We should ask what the purpose of enslavement is. Is it really just about private-party economic maximization, as is commonly considered? Or is it inherently self-destructive? For all the slavery throughout history, self-destruction has remarkably never been the result – chattel slavery in the American south required an army to defeat it, and wage slavery is happily ongoing throughout the present world.
Archive for the ‘Slavery’ Category
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.
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.