/32/ - Psychopolitics

>>2346

That's an interesting read. They don't say they're living in a post-war era (although it may well be), but they're looking at the possibility of permanent peace.

As far as I can tell they reach the conclusion that society is based on war, that the threat of war provides the society with a base level of impetus and that the military performs vital social functions that would need to be replaced in a world without war, or before such a world could come into being.

It's quite funny, it calls the army a welfare institution for men unsuitable for a legitimate job in commerce or production and points out the historical use of the military in press ganging or drafting when unemployment is very high. I guess the world is making headway to a world without war if societies no longer need to draft their young men in times of high unemployment.

>>2346

Report from Iron Mountain is real. It is a government doc. They retroactively tried to discredit it. Denying origin of document is called counter intelligence (spreading disinformation).

The lower classes are not supposed to know what their betters think of them (that they are human cattle). The ruling elite all read Platos Republic in grade school.

You do not understand how the system works and how ancient it is.

Constant war with some vague far off enemy is one of the pillars of 1984

>>2346

>As far as I know it's a hoax

I bet you think the protocols are fake too.

>>3132

It's very important to keep men occupied somehow, it's about appropriating the war instinct, this is what video-games tend to do.

>>3461

>>3356

>We'll also get raided with more porn because of the new embeds. That's more psychological warfare right on this site.

Good point

>The effort it seems is to eliminate the center and induce a state of polarity in everyone.

The Hegelian dialectic is so effective it staggers the imagination. Even if people know it happening they still tolerate it.

>>3387

>The Hegelian dialectic is so effective it staggers the imagination. Even if people know it happening they still tolerate it.

Well if I may, what is the Hegelian Dialectic?

>>3390

For the sake of conciseness: Thesis + Antithesis = Synthesis

>>3392

I really wish you weren't preaching conciseness over actual understanding right now

>>3311

sounds like its Marxism by another name. Someone better get on this commie bastad before he opens a maelstrom of simulacrum and reality that no one can snap out of.

>>3305

when I said "philosophy, as such" I meant philosophy in the sense it is usually taken in the west. see Descartes for a prime example (he basically starts off by denying everything but his own individual mind). that link you posted is silly - "it is no longer possible to define metaphysics that way.." metaphysics cannot change. just reading the beginning section, this is quite absurd...

this article should clear things up if you care to read it:

http://www.studiesincomparativereligion.com/public/articles/Oriental_Metaphysics-by_Rene_Guenon.aspx

>>3307

>>3311

>>3312

You guys are being hostile for no real reason. Simply put, metaphysics is the the laws above physical laws. In secular terms, it would be the "root law" from which all other "instantiated laws" flow/derive, in non-secular terms, it would be the divine substratum of existence.

>>3315

I guess but there's been about a half-dozen contradicting descriptions of it so far.

One guy thinks it includes ideals like 'family' and 'nation', another says its about the first principles of the universe, while another says it goes beyond existence in its questioning. Now you say it's the actual laws that preceeded the universe, the divine basis for the universe; laws above physical laws, which make it seem more important than observable physics, and a kind of religion.

>>3313

>this article should clear things up if you care to read it.

>"...it should be made clear in what sense the word “metaphysics” is used, all the more so since I have frequently had occasion to state that everyone does not understand it in the same way. I think the best course to take with words that can give rise to ambiguity is to reduce them, as far as possible, to their primary and etymological meaning. Now, according to its composition, this word “metaphysics” means literally “beyond physics,” taking the word “physics” in the accepted meaning it always had for the ancients, that is as the “science of nature” in its widest sense. Physics is the study of all which appertains to the domain of nature; metaphysics, on the other hand, is the study of what lies beyond nature. How then can some claim that metaphysical knowledge is natural knowledge, either in respect of its object, or with regard to the faculties by which it is obtained? There we have a complete misconception, a contradiction in terms..."

Make of that what you will.

>>3315

Agreed, metaphysics is often not defined properly, Aristotle intended it as ‘the science of things transcending what is physical or natural.’ from what I understand.

>>369

I haven't heard this term before, but supposedly insulting your opponent tends to be very effective for the broad audience, as it's an appeal to mammalian qualities.

Thank you for the tip, the file has been uploaded to the MEGA. I will do the same for the full Field Manual as soon as I find it.

>>1647

>http://www.enlistment.us/field-manuals/fm-33-1-1-psychological-operations-techniques-and-procedures.shtml

This is what Freemasons actually believe. Nature is way smarter and devious than what can be illustrated using Chess. The only reason these Clowns are driving the bus is because it is full of retards. One day, the Bus is going to get a new kind of driver.

Thank you

Thanks mate!

Are you a nihilist if you decide that you aren't qualified to have an opinion on deeply complex ideals?

Are you sitting on the fence if you find that the left and the right are trying to lure you with, on the left, utopian ideals, and on the right

a nostalgic perfectionism.

Complex issues don't have a simple solution we've never been smart enough to solve OR a simple solution we once had but threw away due to degradation.

But we must all be ideologues. We must make a choice or we don't believe in anything. If we aren't on an extreme then we don't believe in anything.

If we aren't always right, then we're always wrong.

>>3156

you'll throw one ideology out and be too 'drunk' to notice you put 3 back on

>>3181

human beings are innately illogical and fundamentally run on "correlation =/= causation" people that understand said fallacy are immediately skeptical of all correlations and endup correlating correlations as coincidental

Ideologies are just tools. They are not reality, that's when you get problems when people don't realize that.

I follow Buddhism because it's useful to me, to believe that doing good and good will come back to you. It's not exactly how the world works but it helps me to live my life and gives me opportunities to generate compassion in me and that is what makes people happy. We create our own paradises and hells.

Also meditation. That shit is useful.

>>737

Too much stuff is being deleted already. Cannot trust any board anymore.

I believe the term started getting popular around the Trump campaign. It was paraphrased as.

It's alwasys darkest before the Don.

This thread is interesting considering it predated the "calm before the storm" comment.

>>2761

To Sum up.

From thoughts of couple strong minded person into very influential thinking of majority

This video was a shock for me, how deeply it has got rooted into American education to manipulate future generations

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUEgTaM28ls

Do you want to read people analysing feminism or the actual feminist writers?

It all denominates to Marxism. The women were being exploited because they weren't getting paid and their labour was taken away from them (alienation).

I would like to know more about this as well. It seems like feminism and social justice issues burst onto the scene in a way that suggests coordinated action.

I think the slow growth of feminism can be explained in part by "The Myth of Male Power". The notion that women have always occupied a position in society that is wholly inferior is a myth. Women hold a valued and protected status that was leveraged by feminism to inject it into the mainstream.

>>2761

The more ancient perspective of feminism can be found in the character of Lilith, being the first woman (created in the garden), who competed with Adam for sexual dominance. Later, she would pronounce God's full name and fly away. Daddy issues, I guess.

During WW1, women, the early feminists types, used to hand out white feathers to those who chose not to enlist. It was a gesture intended to shame whosoever was given the feather. I've heard it said this was a ploy by some agency to encourage more men to combat. By this I mean to say, feminism has always been a means to control men, and not solely to "liberate" women.

The feminist movement was carried on through marketing ploys, Edward Bernays using the feminist movement to sell cigarettes for example, this led into the "Council on Foreign Relations" which is a Rockefeller social engineering think-tank.

It's intended to break up the family, encouraging women to surrender their children to the education system for the pursuit of a career. It wasn't so long ago that only 1 parent had to work.

I'll add some more thoughts on this, mainly relating to how the Internet affects irl group formation.

a) By off loading such a big part of our intelligence to the net there lies the danger of being unable to function as members of smaller groups in the same way people have more and more difficulty to survive off the grid.

b)The way the net handles cross group relationships: by creating safespaces so as to combat the net's inherent hate machine. This kind of alienation can carry on irl the more people rely on sanitized social media to form their opinions.

c)narcissim, as an anon put it, there are more photographers and attention whores than people actually interested in a group's activities.

Also I have been toying with the idea of parts of the Internet functioning as a behavioral sink. I searched a bit and found the following

> Freedman suggested a different conclusion, though. Moral decay resulted “not from density, but from excessive social interaction,” Ramsden explained. “Not all of Calhoun’s rats had gone berserk. Those who managed to control space led relatively normal lives.” Striking the right balance between privacy and community, Freedman argued, would reduce social pathology. It was the unwanted unavoidable social interaction that drove even fairly social creatures mad, he believed. Culture and upbringing also play key roles in adapting to environment, others suggested.

>Further studies of space design seemed to prove this. One such study compared students living in two different styles of college dormitory— corridor versus a suite style. Those in the corridor perceived the environment as crowded and exhibited increased stress levels. Those in the suite style, where the dormitory was partitioned into a series of separate communal areas, fared better, even though the level of density was similar, Ramsden said. “By comparing the two, [researchers] were able to provide evidence both of pathology and its amelioration through more effective design.

If social interaction is what results in a behavioral sink, can the InterPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>3038

>nowadays [people] basically have no alone time and therefore spend no time thinking.

It is as if everyone is watching Big Brother 24/7

>>3039

>but those niche groups never leave the internet.

Some of those niche groups never leave the Internet, some do. But even those that don't, affect reality by affecting the people using them.

And some groups, niche or not, substitute real structures.

Tinder substituting mating process

Uber substituting state regulations of transportation

Fb - socializing

Wikipedia - parts of the intellectual structures

etc.

The above have the potential to provide value but also very negative results.

As long as Internet groups functioned mainly with text these problems were less pronounced, part of the reason was, less people were using it back then. But once rating systems, recommendations algorithms and social media became commonplace things really started going bad. That, along with the influx of masses accessing the net through smartphones.

Local traditional structures had no way to compete with the results those systems gave to the specific niche they were designed for in much the same way that traditional architecture had no way to compete with the functionality of Bauhaus. But some things were lost during that conversion.

Yes, I keep googling how to make cheese sauce even after having made it lots of times.

Also I must lack ingenuity because I use for stuff like stopping a bike wheel squeaking.

If you attempt to solve the problem without first using the internet but then consult it afterwards, then maybe you can keep your edge AND get the best technique.

didn't mean to sage.