1%-hegemony - a change?

Normal people just get on with their lives – with all the suffering that involves. It is not a reasonable demand to ask of normal people to wake up and fight the hegemony but that is a demand that socialists have asked all my life; to use current terminology the 99% need to rise up for their own interests. Sadly that ain’t going to happen.

Throughout my life the 1% have increased control of the satrapy mostly through what I grew up calling indoctrination. This indoctrination was carried out through half-truths told in school and in the media. What grew up with these half-truths was a neoliberal intellect who could pontificate about the indoctrination whilst still maintaining a standard of living. These neoliberals were better, only marginally so, to the echelon of nice white people who were conservative, looked after their own, and turned a blind eye to the worst aspects of the 1%-satrapy, the aspects of planetary destruction, global war and wage-slavery. These deluded neoliberals and nice white people have functioned within a 1%-satrapy making marginal compromises thus enabling the economic exploitation by the 1% whilst accepting the minor rewards of family stability for some of the 99%.

Is this changing as Carole Cadwalladr suggests below? I am not sure so let’s investigate. The kids are screaming about the state of the planet yet the satrapy is doing little – presumably expecting the kids to burn out. Within the 99%, the 1% have manufactured a huge fracture between liberals and conservatives, bigger than before. Basically they have recognised that they could manipulate the egos of white racist men through facebook and other social media platforms, this is what has been called human downgrading (by the Centre for Humane Technology). But whilst human downgrading is an appropriate description, they (CHT) do not embrace the political reality that is encompassed in the term 1%-satrapy.

The recent TED talk by Carole Cadwalladr (and the interview following) describes the power politics of human downgrading by recognising the manipulations of BigTech. This demonstrates a change in tactics but does it demonstrate a change in fundamental reality? Let’s continue to investigate.

In the US I perceive a drawing back from the depths the satrapy have allowed the US to sink as there appears to be a disconnect between the establishment and the Trump camp. I don’t see the same in the UK because the alternative to Bojo is Corbyn – and the 1% will work hard not to have to pay their way in taxes. They’re taking our jobs is still a rallying cry in both countries for right-wing populism, but there is such an ignorant failure in recognising that the 1% control jobs – not the government. The 1% choose to give jobs to people who are cheaper, colour does not matter to them as we are simply wage-slaves.

But arrogant white men want a target, they can vent their rage and anger on non-whites but they can’t do anything about bosses (who are mostly white). They could choose a more sympathetic government who might be able to do something, but the 1% will still be in charge. If the 1% have to pay taxes they will look for other ways to make profits, but they just want profits they don’t care about governments or people. These manipulated arrogant white men think they are the same as the 1%, house-owners, same nationality, racists; the reality is however that the 1% only care about profits lifestyle and family – their own. NOT MAWPs (Male Arrogant White Privileged).

Carole described a global move to the right, in a sense she is right but she is wrong on a fundamental level. The hegemony has moved its angry MAWPs to the right but that is all that has happened. These MAWPs are white, the people who have moved to the right are the Europeans (white Americans included). Because the hegemony is favouring right-wing internally, it favours the same externally eg Bolsonaro. Politics follows the money (the vast majority – see below), and at the moment the 1% are favouring right-wing populism through human downgrading. The one good thing about liberal censorship was that it forced humans not to downgrade; this censorship was not constructive in the long term but in the short term it was effective. But because liberals have no power (they were only given that power by the 1% who found neoliberalism profitable - ultimately scratching a liberal you find a self-interested house-owner), when the 1%-hegemony decided on the tactic of human downgrading it was very easy to awaken the repressed nastiness.

This investigation kind of reads business as usual. 1% does what it can to increase accumulation, divides the 99% so that now people are blaming each other rather than the real source of the problem – the 1% and its satrapy. But in another way business is not as usual, it is the usual profit-making for the 1% but there is a nastiness and disharmony in the lives of the 99% - not that that concerns the 1%. Within the 99% relationships between people have become far more inimical.

During Occupy there was a move towards unity of the 99%, this had to be countered. So dark money financed social media division through companies like Cambridge Analytica and their business partner-in-crime facebook. As a pathtivist there is already complete disenchantment with the prevailing bipartisan political system as it is self-evidently controlled by the 1%. Even Dark Money now has two branches right wing Dark Money such as Cambridge Analytica as explained in Carole’s Brexit and left-wing Dark Money such as Big Tent, Soros and Breitbart’s Arabella.

As with police dramas following the money usually gives answers. Certainly in the US there is money going to the right and to the right of the left; this enables the MAWPs to scream about Soros and ignore the amount of money that goes to the right. Of course no money goes to Corbyn or Sanders, and there is active Israeli establishment money going to the Labour’s Blairite right to perpetuate this antisemitic myth, and it affects all the Guardian articles promoting the same antisemitic myth. Following the money definitely shows the desire to divide.

The 1%-hegemony is not compassionate, this is transparently clear when you consider planetary destruction, accumulation wars and wage-slavery. But what is equally clear is that compassion can be used to divide the right as amongst the nice white people are good people who would prefer to be compassionate if they had the choice. Liberals cannot be complacent because although their identity politics has an element of compassion this compassion is dominated by self-interest. For many liberals identity politics means that they have as much right to their bit of the cake as do the 1%. But in truth this “cake” approach is destructive as is the destructive approach of Marxism which demands all the people’s right to the cake in the same way. If you are demanding cake you are destroying the planet. Cake means resources means destruction, left-wing (right side) dark money is destroying the planet in much the same way as right-wing dark money – only they are not as blatant as, say, Koch.

So where does that leave this investigation? Is Carole correct in maintaining there is a change? I would argue that the basic infrastructure of power is unchanged. The 1% continue to destroy the planet, wage wars of accumulation, and use us as wage-slaves. In order to maintain this infrastructural imbalance they invest in division – mainly by promoting the right but also promoting the right of the left. Divide and conquer continues.

Because I was thrust on the path at an early age, it becomes difficult to understand this defiled world, a world of greed aversion and delusion (Buddhism’s kilesa). Whilst during my life there have been times when greed has tried to guide mostly I have sought truth, not accepted the delusions that are commonplace to the greedy, and if greed or delusion raises its head I have not been averse to confront it personally. Whilst I understand that these defilements are conditioned, I still find it hard to understand the conditioned who cannot accept rational argument – and am still frightened as to how aversion can so easily turn such rationality into personal violence. One thing that has changed in this time of Carole’s human downgrading has been the increase in such personal violence – the increased public violence of right-wing nationalist groups as well as the enabling of such violence on a personal level.

Facts were always an aversion issue for the right – facts made them confront their delusions, so investment has directed an increase in fake news claims. It is sad to see how easy it has been to delude the MAWPs into dismissing science and accepting the racist scapegoat. This has got to be a real problem in schools. There is now an increased entrenched misunderstanding amongst the kids of these MAWPs that what they learn in school doesn't matter - fake knowledge; this creates antagonism against the teachers. The increased racism has also got to present teachers with problems as well. And the teachers themselves are not equipped to cope with these changes because they will fall back on their training, and such training does not question. Whilst the path is a way through this mess, teachers are usually attached to the knowledge and ideals that underpin liberal education, how they deal with the ignorance this new entrenched confusion causes I have no idea. Of course they adapt to keep their jobs but it has got to be a far worse cauldron than when I taught - esp in the UK. But then Greta and the kids are leading the climate strike so there is hope.

It is also sad to see the sycophancy that supports Trump, when he first was candidate the Republicans resented him, then they supported him in power, and now they support him when he is under attack. Above I claimed there were compassionate on the right, whilst I still believe it is true it is hard to justify when the right defend such a downgraded human. Compassion morality and decency should be the measure of all political parties, no-one can say that is a description of Trump – nor a description of Hillary either but not to the same extreme.

In the UK politics is dominated by Brexit, whilst I always knew the issue could divide the Tories it is distressing to see the way it has divided the nation. What was originally a skirmish within the Tories has become a delusion that keeps people away from the true issues of the 1%-hegemony. People have been divided into thinking that Europe was the source of class disadvantage as opposed to the 1%; the EU was setup by the 1% to increase their accumulation but leaving the EU will not make any fundamental change to the 1%-satrapy. The division has reached such a level that the disadvantaged working-class will vote Tory to ensure Brexit, ignoring the class exploitation that will continue if the Tories are voted in in the next 3 weeks. People will rather condemn commie Corbyn than condemn the downgraded human that is Johnson. So much delusion. A pathtivist promotes compassion; at least on paper Corbyn is more compassionate – that is enough for a pathtivist until proven wrong. A pathtivist will support any attempt to take power away from the 1%-satrapy, although pathtivism recognises that only the path can produce humane change.

Carole points at the delusion the 1% have manipulated through facebook and social media in general. It is hard for me to understand this delusion. Facebook has a business model – selling advertising. Throughout my life I have seen that advertising appeals to the conditioned, but I don’t understand why. The essence of marketing is to sell by creating a market, marketing is not concerned with what people need but encouraging them to buy what they don’t need. Why click on sponsored ads? If a comment is not from someone you know, don’t believe it. Control the information that you accept. Rather than dismissing the lies of the human downgraders, people have been diverted into questioning facts. This makes no sense to me.

And it is all geared towards one group of people – white racists, amongst whom are the men I call MAWPs. Whilst there is some debate on the 52% of white women supporting Trump (I wrote about), it does suggest that there are FAWPs (Female Arrogant White and Privileged) – I cannot speak to that. It is such a relatively small demographic amongst all the people in the world who have been manipulated into turning to the right, relatively speaking such a small group of self-interested deluded people.

Politicians are self-serving although I know from personal experience that the best grassroots on the left (not the leadership except for 80’s Corbyn - I don’t know if he has changed significantly, Sanders and maybe AOC) are caring and compassionate. I don’t have personal experience of the right but some libertarians claim compassion. If we demand compassion the self-serving nature of politics will give rise to it. Sadly this is a long job because although self-serving politics is paying lip-service to Greta Thunberg, she and the millions of youth on the street are not affecting the resource exploitation by the 1%. It took a long time for the world to become so defiled, it will take a long time to remove that defilement. Gaia and compassion are the start of that journey.

As for Carole’s change I do not see it as fundamental. The 1%-satrapy continues their accumulation at the expense of the world and the 99%. Within the 99%, division has been increased through the usual forms of manipulation – funding and media, so on a personal level for the 99% there is a greater risk of violence. Daily life has become tenser for the 99%, but as usual politics is controlled so offers no solution. Following the path remains the only effective choice in this defiled world.

<-- Previous Post "#fromwomentomen"

Next Post --> "Ode to Jeremy"