I writ this for Twitter, and that’s all I have lately, apologies.
I think the content is still decent, though.
- Grown-up, nasty talk, TW: Nazism.
Nazism wouldn’t be resilient if they weren’t onto something, if there wasn’t some awful grain of truth for it to exploit. If you know me, you know, that kernel is the fight, our life of group conflict.
/more
- It was in that fool’s paper, it’s a staple of theirs, that society is “more efficient” when it’s monoethnic, and that’s my proof. Simply living doesn’t lack efficiency, that’s a term for a task, a goal.
/more
- The thing is, humans are at their most efficient when they are on the warpath. I don’t see an endgame, if the rationale is efficiency, it’s the war machine provides this organization and clarity of purpose. NOT an endorsement.
/more
- Who are they if they finish the enemy? What’s a Nazi in a monoethnic world? I believe it’s a war ideology, and it doesn’t end, it’s “goals” are not really goals, constant war is the goal.
/more
- I do think it’s the clarity, the efficiency, that feels like a purpose to them – to people generally, in a less focussed way. Group conflict is central to human life, it’s supposed to be what that giant cranium is for.
/more
- It’s why it’s so easy for us to just hate and blame “the base,” the same way they do us, you’re made for it. It’s so natural, in fact, that it’s probably possible to get us acting like that about an enemy that doesn’t really exist.
/more
- It’s also why that seems enough, to hate and blame and just keep up the never-ending fight between us, the libtards and the Right, again, to live in conflict, unfortunately we have evolved for this, it feels normal.
/more
- So it’s the fight that is the problem, it’s the fight that never ends, that we never really question. Our answer to the downsides of fighting is, fight harder, don’t lose – the fight is unquestioned. “isms” are rationalizations.
/more
- This is why our troubles are so intractable – we haven’t addressed our only real trouble once yet, the fight. We argue about the reasons we fight, every demographic asks, stop fighting with ME, please – but how do we “fight” fighting?
/more
- This is what humans all share, our common problem. We don’t even have the language, see what I had to do there? Not having the language probably means we don’t have the software, unfortunately.
/more
- So the good folks, the woke, the liberals, the socialist purists, whatever era’s name for it works for you, we . . . fight. That wasn’t really the plan, but we can’t know it, the fighting is what we hope to stop, but . . . what else?
/more
- I mean, it’s self defense. You can’t stop fighting or you’ll be wiped out, and we libtards can’t not fight this global fascism, I’m just saying, a fight can never end the fighting, there is no endgame for liberals either.
/more
- The only end to the fight is folks just have to stop themselves, like, willingly. I can’t make you stop fighting, that’s fighting. You have to do that, I have to do that, we all must. One idiot wanting to fight ruins everything.
/more
- Because now we have to lower ourselves to his idiocy and fight him to stop him. This is not a solution, this is the victory of the problem over the solution, really, over all solutions. Problem? – a person fighting.
/more
- Solution – TWO people fighting! Socialized to the level of law and order – ALL people fighting. The problem going viral, taking over the world, this has always been our “solution.” There’s violent folks out there – so fight them.
/more
- A few miscreants want to use violence to push people around, take an unequal share – so we all learn to fight, learn to deal out the deterrents. Self-domestication hasn’t succeeded completely on us as its objects
/more
- – but it has made us all whip-crackers, it’s succeeded in making all of us try to domesticate one another, it’s made horse-breakers of us all. We may or may not be domesticated, but we are all domesticators.
/more
- The group control, the application of rules and punishments, it “works,” to manage unwanted behaviour to some degree – “some degree” means sometimes, and sometimes means intermittently.
/more
- I’ve said before, but I’m nobody: rules and punishments (and rewards) bring intermittent rewards – sometimes it “works,” so we do it all the time. In the experiments with rats etc., these result from false, imposed causality.
/more
- The rat learns that a lever gives a treat, or stops a shock, and when the lever works intermittently (when we interfere), the poor creature seems unable to shed its belief in the lever, in the causality it learned.
/more
- This is parenting, at the personal level, human society at the higher one – breaks my heart, not going to lie. I think I’ve had a peek outside the cage and seen that prick in the lab coat screwing with our lever. Of course, he is us.
/more
- Intermittent rewards are what we get for our systems of morality and punishment, this intermittent civilization, interspersed with war, part-time benefits – but Murphy’s Law seems to apply to everything, like Ockham’s razor,
/more
- and while the rewards of our methods are intermittent, the downsides perhaps are not, benefits come and benefits go, but costs accumulate, to paraphrase and adapt that Irish saint for biology.
/more
- If we were the rat, perhaps it would mean the lever also powered something for us, charged a battery, and that part we like, we don’t stop that. We the rat, may or may not get our grape, but we the scientist, get our battery charged.
/more
- Again, this is self-domestication – but we do not have batteries. It charges our aggression, is the thing. Pretty reliably. And in a pretty well documented fashion if you simply look at it this way, the correct way.
/more
- If we see cause and effect, free of overriding taboos about what those may be, then aggression is an effect, and abuse is a cause – in other contexts, we all know this. It isn’t salient, we think, because we don’t mean to abuse.
/more
- Abuse, we say, is accidental, and so rare. Abuse we say, is wrong, and so rare – all false. Abuse is the force we wield with our slightly more developed concept of “punishment,” of “morality.” Abuse is the main ingredient.
/more
- We mean to, AND there are plenty of accidents AND there are plenty of times when it’s wrong, is the truth. Part of the lie and the myth is that barring accidents and crime, people are basically unabused – the baseline.
/more
- In the old twin study parenting views, this group may be the children of the “authoritative,” middle way parents, certainly that was determined to be the baseline – and no consideration of accidents or wrongful abuse either
/more
- except the qualifying rules. So it’s a baseline – and there is a certain amount, a certain level of punishing abuse which I say has a correlate in a certain level of aggression in the population. Baselines are not zeroes.
/more
- The twin study conclusions seemed to see zeroes. These amounts, these levels, are by no means uniform across society. Generalizations can be made, and indeed it is the business of science to do so,
/more
- and it seems clear that one side of the political spectrum is harder on its children and its subjects than the other, one side more strict on law and order, that in fact, this is the major criteria that divides politics and life.
/more
- Again, this indicates, that in other contexts, we are all aware of this power in our lives. Again, for clarity: these differing levels of belief in punishing means different levels of faith in a system of dependable abuse
/more
- and the intermittent reward of improved behaviour. Of course, it’s very important that everyone behave better intermittently, which, welcome to human society. This is the magic of my Antisocialization theory:
/more
- we are punished, beaten perhaps, by our people, maybe our parents, maybe the neighborhood boys and so our battery is charged and we are ready to fight someone else. This is the dark trick of society.
/more
- full circle perhaps, this is the Nazi: beaten, batteries charged by his Christian parents and/or peers, ready to discharge on someone his society tells him to. And you heard me right: because of our “moral system” of abuse.
/more
- Because we believe in spanking and such. Not kidding. What other creature does, and what other creature has got itself into such straits?
/more
- OK, here it is, my summation, >40 Tweets:
Jeff’s Unifying Theory of Human Conflict
Jeff
Jan. 23rd., 2020
Abuse with an Excuse 