Lapsing on democratic deception dialectics and corporate coercion
Not prime of thought
As the nature of relations that discorporate rational essence from emergent rationalizations progressively becomes a lesser imperative with the surge of oblivious observers and their ideologically synthesized sensibility, objective reality and it’s solitary sophistication bordering society consequentially renders a state beyond blur. Improperly and expressionistic, rationality and reasoning is derived and cast as paradigmatic pretensions of subject states of mere docile determinations: Destructively converging towards a sub-optimum by the coercion’s of it’s unyielding contradictions, manifesting a tedious circumstantial interplay between conformists and chaos critics.
Depending on the depths of their nature as such, and in terms of variety, vacuity and viability thereof, consequentially, these subjectivist states in and between ideological vacuums will accordingly be progressively affirmed and endorsed as politically effective overarching and categorically unifying concepts by the agency of their capacity for incomplex imitation of innate reason. Furthermore, the very increase in fundamental appeal to it’s own proprietary feedback-functionalism: Essentially, political power mongering and rule by positivist arguments, as opposed to say a more natural order through rational alignment, actual and adept, clarifying criticisms.
Currently, the most viable of such subjectivist states and progressive self-processing (appeal to concept principles over actual effective function), can arguably be identified in what I perhaps shoddily dub the systemic drive of discontent of modern mass-democracy—where ultimately the quantitative degree of deliberations and the potential for misrepresentation becomes it’s main quality, and as a consequence, the source of it’s power, appeal and political working utility.
The parallel physics: The conceptualized notation of rule by potential entropic inflation, meaning, sets of ideologies which literally unreasonably suggests weighing mass over mind and matter to procure political force and power. But a kind of power which is inherently achieved, assimilated and incorporated through a fundamental corruptive and false design in regards to rationality, and it is therefore more accurately something of a destructive power in the place of a more constructive and non-contraindicative nature.
On the embodiment
Any past favourable truths of the previous political universe must in effect and by configuration of the new chaotic democratic ideologies be polarized and so generically re-popularized within the emanating truth-paradigm and it’s ideologically absolutist overrides, which obviously includes things like more censorship the more it’s core is actually, objectively corrupt, «evil» et cetera.
The ideological innatism of democracy and equality invariantly procures it’s power by an all encompassing compression-to-system scale ratio of all available sense and self-functionality within it’s own syntactics which further develops an ill-cognizant, but compelling standard for it’s entropic expanse, which again, in a physical context and function of utility, is by fact and prime deduction inevitably an exercise in political demagoguery and a disjunction into logical decay.
The developmental decay is occasionally parsimoniously shrouded under the guise of liberalism’s many conceptual conflations, authoritative contradictions and abject abstractionist, abolishment acrobatics. The many «clown world» operators obscure and pray on social systems in order to enable and embolden self-deterministic public opinion so that these are insensately conveyed as «universal», perpetually justifiable and naturally wholesome as the universe itself by it’s observers by the force of their own dead weight. Democracy in that regard is a self-grandiose entity by the very ostensible definition.
To bring about and ultimately survive in the reins of such a social post-capitalistic, pro-social, paradoxical, parable political schema, it’s not synchronically, but an empiric imperative that even some of the most technically exclusive and pseudo capitalistic corporations at some point in the archetypal endeavor must interlock, merge or invariably mirror and perhaps prominently spear head even the ideological designs to a tee. Literally by: «Showing the way» (or some other stupid corporate concocted slogan) to some kind of pie in the sky rat race by ambiguously identical and equivalent in popularizing certain categorical «facts» familiarly astute in quality of most historic ideology.
If my discernment of perceived reality is non-faltering, I sure can tell that I am amidst both of these worlds meeting head-on, right now, here, where such anti-logical larceny now apparently beckons brightly right before me in person. Thankfully, I can see very clearly, or is that a contemporary curse? I am not so sure about that any more. At least there is not many Minority people Inc. here, yet, just two or perhaps four, and I don’t think these even are employees. Probably temporary deck hands.
I am white and bright as the Texas sky, but surrounded by what I picture as busy bodied, blockheads turned gear headed engineers. However, do not let the credentials fool you. These are mostly morons, perfectly professional, that is. Nothing personal, never. I really should say «we» instead of only I, because, thankfully, there are a couple of bright, white people here, at least to my perceptive and partially previous knowledge. The rest are rather uncharted, swarthy territory, but arguably morons in this technically related context, and too so, in and onto the next lecture of the day. Yes, many here are arguably big time normies, seemingly anyway, as I do not know too many personally outside my branch and area of expertise here. I always feel like generalizing outside of work. I believe it is important to take personal leaves of actual critical cognition.
Still, I do know how normies tend to shine dark on the surroundings, and whereby dampen true greats and fun guy’s like me by their mere numeric presence, and what they usually behave like in that regard. Anyway, I don’t even need to investigate these people much, fortunately, because it’s too obvious that things here are not on the up and up nor the right direction in that respect.
Sure, these normie’ got their formal resumes, corporate positions, and they sure think they can run.. things straight, but probably ultimately only into the ground. Though, at least they can’t can’t hide from my judgement. If I was boss, I’d fire 80% of these people right on the spot.
Be it by lack of original imagination, spirituality or complex rationality, first and foremost what generally defines these promptly prone ideologically filler-people, is whatever they apparently have the capacity to soak up of intellectual garbage and emotional drivel and what their relative responses are to ideological sensibilities as opposed to more sensible and strong imperatives. In that regard, it does not look good. The future of this corporation does not make sense, at all. No wonder these people look kind of sick. Their world, their imagination and dogma—it’s all sick and synthetically twisted. They will always be looking for that cure. I feel like quitting this gig more than ever.
It’s actually quite preposterous that I have to be here to begin with. I deserve to be with better people by merit. Actually and realistically. Heh.. I bet Jordan Peterson probably «saved» one of those pathetic looking people over there.. Yes, I am beyond assured. While the women here, well, I don’t think women even read the books they claim to read, to be honest. Maybe they just pretend it all, and simply read the synopsis? Women generally just remember and regurgitate things that are smacked into them, somehow, rather naturally though. They definitely got a knack for holding on to junk—a super power in democracy. The women here might look professional, but they might as well put in their work and talents on a street corner. Women might actually superhuman in this regard. They are always in high demand, no matter the problem, and seemingly no matter their effort. There is always a willing customer, and few critics. I’ve never heard about a women doing something actually impressive in this corporation myself, but that must be because I am racist and sexist, surely. I need to try harder in finding the positives, many said.
Thinking of effort…there is a nice enough girl right over there, perhaps… yea, that one might be worth some actual effort, I mentally put to rack, of which there are too many to simply keep track nowadays.
And over there is someone I suspect to be bona fide diversity hires… who’ve just happened coming to town for this event, introducing themselves by way of lame and all too predictable speeches. The new boys, likely to just have graduated. They’re Asian, one definitely Indian. Indeed, there is no mistaking those people. Surely, these will also serve up some inane narrative on how important diversity and team work is. But, I can’t for the life of me understand why almost anyone would agree to giving a speech that is so utterly on the mark predictable and of such a conventional nature in our line of work. What’s the point for this charade like social appeal in what is ultimately carried by a distinct few? I really blame the culture of democracy for this, where everyone’s has a voice, a vote, and a way of exposing themselves as nothing special. So much for the excellence in demand and their salaries. Surely, on some level, this must be some type of joke, right?
I only get bored around boring people, and so I scan the room once more hoping to find entertainment:
Maybe I should strike up a conversation with that other Danish guy over there. He may be reasonable, judging by the looks of him. Of course I judge people by their looks. Only mediocre people reject what is an strong instinctual preference, as they can’t accurately trust their thinking, regardless. Meanwhile, my terminator-like, pretend interface display analysis suggests that this guy might indeed be a suited subject so I do not succumb to total boredom, and remember, the Danish are not as culturally demoralized, at least yet. But, the Danes do sound like they’ve got potatoes stuck in their neck, English speaking or not, it tends to make me think lesser of them when they eventually start talking..
Maybe we could examine how these recent corporate conditioning’s as not so convincingly, but arguably affirmed here today, (big breath) intend on carrying over many of the same ideological fundamentals that overly stated aim to implant the same collective frame work of fraud and authoritarianism to ultimately manifest it’s own normalcy bias by way of ideological conditioning in our ranks, essentially, eventually and inevitably turning it into a ideological conformist playground for overrated people with some diploma and diversity background, resting on the laurels of people like myself, and possibly him, to do all the competent and actual intelligent work? It’s not even half baked communism, what these Marxists are proposing. Come on, man! I feel like yawning. It clears the brain of clutter; a Danish researcher claims..
But no. In a second analysis, decide against having a chat. From an overall observation, I finally suspect that the Dane is too feeble minded and scared to hang. It would probably be a social wash out—another very effective estrangement of mine. He seemed alright, but rather pale and directionless. A very common archetype in this field of ours. He’s probably one of these introverted, middle of the road aspies. I see no potential loss of intrigue and benefit.
Now, I better just get through this charade, and then get a looker of an escort as some type of make-shift excess and much needed reflexive contrasting later on.
Who am I kidding here? I can’t and won’t relate to normal people anyway. This obvious reflection warrants another chuckle. Then I boisterously regard my new time piece, once again. Yes, I paid too much for the Heuer TAG time this time round. It really does not shine the way I thought it would for five big ones.
I’ve also noticed that this particular city has remarkably bad looking people in it. Consistently so. They’re old on ol’ average too. It is not just me seeing and saying this. I looked it up online, and it seems to be a certain consensus going around. Kind of humorous. May be worth tracking and perhaps revisiting some time in the future. I got already have some theories on the matter.
It seems like the various decadence’s has no apparent limit within The Walls of Democracy. The situation outside really reflects the inside corporate mirroring and bullshit about «Reaching Beyond» this and that. An outcry and outreach to the «effected communities» of various kinds. Compensation for spillages. Lame duck stuff. Basically, this sloganeering and campaigning is all part and parcel of the overindulged spending aimed at carefully conforming to the dying symptoms of end stage democracy. And in this regard, this country is on the precipice of going full, downright «Weimar», or is it just the symptoms of spring break I am beholding?
The democratic decay has now officially and formally come about to crush the culture and average competence within this corporation in a similar complete fashion. One part of me really hopes it does, as people don’t really get what they deserve anymore.
And yes, the many fates and ‘sunsets’ of democracy colliding with natural reality is for sure amongst the least aesthetic things I can possibly imagine. I pinch myself while pretending to follow what is being said on the stage, hoping it all would be a bad dream.
Power is essentially about physics, structures and functionality, all frequents subjects of my imagination. In order and to create and maintain a ideologically derived social standard and political concept as democracy, you need to somehow proportionally enforce a systemic vertical subservience to everything which successfully can be projected in the minds of the people as converging into an equalizing, minimal horizontal level. Much how like a theoretical black hole; Democracy as a concept only appeals to it’s own consumption of mass, but it has no fine regard for actual matter or viable mechanism to evolve anything of the sort. And people arguably gravitate to democracy because they intellectually confuse it’s uniform, chaotic nature to some type of justice and freedom.
Democracy is supposed as a concept vehicle of self-enforcing ideological goals which by it’s own nature neither can be properly affirmed or attained because the political prestige’s is continuously in conflict by their own convoluted nature and it’s lack of rationalizing continence. Mass-democracy is not even about means to an end of anything, but means for sake of the means within democracy itself.
In it’s very origin, democracy was always a severely logically flawed concept where the massive input has very little to do with the theoretical or actual output. However, democracy paradoxically persists on it’s feigned a priori legitimacy, as it retains an unlimited supply of the appeal to what is not necessarily any of substance, but what is immaterially available by any ideology that the structure effectively facilitates against rational criticisms by it’s mass-mechanistic nature: a sort of shielding container with nothing in it worth protecting except itself. Almost entirely devoid of reason.
Democracy also disregards any proportional effects significant of any feed back function. Meaning, it has no internal justice but it’s own self appeal. This in particular, is often incorrectly understood as a structural problem instead of functional, and usually codified by crummy constitutional law.
To effectively create substance of power and divides in a power configuration like modern, institutionalized, bureaucratic mid-witted democracy, the most effective way for the system to ‘succeed’ in it’s fanaticism is to build up the synthetic images of the individuals that neither reflect nor inspire to much critical thinking or controversy bar none. Meanwhile, real people in the know or of critical competence must comparatively be quelled and gotten rid of. This type of corruptions is seen as constructive for the conformist and democratic group thinking paradigm. While it at the massive categoric cost of potential truth loss. In other words, in the end, democracy, by it’s inherent disdain of logic, is more destined to become the rule by the wicked people, for the wicked people.
The democratic fanatics together with the more cynical game theorists who promulgated the popularity worship, postulated and promoted that once they finally could openly address the previous injustices and disjunct the traditional corruption from previous societal structures, and thereof re-scale governmental responsibilities back to basically more people along the popular appeal of democratic delusions…. society was really good to go. Henceforth, unleash the public good for the good of itself. Hence, equality.
In actual reactionary theory, excluding a more hierarchy rule and replacing it with more potential of corruption, a lesser emphasis for rational appeal through say excellence, and essentially beguiling the lot of The people to the narrative that they were in charge, became the basic framework of the whole structural justification of the mass-democratic appeal and the subsequent outpouring of a ideological grid locking paradigm.
Meanwhile, the social engineers glossed over the crime of not denoting democracy as a logical fallacy in and of itself, and whatever it ever could bring about be in terms of the cascades of it’s concurrent waves in society. Representation, another beauty that did not age well, and many The Houses of the people, which never had very good bones to begin with. Moreover, a categorical fallacy of compositional, flawed, nature was sold as a system which structural base was said to being somehow ideal in resolving political questions on a spectrum of sentimental appeal rather than on a scale of merit and competence based rational representation.
The basis of democratic deliberation as a pro-social improvement of interest to the people, was in fact misrepresented as a beneficial in terms of it’s sheer structural utility. This lie actually allowed corruption and incompetence to flow every more freely, high and wide, delusively affirming to itself that the best ideas naturally would be the ones gathering the majority of popular support.
These failures is what appeal and define synthetic doctrines and derived ideologies trying to, as opposed to what logic would, bring about one way or another. What it actually warrants, is nothing but forms of rationalized historicism and misrepresentative arguments which effectively and emotionally are used to support the perpetual «Government of the people and for (a better) tomorrow». Today, a government and ideology which cannot be effectively opposed by the people, but in reality, merely opportunistically driven towards it’s inevitable and cascading failure of it’s people, en mass. That is evidentially and totally.
No, what we’ve got with democracy is something more like a monolatrist government ideological charade of forever farcical, unconscious and self-subversive, 21th century stoic neo-fascism on horse tranquilizer, courtesy of the «ju00iced up» mass media who’s all too busy playing their little ravenous side game.
Wayward universal totalitarianism
A very pervasive aspect of the democratic charade is the very totalitarian tendency to eradicate critics and to categorically misrepresent processes of actual arguable rationality by systematically lowering standards on all according mass subjects of which matter actually warrants exponents of increased complexity, importance and breadth. The concept of democratically derived equality is too essentially all about effectively replacing standards and responsibilities for those in charge, and to create a intelligible power structure of The people based on subsequent values.
Democracy is a rationalization scheme gone full fraud mode and by way of mass deception, plus adjacent psychosis management, where de facto deliberation and sovereignty has been abolished and inverted to now serve the central power structures in concert with big corporations. It is an means to an end-system for the benefit of the segmented, departmentalizing power structure, while touting the same lame, ubiquitous universalism dogma, like some secular global mega church. Democracy is by that definition pure end-to-end, sealed fanaticism. Both from the ground up, and top down.
This is partially is why so many; the vast majority, find it so problematic to formulate criticism against: Because they are stuck in-between a fundamental, false compromise of good government and «Freedom», which essentially are interlocking fantasies which actually serves no function as it’s main function.
And while such frauds require obsessive charlatans and popular fanaticism to even barely function, actual non-pseudo rationality is often too complex for simple people to utterly re-define and make use of it’s more reasonable logical inferences. It is easier to destroy than to deduce and actually command objective and rational truth. That is to peruse and master knowledge. Democracy takes full advantage of those adages. That is also why, at it’s core, democracy hates and shuns truth.
The main rationale of today’s modern democracy, stupidly dubbed «political correctness», but basically, a substance that provides pseudo-intellectual oxygen for NPC’s, is the characteristic and pietistical emotional dubiousness concerning the most collectively manageable and reactionary of it’s topics and subjects. Therein, the most frailest or wicked of nature becomes both the premise and inference.
There is no other possible premise and conclusion within the social processes of democracy, as it does not contain any intrinsic truth or atonement mechanism to begin with at it’s root core: A mechanism of actual, system broad function, where validity could be properly distinguished by it’s natural representations, or capable of any systemic retro-action, that is besides totally superficial, actually disruptive government term limits, and what not. Term limits are there, because the people democracy, inherently, fear power and function, so it needs to be limited in order to project another type of strength and «reason».
In a recursive and systematic sense, this is also much due to the increasing non-variation (democratic stability) as manifestations of truths are essentially always lost in the ever going entropic inflation, and by endemically aligned effects of the increase of different social constants enabled by conformist equality. Analogical: The Cycle of Democracy is the complete opposite to materially constructive as it appeals to mass rather than being born out of matter. It shifts and sifts base utility from a low to high order of basic ineffectiveness. Democracy in that regard, is essentially a conceptual centrifuge of all matter(s) that come before it. This in order to maximize mass for it’s inherent vacuous consumption and refinement.
Illustratively, endemically: It’s systemics are functionally equal to a chain that is no stronger than it’s weakest link. Similarly: The prosperity of any purported modern, equalizing dogmatic democracy is no stronger than it’s own weakest argument.
Eventually, the mass and many prophecies of Democracy will only actually proliferate endemic unreason by force of the countless principles of mere and simple logical explosions, and it will level everything else in course given enough mass support by the windbags, the wind up dummy and material time.
Will Ares Sabbatsson Paris' di Duce
DEng praxis, ex Candidatus D.C juris 1/x 672,500,000 Titan ♈︎