The Hissy Fit Generation and The Loss of Free Speech I: Postmodernism (2)

“Don’t you give me that postmodern bullshit. There is truth, There is a truth. And what you want, or you feel, or you need, isn’t going to change the truth. Any more than it’s going to topple a skyscraper. There’s truth, and there’s belief.  Don’t call a mule a stallion.”

— Carol Plum-Ucci, young adult novelist, essayist


You don’t need to give a shit about postmodernism and other tangential beliefs for them to work on you.

Before long, people are programmed to act in a certain way, use the correct language and associate with the right people because thinking this way becomes part of the socio-cultural constructs in which we live and have our being; it becomes a default auto-suggestion, a kind of neuro-linguistic leveller for interpersonal relationships acting at the subconscious level. Academia’s psychology of choice is transposed to cultural precepts and channelled swiftly across the global brain of info-tainment technology. People don’t even know they are following the herd because postmodernist thinking is designed to homogenise and consensualise; to enforce conformity through ostensibly benign principles. That’s how it seduces intellectuals who are happier living in their head than their heart, hence the seeding of these ideas in universities.

Canadian clinical psychologist and professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, Jordan Peterson is passionately against this brand of postmodernism and their adherents, having been on the receiving end of their witch-hunts for refusing to use the correct gender pronouns. (We’ll look at gender issues later on in the series). Peterson’s view on postmodernism is unequivocal and asserts the origins of this philosophy is rooted in cultural Marxism. From a recent interview given to The Epoch Times (see video below) he explains that by the 1960s even French intellectuals had to concede that state communism was a disaster and needed re-branding into a new ideological platform “under a post-modern guise;” identity politics would then swiftly take over the reins of popular socio-political movements for change.

It didn’t take long for this catch-all philosophy to spread through Anglo-American academia channelled through the traditions of workers’ emancipation and minority group rights. The unpopularity of Marxism meant that insights from the Frankfurt School of cultural Marxism were brought into play. Peterson states: “They started to play a sleight of hand, and instead of pitting the proletariat, the working class, against the bourgeois, they started to pit the oppressed against the oppressor. That opened up the avenue to identifying any number of groups as oppressed and oppressor and to continue the same narrative under a different name.” Postmodernist thinking s actually the same form of intellectual tyranny exemplified by state communism but re-invented through philosophical circus tricks ostensibly based on a collective social conscience. Unfortunately, it is anything but the latter. The professor explains:

“It was no longer specifically about economics,” he said. “It was about power. And everything to the postmodernists is about power. And that’s actually why they’re so dangerous, because if you’re engaged in a discussion with someone who believes in nothing but power, all they are motivated to do is to accrue all the power to them, because what else is there?” he said. “There’s no logic, there’s no investigation, there’s no negotiation, there’s no dialogue, there’s no discussion, there’s no meeting of minds and consensus. There’s power.”

“And so since the 1970s, under the guise of postmodernism, we’ve seen the rapid expansion of identity politics throughout the universities,” he said. “It’s come to dominate all of the humanities-which are dead as far as I can tell-and a huge proportion of the social sciences.”

“We’ve been publicly funding extremely radical, postmodern leftist thinkers who are hellbent on demolishing the fundamental substructure of Western civilization. And that’s no paranoid delusion. That’s their self-admitted goal,” he said, noting that their philosophy is heavily based in the ideas of French philosopher Jacques Derrida, “who, I think, most trenchantly formulated the anti-Western philosophy that is being pursued so assiduously by the radical left.”

“The people who hold this doctrine-this radical, postmodern, communitarian doctrine that makes racial identity or sexual identity or gender identity or some kind of group identity paramount-they’ve got control over most low-to-mid level bureaucratic structures, and many governments as well,” he said. “But even in the United States, where you know a lot of the governmental institutions have swung back to the Republican side, the postmodernist types have infiltrated bureaucratic organizations at the mid-to-upper level.” [1]

Peterson does not think its dangers nor “the degree to which it’s already infiltrated our culture can be overstated.”

The “post-Marxist sleight of hand” sells the idea that societies are “a Hobbesian battleground of identity groups” through which dialogue, a free exchange of ideas and individual creativity is subordinate to the collective and its subjective opinions. With the sanctity of free speech as a unassailable principle the oxygen of genuinely hateful opinions would be denied through the unimpeded flow of ideas. Yet, the much needed light of reason to show up REAL hate groups is now in danger of falling into that same abyss.

Free speech is the light from which the left and its parasitical invader is intent on extinguishing. There is only the victim and the oppressor fuelled by an artificial pseudo-philosophy that thrives on re-inventing itself through DIVISION. Which is why commentators have persistently highlighted the fact that mainstream media actively looks for for neo-Nazis and white supremacist groups’ activities in order to place them on the front page in hysterical deference to left-liberal postmodernist ideals. Normally, such groups would barely receive a flicker of interest other than a passing sniff of derision. Please ask yourself why the MSM has an obvious remit to find these fringe people and elevate them to celebrity status?

Since Peterson was summarily attacked as university professor by a noisy gaggle of SJWs and more alarmingly, by his own faculty,[2]  it is not a surprise that academic science is also the target. (As if it didn’t have enough problems). Former biology professor Heather Heying writing in the Wall St. Journal last month, summarises the problem on college and university campuses:

Opinions not fitting with the currently accepted dogma – that all white people are racist, that questioning policy changes aimed at achieving “equity” is itself an act of white supremacy – would not be tolerated, and those who disagreed were shouted down, hunted, assaulted, even battered. Similar eruptions have happened all over the country.

What may not be obvious from outside academia is that this revolution is an attack on Enlightenment values: reason, inquiry and dissent. Extremists on the left are going after science. Why? Because science seeks truth, and truth isn’t always convenient. The left has long pointed to deniers of climate change and evolution to demonstrate that over here, science is a core value. But increasingly, that’s patently not true.

The battle on our campuses-and ever more, in K-12 schools, in cubicles and in meetings, and on the streets-is being framed as a battle for equity, but that’s a false front. True, there are real grievances. Gaps between populations exist, for historical and modern reasons that are neither honorable nor acceptable, and they must be addressed. But what is going on at institutions across the country is – yes-a culture war between science and postmodernism. The extreme left has embraced a facile fiction.

Postmodernism, and specifically its offspring, critical race theory, have abandoned rigor and replaced it with “lived experience” as the primary source of knowledge. Little credence is given to the idea of objective reality. Science has long understood that observation can never be perfectly objective, but it also provides the ultimate tool kit with which to distinguish signal from noise-and from bias. Scientists generate complete lists of alternative hypotheses, with testable predictions, and we try to falsify our own cherished ideas. […]

Despite the benevolent-sounding label, the equity movement is a highly virulent social pathogen, an autoimmune disease of the academy. Diversity offices, the very places that were supposed to address bigotry and harassment, have been weaponized and repurposed to catch and cull all who disagree. [3] [Emphasis mine]

Heying underlines the intellectual bankruptcy of postmodernism by finally stating part of the reality that most people with common sense already know: “If you’re a professor of humanities, ethnic studies, or gender studies, and your work relies on postmodernism, then it’s given you employment. For everyone else: absolutely nothing.” Yet, this is only one spoke in a very broken wheel which still inexorably turns.


“If you teach students to be warriors against all power asymmetries, don’t be surprised when they turn on their professors and administrators. This is what happens when you separate facts from values, empiricism from morality, science from the humanities.”

— Michael Shermer, Scientific American, ‘The disastrous fallout of campus postmodernism’


The ponerisation of the left is also rooted in the affirmative action of the 60s, 70s, and 80s, petering out by the early 2000s. It was based on a fusion of postmodernism and socialist ideology, with altruism and egalitarianism undoubtedly part of its vision, as was its social determinism and collectivist principles. This often aggressive equalisation of opportunities goes counter to individual volition and thus has enormous implications for free speech. It’s failure meant that the postmodernists needed to find another channel through which they could enforce equalisation of rights through the imposition of speech codes in universities, going to the heart of education and the creation of new social paradigms. As previousy mentioned, this way of thinking about the world, with its materialistic, atheist and valueless shroud of intellectual dead-ends is extremely appealing to psychopaths. It explains why this philosophy is heavily ensconced in liberal university academia and pervasive in social science; so-called progressive organisations and NGOs. Being offended and a victim – whether individual or within a group – is the de rigueur position to become accepted by your peers. Reasonable debate isn’t allowed. Moderate conservatives – for all their often simplistic and seemingly regressive notions about family values – are now genuinely the only firewall between such thinking. Suddenly a return to family values and basic morality doesn’t seem so quaint anymore.

Left-Right Dialectic and Education Bull’s-Eye

From the above, it may be tempting to believe that it is merely Peterson’s and Heying’s bias working against left ideology, that it is merely an overreaction and caricature of what’s taking place. This would be a fundamental mistake. Such resistance is a free speech issue and is linked to an historical thread of subversion. You can actually trace this particular brand of the left’s ponerogenesis as early as the 1950s, misinterpreted and pushed to reactionary extremes of the right by the McCarthyism of the day. However, the basic reality of social subversion was sound, despite the encouraged hysteria and injustice. (See “World State Policies II: Fabianism: ‘With Fate Conspire‘”). In truth, any belief can be ponerised at its inception or much later on, usually when it gets institutionalised and begins to serve State dictates. The merits of left and right policies is irrelevant if its serving the same masters each time and who are naturally pre-disposed to facilitate greater extremes of psychopathy. So, we can’t get too hung up on left-right dichotomy here.

For instance, Peterson’s avowed conservatism means he also has some obvious blind spots in his thinking as do we all when we claim one political allegiance over another, but the value that the professor brings to this debate (or lack of it) on free speech is to strengthen resistance against one of the ways in which psychopathy is expressed through our culture using whatever channel is best suited to propagate its reality. Postmodernist subversion is one of these. Right now, it isn’t just right wing extremism which is significant, it is much easier to flow through ideologies and social strategies which are the antithesis of the right. This is how it’s always been for ponerological dynamics and the perennial influence of Hegelian dialectic in crowd psychology.

Remember the classic military fascist coup against the US government in operation by the US military only two decades earlier? It was only averted by one General Smedley D. Butler of War is a Racket fame. To keep the bigger picture it must be repeated: the evil of fascistic thought rises up through right and left authoritarians. Pathogenic infiltration of evil by stealth through left-liberal socio-political traditions makes the entry point of evil much easier since it is more difficult to see its germination until it is too late. Similarly, Peterson has spent over 40 years studying totalitarianism on the left and right. Its pathway to manifestation has been overwhelmingly through the channels of left, Marxist/Communist ideology. Once the State gets behind it – tyranny very often follows. And we are seeing worrying signs of just such infiltration of thinking across society in a complex interplay of predominantly left-liberal activism and academic discourse. New fusions of libertarianism, alt.right and ultra-right neo-fascism act as the left’s target so that each deepen the other’s shadow whilst being unable to see their respective reflections. Meantime, the Establishment pathocracy monitors and predicts when it can tinker with this collective instinct and emotion on tap, and use it to its long-term advantage.

For long-term conditioning and contouring of generations you need to start young. Which is why educational institutions from Kindergarten to universities are the first port of call. As the late clinical psychiatrist Andrew Łobaczewski has shown us in his Political Ponerology: The Science of the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes (2006) it is always the intelligentsia and higher institutions of learning that are first targeted and which ultimately succumb to the infection of paramoralisms and paralogicisms. This is the first step in softening up the intelligentsia, those predisposed to become authoritarian followers and individuals who have the charisma to act as spellbinders for the cause begin to shape the new paradigm. Society at large and younger members of our societies already dumbed down by the hysteriodal cycle of “good times” and “bad times” lack a “naturalistic knowledge” or common sense regarding the nature of psycho-spiritual corruption. The collective psyche, in the face of philo-ideological pathogens like postmodernism becomes weakened and exposed to a gradual encroachment of psychologically deviant minds and their materials.

Łobaczewski states:

“The psychological features of each such crisis are unique to the culture and the time, but one common denominator that exists at the beginning of all such ‘bad times’ is an exacerbation of society’s hysterical condition. The emotionalism dominating in individual, collective, and political life, combined with the subconscious selection and substitution of data in reasoning, lead to individual and national egotism. The mania for taking offense at the drop of a hat provokes constant retaliation, taking advantage of hyperirritability and hypocriticality on the part of others.

It is this feature, this hystericization of society, that enables pathological plotters, snake charmers, and other primitive deviants to act as essential factors in the processes of the origination of evil on a macro-social scale.” [4]

Essentially, much of postmodernism is the schizoidal psychopath’s philosophy of choice. It is the philosophical jewel in the crown of the Left-Liberal Establishment; the connector and descriptor for collectivism, Fabianism, gender theory and much of what passes for race, sex and 3rd wave feminism studies which spawn all manner of movements hell-bent on re-shaping society. It is then that the oppressed become the oppressors of everyone in the name of “tolerance.”

As I wrote in In the Name of the Father IV: Catholicism, Cathars, Psychopaths and Satanists: “… the hysteroidal cycle is defined as a pattern of change drawn from the psychological definition of hysteria: a state of uncontrollable fear or exaggerated excitability. In this context, Łobaczewski describes it as ‘a ‘fear of truth’ or fear of thinking about unpleasant things so as to not ‘rock the boat’ of current contentment.” Postmodernism appears to fear truth and reason and is antithetical to realities beyond the senses. * I further stated: “So much of our atrocities and genocides occur precisely due to normal people’s refusal to see the writing on the wall until it is too late – a pathological adherence to a perceptual [and wilful] blindness. The primal fear of the psychopath and the evil that exists ironically causes an avoidance and projection of those fears to the extent that we collectively conjure the very thing we so desperately wish to avoid.”

Łobaczewski reminds us that while the emergence of macrosocial evil has: “…certainly appeared many times in history, in various countries and in various social scales … no one has ever managed to identify it objectively because it would hide in one of the ideologies characteristic of the respective culture and era, developing in the very bosom of different social movements.”

We can see why the neo-Marxists, the liberal media and Jewish left and/or Zionists make up the vanguards of postmodernist discourse since it dovetails perfectly into the culture of terminal “offence” and victimhood, identity politics and the new Orwellian language that prohibits free speech. It makes sure morality and truth is so relative that everyone remains disoriented and lost in the narcissism it encourages. This can only benefit the power Elites of the Three Model Establishment who must, at any cost, have divided, pathologised populations scrapping amongst themselves.

 

 

A Mote in Your Eye…

Socialism, traditionally for the working class and union rights; anti-war, anti-capitalist and all the excesses that such a system produces, appears to be at an impasse in its current form (maybe it always was) having been comprehensively hijacked by postmodernism, political myopia and wilful ignorance. The radical left now dominates in much the same way that 3rd wave feminism has drowned out classical feminism with a narcissistic bull-horn of lies and propaganda. Even the green movement is suffering from exactly  the same symptoms of pathogenic infection via a resurgence of eco-fascism. We know very well the weaknesses and extremes in conservative ideology, but the current bankruptcy of the left is a conundrum that many didn’t see coming – if there is awareness of it all. If such a ponerisation of left-wing politics was not a surprise for many over the years, it is nonetheless shocking how rapidly it has infected society (and our student youth in particular) over the last decade.

To obtain clarity on the origins of our immigration crisis and American and NATO geopolitical strategy; the influence of gender studies and anti-free speech advocates, indeed many obsessions presently shaping societies today, it is necessary to confront institutionalised opinions and mythologies that promote only one slice of truth while ignoring other unpalatable facts. The common denominator is a refusal to approach these subjects without a reactionary belief that forces us into erroneous conclusions, safe in a bubble of self-righteous indignation. The demarcated perimeters of belief and identity are insolubly fused for so many people, which means facts become quite inconvenient when they do not fit the proffered “social conscience” of the day. This has now become a super-charged act of denial, which is fast becoming a religion in itself.

To question progressive orthodoxy is akin to battering to death a cute kitten or elderly relative. Even more incendiary is to question the hysterical vilification of Trump or the social demands of those suffering from gender dysphoria …You might as well open your jugular vein. It’s even more disturbing to realise many so called progressives might help you do it.

The failure by the left to grasp the enormous changes in the last few decades – most notably the effects of globalisation and Deep State manipulations – has led to the working class transferring their support to a global resurgence of neo-nationalism which like it or not, stands up for the common man and woman and resists the erosion of national sovereignty, despite reasonable charges of racism and Islamophobia flowing through its ranks. But it is more complex than that. And complexity and isn’t something that many of us want to acknowledge – least of all the left-liberal students of generation Me.

The European Union – that strange fusion of neo-Marxist philosophy and neo-liberal economics – has the left embracing social and foreign policy that shows at best, ignorance and naivete regarding the forces behind our current global malaise and at worst, purposeful and cynical attempts to use immigration and NATO’s blood-soaked legacy of war as cover for Anglo-American economic expansion. This strategy is implemented at great cost – literal and metaphorical – to the populations of member states. Yet, progressives still believe that our destiny must lie within the hopelessly corrupt and undemocratic belly of a European Union. Indeed, despite the European Union’s left-liberal ideology its creation was purely rooted in British, Franco-German Synarchy – a distinctly fascist  Pan-European movement with Catholic allegiances.

The advocates of a New International Order use both left and right beliefs as concentric circles of influence. These have thousands of tributaries which are ultimately encouraged/coerced to flow in the direction of a central core of totalitarianism. By stealth, it begins as an inverted or “soft” form, eventually breaking out into full blown classical totalitarianism. Neither forms are mutually exclusive in the same way that corporatism and communism exist today. This is postmodernism’s neo-Marxist’s role: to imprison thought through a nihilistic pseudo-intellectualising and philosophizing. But such a truth for the left is merely unsophisticated conspiracy theorizing because they are too lazy and programmed by postmodernist perception to countenance such an historical reality. Accordingly, the left mindset acts at the behest of the Liberal faction of the Three Establishment Model.

This trap of denial regarding the existence of such internal forces and their agencies (not least the denial of democracy when it doesn’t go their way) is where the hypocrisy becomes a 500 pound gorilla chewing a banana in the university cafe. To deny such preposterous attempts at social conscience said Gorilla (or elephant, if you prefer) is explained away with increasingly obtuse and nonsensical discourse which, as stated, attracts those who like the sound of their own voice and are wedded to intellectualism as a self-important obsession rather than an act of genuine service to education. Consequently, the left and its radical elements turn themselves upside down to validate their beliefs (and thereby their enmeshed identities) using a juvenile dictionary to interpret reality, thinking that we are still in the social and cultural typography of the 1960s and 70s. Sitting atop an economic powder-keg about to blow sky high, the current culture wars could descend into something much more violent.

The group think of postmodernism is now so dominant that individuals and organisations have become the new, often unconscious propagators and propagandists of post-modern “sophistication”. This is often where gender studies, feminism, left internationalism and neo-Marxism meet; its pillars of moral relativity and gender fluidity now transposed to politics.

An extension of this is a distinctly Judaic preference for a culture of victimhood, something to which the left-liberal sentiment is now adopting to its detriment. The culture of victimhood and infantilism is fed by postmodernist mindset; deformations which have been the natural consequence of socio-economic stresses, technology and social engineering. It has been mainstreamed into everyday discourse and extended to permit a failed ideology make new in-roads into Western societies. Which is why so many Zionists appear on the left since it harbours an historical partnership with forms of Marxism – both cultural and political –  comprising a high ratio of Jews and/or Zionists. It thus offers fertile ground to encourage collectivist conformity towards apparent egalitarian and altruistic belief but actually lays the groundwork for fascism and therefore a rejection of free speech. The latter is a litmus test of societal freedom that must be removed. Once this is gone, this is irreversible without a form of interstate civil war.

The attack on free speech and open discussion on a range of pressing problems is limited by hyper-sensitivity and a conditioned reflex that the oppressed must become the oppressor; a new social dominator that determines the trajectory of our culture and politics. People are afraid to say what they think for fear of being tarred with the racist or sexist brush. If you have the sheer audacity to question the politicisation and often aggressive tactics of minority groups such as LGBT rights or the fallacious propaganda of aspects of the Black Lives Matter movement, then this can create a firestorm of reaction that causes constructive criticism to be labelled as hate speech. Self censorship and thus the restriction of free speech is normalised. One only has to look into social networks to see that censorship of those deemed conservative/right wing; if they do not conform to the left consensus they are ejected forthwith. This is dangerous for everyone’s free speech and opens the doors to further restrictions that will effect everyone.

Such ideology saturates many employees and directors of social networking and tech companies like Google, Facebook and Twitter leading to overt censorship. This can be seen in algorithmic rankings and policy agreements. A dominant belief in the hands of those with real power to restrict opinions facilitates a subtle self-censorship and the rise of the thought police. Worse still, it allows self-elected trolls to infest the internet who thrive in enforcing a social “tolerance” by shutting down any opinions that go counter to the prevailing left-liberal orthodoxy.

Through social media and internet commentary some of the most disturbing and vociferous attacks against differing opinions come from those who consider themselves progressive or socially aware and striving for “equality”. This allows a huge diversion of energy away from the key issues submerged in the razzmatazz of identity politics and the phantom of perpetual “offence”. For now, it is the left’s cowardice and lack of integrity in facing complex social causes and effects that have allowed the Anglo-American Establishment to literally get away with murder. The deafening silence on issues that should be centre stage is only making the ultra-right more incendiary.

That is not to say that the radical right and religious extremism isn’t making a come back. Islamism and terrorist propaganda is here with a vengeance. Once again, however, when we have awareness of the roots sources of such State pathology and its history it provides context that mitigates emotional reaction and its erroneous conclusions. An expression of inner imbalance that prefers to deny nuance and the crucial recognition of context is required for state-sponsored acts of terror and geopolitical manipulations since the latter requires fear and conformity to continue. Making sure fear, anxiety and dissociation feature in the daily lives of populations is essential. To break through this programming there is nothing more important than to question everything that is presented to us as an official consensus when it comes to movements and ideologies dominating  politics, culture and science. Not an easy task of course. But once we do, there are persistent “glitches in the matrix” if you will, which appear again and again in relation to the official narratives we are fed. These are windows to the real world, although it may be too dark for some to enter. Yet, facing that darkness in order to understand it has a direct relationship to our own inner worth.

For instance, several questions to illustrate this point might be: what part does the State and its intelligence agencies play in the fostering of such activities? What role does social engineering play in the genesis of social memes? Is the rise of neo-nationalism a danger or a temporary antidote to globalism and the further dissolving of national borders? Do people equate Brexit with only xenophobia and racism? Where are the protests against the European Union’s NATO which has supported and taken part in most of the United States’ wars over the last thirty years? Where is the outcry concerning Israeli occupation of Palestine and powerful Zionist influence over American politics? What of organised paedophilia networks and human trafficking and its relationship to governments and their outsourced agencies?

No. It appears that whether someone uses the correct gender pronoun or feel violate in safe spaces is far more important…

Questions like these open up a whole new can of worms for those stuck in the tradition of left = good, right = evil;  a can that the left appears unwilling to open lest the holes in its own political allegiances are seen to be less than healthy. It is this weakness that is now helping to polarise secular and religious forces by denying free speech and destroying any hope for pursuing the core subjects that shape our societies. Our Western institutions are all bending over so far backwards to accommodate this once ridiculous politically correct posturing that it has now metastasized into a postmodern ideology that is eating society from the inside out. Human rights and real basic values that the left correctly held aloft as a defining principles are now diluted into a reflex offence at all and everything that leadsto an increase in the already fractured and reductionist appraisal of societal influences.

There are countless examples of this self-censorship and herd mentality, where ordinary folk supplicate themselves in honour and worship of postmodern “progressivism” as an end in itself. To go against such dogma means “micro-aggressions;” the triggering generational trauma and often the hissy fit of narcissistic wounding.  Justifying the unjustifiable is fine so long as ideology and belief is maintained.

Official Culture’s incorporation of this pseudo-intellectual thought police is now so dominant that it has become an echo chamber which permits conclusions to come only from a range of unconscious, irrational reactions.  These are derived from the institutionalised  subjective state of mind that so many postmodernists inhabit. It has helped to create another toxic tributary into a psychological malaise that is busy defining how the public reacts to important local and global issues through the fake news of Facebook, the info-tainment of YouTube and the inevitable distraction of endless Twitter wars, all of which runs parallel to an utterly corporatised and largely left-liberal mainstream media.

An unreasonable and fear-based deference to minor and minority social issues is becoming the Medusa touch through which all of us are turning to stone. As a result, a psychological virus of narcissism is being transmitted more rapidly through what is effectively an emerging global brain. Such pathology fits perfectly into postmodernism and the co-opted left-liberal mind, which in theory at least, is rooted in altruism. Unfortunately, by the time it has been filtered through such fly-traps for truth it ends up just another excuse for Elite control through enforced collectivist “justice.” The quality of information that flows between synaptic locales of this global brain is generally low and promotes reaction and hysteria as the answer to uncertainty and injustice. In this Age of Information the ratio of qualitative knowledge to quantitative mediocrity and its incessant noise has never been worse. How can people critically think about themselves and the world if there is no cognitive time or space to do it?  This is, of course, the Elite antidote to true psycho-spiritual emancipation of the mass mind.

In order to understand further the reasons why free speech is under threat in our world, the next post we will go deeper into the nature of anti-free speech advocates, the main social and cultural domains where the erosion of free speech is occurring and how language is being distorted to serve this agenda.

 

See also: a disturbing trend in internet “edu-tainment” which is a spin-off from postmodernism:

Algorithmic cartoons turning young brains to mush on YouTube



* Yet, we should not confuse good science, reason and rationalism with the Illuiminist thinking that rode the coat-tails of the Enlightenment. The Age of Reason had a shadow which was open to subversion like anything else. Nonetheless, the world IS rational in that it follows natural laws and has objective realities that function within a highly prescribed set of symbiotic rules and formulas which make up our biosphere. The Earth itself may be, in essence, an expression of a Rational Design at the material level. This does not exclude other forms of reality and manifestations of consciousness at different levels of being. The trick is to elevate science and metaphysics as a complimentary journey; to know, step by step, and with the humility to comprehend the immense undertaking as we strive to understand the human condition and our place on planet and in the cosmos. If we reject open-minded science, reason and rationalism married to creativity and intuition as our starting point then we become lost in a subjective world of fantasies and feeling only. Postmodernism with its dry intellectual meandering and paradoxical appeal to a phantasmagorical subjectivity as the beginning and end of discovery is neither rational nor intuitive; it straddles an epistemological and ontological no-man’s land which offers nothing except the complexity of clever words and philosophical obfuscation. Being lost in Mind rather than Mind as the liberator of knowledge applied.

____________________

Notes

[1] ‘Jordan Peterson Exposes the Postmodernist Agenda’  Communist principles in postmodernism were spread under the guise of identity politics By Joshua Philipp, The Epoch Times,June 21, 2017.
[2] ‘U of T letter asks Jordan Peterson to respect pronouns, stop making statements’ Psychology prof says: “there’s absolutely no excuse for the letter” The Varsity, By Tom Yun 24 October 2016.
[3] ‘First, they came for the biologists: The Postmodernist Left’s attack on science and truth’ By Heather Heying, Wall Street Journal, 02 Oct 2017.
[4] p.62; Lobaczewski, Andrew; Political Ponerology: A Science on The Nature of Evil adjusted for Political Purposes (2006).

One comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.