Mean Boss

If your boss is a mean and bullying tyrant, it is your fault that he is allowed to get away with being such a vicious, nasty person. With a workforce of feisty, assertive individuators, no boss could long be tyrannical, for he would have to settle for being a democratic supervisor.

In Jordan Peterson's terms, the hierarchy will be much less likely to turn corrupt and tyrannical if the subordinates are maverizers.

Whether a citizen is being tyrannized in the political realm, it is his fault.

All need to man up and beat down any tyrant, as a citizen or as an employee.

Department of Disinformation

The Biden Administration has now developed a Department of Disinformation as part of Homeland Security.

This Administration now seeks to regulate free speech and freedom of the press.

Congress must threaten to cut off all funding for that department immediately until this department is disbanded. If it is not disbanded, all funding should be severed immediately.

We cannot stomach federal statists interfering with the free flow of information or disinformation. It is none of their business, period.

As a moderate I am not allowed to be a free speech absolutist, but I feel morally obligated to land close to that stance.

 

Sanity Is A Social Institution

 Jordan Peterson, from Pages 3 and 4 of his book, BEYOND ORDER 12 MORE RULES FOR LIFE argues that sanity is a social institution, that we think, learn, and stay healthy by talking to others.

I disagree in part for I believe sanity is an individual institutions as Freud and Jung believed: Here is Jordan on Page 4: "For Drs Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung, the great depth psychologists, sanity was a characteristic of the individual mind."

 Jordan Peterson on Page 1 of his book, BEYOND ORDER 12 MORE RULES FOR LIFE, writes out Rule 1: "Do not carelessly denigrate social institutions or creative achievement."

We are individualists first, he recommends, and I would argue that makes us loners and individual-livers more than joiners and group-livers, but the moderate Peterson chides us not to forget our social needs, and some legitimate comfort to be find there. I agree.

I agree that we cannot denigrate creative achievement as is the human norm, but that is a groupist tendency for the most part.

Jordan seems to contradict himself here: on the one hand he warns the reader not to denigrate social institutions, and then he chides the reader for past sins of denigrating creative achievement. This rule seems shoddily formulated and internally contradictory to me. It seems poorly written.

The Communist Rag

 The StarTribune is unapologetically a Communist rag. Today, in there A section (Sunday, April 24, 2022), they ran a long article about the wonders and glories of the EU legislature that just passed a putatively strict long, controlling social media to root out hate speech.

Hate speech, actual or alleged, is free speech, and no government need or ever should by allowed by its citizens to suppress free speech. But here in Europe turanny is legal and suppressed free speech is legal and praised by a major, regional American newspaper.

Traditionally, American legacy media was all for freedom of the press, of free speech. No longer. Marxists are flexing their muscles.

React Well

 In the Preface to his book BEYOND ORDER 12 MORE RULES FOR LIFE, Jordan Peterson worries that we will corrupted by setbacks, suffering, losses and pain encountered from source in nature and in the malevolence of other people working against us.

He sure is correct here. A good, positive attitude is the key: if one is resilient and seeks constantly to rise above whatever comes one's way, there is a large chance that one will triumph. One cannot be bitter or resentful when one has learned to make lemonade when life hands one several lemons.

Incompatible

.

 I have never gotten over my shock as the sheer, purely consistent hatred, opposition, and hostility that actual joiners demonstrate directly and unfeigned against loners, especially openly, unapologetic, feisty, individuating loners.

As long as evil rules this world, and people live in sin, ignorance and illusion, the great, brute aggression of the pack towards the individual is the core happening at the base of all social interactions.

To alter this corrupt, unjust persecution of and discrimination against individuals by groupists, some social, learned changes must occur and become the new moral custom.

First, individual-living, not group-living, just become the primary mode of living for most people.

Second, maverization must become common, ordinary, customary, even popular.

Third, it must become accepted that those that group-live, individual-live or those that move back and forth between all these modes of living must be accepted as normal, and not be a source of ridicule or social punishment..

Fourth, it must be recognized that the Light Couple and the Good Spirits are individual-livers, primarily.

Paradox

 We know that paradox and inconsistency are fundamental, perhaps insurmountable aspect of objective reality. But, to contradict myself in grand moderate style, to live is to require logical consistency and the rational resolution of puzzles and dilemmas. We must construe a metanarrative to explain everything, or to so attempt to characterize. We require values, culture and meaning in our lives that grow out of or constitute that metanarrative.

For the sake of sanity, for the victories for the Good Spirits to be ongoing, we must live as if existence is attributed to t such a sensible, sane metanarrative. We must assume that consistency and intelligibility are reachable about the world and our lives, in order that spiritual and moral goodness, even civilization itself, can be realized and added to. If this is a fantasy, it is a fancy critically to be lived by so that the children of light may increase and do well in each generation.

Genuine Revolution

 The only genuine revolution is one whose plotters and participants aim at and achieve their aim to eliminate elites from ruling society for the foreseeable future.

The only authentic and lasting revolution must be gentle, generally nonviolent, from the bottom up, with the persuaders reaching out inviting voters to come along for the ride, one voter at a time.

The sellers and buyers of this gentle revolution are most potent, effective and competent, if the actors are individuator-anarchist supercitizens, under which each participant is half-common person, and one-half an elite, aristocratic individualist that is maverized and maverizing.

Deconstruction

 On Page 188 of his excellent book, Explaining Postmodernism, Professor Stephen R Hicks lays out his description of how postmodernist Marxists schemed in and out of Academia for decades to groom students and the public into accepting their deconstruction of Western thought and culture, in effect separating the masses from their traditional cultural values and mores.

Once Americans are separated from their love of the American Way, then the educated and the young are fairly receptive to embracing Marxist, nihilistic and globalist views and doctrines. 

The clever, patient ploy unleashed on the young and the unsuspecting public by these academic Leftist revolutionaries finally took hold, after about 2015 or so as America is no a woke country where 50% of young people prefer socialism over capitalism.

The revolution is close to being launched, and perhaps we traditionalists and conservatives can yet turn things around, but it will be a close race.

Eric Hoffer's loathing of and fear of intellectuals and idealists is shown to be brilliantly insightful decades ahead of just about anyone else, as he warned then against power-addicted, elitist intellectuals crave to rule our people as slaves and wards of the state.

Their first aim is to make the people lose faith in their traditional culture. Once that bond is severed, and people need metanarratives and a cultural story and its accompanying values to make sense of their suffering and confusing lives, to give them reason, purpose, even a reason to live, love, worship, behave, work, and perpetuate the race.

Hoffer knew clearly that a people without values is a people that are enmasse, misfits and they are fruit ripe for the picking for every demagogue, zealot, revolutionary and ideologically malcontent.

Hoffer realized full well that a people need their American values of liberty, prosperity, capitalism, and independence to remain fitted, quiet, contented and stabilized. He wanted to rule no one, and he wanted the citizens of this greatest nation to fit in, be content, happy, and quiet. Gentle, constant, incremental reforms could be launched and implemented, but also introduced peacefully, and with voluntary acceptance or rejection of such suggestions without violent revenge heaped upon the masses for rejecting the ism of the zealots and would-be oligarchs.

Leftist and elitist intellectuals are not noble idealists, for the most part. They claim the moral high ground, but they actually deconstruct and intentionally undermine good values owned and practiced by the good, common people in order to convert these quiet, happy, peaceful citizens, with their boundless ache to believe in something—even an unholy cause to feel into—transmuted into mass movement devotees controlled and slaughtered by the totalitarian overlords controlling the whip hand.

 

The Enlightenment's Fable

 The late Professor EJ Hundert wrote this authoritative book (The Enlightenment's Fable) on Bernard Mandeville's masterpiece, The Fable of the Bees. 

This is what Hundert wrote on Page 120: "At the heart of Mandeville' mature argument was the thesis that the growth of commerce, increased consumption and the expansion of a class of leisured commoners were all civilizing agents."

Mandeville does not think that people are basically good and that they are born selfish, but could be socialized if politicians, crafty and wise, knew how to appeal to their self-interest that working together and depending on each other was in the best interest of everyone, and indirectly promoting the public welfare.

Mandeville knew that the economy needed to grow (he was a mercantilist, not a capitalist), modernize, become more secular, more urban, and more prosperous if a people were to flourish. He felt that morality and commercial activity could not be mutually accommodated.

Note that he offered that increased wealth enjoyed by common people would improve society, even civilize its raw appetites and expressed passions.

I am more of a materialist than an immaterialist. As an egoist, I would agree with Mandeville that per capita prosperity morally elevates more than poverty and deprivation positively influence people. Until people enjoy affluence and prosperity, they suffer from low self-esteem, and that is evil incarnate. By raising the standard of living, we raise individual citizen self-esteem and that adds to virtue, so secular material well-being needs to suffuse modern society, and that is of benefit to all, and the Good Spirits approve of such widespread living conditions.

Howard Gardner

 Psychologist Howard Gardner suggests that there are 8 or 9 kinds of intelligence, not just linguistic intelligence, and logico-mathematic intelligence, both of which are measured by standard IQ tests.

Whether Gardner is credible or not, he does raise for our consideration that interesting proposal that there are many kinds of intelligence--and let us include transhumanism--so that there may be many ways for all people, including people of average ability to demonstrate that individuated talent and brilliance to the world.

Once again, in disagreement with Jordan Peterson, I propose that talent is not rare or exceptional, only not supported nor encourage by society.

Strong Words

 Dennis Prager recently averred that Liberals are wrong, but Leftists are more than that, they are evil. These strong words are accurate.

Leftism is not a cause, an ideology, cancerous, and nihilistic--its followers scheme openly to wipe out Christianity, whites, the Western World, American and capitalism. They are irredeemably vicious.

Now, they would accuse conservatives of being fascists and evil, and moderate conservatives of being wrong.

The American conservative movement is feisty but not totalitarian, whereas our Leftists are, and they require a firm, aggressive, hand to hold them at bay and save the country.

  

Virtue Responsibilism

We must constantly self-check and self-evaluate to try to ensure--there are no guarantees that we are on the right track--that we are not deceived or embracing false beliefs. We cannot know that we are still on track even if we once were well-oriented.

We need to talk to others, and dialogue so that they can give us instructive feedback about what we believe, do and say. We must always seek to learn new things and see familiar things in new ways so that we ever expand our knowledge and search for truth.

We may also want to talk to God and the Good Spirits for they are objective truth and live it, so their input will enable us to see the world more clearly, closer to how it is as noumena.

Once we are committed to seeking truth and refuting deception and illusion via applied epistemic humility, then we must immediately apply this same technique to our consciousness of our proclaimed spiritual and moral goodness.

Here again it is easy to self-regard oneself as one of the chosen/the Elect/ the saved inevitably bound for heaven, almost flawless and free of sin, awash in God's grace. It is easy to self-deceive and decay, falling away from the Good Spirits. We must be on guard for this loss at all times and remain humble enough to accept that we are sinners, so born, and that it is easy to lose our way once again, while still assuming that we are right with the Good Spirits.

Humility

When such aggressive proselytizers approach one, it is a groupist seeking power over the individual not part of the pack that follows the cult, and the attempt to capture one for the cause is hostile and unfortunate, good for no one.

As a general rule, being good or holy is a tricky posture to assume. Both roles are positive and desirable, but to talk about either openly, constantly and preaching one's cause's expansion as all are urged to join up--all of this self-conscious strutting and prattle disguises and corrupts the individual aim to be good and holy. 

It is not something to boast about constantly, nor to a worshiped abstraction, nor to be the cause pushed by the state upon citizens.

Being good or holy is a private, personal matter, and the self-realizing individual is best situated to arrange her own life to be good and holy in a way that works for her, and only she knows what is best for her, and her choices usually will be to society's benefit.

We need to talk little about how good and holy we are, and rather work tirelessly to be good and holy, and God and the Good Spirits will notice and approve, and others will notice our good works and example, left done but unstated, and not advertised.

The Wise Prager

 Dennis Prager was talking on the radio the other day about how young adults that do not commit to getting married for years and years, are missing the boat. It is usually men that threat girlfriends this way, and Dennis urges the girls to sever the connection. 

He may love her, but he will not get married until it feels right. Dennis wants us to commit ourselves early and firmly (after some careful weighing of the options, their pros and cons) to a course of action. If we act, then accompanying feelings of reassurance often follow. In life, we must act. Delay and indecision stunts moral growth and the chance to grab personal happiness when the right girl comes along.

Witnessing

When such aggressive proselytizers approach one, it is a groupist seeking power over the individual not part of the pack that follows the cult, and the attempt to capture one for the cause is hostile and unfortunate, good for no one.

As a general rule, being good or holy is a tricky posture to assume. Both roles are positive and desirable, but to talk about either openly, constantly and preaching one's cause's expansion as all are urged to join up--all of this self-conscious strutting and prattle disguises and corrupts the individual aim to be good and holy. 

It is not something to boast about constantly, nor to a worshipped abstraction, nor to be the cause pushed by the state upon citizens/

Being good or holy is a private, personal matter, and the self-realizing individual is best situated to arrange her own life to be good and holy in a way that works for her, and only she knows what is best for her, and her choices usually will be to society's benefit.

We need to talk little about how good and holy we are, and rather work tirelessly to be good and holy, and God and the Good Spirits will notice and approve, and others will notice our good works and example, left done but unstated, and not advertised.

Wearing It On Your Sleeves

 One should be happy but generally serious and ambitious about serving God and making something of one's short life while here. The clock is always ticking, and death comes closer to one each passing day.

It is important to maverize by doing it, not wearing it one one's sleeve, or chattering endlessly with others about how important one is.

One should be enthusiastic and thrilled to maverize, but not go around bragging about it or self-consciously acting like a higher-caliber kind of human. God expects us to be humble and courteous in public (confident but not haughty). 

When we maverize, whether we have consciously made the association that we work for God as creators, whether we do it for God's sake, for our own sake, or as indifferent atheist individuators, we do work for God.

God expects us to comport ourselves towards others in such a way as to make God look good, not to embarrass or bring shame unto God due to our rudeness, cruelty, lying and misbehavior.

Doing Damage

If one general maxim is to do good, then a negative general axiom is to do no harm, or as little as possible.

Intellectuals and experts, Prager said yesterday, may have expertise in their own area, but, without wisdom, they do not have intelligent, workable solutions for public problems. They may know more than the average citizen that they are looking down upon, and are self-righteously lecturing, sincerely self-assured that they are smarter, better and superior than the unwashed masses.

Well, it is likely that the average citizen would make better decisions because the wisdom has not been bred out of him, so he is in fact superior to the smarter intellectuals.

Be Not Jealous

 It is important not to be arrogant and hurt others’ feelings, by implying that you are superior to everyone around you.

Some people are very, very accomplished, seemingly flawless, and that can make nonindividuators and joiners around them, that encounter them, feel inadequate. At best they will ignore them and leave them lonely, and at worst the nonindividuators can mob-attack the "superior ones' among them, and destroy themselves, sometimes literally.

It would be far better and morally desirable for mediocrities and nonindividuators to get going and maverize themselves. Then they would feel so justifiably proud of their own accomplishments, and confident of many impressive, future rounds of success and victory, that it would not occur to them to be jealous of those smarter, more accomplished, and more talented than themselves.

This is the best way for people to cease being jealous of neighbors or trying to control their neighbors' lives.

Both

 Both moralists and ideologues groom children, but so proceeding must be done above-board, in open, ethical fashion requiring parental approval and support; so pursuing children must be done with decency, caution and great care.

Brave When Alone

 I was rereading American Iconoclast by Tom Shactman, a biography of Eric Hoffer, when I had some thoughts about what Shactman wrote of Hoffer on Page 75: "Why had Soviet citizens been able to stand up heroically to the advances of Hitler's armies, but offered no resistance to the depredations of Stalin's secret police? Why had some Jews fiercely fought to establish the state of Israel, while their relatives went in a seemingly docile manner to Hitler's gas chambers? Hoffer posited the same answer for both questions: that the Soviets when facing Nazi armies had been united as a group, but scattered as individuals when facing Stalin's secret police, and that the Jews had been united when fighting the British in Palestine but assimilated and scattered when facing the Nazi secret police."

I believe what Hoffer posited here was correct. People, when united with others in their group, are confident, emboldened, feel forceful and willing to resist, can withstand evil or governmental forces, When people are scattered and disunited, they are easy to pick off.

What are we to conclude from this: that united and group-oriented, then people are strong, confident, assertive and will defend themselves, but that none should live as individualists for that leaves them weak, divided, and easy to pick off?

I do not think that this conclusion, though useful, was one that Hoffer accepted, though he noted its existence: he was just pointing out how people naturally act, that, though individually and naturally cowardly and meek against bullies, attackers, and oppressors, as a militant united in group-member, they can put up fierce even overwhelming resistance.

That groupists will so react, to severe external police or mob pressures, seems to be the conclusion and it is correct for predicting how groupists will react generally to severe, cruel terrorization by authoritarian forces.

The general reaction from advanced, willful, proud individuals would differ markedly. 

I would posit that the isolated, nonindividuating, group-living person separated from his pack, will collapse like an accordion, and is helpless against mass movements, secret police, and totalitarian pressure. Only a few are naturally courageous, without mass movement type ferocious courage as a collective fighting force clashing fiercely against an identified foreign or oppositional enemy.

Were an attacked people, as individuals and as organized units, brought up as individuators and individual-livers, the fierce courage and will to fight back even violently against secret, thugs, mobs and totalitarian opponents would become commonplace. 

It is this fierce desire to conquer any oppressor or vicious foe that we need all American citizens to foster.