to survive long enough on the rapidly-becoming-hell earth to enable their Rapture.

Secular America typically explains the “death of the left” during the 1990s in America with the blow to the left dealt by the fall of Soviet Communism and the supposed “end of history” with the eternal condition of free market capitalism. But there’s another explanation – the 1990s saw the rise in consciousness in humans of the end of the natural world. In the face of this despair humans became more entrenched in distraction and entertainment, and more beholden to capitalism with it’s ethos of “looking out for #1″.

Someone drowning doesn’t save the world. He lashes out at anything to grab onto to save himself.

Something rarely spoken but true – solidarity requires *strength*.

American fight for freedom only when the imperial benefits are gone

This is a reply to Tennessee-Chavizta from Dissident Voice. His words are in italics:

“But USA is just like any other country, i think that we will see a real change in USA in the near future, i think that there will be a popular uprising in this country, because american jobless citizens will not be able to conform to the misery food-stamp program”

The USA is not like any other country. It’s the heart of the global empire, and it’s people (pathetically) reflect that. There may or may not be a popular uprising in this country, but if so it will be the *last* among the Western countries.

Americans will defend their imperial benefits long before they will defend their freedom. It’s only when little hope exists for the continuation or recovery of those imperial benefits that Americans will “fight for their freedom”. This is precisely why the “shift to the left” in America only happened after 9/11, when Americans for the first time glimpsed the end of their empire.

This has always been the case in America, going back to the American Revolution when “fighting for freedom” was overheated rhetoric which translates into “fighting for power”. Once it became more profitable to overthrow British rule than live under it they did so, and Americans ever since have been brainwashed (most quite complicitly) into believing their country was founded on principles of freedom and equality. Tell that to the indigenous population, or the imported african population, or women, or various white ethnicities, or various capitalist losers, or the countless people outside the US enslaved or killed by these “freedom lovers”.

For Americans, it’s always been about power and it always will be. Now that the elite are weak and unable to provide Americans with sufficient imperial benefits sure, they may revolt. And then Dissident Voice can continue the centuries-old brainwashing by providing countless articles breathlessly extolling the “fight for freedom” of the American masses.

When will humanity move past ALL forms of propaganda and embrace truth?

Super Mario Bros: Frustration

Link

Regarding the residents of the Gaza Strip

“These policies punish innocent civilians with the goal of exerting pressure on the Hamas government, violating the rights of 1.5 million people who seek only to live ordinary lives – to be reunited with family, to pursue higher education, to receive quality medical treatment, and to earn a living.”

This statement is from ZNet, talking about the perpetual policy toward the Gaza Strip of Zionist Israel.

Here’s one big problem – if you’re in the Gaza Strip, and you seek only to live an ordinary life, you’re seeking the wrong thing.

“An ordinary life” doesn’t match up too well against air strikes, checkpoints, and minimal natural resources. The only effective way to live is to incorporate the destruction of these air strikes, checkpoints, and problematic access to resources into one’s everyday process.

The Gaza Strip is nothing but ordinary, and it calls for merely exceptional lives.

If the statement is truly correct and all 1.5 million Gazan residents are seeking only to live ordinary lives, the Gaza Strip is doomed.

The myth of entertainment

A funny thing about entertainment is how not-entertaining it is. Yet people are seemingly quite convinced that Paris Hilton and Britney Spears are endlessly fascinating.

Let’s assume for a moment that you’re a slave. Your master tells you to look inside a box, and keep looking inside it indefinitely. Perhaps you object, noting that there’s nothing in the box. But given that your master is brandishing his sword and glancing meaningfully to several decaying sword-slashed corpses next to him, you decide that looking in the box is a good option.

But this situation is interminable! How shall this slave gain some relief from his predicament?

Simply pretend that the box is entertaining. And so the myth of entertainment is born.

We know that our masters, the elite, want us to stay out of their business. We likewise want to respect ourselves and not tell ourselves there is nothing in the box. These two factors combine to make looking in the box “entertaining”.

Entertainment is a totalitarian reality. It’s a slave consolation notion – it says that “I find this fascinating of it’s own accord” in order to remove the reality from the consciousness – the reality that one is a slave looking inside an empty box at the behest of those who have power over one’s life.

So Paris Hilton and Britney Spears? Quite fascinating. Or perhaps the slave sniffs with his nose high in the air and derides these people as pathetic, and thus turns the channel to the show “Lost” or plays his favorite video game. Merely other boxes, different colors of nothingness.

It’s this latter treatment, this “negative” treatment of Hilton and Spears, that are the real danger. The mass media doesn’t provide entertainment even by slave standards – it provides crap in order for the slaves to believe they are experiencing REAL entertainment by “choosing” their own box to look into.

The slaves have many words for people who deride all boxes – nihilistic is their favorite. The slaves turn on anyone calling what they call entertainment an empty myth instead of turning on their masters.

You believe in nothing, they claim.

That’s completely false. I believe in killing my master. Nothing else is worthwhile while I am a slave.

You’d better fucking believe I’m terrified

“What are you so afraid of?”, they ask me, sometimes with an air of aggression, sometimes with puzzlement, sometimes with pity.

For one thing, I’m terrified that so many people have to ask that question. The state of the world implied by having to ask that question is terrible.

Nietzsche said “What does not kill me only makes me stronger”. And so the 20th century saw the refinement of torture to a science, the development of nuclear weapons, the accelerated destruction of the environment, widespread totalitarianism and surveillance by the elite, and the making ignorant and infantile of the population. If Nietzsche lived today how very strong he would be!, whatever that means. Strong right up until an airtight scientific slavery, a quick death, or an increasingly certain death, apparently.

All being on a mountain does is ensures you’re the last to die. Perhaps that’s what Nietzsche wanted. Him and his non-human animals and his plausible deniability in the form of his writings.

But the terror goes far deeper. Women accept having sons who are torturers. Men commit atrocities and call it “feeding their family”. Only a small fraction of the society effectively condemns atrocities, and virtually noone blames the individuals responsible, saying the problem is “the system”. Yet instead of destroying the system, they merely try to ensure that their own individual lives are decent, and shut away their relationship to this system they say is the problem.

A much more rational question is to ask someone living a placid life, “What are you so not afraid of?” I’ve never heard that question asked, which is one more reason to be terrified.