Capitalism as a vehicle for a pathocracy

[palestine]

Thank you iamthatis for your post.

the perceived enemy of the technocrats

I had in mind the perceived enemy as: artificially created, for the brainwashed population
(Unless you attach technocrats to such pool?)

This wouldn't change that you could be right - I could not think of the bRICS and it's true that there has been quite a demonizatioon of Putin and BRICS. Point is that people have to make Brazil fit in such false neural equation :) Good luck! Not that I am being sarcastic, far from it, but I see it and I mourn the eventual coping at the level of the brain. Something is constantly failing. Suffice to add some specific fuel and such equation can be leveraged. I believe that's what Israel has been doing - ie "Lebanese pagers" (such episode was kin to "The Goonies" movie, completely anachronistic and with a Netanyahu "father of the people").

One thing I've considered is that this shift in all global systems would probably be way more difficult and devastating than the historical change from agrarian to industrial societies. Even the technocratic test-runs

Really? I am having hard time picturing this - but I accept it as being factual of course. Cannot see it that huge for now.

the acceleration of capitalism into a technocracy.

Yes this seems to be the idea. But as stated, it could be that such transition may be actually difficult to operate now that the capitalism wind has been stopped (cf H. Koehli). It seems that it was indeed planned that way (Schwab etc), but I am not even sure this was where it was headed. We shall see.

Thank you for putting in consideration several mechanisms that we may tend to forget. STO, earth's cleansing's mechanisms, the Wave.

I have been reading the above linked thread ("socialism to capitalism") and what primarily came out was that capitalism, socialism, technocracy, are already reductions in terms of intellectual perspective, and that we should keep an eye on that sparrow... I notice a tendency in myself to state "capitalism" and the rest as relatively neutral while those may deserve a harsher treatment. I would end up focusinhg less on "the main stream intellectual perspective": I geuss that I picture myself speaking abotu those thigns with common people, and that most people are actually been fooled/trapped if sincerely basing a conversation with "capitalism". "Capitalism, good, bad, not that good, etc". Actually there is an insufficiency uphill. I see this.

 

[palestine]

success: the green managed to destroy germany...

Yes

Definitely

A: Alogmgna of Cassiopaea. Many changes in process and more to come.

Q: (L) Okay. "Many changes" in reference to what?

A: Global politics and cosmic yet to fully descend. Most of the political changes transpire behind the scenes.

Q: (L) In other words, there's a lot more going on than meets the eye?

A: Oh indeed.

Q: (L) Anything further on that, or does anybody have questions?

(Perceval) Well, the changes that we can see, are they indicative of the kind of changes that are happening behind the scenes?

A: If you connect the dots correctly.

Past geopolitic snapshots relate to the above STO/STS pool

Even capitalism is something issued from one or the other - it has been a straight reflection of a process that took place first, above

(That's how I understand it)

Thank you for the quote, Heinrich!

 

[palestine]

How did the capitalism-based pathocracy start?

• Looking at Soviet communism for study and comparison (communism started because of Trotsky and his manifesto).
• Was Trotsky an "agent" or an "idealist" guy?

Requoting for context:

Even Trotsky is documented to have some strange info on his background ( his stay in New York and his financial support while living there , as well as being arrested by Canada AND released , while on his way to Russia , on British orders. ( and on it goes , they called it Communism , as far as i can tell , on a stalking maneuver to quote C. Castanẽda's term , to give the have nots their place , as ordered by the have mores , along with all the furnishing of political speech and ready made ideals and whatever else they deemed appropriate

When reading Lobaczewski, you read that the process starts with some "guy with a will to improve society, a guy with a manifesto" - and that this is what starts the motion (or at least that's how I understood it!):

0 psychopathology > the manifesto > magnetization of psychopathology > some psychopathology around

It features the apparition of the problems.

With Trotsky - and you hint at some very odd elements, indeed - I was wondering if some psychos wouldn't have been around BEFORE. And so, Trotsky would not technically fit the role of some "dumb guy having brought Sauron to society" - it seemed to me that this was how psychopathology would appear, mostly.

Inputs:

Andrew M. LOBACZEWSKI - "Political ponerology"
p.159-165

Two basic types of the above-mentioned unions should be
differentiated: Primary ponerogenic and secondary ponerogenic
(...)
A primary ponerogenic union is formed at the same time as
its ideology, perhaps even somewhat earlier. A normal person
perceives such ideology to be different from the world of human
concepts, obviously suggestive, and even primitively
comical to a degree.

An ideology of a secondarily ponerogenic association is
formed by gradual adaptation of the primary ideology to functions
and goals other than the original formative ones. A certain
kind of layering or schizophrenia of ideology takes place during
the ponerization process.

Communism seems to fit the second definition, but in regard of puzzling elements, I am wondering if communism wasn't a "primary ponerogenic association".

-

I could not find any straight statements on capitalism in terms of "primary or secondary" but I still found some quotes:

p.239-240

... the “worst variety of capitalism”. After all, concentrating capital and
rulership in one place always leads to degeneration. Capital must
be subject to the authority of fairness. Eliminating such a degenerate
form of capitalism should thus be a priority

=those would be the psychopathology attractors, if left unsupervised

p.305

Wherever old social systems created by historical processes
have been almost totally destroyed by the introduction of state
capitalism and the development of pathocracy, that nation’s
social and psychological structure has been obliterated. The
replacement is a pathological structure reaching into every
corner of a country, causing all areas of life to degenerate and
become unproductive. Under such conditions, it proves unfeasible
to reconstruct a social system based on outdated traditions
and the unrealistic expectations that such a structure does exist.
What is needed is a design of action which will first permit the
fastest possible reconstruction of this basic socio-psychological
structure and then allow it to participate in social life’s
autonomization process.

= what we saw during Biden's mandate

p.305

In the meantime, many divergent ways of thinking have
taken root in those countries. Private capitalism’s world of
social institutions has become distant and hard to understand.
There is no longer anybody left who could be a capitalist or act
independently within such a system. Democracy has become an
imperfectly comprehended slogan for communicating within
the society of normal people. The workers cannot imagine the
reprivatization of great industrial plants and oppose any efforts
in that direction. They believe that rendering the country independent
would bring them participation in both management
and profits

= hint at normal people (their world view) under capitalism undergoing a ponerization process? (or capitalism only?)

 

[palestine]

p.270

Not to mention the fact that currently, the neocon-Bush administration is
using Christianity as the ideology by which they mask pathocracy. [Editor’s
note.]

Bush and his religious tirades was a mandate mostly based on bombing and creating troubles. It was pure hypocrisy. No alignment between the ideology and the reality.

	official ideology	serving as a front?	reality	presence of pathocracy
Stalin	communism	yes	gulags, domestic extermination	yes
Hitler	nazism	no	negative eugenics	yes
Bush	christianity	yes	foreign damages	yes
Obama	?	?	damages	?
Trump	"USA government"	no	normal people	no
Biden	capitalism	yes	domestic damages	yes
Trump	"USA government"	no	normal people	no

 

[Alejo]

hey Palestine, I have read through this thread and I still cannot fathom what you are attempting to say.

Can you put it in one small paragraph?

 

[palestine]

hey Palestine, I have read through this thread and I still cannot fathom what you are attempting to say.

Can you put it in one small paragraph?

Capitalism, as an ideology, can be subjected to a pathocratic motion; a pathocracy can develop on it. It has been the case, lately, but the whole failed, and the pathocracy could not mature. This provides different stages for a study. For example, looking at this capitalism at the beginning. Trying to see the start of the contamination. As well, was capitalism a "primary ponerogenic association"? A "secondary ponerogenic association"?

Normal people may have been a bit shaken by the last decade / years. They wouldn't probably be able to go as far as to see capitalism as the culprit, and even less to reach the understansding that there was an additional stage - a pathocracy.

So a basic study of all that pertains to the above.

 

[palestine]

"It was capitalism, guys"
"Something attacked it, in the form of a graft"
"capitalism itself was not pretty, initially"
"the addditional stuff made it terrible"

"that's why you found a Haitian guys in your garden & eating your cat, why your son decided to proceed to the ablation of his reproductive apparatus, and why Germany is acting strangely"

"so yeah, we were right to watch out not to developp a banksters mentality, in the 90's..."
"what else do you see? what went wrong?"

"the process has been all the time the same - communism, nazism, etc there exists a basic template"
"while you saw it as a surge of LGBT stuff, ponerologists saw it more precisely"

 

[Alejo]

Capitalism, as an ideology, can be subjected to a pathocratic motion; a pathocracy can develop on it. It has been the case, lately, but the whole failed, and the pathocracy could not mature.

So wait.

Captialism as an ideology can be used to hide other intentions, a pathocracy. Correct?

But then you say "the whole failed and pathocracy could not mature"... so you know for a fact that a pathocratic system has failed.

And so, you are trying to use that fact, the failure, as a way to study the pathocracy that will mature at some point?

yes?

 

[palestine]

And so, you are trying to use that fact, the failure, as a way to study the pathocracy that will mature at some point?

I am not exactly sure I understand the question but I would say yes - for future reference (or past ones)

Imagine a book:

Ideologies subjected to psychopathology

• communism
• fascism
• capitalism

Each chapter generically develops. How it looks like. Etc. A historian spotting a capitalism during the 17th may then refer, he would have some bits

This is why I created another thread "the last pathocracy which grafted on capitalism" - for today. This present thread would be some bits of a chapter which does not yet exists.

I have been trying to gather generic elements only.

I guess that I wrongly expanded on the failed one of last year - when I had to remain generic, here. But some inputs could still be useful in this thread which is really "capitalism as a vehicle for a pathocracy" - ultra generic

 

[palestine]

I don't want to humiliate myself more than necessary, but as you did not get it, it shows me that something in my posts is not okay.

I was tempted to tell you : "the title, it says it all".

How would you proceed? I suppose that this would hint me at a basic way. In case of a future post, being more than just a "like"

 

[palestine]

My personal interest exclusively rely on the transmission of something of value.

If an admin does not get it, I mean, let's delete the thread or else. Should you remaster it if anything is of value, that I would be very grateful. A sharp delete is still perfectly okay

 

[Ricardo]

fwiiw ,a bit hesitant on writing this comment since do no want to add confusion ... , as long as humans do not learn to differentiate ops this seems a somewhat pointless exercise , ie ideology vis-a-vis ponerization , barring the fact that we live in an open system , for many vectors , in part psychopaths are broken op's , further this also implies an un-acknowledgement of sociopaths , thus , ideology will be always submissive to a downward force .imo/blah/my 2x cents

 

[axj]

Hi @palestine, it seems that the confusion is partly because it is often unclear what you are referring to. For example:

Ideologies subjected to psychopathology

• communism
• fascism
• capitalism

Each chapter generically develops. How it looks like. Etc. A historian spotting a capitalism during the 17th may then refer, he would have some bits

What does "generically develops" mean?

"How it looks like. Etc." seems to have no logical connection to the previous sentence.

What does "spotting a capitalism" mean?

Does "during the 17th" refer to the century? If so, it may be a good idea to reread and edit your posts, to see if you skipped a word or if something can be explained in a simpler and clearer way.

A historian "may then refer" to what? What do you mean by "bits" he would have? Bits of what?

Try reading your posts from the perspective of someone who is not familiar with the topic or your thinking process. How can you make sure that it is as simple and understandable as possible? Which references are you making that may be difficult to understand?

In general, it seems to be a good idea to read a post before sending it and edit it for clarity and simplicity.

 

[palestine]

Hi @palestine, it seems that the confusion is partly because it is often unclear what you are referring to. For example:


What does "generically develops" mean?

"How it looks like Etc." seems to have no logical connection to the previous sentence.

What does "spotting a capitalism" mean?

Does "during tge 17th" refer to the century? If so, it may be a good idea to reread and edit your posts, to see if you skipped a word or if something can be explained in a simpler and clearer way.

A historian "may then refer" to what? What do you mean by "bits" he woukd have? Bits of what?

Try reading your posts from the perspective of someone who is not familiar with the topic or your thinking process. How can you make sure that it is as simple and understandable as possible? Which references are you making that may be difficult to understand?

In general, it seems to be a good idea to read a post again before sending it and edit it for clarity and simplicity.

Thank you axj - I understand the above questions are not requiring answers (or?).

I guess that the best for me would be to submit a future post (if long) to somebody for verification.

Thank you to have taken the time to develop on what does not work. I come to the conclusion that best would be to submit the post for re-read.

 

[axj]

I think we are all capable of being our own editors for posts on a forum. It is simply a skill to develop more, as well as just taking the time to go over a post before sending it.