enshittification

Emotional Labour

Jeff/neighsayerLeave a comment

You know, what I think I’m doing with my divergent theories and my “book,” by complaining about spanking and police, by trying to tell people we are drowning in the toxic byproducts of these behaviours, what I fancy I’m doing is the emotional labour for the whole goddam world.

From my very first formulations, from when I heard someone say, “I hit them, but it doesn’t hurt them,” and I would simply argue – it does! Maybe it doesn’t kill them, but it hurts them. Don’t you know that’s what hitting is for? If it doesn’t hurt them, why hit them? – and that is the definition of emotional labour, explaining to someone that they’re hurting someone, figuring out for them that the hurt they cause is what is coming back to bother them now, in this case perhaps explaining to a parent why their adult child doesn’t speak to them anymore.

Emotional labour is doing someone’s thinking for them in the realm of feelings, right?

But everyone says that, “it doesn’t hurt them,” stuff, at least almost everyone in my white, North American, formerly so also European life – so I’m trying to do it for everyone: it does, you fools. Something is wrong with you, it’s obvious, or it ought to be. It’s what’s coming back to bother you now, in terms of angry fascists the world over melting down into another world war.

You owe me ten million dollars for that judgement, it’s the labour of a lifetime. Labour isn’t free.

That’s real, you aren’t dealing with the bad feelings you ignore with that rather obvious fallacy of consensus lie. You can gaslight your kid, you can all pretend to one another that it’s true – but you can’t gaslight an entire world of repressed childhood righteous rage – that little gem is the product of the emotional labour I have done for you. That’s why I ought to get the big bucks.

Because like in a movie, “Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children,” I can see the monsters. That’s a great metaphor for emotional labour, isn’t it, you can’t see it and it will destroy you, you need me.

That’s a trade-off, when you’re the “strong,” one, you farm your emotional work out, like the social sexual dimorphism we have now, Dad is “strong,” so Mom is “loving,” right? Except Mom is often enough “strong,” enough to beat your ass too, and the kids maybe try, but basically no-one is doing humankind’s emotional labour anymore.

I mean, no-one but me of course, but I don’t imagine I’m the last of God’s Fools quite yet.

But y’all are not letting me do it, y’all are not talking the advice or the lessons. I searched for a definition online to give you, but I saw half of them were the very opposite, “workplace emotional labour,” means suppressing and ignoring your feelings, not planning for them – normal people get a lot of things backwards like that – so half of y’all have worse than no concept of what it is, a backwards one, with your salary in the balance of which you choose.

A lot of things – but my goodness, that’s a bad one, redefining the cure as the disease and vice versa.

And here we are again, at the end of another film, “Legend,” with me begging your sort to let me help you, you know, instead of killing everybody.

Jeff

Sept. 17th., 2024

Everything, Just Everything

Jeff/neighsayerLeave a comment

Every time I talk it’s an infodump because it’s never enough, and I try not to notice in order to avoid catatonia, to keep moving, but it’s the whole world, everything, so it’s only “true,” while I keep talking because it’s not wrong or a lie until you finish – but the second I stop, it was all flawed, incomplete. Garbage.

It’s never enough because we have no common ground, zero.

I saw an image of a social media post today where some man asked, “If there were no men, who would protect you?” and some clever women responded, “From who?” – and this is true of all of it, the government and their army, the police, “protecting us,” – from who?

There is always some mythical enemy in most of what they say, everything is geared against some, “them,” no matter what they’re talking about, whether there really is any such group or even could be, still, some “they,” are always to be prepared for.

There is hate at the bottom of it, not towards anyone specific in the here and now, maybe, but still,  you know they’re coming: people. “They,” are people, the enemy is people, and you’re not one of us if you don’t intuitively grasp this . . . I know. It sounds crazy; it’s a mobius strip of logic, you’re not one of us unless you hate . . . us. I’m telling you though, nothing else fits.

I mean, “us,” gets parsed, us, but not you, I like you. So we’re innocent of “hating people,” if we like any of them.

It’s everything.

This species hates itself and it is committing a global murder suicide, clearly we have had enough and we can’t take it anymore.

Everyone hates child abusers, in prison, the worst sorts can feel good about themselves when they speak of child abusers – but there’s a trick, the Monkey’s Paw surprise: spanking doesn’t count. No-one is a child abuser because hitting them doesn’t count. You don’t think people hate people?

Imagine hating dogs so much that you beat puppies.

Imagine everybody understands if you do!

Not a thing, because people don’t hate dogs like that. Right?

I’m not making moral judgements, there’s no power there, morality to this animal means punishment, which is abuse, I do not wish to impress this creature in terms of its “morality.” I’m saying it’s suicide, that’s not a moral issue for me, your life is yours to lose if you prefer. But that’s what’s going on: you think people are the enemy, so you’re killing them all, even your doctors and the people who grow your food.

It’s ironic, just short of funny when this species speaks of good and life and then goes home to beat its children: the children and the world feel what you do, and you can make the children forget, or force a recontextualization upon them about it – but you can’t talk the world out of it. There are consequences. It is always sad to hear of some plan to do some good: it doesn’t matter what little good you do if all the children are raised in a violent crucible where the adults prove to each of them that people are the enemy because if even Dad and Mom attack you, what else are we to think?

Of course people hate people if human caregivers attack human children.

What other outcome could we possibly imagine?

In the end, the “help,” is extremely limited, hobbled by the “normal,” business of hating and competing with people instead and the hate is the main revenue stream: the help are the gratuities, the sort of help that changes nothing.

I’m sure you’re arguing, I don’t hate people!

This almost certainly happened to you. You were almost certainly a young child with some sense of your rights that got spanked, so of COURSE you hate people, if you don’t seem to feel it, it should still be your first guess about how you feel because OF COURSE. How not? Why wouldn’t you?

If you don’t hate people after that, I’m offended and I demand to know why, what is wrong with you. Isn’t that probably the Oedipus complex? I’m not the first to suggest there are inherent conflicts in human life, am I?

Even the most violent prisoners hate child abusers, but not your very young self? Am I to assume that we are born thinking that violence to our own young self is “not abuse?”

One, I don’t want to believe it, even about Allistic people, but for the same reason I don’t want to, what’s the point in believing it? Where’s the hope, what’s to be done if that’s the case? That’s like Dark Tribbles, Well, Jim, near as I can tell, they’re born killers! Case closed.

Two, my logical problem with it is, then, so you’re saying spanking does nothing? And again, how does anything do nothing, and why wouldn’t it, and OF COURSE it does something.

And show me your list of all the other things that everyone does all day because it does nothing, what else do we do because it doesn’t “do anything?”

But is it sort of magic, the way it is self-operating, isn’t it, if you’re spanked you have a reason to hate people, if you hate people, maybe spanking – child abuse – seems OK to you – we do it because we do it. Right? That’s hard to argue away, a circle that tight. It’s not something we were argued into, as the meme goes. In this sense, of no change from generation to generation, it sort of “doesn’t do anything,” in that we’ve done it for a very long time and it doesn’t appear to change anything anymore.

But not doing it would have to be “doing something,” then, I suppose, I mean, that’s what I think, that’s often when we find out that what we were doing was indeed “doing something,” making other things happen, when we change – again, falling into the analogy of the psychology of addiction. Also like that though, is we also already knew it all deep down already, sort of, but seeing is a different level of believing, when we change.

Or so I hear.

Jeff

Sept. 5th., 2024

The Autistic and the Blade One, Update: new blog just for it.

Jeff/neighsayer2 Comments

I’ve written a short book, the one I’ve been threatening to, I think I’ve stated the idea in a few blogs, I’ve adapted Riane Eisler’s “The Chalice and the Blade,” for spanking and for Neurotype, to rename her social models Neurological Types, Neurotypes instead, and to try to trace the spread of the type and the genes for what Dr. Eisler calls the Dominators, the people “following the Dominator social model,” in their words, through prehistory and history, following their book.

“Normal people,” in mine, Neurotypical people.

I’m trying to let some time pass before I put it on this popular site, I’ve only just finished and just warned Dr. Eisler’s website that I’m up to this, I suppose I’ll give them next week to stop me, of course I don’t expect an answer.

Jeff

Aug. 9th., 2024

Here it is:

https://thespankinggene.blog/

Brutal ND Theory

Jeff/neighsayer2 Comments

Before all the normal people get upset, realize that the people representing all you nice normal folks to us Autistics are the Tylenol Moms who want to make sure none of us are ever born again, and the ABA practitioners who torture us as children, realize that I am not throwing the first punches here, not by a long shot.

As brutal as I am about to be regarding your sort, I’m just talking, so you got nothing moral to say to anybody about it until the hate and the torture stops.

 Allism is Human Nature, whether evil, or flawed, or “with a legacy of our ape past,” and with its common fallacies and biases. Allism is caused by spanking, an environment of threat and violence sets Allistic children’s “warrior genes,” to fight mode, making them aggressive. Allistic parents do this consciously, feeling that if their child is more aggressive than the next, that they will have a better life than the next.

Everything about Allistic life centres on this binary, self and Other, they all place themselves among some hostile Other, and justify their aggression by projecting it onto everyone else, they are somehow All the Same, but also Alone in an Hostile World. Allism means the Other is wrong, and also the they are the same, with Allism, we are ALL wrong.

With everything to do with Allism, it gets a smaller name and a smaller explanation, it is only some people, only our people, so for Europeans it is CHRISTIAN We Are All Wrong, Original Sin. I think in the east it is the Buddha who says All Life is Sorrow and we are wrong to still be here. In ancient Egypt, I guess all deserved to die and rot unless they had the earthly power to preserve their earthly bodies for all time, surely there was something wrong with all of them too.

The aggression seems to be the point, both consciously and unconsciously, but along with, whether this makes total logical sense to you, or if it’s only one of those things, you change one genetic thing you get many changes, like they learned with the foxes – other neurological things change. Like they are somehow opposed to evolution, and cannot learn it, and so are entirely non-viable.

If not understanding the world as well as the average wild animal does and so living in constant violent conflict with the world is the price of this adaptation of aggression, then we ought to let it go, go back to being passive, but, it’s a conundrum. “Be less strong,” simply does not compute for them, that is their bottom line, or they think it is, which means the same thing (do you kids understand that expression anymore, does not compute? It means a not sane command, an un-followable instruction for an old TV robot. Nonsense. A command it has no program for).  There does not appear to be hardware support for saying No to Strong in the Allistic brain. At least they don’t let it out into the world if there is.

The best I hear is, Strong AND good things, but that’s clearly not how this gene works. They are making a choice.

About The Chalice and the Blade:

Ten to seven thousand years ago, they turned their back on not some fictional Goddess, but on evolution, on nature and reality. The supremacy of the blade and the stories of spontaneous “creation,” utterly disconnected from any logic or reality,* were the beginning of the end. They insist that things work how they do not and they are not blind to the failure, they seem to see the end coming, but they are utterly blind to their part in it, and to any other possibility.

Simple like that.

Spanking causes Allism, Allism is actuarially R-worded and cannot see natural causality, like spanking, and so it’s over. That sort of a circle is a blind alley and a dead end. This spanked creature learned that words mean nothing and violence is the only logic before they could talk, you try to teach them, they fight you instead, always winning and never learning a goddam thing.

Sometimes I get angry, it’s ultimately frustrating, and declare that they deserve what they are about to get, but of course, every other living creature on this rock doesn’t, and anyway, what’d that guy say, Deserve’s got nothing to do with it. “Deserve,” is part of the lethal mutation that some of us, your humble author, don’t have and aren’t supposed to talk about.

My apologies.

Jeff

July 29th., 2024

The Wall

Jeff/neighsayerLeave a comment

So, there are five blind men, trying to identify an elephant.

Why is this the job of blind men? Well, for the purposes of the story, let’s say this is the whole town, everyone is blind, and hey, why not the whole world? It will still work, as long as you and I, Dear Reader, are still in this world and not in the story. It is a blind world and a blind little town, and these are the scientists among this blind population, these five. Why five? Well the elephant is an unknown, no-one knew which to call and simply called them all, I assume they must all have their own areas of expertise.

These five have lives and do not live together, so when they are called and come to inspect the new thing, they come from all around, and each approaches the thing from a different direction. The nearest and first to arrive encounters the tail of the beast and proposes that someone has hung a rope here but is no longer about to claim or explain it. The next one comes up beside the first, touches the elephant’s leg and says, Rope, what rope, this is a tree, while another meets the animal head on and declares that the town has been invaded by a huge snake.

A fourth scholar upon arrival finds an ear and has a theory, it is a great fan for some reason, I’m sorry, I only repeat the story, I wasn’t there. I don’t know how trees or fans just walk into town or suddenly appear – look, it’s not the point, OK?

Anyway, the last of the five appears with some pomp – apparently he was waiting in order to show up last – and broadsides the beast at full walking speed. Embarrassed and rubbing his nose, he bellows, What are you all talking about, it’s a bloody wall!

By now, a crowd has gathered and there is some quiet laughter and chatter going on. The other four examiners double checked and reiterated themselves, Sorry, no, it’s a rope, a fan, a tree, a snake.

Run, you fools! Shouted the one at the front. A snake this thick and standing this tall can surely eat people! But the other four were unmoved, assured of their own perceptions, and honest with himself, that scholar had to admit that the snake had not grabbed him, or demonstrated any aggression and all remained debating the situation, but the latest arrival, Mr. Wall, let us say, turned to address the crowd.

The wall broke my nose! It’s a hazard! He declared. No-one has been eaten by any snake, and ropes don’t break your nose by just hanging, and trees and giant fans don’t simply appear out of no-where, someone has built a wall!

He waved off the objections of his peers, still addressing the people hanging about. Are you going to wait until you break your noses too? He waded into the crowd, taking people’s hands and having them feel his swollen nose.

Ouch! said some empath, No, we don’t want that! What are those other guys thinking? At this, Mr. Wall grew serious. That’s a good question, he said, and honestly, I can’t explain it. They seem to have taken leave of their senses, don’t they? What sort of perversion turns a wall into a snake?

The buzz of the onlookers dropped an octave as well. Was there something wrong about the other scholars? Were they lying? Someone wondered, was this the first time? What other things have these four been telling us about? As these noises increased, the erroneous four melted into the background and made an escape, saying to one another, I may not know from walls, but I know from angry crowds, I’m out.

It happened that soon after the event that the wall disappeared, along with a great quantity of produce from the stalls along the town’s main street, and so with further study impossible, the wall incident passed into history. Mr. Wall made great hay and fame off of it, he would be the Father of Wallology, while three of the other four saw their reputations suffer and their departments’ budgets shrink, and they faded into retirement.

Mr. Snake published a somewhat successful book about the missing produce, which phenomenon happened a few more times, although no-one felt a wall during those events, so no-one paid much attention.

It would be the Age of Walls now, and dissenters would find themselves on the wrong side of it.

Jeff

March 7th., 2024

The Hard Pill

Jeff/neighsayer3 Comments

It’s not easy hearing about neurotype, hearing about it and that it means you. I’m sorry. I’ve been trying to bludgeon people with it, I so ought to know better.

It’s not easy for anybody, is it, and of course, it means everybody.

It’s not easy for “normal people,” either.

I think in normal people’s normal paradigm, in the world of “Human Nature,” everyone is all things, at least we all have the potential for all things, like the individual is a molecule of the human element, made of what all of humanity is made of, a fractal sort of idea, as for one is for all, sort of a thing, but the existence of neurodiversity annihilates all that.

Perhaps we are atoms instead, and combine to make only neurotype molecules instead, and humanity is not one element but several, a compound element. From containing the possibilities of all of humanity within oneself to containing only some of them, this can only be a downgrade, a sad bit of learning for us all, but many folks on the divergent side learned it young and have lived with it already. For the Neurotypical, learning it must be comparable to the experience of a late hatching Autistic, what the Hell do you mean I am missing some big pieces and no-one cared to notice?

Except how many are forced to see it, not so many.

The force, ha – the Force – is on their side, and works against their self examination, to their own detriment. To know thyself is critical, but somehow we have evolved in such a way that not to has somehow become even more critical, we are a mystery, wrapped in an enigma, etc., insoluble and so unbeatable or something. There is something about your organizing principles can’t be disturbed if you don’t know what they are, or something.

That’s an intuition, too difficult to express. Don’t worry, it won’t be on the test.

But I have been screaming, “YOU are a neurotype too!,” at people online and getting predictable responses, it’s not going great. I need a real plan.

I need a way to soften it, present it as a positive, somehow.

I’ve considered something like, “Spike’s my friend, ‘cause he’s so big and strong,” and really, I can’t let the idea go, it sort of is the point for me, and that’s a compliment for them . . . but of course that will be the end of it, Thanks Kid, I know.

Sigh.

I’m open to suggestions.

Jeff

March 6th., 2024

Role Swapping

Jeff/neighsayerLeave a comment

My idea is equal and opposite, in every way.

I think Allism is a modernish, growing problem, like they thought/think about us.

I think Allism can’t really be cured, but a treatment, assiduously applied as early as possible in life may mitigate the worst kind of onset and allow them to live something closer to what we Autists might call a normal life – just like they thought/think about us.

The treatment is equal and opposite too: NO spanking, NO “aversives.” Gentleness and reason applied scrupulously through early life may head off onset – of course, research needs to be done – same as they say about us, equal and opposite.

Equal and opposite, they are sure everyone needs the epigenetic push of spanking and discipline, and they think we must need it harder to make us employable – while I am sure the world needs them NOT to keep pushing themselves that way.

Difference is, they can add punitive abuse when they like, a certain amount is “normal,” to them, and also they can bend and break their own laws like Lovaas did – but we can’t simply lock them up and make them stop, applying the equal and opposite fix of not spanking, I don’t know how we create the will to do it.

Placing neurodiversity under NT medicine is clearly an error of structure, a neurodiverse population requires neurodiverse oversight. An error or something like a coup, a power grab with no across the board justification.

I think the parable of the five blind men and the elephant is about this, about neurodiversity, and clearly none of the five blind men should have veto power over the rest, obviously identifying the elephant requires them all.

So equal and opposite, in theory, should apply to pathologizing too. The Autist should see their pathologization as not just wrong, but backwards. It should be obvious and understood that they look pathological to us too, equal and opposite. Anything less and we’re self-censoring, giving the field away.

And there’s an irony that paragraph dances around, that I won’t touch, it will only confuse things further.

Jeff

Feb. 28th., 2024

In Search of a Word

Jeff/neighsayerLeave a comment

In Search of a Word

“Antisocialization.” I am trying to make a word that makes sense in a field where all the words have been repurposed already, and I suspect sabotage.

LOL. Good Lord, what a mess!

I mean, the word “socialization,” is taken, I suppose that would have been the first, most obvious word for my purpose too? Literally, “ize,” is to “make like,” to cause to conform, and “ation,” is the process of doing a thing, so socialization means being made to conform to the social environment.

Of course, that’s fine, we’ll leave that be.

But I certainly don’t intend “antisocialization,” to mean the process of forgetting the social rules, tuning in, turning on and dropping out, it’s not, “anti,” that way.

I pray I’m just a fool with the wrong prefix or suffix, or both, but I fear not.

I think I’ve talked until I forgot my original context, that being “social,” is composed of being some portions of prosocial, neutral, and antisocial, that there are things you are to be for and things you are to be against and things where maybe you can take your pick, or somethings where we need to simply think and be reasonable about, that liking them or not isn’t the point. These three can be said as prosocial, asocial and antisocial, and what about this?

Can we say that if everything is in the neutral zone for you, all simply things with relatively little emotional content for you, that you are relatively asocial, and that the fewer things that are in your neutral zone, the more things that you must love or hate, that you are more social? With the caveat that lacking social pressure, the things in the asocial/neutral zone can be dealt with other ways, one of which would be rationally and logically. Where the society allows, we can think, if we wish.

We are perhaps talking about another spectrum, from asocial, to hypo-social, to something like “normal,” or simply social, to hyper-social.

I am well outside that acceptable social zone here, I think, Autistic. I don’t think any of this is really allowed, that’s why the language is such a problem. Unfortunately all that is allowed is the end of the world, so I am conflicted. Which of these?

The less socially oriented one is, the more things fall into the neutral zone and perhaps we deal with them more coldly, more rationally, and the more socially oriented we are, the fewer things are neutral and get the rational treatment and more things are seen through the social lens, and are either with us or against us, or rather we are pro- or anti- about more things for social reasons, group reasons.

So my antisocialization can serve, mostly because it is not in the dictionary and available, and also because an increase in social behaviour means an increase in antisocial behaviour, I mean perhaps it means both, an increase in prosocial behaviour as well. I don’t think so, but if so, both still means more antisocial behaviour – which in theory is highly visible and a problem and what we ought to be tracking? Honestly, this will be my first try at expressing this, but . . . it is through antisocial behaviour and our responses that we are oriented towards the antisocial and the social. I don’t think an excess of prosocial treatment makes anyone more socially discriminatory. It’s all sort of a Dark Side matter. It’s the Bad Wolf that makes us socially discriminating, love doesn’t do that, the social and antisocial travel together, a package deal . . .

hey, maybe the Good Wolf doesn’t make you good, he just turns down the volume on your social, flattens you out.

Good Lord, do not tell me it’s hyper-socialization I wanted all along. Maybe. Oh my Gawd, it is, isn’t it, that’s what I’m trying to say: abuse makes you hyper-social, makes you define an out-group and want to hurt it. Speaking too soon, I haven’t even googled the word yet. And also – this new one isn’t exactly slogan material, is it, Mommas don’t make your babies too social, isn’t exactly a call to arms.

I’ll find the logic if it’s not all here yet, but the ol’ right brain is already satisfied. Antisocialization is the process of becoming more intensely social. It sounds backwards but doesn’t it all. Just remember that the more social we are, the more antisocial we are also, that it’s all one, not opposites – the very error of group dynamics again, to confuse the same as opposites, somehow.

New on Jan 28th., 2024:

Maybe solving this question, or at least reinforcing the rationale:

Hyper-socialization is right. Still a harder sell, but I’ve figured out that it is indeed a push to both ends of social, I’ve found the prosocial part.

It’s a thing I say in a different rant quite often, that you can overdo empathy, that in fact, racism is a matter of too much empathy for our “own people,” so that we forgive our own people for crimes that destroy the world.

So hyper-sociality in the extreme is Nazism and the like, supremacy movements and pogroms, with little neutrality in evidence and too much antisocial behaviour going on, violence and such, accompanied with too much empathy for the people committing those crimes from their own communities.

Sound familiar now?

Like why TF America cannot hang its violently racist traitors?

So yes, I’m afraid, technically, it’s creating hyper-sociality I rant about – but still doesn’t sound alarm bells – and they still add up to anti, like multiplying positive and negative numbers, the product is negative.

I suspect all terminology has these issues, but I’m hurting, feeling weak.

I must say I have been wondering what the Hell group dynamics was talking about with their suggestions of prosocial behaviour within the group for a very long time.

Jeff

Jan. 26th., 2024

Everything is Backwards

Jeff/neighsayer6 Comments

The “progressives,” want things to stay the same, like things don’t and the institutionalists (conservatives) want the change to continue, like it does. I’m serious. Why? Have you solved it your away around or something?

ADR – All due respect – but Dr. King, like most people, didn’t know from evolution and the Dream Speech is creationist. I do not “have a dream,” of a better life, I have a dream of ANY life, because the choices are not a good life or a bad life, the “bad life,” isn’t stable. It is not some ideological BS where we have a choice between a better future forever or a worse future forever. A worse future is death.

A future in that direction isn’t any future.

It’s evolution, so the choices are not static states, the choice is to get better or get worse, it is how to change. The status quo is not static, it is an endless cycle of change and collapse.

The status quo is in motion, it is the Overton window, it is the march to war.

The voices for war speak as if progressives want change, and the progressives talk of “old boys and old ways,” as though the status quo were stable and not forever cycling into chaos. They speak as though nothing ever changes and we are in the middle of eternity with the fascists, but that the forever natural communism we had for tens or hundreds of thousands of years were some future dream, that it is the progressives who want to “change things.”

No.

Surprise: it is the bad guys who change, who evolve, who live the constant change of antisocialization. It is “progress,” to slow them down, because the abuse of law and order and “spanking,” is an environment and we adapt to it and then write more laws: this is evolution. The enshittification is evolution. The bad guys are very into evolution, just not the good kind.

Everything is backwards in AST, in Autistic science.

Rather, they are.

I love this. This is what I call the good thinkin’.

I accuse the Parental Rights people of Evolution, of believing in evolution, and of using and abusing it for purposes of crime.

If the Ds don’t fight Parental Rights hard enough – and they won’t, same as CRT – it’s because the Ds don’t understand evolution and they fantasize about a static, created world. They don’t realize that every spanking costs the good guys a vote by pissing someone off. It’s sort of too late in the world for AST to have made the predictions, but it made them all and  this is one, already in the past as it is, that the Ds won’t fight the Parental Rights shit.

I bet it took me writing three million words to get to this: evolution is reality – so the status quo is evolution, not the agreed upon state of things, but the agreed upon rate and direction of change of things.

The institutions are protecting the change, protecting the rate and direction of change – so no, they do not “hold.”

They move.

They force the change, the degradation, the descent into conflict, if that’s the direction things go, it is the institutions taking us there. Force seems to have its own direction, so generally that’s the direction human things go.

Again, the whole public Allistic narrative is backwards to my mind, so I had to throw out my Allistic education, ignore all the grownups and professors and rebuild it properly, for me.

❤️

And then I hatched.

So I hope it’s for us now.

So Wallace and Darwin weren’t discoverers – they were whistleblowers, because of course society always ran on evolution. It’s just that the silverbacks don’t want you to know about it.

Wallace and Darwent and me (perhaps it was the enshittification that tipped them off too). Autistic joke, never mind, it’s a long, dumb walk. Don’t let it erase the lesson.

Jeff

Jan. 27th., 2024