Who we are up against

[Zenaan Harkness]

On 12/14/15, Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 12/14/2015 12:26 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>> On 12/13/15, Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net> wrote:
>>> On 12/13/2015 11:01 AM, Georgi Guninski wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 03:20:15PM +0000, Zenaan Harkness
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> For those who have not yet read of this, it's a must to
>>>>> comprehend. Lest ye doubt humans are rightly labelled
>>>>> 'sheep'.
>>>>
>>>> Call me a crank, but I am against the sheeple.
>>>>
>>>> Sheeple are major cause of trouble, electing current so
>>>> called "establishment".
>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
>>>
>>> When I see or hear the word 'sheeple' I think about how
>>> successful our adversaries have been in dividing the people
>>> they prey on into mutually hostile factions, each of which
>>> blames the actions of their common enemy on the others.
...
> I have been pushing this packet of books for around a year now,
> and from time to time it seems to have been well received:  It's a
> course in remedial politics, intended to fill basic gaps in
> people's information about how populist a.k.a. anarchist politics
> actually works:
>
> http://pilobilus.net/strategic_conflict_docs_intro.html

Thank you. Added to my to read list.

>> Another shot to prod you along a bit further:
>>
>> Those who are compliant with despotic external authority in the
>> face of their own inner conscience of right and wrong, ought be
>> regarded as other/ outer/ "them", and treated with extreme
>> caution!
>>
>> "Those" sheep happens to be about 60% to 90% of everyone! You
>> wanna sweep -that- under the carpet of your politically correct
>> boat?
>
> The presumption that people who are notably compliant with
> illegitimate  authority have a "conscience" and fixed notions of
> right and wrong is questionable.

We're talking about the Milgram experiment - instructor (authority,
actor), teacher (the sheep), learner (electro shock pain receiver for
wrong answers, actor).

In this experiment, which was repeated numerous times, in various
countries, and even in recent times, in all cases the results have
been highly consistent, and includes examples of "teacher" (sheep) in
so much emotional stress that they would be crying, yet when prompted
with the 4 standard commands from the "instructor", would nearly
always go along, applying life threatening electric shocks to someone
they'd just met whom they knew had a heart condition.

My summary is woeful so read the wikipedia page, but the gist is the
relevant point - despite all sorts of responses from the
"teacher"/sheep which clearly indicate that they were experiencing
emotional stress, questioning/ challenging if they really should be
doing what they were being asked to do, crying, shaking uncontrollably
etc etc, in 60% to 90%+ of cases, the human sheep, with up to 4 simple
and escalating commands from the "external authority figure", submits
their own will/ "conscience" (call it what you like, but their
reactions demonstrate what I name as "conscience") to the will of the
"instructor authority" and continues to apply potentially lethal
electric shocks to the "learner with a heart condition".

The results speak for themselves!


> Those who comply most eagerly include sociopathic
> personalities and people who are all to easily
> led due to other disorders.
>
> The "60% to 90%" cover a spectrum from grudging, minimal
> compliance to elaborate and even competitive compliance, typically
> related to the degree that their individual income and social
> status benefit from a show of compliance.

The results speak for themselves. You keep apologising in subtle(?)
ways - "oh, it's only the most eager sociopaths" and "all the others
must have had some other disorders".

Seriously?

The results speak for themselves and speak very loudly - humans are
majorly missing some fundamental tools to handle despotic external
authority. These experiments were invented as the Nuremberg trials
were underway, in a specific attempt to understand/ comprehend the
defenses that the accused Nazis (military officers) on trial were
giving. The experiment verified that "yes, this -is- how humans act in
such situations".

This result doesn't need our qualification nor any apology! 'We' need
a solution to educating 'ourselves' - our 'fellow sheep'!


> But as the gap between
> rewards promised and rewards delivered continues to widen, and the
> violent excesses of our rulers become more and more obvious,
> compliance will continue to decline.

Please - "obviousness" is not a citation!

And then "we" all suffer your proposed "violent excesses of our
rulers" - what sort of solution is that?!!!

As history shows, not until WAY after its much too late to be relevant
to those who suffer the torture and or death arising from your stated
"violent excesses of our rulers".

Why do you keep qualifying this as though it's somehow "ok" and
"explainable" - are you proposing to remove the "reward" of all
salaries of all government employees? I'm sure Juan and I would agree
- but do you think that would be attainable? Right, just like before
Libya got blown up by the USA - refer Hillary "We came, we saw he
[Gaddafi] died" Clinton?


> This creates a growth market
> for populist political agitators - a market that opponents and
> supporters of authoritarian rule are already competing to capture.

What do you mean by "this"?  I cannot comprehend this sentence.


> Politics is about power:  Who has it, who doesn't, and how these
> groups interact.  The object of political activity is to obtain
> and exercise power, toward whatever ends one chooses.  Political

That might be your idea.

Politics is a little about power, but more about authority -
exercising authority in the context of a shared common delusion of
"democracy" or whatever the regime of the day is spouting to its
sheep!

And Milgram showed us definitively that most people are sheep who will
submit to any and every external authority firmly put to them (eg
verbally), right up to and including the point at which that sheep
will be applying deadly force to another "fellow sheep".


> models and strategies that actually work in this context are
> "correct" while those that do not work are "incorrect."

What do you mean by "work"?

Note to yourself - my definition of "works" may be different to yours.
These generalisms slow the conversation down.


> There is a time and place for everything,

Like ritual human sacrifice?


> but rarely a time when elitism,
> or driving wedges between groups who have political enemies in
> common with oneself, is "correct" in a functional sense.

So your position is that Milgram, by doing his experiment, and
empirically showing us that humans are despotically submissive sheep,
is fundamentally being elitist?

Or pointing out Milgrim's result is elitist?

Or warning that a huge percentage of humans are despotically
submissive is elitist?

Or that this mass debate you're engaging in is your hissy fit over the
term "sheep" to describe humans? Humans as demonstrated to a shocking
degree by Milgram's experiments? In that case, the term sheep is
seriously understated!

How about this then eh:

Humans are breathing, eating, sleeping and shitting (BESS) drones,
easily caused to submit their wills to comply with external commands
and to do absolutely despotic acts; witness Milgram, witness Nuremberg
trials.

Humans, the BESS drones man, just the BESS!

Better?

Regards,
Zenaan