The War over White Men
Am I talking about the patriarchy? Am I talking about white supremacists? What is this war I am talking about?
To understand this war we have to look at electoral power. How did Trump win his election? How did Bojo win his election? By manipulating white men. What was a characteristic of these white men? Nationalists who can delude themselves that race is the issue. At the same time these men, through differing generations, have maintained a sexist attitude to women as well as a usually-unspoken limited attitude to LBGQT communities. Somehow the 1%-satrapy has convinced these white men that the reason they are losing their lifestyle is because of the above delusions, and not because the 1% are accumulating profits by employing the cheapest workers, and having no responsibility to the communities they live within.
It is important to understand that there is an ongoing conditioning war on these men to maintain these outmoded attitudes, and what is equally clear these manipulative tactics are working. No “white” country has compassion as the agenda. When Corbyn presents his compassionate agenda hidden within socialist rhetoric “for the many not the few” (my view of Corbyn), these white men vote against their class interest – I note class interest as being the clearly delineated bourgeoisie-proletariat, 1%-99%, and none of the liberal intellectual confusions. In terms of social media the Centre for Humane Technology describes this ongoing conditioning war as human downgrading, rather than these men supporting compassion decency or morality they are downgraded into accepting the delusions of the previous paragraph.
It angers me that these white men are so gullible, but I have to recognise that the 1%-satrapy are targeting them and because of this intense pressure (that I have taken license and labelled as war in this blog) these men are downgraded and acting according to conditioning in a downgraded way.
Why am I being gender-biased and speaking of white men? Why am I not talking of white women or other ethnic groups? And the answer is quite simple, if they condition the white men into being nationalists, racists etc. (MAWPs), this appears to be sufficient for the 1%-puppets to win an election. When the right-wing targets these types of egos they do not exclude other races or genders, but they know that they only need to target white men. And the egos of these white men have been responding appropriate to this targeting and conditioning.
Why are these men so vulnerable to being greedy and therefore willing to accept delusions that are evidently not true? Why are they averse to questioning? It’s simple – their conditioned egos have always been that way (since colonialism), and the downgraders manipulate that ego through generations. As a white man who does not accept this conditioning, I find it difficult to understand why it is accepted. What I do know is that it is – from generation to generation. So that amongst these men we now have such a level of aversion to introspection, and that the level of racism now is worse amongst them than the ignorant racism I grew up with. The racists of the 60s were just British, they did not understand anything about race – they just put other races down, a colonial inheritance. Nowadays these white men have a level of awareness, not internalised, through media and education that racism is unjust, but they still choose to be racist. Why are they prepared to accept this conditioning?
Greed and labour are connected, our possessions usually come from our labour. We are not talking of accumulation with these men although many delude themselves that their accumulation is of the same type as the 1%. We are talking of men who have worked all their lives for their families, have a home – mostly with these men a home they own, and as they get older they become frightened they will lose this. This fear is understandable.
These are men whose interests lie with the 99%. Homes for their family, a car, living out their lives with a certain level of comfort, this is not a level of expenditure that is comparatively ecologically unsound. In a compassionate society their level of expenditure would not be unreasonable, an appropriate award for years of labour.
For these men the issue is fear, fear that is manipulated and exploited by the 1%-system. Their fear is that they will lose their homes, and closely related to this is the fear that they will lose their jobs and pension. So the 1%-system ensures that some of such men do lose their jobs, do have their pensions affected and do lose their homes. Not many just some - a warning, a control.
Who controls the homes, jobs and pensions? The 1% and their puppet governments. If governments were run for the benefits of the people, then it would be part of government practice to ensure that such men would be protected – as well as protecting all other groups. But they are not protected because the 1%-system requires market forces. With the erratic nature of market forces, where the profits for one corporation can leave people homeless, such men are under threat.
And the manipulation turns this fear into fear of cheaper labour taking their jobs. A government in control with the interests of the people at heart could ensure that such could not happen, such a government could protect jobs. But that would not be market forces and the 1%-satrapy requires market forces.
For most white men they have been surrounded in their work by a system whose bottom line is greed - a systemic greed that is there to increase the accumulation of a few. These men have spent their lives under the delusion that the right-wing has their interests at heart and will protect their houses. This delusion is carried through the generations of white men even if when younger such men develop some compassion and are more liberally-inclined. In the UK of the 60s and 70s were the young hippies, most of whom were these white men. Yet through 30 years of earning a living these white men who were connected to, if not part of, the hippy generation have become so frightened for their houses they have voted for Brexit and Bojo, a Brexit that is at the mercy of market forces to such an extent that their houses will be under threat of health insurance amongst others.
There is no factual evidence for this "economic competence" delusion about the right-wing, but it’s almost as if the delusion is written in stone. In the bi-partisan satrapy the old gravitate to the right yet there is no evidence that the right will protect the old. There is more evidence they won’t, but that evidence does not affect the delusions.
It is the perception of these men that they need to be greedy, that greed will protect their possessions and way of life, when the reality is that their level of income and expenditure is not the problem of greed that is accumulation. The 1%-created delusions manipulate the greed of these men into moving to the right, accepting the lack of compassion on the right such as racism and sexism.
And accumulation has only one objective, to increase accumulation. Such white men develop greed because that is the conditioning but their greed is not necessary as a compassionate system would not affect their livelihood. When the left-wing propose financing their compassionate programmes they tax the 1%, they tax the accumulation. They are not taxing these white men but these white men delude themselves that they are in some way linked to the white men of the 1% (mostly white). They delude themselves that their interests lie with the 1%. This has happened with the white generations in my lifetime, and yet if there is any evidence that evidence contradicts their interest being the same interests as the 1%. But emotionally they are deluded.
The level of conditioning these men undergo is phenomenal. This can be seen by the various racist and sexist backlashes that come out of this group. The 1% are the problem yet every so often a new group of white men espouse their lack of compassion.
These men are targetted by the 1%-system. At the same time these men are targetted by the forces for change. Liberal assaults against white men are continuous, and these assaults are justified. The 1%-manipulations push these white men into becoming the very people the liberals attack – racists and sexists. But these men are only being conditioned from both sides. The 1% play on their egos and fears, and they are assaulted by the liberals for the way their manipulated egos take them. It is a vicious cycle of conditioning that is not addressed. And these men are left alone with their defilements of greed, delusion and aversion. Yet their possessions are not inordinate greed although they fall back on greed to protect their possessions because they have been immersed in greed all their lives. They accept the delusions that reinforce that greed, and they become averse to personal enquiry because of the ongoing onslaught that they as white men are continually undergoing.
Unfortunately some of these white men recognise the level of assault they are under, and turn that recognition into being protective. Black people suffer because of racism so if we examine their social suffering with the relative wealth of these white men then it is quite easy to just label the white men as privileged – and with my classification of MAWPs I do that. But these white men need help because of the level of conditioning they are assaulted with. These men need to be encouraged to be compassionate. Often when they are developing this compassion it is still accompanied by a high level of ego that has come from the years of conditioning. Such ego should not be rejected out-of-hand because it is conditioning. Nor should such ego be encouraged either, because that ego is so strongly manipulated by the 1% and that ego is the basis of the worst aspects of these white men – their unnecessary greed, racism and sexism.
What this comes down to is a recognition that privilege is conditioned. The privilege of white men is manipulated, and we need to help these white men overcome their conditioning. The problem is that politically targeting this group leads to electoral success as has been shown by Trump, Brexit and Bojo. It appears that voting patterns of white women follow the voting patterns of these men yet do the 1% target white women? Other than making the observation of the voting pattern, I cannot comment as I believe this is a discussion for women to have. The 1% have recognised that targeting the egos of white men provides them with the electoral manipulation they need. If at the same time the way they are targeting white men also targets white women, then that is for women to judge and analyse. However targeting the egos of these white men increases sexism so it is not in the interest of white women to react in the same way; yet it appears they do. There was an exit poll that suggested 52% of white women voted for an immoral sexist in the US election (poll discussed here). Whilst men need to be more compassionate and moral in not voting for him, these women voting for him were also voting for a man who encourages sexism as well as not being compassionate and moral. I judge any vote that is not based on compassion and morality but beyond that I make no judgements or analysis concerning white women – that is for them and their movement.
What has to be addressed both for the improvement of compassion and morality in society and for any changes in electoral direction is that there is a war over white men. We have to find sympathy where we can because these men have been targetted but it is hard because the human downgrading has created such an awful character - a person who lacks compassion, decency, is focussed on their own greed, and is now often openly racist and sexist. Let me be very clear inherently (by nature) these men are no different to other men, they have the usual potential for ego and defilement as do all men and women. However once they are targetted through societal conditioning these egos become far more enhanced than with other men.
The particular downgrading that is occurring now was not in my view initially designed but the 1% recognised the potential of prevailing forces. Historically the privilege of such men has led to a white supremacist patriarchy (bell hooks), where white men have always been privileged - and have the associated egos that come with such privilege. Because this privilege brought with it male violence towards women, this led to a justified feminist movement against such privilege. In the latter part of the 20th century the anti-racist movement quite rightly targetted white people for their misuse of privilege so these white men were also targetted by this movement.
Right-thinking people within these movements always held such targetting within the context of class, typical of this would be Occupy who delineated the 1% and 99% as the current Marxist classes of bourgeoisie and proletariat; throughout Occupy anti-racism and gender equality were always promoted. This analysis did not suit the 1%. They recognised the legitimate nature of the forces at play, the attacks on the 1% including being attacked by white men who had been privileged by the 1%. The 1% reoriented the forces through investment. Within the Liberal movements they promoted identity politics, now if you listen to identity politics you rarely hear talk of class. All women and non-white men are celebrated for their identity (some white men are celebrated if the y are gay or trans), whether they are working for the 99% or not. It is my understanding that for some women (not bell hooks) Beyonce is celebrated as a feminist icon because she controls her own finance. I have no idea how much she helps black people financially and through political activity, but because she creates and owns her own wealth through her creativity and intended use of her attractive body does not make her feminist. Is Oprah feminist? She is hugely wealthy but gives back, is she a feminist icon? Was Marilyn Monroe a feminist icon? She gained wealth from her beauty, sex appeal and acting ability. Identity, per se, is not a revolutionary position. Focussing on identity does one thing only - it isolates white men; it makes them a target. The 1% have recognised this and have financed movements that defend white men. But not only do they defend white men, but they have developed a human downgrading with these men lessening their compassion and morality; and effectively increasing the targetting. For some reason this targetting has developed sympathy within white women who are not feminists - traditionally-speaking defending their men. As a consequence this financing has led to a consolidation of voting for appalling white men with no compassion or morality like Trump-puppet, Bojo-puppet, and - they tell me - Scomo-puppet. This downgrading has also now enabled acts of war such as the assassination of an Iranian general in peace-time.
The movement in general has not helped such men in this assault, and they do need help. Despite the appearances of privilege, the conditioning of these men is hurting them as well as hurting society by controlling their voting and increasing their defilements. We need to work together to find a way of helping these men overcome this assault whilst not encouraging their egos – in fact by actively discouraging such egos and working against the human downgrading that will have the same result. We need to understand the role of conditioning in our upbringing. We need to move away from identity towards awareness. Voting by tradition maintains the status quo which is biassed in favour of the 1% because they have controlled the electoral process since it started. Awareness brings with it compassion and morality, and these are the values that need to be the cause in the manifestos of our ballot box. When we look at conditioning we need to recognise that it is important to move beyond conditioning as is suggested here:-
Bring compassion to the table when looking at these white men. Don't look at their character faults, see that as a product of 1% societal conditioning. In the same way as we see black men in gangs as a product of conditioning, see white men as downgraded self-interested bigots in the same way. They need our compassion as do people lacking privilege. Don't attack their privilege, attack their conditioning and the source of their conditioning - the finance of the 1%. Help these men heal themselves.