Class Society, Power, and Adaptation

[realunoriginal]

This post is mainly a response to (you) Joker’s dilemma against Western, classist society. Though of course, it is also to everybody else.

There are two kinds of individuals within the system of America’s classist society: those who are truly free and those that are truly slaves.

The truly free are beyond the scope of the system, acting in ways that may seem nonsensical, dangerous, and especially uncontrolled. These ‘truly free’ individuals are free, because they have freed themselves from the precisely developed restraints of society that have become more and more efficient over time. They need not adhere to so-called ‘moral rules’ or the ‘Social Contract’. They understand that their own actions and thoughts are the true law of the land and who controls these things–the state or the individual? The individual controls his/her fate, because it has not left the hands of the individual into the hands of the state.

The true slaves are the ones who have given into the system through either thought or action. These individuals succumb to the system, consciously or not, by adhering to rules that may very well be absurd. Under the systematic rule, the concepts of meaning, purpose, and happiness are all necessarily limited. There is only so much that can be achieved from within the systematic rules and laws of society. Ultimately, the true slaves make no impact upon society while society makes all the impact upon them. They eat, breath, and shit the filth that they are given, which may or may not be ‘enough’ to survive.

Power is inherently dominated by the ‘ruling elite’ of our Western, classist society.

However, there are actually two kinds of power within society. There is social power, which represents the will of the masses (and is controlled by the ruling elite). And there is individual power, which represents the will of the individual (and is controlled by the individual). Under the contexts of freedom already mentioned, the individual’s power is inherent, while society’s power is not. Being truly free means that there is no defaulted force that directs the actions of the individual beyond what the individual chooses for him/herself. This does not mean that the individual exists in isolation; it simply means that any contribution to a social system is always considered at will. There is no control. There is no contract. The persuasion of morality is empty. The individual acts upon his/her will only and the individual will do whatever he/she wants under no obvious discretion.

Human adaptation has changed and is only available to those that are truly free.

The truly free individual has two paths, which lead to the same end. The individual can attempt to destroy society and tear it down, or the individual can attempt to cultivate a new society and build it up. Both of these routes lead to the same conclusion–the individual must first reject society as it exists and must obtain true freedom (i.e. enlightenment). Without true freedom, there is no possibility for true meaning, purpose, or happiness in life, individually or socially. Thus, any society without true freedom is doomed for failure and any prosperity will be short-lived.

A common delusion under Western, classist society is that somebody can be truly free while remaining moral. This is false! Morality is almost absolutely society’s most dominating force. Morality is a tool of control and enticer of fear. The masses tremble under the awe of God and recite his Word to lead them into the future of false hopes and dreams. Within the small percentage of America’s ruling elite, there may not be more than a handful of truly free individuals. The Moralists exist to ensure that the ruling class gives in to the whims of moral majority of the populace.

To Joker,

My issue is this: what kind of society would you prefer to live in if you had the choice? There are many societies of the world, some that I’m sure you may agree with and enjoy, but I do not understand your discontent with American society? The problem that I see is that everybody needs to acknowledge and accept the social status of our animal nature. We are social beings, so we will be and must be social people. A context of individuality only represents a half of the picture of the human animal.

I believe that it is a confusion to say that America is ruled by ‘the weak’. How I see it is: ‘the strong’, ‘alpha male’ ideology has been in a ‘behind-the-scenes’ control throughout the entire course of history. What happened to develop Western society into what it is came with a necessary adaptation that had to be made–the strong individuals had to adapt to remain in control. I believe that there has been a mistake of perception to say that, “the weak inherited the Earth.” This is not the case. The strong individuals remained in control through adaptation. Our society represents that an individual’s strength no longer rests on physical power. Instead, it rests on the power of the will. Those individuals with the strongest will hold the keys to power. Hitler is a prime example of this and it is an example that many people learned an important lesson from.

The ruling elite play the same game that every class plays, only the rewards are different.

Again, my question is: what is wrong with society as it stands?

[Joker]

@realunoriginal

This post is mainly a response to (you) Joker’s dilemma against Western, classist society. Though of course, it is also to everybody else.

There are two kinds of individuals within the system of America’s classist society: those who are truly free and those that are truly slaves.

The truly free are beyond the scope of the system, acting in ways that may seem nonsensical, dangerous, and especially uncontrolled. These ‘truly free’ individuals are free, because they have freed themselves from the precisely developed restraints of society that have become more and more efficient over time. They need not adhere to so-called ‘moral rules’ or the ‘Social Contract’. They understand that their own actions and thoughts are the true law of the land and who controls these things–the state or the individual? The individual controls his/her fate, because it has not left the hands of the individual into the hands of the state.

The true slaves are the ones who have given into the system through either thought or action. These individuals succumb to the system, consciously or not, by adhering to rules that may very well be absurd. Under the systematic rule, the concepts of meaning, purpose, and happiness are all necessarily limited. There is only so much that can be achieved from within the systematic rules and laws of society. Ultimately, the true slaves make no impact upon society while society makes all the impact upon them. They eat, breath, and shit the filth that they are given, which may or may not be ‘enough’ to survive.

Power is inherently dominated by the ‘ruling elite’ of our Western, classist society.

However, there are actually two kinds of power within society. There is social power, which represents the will of the masses (and is controlled by the ruling elite). And there is individual power, which represents the will of the individual (and is controlled by the individual). Under the contexts of freedom already mentioned, the individual’s power is inherent, while society’s power is not. Being truly free means that there is no defaulted force that directs the actions of the individual beyond what the individual chooses for him/herself. This does not mean that the individual exists in isolation; it simply means that any contribution to a social system is always considered at will. There is no control. There is no contract. The persuasion of morality is empty. The individual acts upon his/her will only and the individual will do whatever he/she wants under no obvious discretion.

Human adaptation has changed and is only available to those that are truly free.

The truly free individual has two paths, which lead to the same end. The individual can attempt to destroy society and tear it down, or the individual can attempt to cultivate a new society and build it up. Both of these routes lead to the same conclusion–the individual must first reject society as it exists and must obtain true freedom (i.e. enlightenment). Without true freedom, there is no possibility for true meaning, purpose, or happiness in life, individually or socially. Thus, any society without true freedom is doomed for failure and any prosperity will be short-lived.

A common delusion under Western, classist society is that somebody can be truly free while remaining moral. This is false! Morality is almost absolutely society’s most dominating force. Morality is a tool of control and enticer of fear. The masses tremble under the awe of God and recite his Word to lead them into the future of false hopes and dreams. Within the small percentage of America’s ruling elite, there may not be more than a handful of truly free individuals. The Moralists exist to ensure that the ruling class gives in to the whims of moral majority of the populace.

To Joker,

My issue is this: what kind of society would you prefer to live in if you had the choice? There are many societies of the world, some that I’m sure you may agree with and enjoy, but I do not understand your discontent with American society? The problem that I see is that everybody needs to acknowledge and accept the social status of our animal nature. We are social beings, so we will be and must be social people. A context of individuality only represents a half of the picture of the human animal.

I believe that it is a confusion to say that America is ruled by ‘the weak’. How I see it is: ‘the strong’, ‘alpha male’ ideology has been in a ‘behind-the-scenes’ control throughout the entire course of history. What happened to develop Western society into what it is came with a necessary adaptation that had to be made–the strong individuals had to adapt to remain in control. I believe that there has been a mistake of perception to say that, “the weak inherited the Earth.” This is not the case. The strong individuals remained in control through adaptation. Our society represents that an individual’s strength no longer rests on physical power. Instead, it rests on the power of the will. Those individuals with the strongest will hold the keys to power. Hitler is a prime example of this and it is an example that many people learned an important lesson from.

The ruling elite play the same game that every class plays, only the rewards are different.

Again, my question is: what is wrong with society as it stands?

Good post.

To Joker,

My issue is this: what kind of society would you prefer to live in if you had the choice?

Nomadic or hunter gatherer society. Those two are the ones I like the most.

Where there are few controls if any over an individual. Where socialism is practiced and where the original meaning of cooperation hasn’t lost its meaning.

There are many societies of the world, some that I’m sure you may agree with and enjoy, but I do not understand your discontent with American society?

Actually my discontent stems with modern industrial societies guided by markets and absurd religionisms not America itself.

( America is just one modern industrial society amongst many.)

For starters in industrial nations there are no individuals but instead there are only commodities of different kinds of people mechanized into an array where people are represented as a bunch of ones and zeros for profit.

The reason I don’t like the market is because of its hive mentality and because it revolves around monetary value or worth a religious construction guided by moral civil engineering.

I don’t like being categorized at the whims of other people. I don’t like having to revolve around other people’s worthless ideals and standards.

Also I believe most modern forms of philosophy and science that has come to dominate every form of society is still operating on alot of religious assumptions of objective purpose. In the past one could ignore other people’s religions with ease but since science and philosophy is working through entire whole aspects of present society everywhere they simply cannot be ignored anymore as they exist in every fabric of our modern lives. ( In all social aspects.)

I believe the whole part of the modern world being operated by absurd religionisms you already know about and don’t need my explanation on them.

The problem that I see is that everybody needs to acknowledge and accept the social status of our animal nature. We are social beings, so we will be and must be social people. A context of individuality only represents a half of the picture of the human animal.

I accept that. Another reason why I don’t like modern industrial nations is because everything social now is becoming impersonal unto being indifferent.

( I would describe the modern era as where everyone is indifferent to each other or dis-associated.) ( Privatized.)

( I believe the beauty of being social with others has been lost over time and is especially deteriorating in the present.)

It should be noted that I do like cooperation despite my rebellious defiant tone but only when it is mutual.

The problem with the modern notion of cooperation is that it is rarely ever mutual but instead lies on intimidation and forceful coercion.

( I have no problems with intimidation or forceful coercion but today’s morality has made it illegal to even fight or rebel against today’s social movements.)

I believe that it is a confusion to say that America is ruled by ‘the weak’.

I would say that all modern nations are ruled by the leisure class. I call them weak because they’re dependent on everyone around them and on the laws that protect them making them a protected class.

I call them weak because in a world outside of their dependent institutions they wouldn’t be able to survive.

How I see it is: ‘the strong’, ‘alpha male’ ideology has been in a ‘behind-the-scenes’ control throughout the entire course of history.

Sometimes. Depends on the individual case.

What happened to develop Western society into what it is came with a necessary adaptation that had to be made–the strong individuals had to adapt to remain in control. I believe that there has been a mistake of perception to say that, “the weak inherited the Earth.” This is not the case.

Look at what I said about the leisure class.

The strong individuals remained in control through adaptation.

Temporarily maybe. Overtime I would have to disagree.

Our society represents that an individual’s strength no longer rests on physical power.

Why is that?

Instead, it rests on the power of the will.

What kind of will though? All I can see around me is blind faith.

Those individuals with the strongest will hold the keys to power. Hitler is a prime example of this and it is an example that many people learned an important lesson from.

Again this is not always the case. Look at what I said about the leisure class.

The ruling elite play the same game that every class plays, only the rewards are different.

If you mean they are enslaved to their ambitions like everybody else than yes I would agree with you.

[Joker]

Finally

I would like to say that I don’t see modern industrial societies offering any form of real independence and freedom either.

You need permission to do anything anymore and quite frankly I dislike this dam “Nanny” state.

I also can’t stand it’s non-violent tone or it’s constant usage of mythological “justifications” either.

[realunoriginal]

@Joker

Also I believe most modern forms of philosophy and science that has come to dominate every form of society is still operating on alot of religious assumptions of objective purpose. In the past one could ignore other people’s religions with ease but since science and philosophy is working through entire whole aspects of present society everywhere they simply cannot be ignored anymore as they exist in every fabric of our modern lives. ( In all social aspects.)

Great responses, especially this one–I agree with it completely.

I’ll need to ponder about your other points and I’ll respond in due time.