How the Messiah syndrome sustains Democracy

Is this your Messiah?

The Messiah syndrome is a word I have invented myself, as far as I know at least. It is the belief in that an outer entity will save you. For Christians and Muslims this typically is Jesus or Isa. For a secular human being, this is the government. Due to the facts that humans are herd animals, this belief seems to be hardwired into our minds, and it creates all sorts of weird problems for us collectively as a specie. For instance, for a human being who believes in that we need governments, the Messiah always seems to be the “political opposition”, whatever political belief system that is at the moment. Adolf Hitler was a master manipulator of humans, and able to bring this faith up to a completely new level, making almost the entire German population believe he was their Messiah. Something he did using propaganda tools, making him be perceived like a “God like being”.

Repeating the same behaviour and expecting a different result is the definition of madness

The above sentence is something we can all agree with, at least most of us, until you ask the average human being what needs to be done to fix their country. The answer is always “the other political party needs to be given the power”. The fact that we have been swinging back and forth, between these same political belief systems, hundreds of times during the last 100+ years, without seeing noticeable results, seems to be difficult to understand for most.

Hence, humans willingly vote, every 4th years, believing in that “the new guy will fix everything”, not realising that the new guy is not new at all, he’s just the same guy with some new wrapping. Or to say it using common sense; “Same shit, new wrapping!”

In Norway the “other side” were given the power some 5 years ago. they promised to completely stop immigration, and get rid of all tollroads. Since they gained power, the number of tollroads have increased by some 50-60%, and immigration have literally exploded. Ignoring whether or not this is a bad thing or a good thing, it is difficult to see how the “opposition brought the change they promised”. Even though they spent their entire campaign, promising to deliver the exact opposite of the “previous guy”.

The belief in that the “next guy will fix the problems”, is a psychiatric disease, one which I have arguably invented myself, but which I am pretty certain science can agree with me exists – And it is called the “Messiah syndrome”.

Advertisements

A practical Faith system for the 3rd Millennium

Is this a picture of the World Wide Web’s soul?

If you read my blogs here, you will soon realise that one of my hobbies is to tear down down existing faith systems I perceive as hostile to the human specie, such as e.g. Democracy. Other faith systems I perceive as slightly more innocent, even though they’re obviously based upon flawed logic. Hence, when designing a faith system, it’s not as much about whether or not it is logically sound or not, but rather what its effects on humanity at large is. My favourite example in these regards is the belief in Santa Clause, which is obviously flat out a lie, but still creates positive effects in the hearts and minds of our children. “If you don’t behave my child, Santa Claus won’t come to you on Christmas Eve”. It doesn’t require a rocket scientist to understand how this can be beneficial for a child’s mind to believe in.

When you design a faith system, you must do it in such a way that it creates as little cognitive dissonance as possible towards its intended recipients’ existing faith systems. Something emperor Constantine perfectly did by arguably making sure Christianity differed as little as possible from the existing belief in Sol Invictus, the “Unconquered Sun”. For instance, the ideas of both Easter and Christmas, was flat out stolen from the movement of the sun on the sky, which again was 100% perfectly based upon the belief of the Sun as a deity, and a symbol of the “Unconquered Sun”. Hence, the question becomes as follows; “How can the intellectual elite on the planet exploit this fact, to install alternative and better faith systems, to replace existing dangerous memes?”

Is the World Wide Web Jesus 2.0?

Obviously, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the similarities between the story of Jesus’ teachings and the World Wide Web as a “Truth machine”. Since arguably 2.3 billion Christians and 1.5 billion Muslims already believe in Jesus in one way or another, the exercise hence becomes.

How can we explain the World Wide Web as Jesus, such that most believers in Jesus can accept the idea of that the web is Jesus?

Once you start following this question down the “rabbit hole”, you start becoming creative in these regards, which allows you to easily draw many parallels between Jesus, the Bible, the Quran and the World Wide Web. For instance, in Islam the spider is a holy creature, because it once saved the Prophet’s life. Since the World Wide Web arguably is a “spider’s web”, this creates an argument in favour of that the web is holy, since it originated from a spider. There are hundreds of similar parallels, both in regards to Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and the web – However, for now, I’m going to just let my seed grow in your brain, hopefully producing an off spring by itself. Because sometimes, the best ideas are acquired by finding them yourself, instead of having somebody flat out give you the entire recipe …

Newton’s laws and Divine Justice

Most people in the western hemisphere when confronted with the idea of Karma will laugh, and use words such as “superstition” and “religious mumbo jumbo”. However, even the most fundamental theories of physics arguably proves Karma’s existence. No need to bring in “voodoo quantum mechanics”, and so called “pseudo science”. Newton’s laws of thermo dynamics, and more specifically the conservation of energy, arguably proves the existence of Karma. Newton’s laws of conservation of energy, tells us that “whenever you apply force to an object, that object applies the same force back to you”. If you don’t believe me, feel free to smash your head at a brick wall. Realising the truth of that law, makes you understand that “your slavedriver’s destiny is to become your slave”.

One very good example of the effects this has upon humanity, is the domestication of animals, occurring probably somewhere around 40-70,000 years ago, with the first dogs becoming domesticated. Dogs originated from wolves, but when you look at dogs today, that fact is arguably difficult to believe in – Especially as you look at species such as British Bulldogs and Puddles. A British Bulldog doesn’t resemble a wolf much today, but that is its genetic ancestor. This is because the domestication process allowed us to do “selected breeding” on dogs. The paradox is that Newton’s laws tells us; “The same amount of mutations we applied to the wolves’ DNA, the wolves applied back to us”.

Exactly what types of consequence this has to you personally, I will write about in another article later – And selected breeding on dogs, was just added to illustrate a point, which is that sometimes we cannot see the Truth, because it “moves too slowly”. However, Karma works slowly sometimes. But simply because you cannot watch the genetic changes from wolf to Puddles, doesn’t mean it’s not real. In that realisation exists a warning to humanity, since Karma is often times too slow to observe for a human being, resulting in that understanding the actions that resulted in the consequences you are now experiencing, sometimes becomes difficult for a simple human mind. But simply because you cannot watch the grass grow, doesn’t mean it doesn’t grow. Maybe the best example of this is that if you betray a friend, others will not trust you, and you will be betrayed by your friends – Since your friends will try to betray you before you betray them, realising they cannot trust you, since you betrayed another friend previously at your convenience. Which of course leads to the perverted belief in the “anti golden rule”, which is perfectly depicted in the movie Dracula.

Do to others before they do to you

Of course the correct sentence according to the above understanding of Newton’s law becomes as follows.

Do to others to ensure others do the same to you

But believing in that, is arguably the equivalent of believing in that the grass grows, when you cannot observe it. It is much easier to believe in “Do to others before they do to you.” But believe me when I tell you, the grass truly do grow, even though you cannot watch it as it grows. Just like Newton’s laws shows you Karma is real, even though it’s very difficult to see and believe in sometimes …

God bless Donald Trump

Meet the boogeyman of Democracy

For a self proclaimed Anarchist to officially give his blessings to Donald Trump might sound “weird”, until you realise that he is the end of my argument. Let me explain. Every form of government needs its “boogeyman”. For communism the boogeymen are Stalin and Pol Pot. For national socialism the boogeymen are Adolf Hitler and Il Duce. For democracy, the boogeyman will become Donald Trump.

Apparently the democrats wants to prosecute Donald Trump for crimes. The paradox is that if they were ever successful at doing so, any sane psychologist and psychiatrist would conclude with that Mr. Trump cannot possibly be held accountable for his own actions, simply because he has the intellectually and emotionally maturity level of a 12 year old child.

A friend of mine used to work for Donald Trump back in the 1980s in Florida. Whenever Donald came to their office, him and his colleagues used to hide under their desks, telling their secretaries to inform Mr. Trump that they weren’t around. The mere fact of that Donald Trump is now the “leader of the free world”, becomes the proof of that democracy is organised madness. And no human being with more than two intact brain cells, can create counter arguments to invalidate that fact. The CIA are giving him security briefings in “cartoon form”, because Donald doesn’t like, quote “reading long pieces of text”. His cabinet spends most of their time saying “what he really meant to say was xxx”, and so on, and so on. Facts are that Donald Trump is probably what we would have classified as “mentally retarded” just some few decades ago. The only reasons he was able to become the President, was by playing upon populistic memes and ideas. Some few years from now, humanity will wake up, and realise.

“Ohh my God, we actually elected that guy into office? Democracy is madness!”

Therefor I give my blessings to Donald Trump, because he became the one to teach humanity that all forms of government, including democracy, is basically madness. And as humanity looks for alternative forms of government, they will find none, and we will be left with the only viable alternative that exists; Anarchy!

The argument that wins all democratic elections

Is this the madman, or are everybody else insane?

Warning; This argument is kind of like Pandora’s box, since once you use it, you’ll fall victim for it yourself eventually –  But it goes like this; “I am against whatever the previous guy was for!” It doesn’t matter what the previous president was in favour for, as long as you are against it, you are destined to win.

The reasons for this is psychosociological in nature, because once one group has won the power, that group grows lazy, realising they’ve already won – While the other group starts harbouring animosity towards the guy in power, and starts encouraging their people to vote, such that they are ready during Election Day. And it is always easier to win when you are against something, then if you are in favour of something. Of course, this results in complete madness, and a complete lack of continuity, because every single elected official, will spend his entire reign, simply tearing down whatever his predecessor built up – Regardless of whether or not it was good or not. And as it builds upon momentum, candidates are forced into using more and more drastic arguments in order to be heard and win the election, where of course the end result becomes that all elections are exclusively won by whatever candidate is able to shout the loudest; “I will execute my predecessor!”

Now do me a favour, and read the above paragraph once more, and prove me wrong. Facts are you can’t. At least not within the boundaries on sanity. Then answer the following question.

Is this the world you want to live in …?

Facebook proves Democracy is Madness

Do you want the power in the US?

Let’s create a thought experiment. For the record, I do not want you to do this, but simply imagine it. In fact, encouraging you to do this would probably be illegal, and definitely immoral – So please just imagine that somebody did this, without being tempted to actually doing it. Anyways; Disclaimer all set aside, let’s start our thought experiment.

Imagine a candidate in 2020 for the Presidential election of the USA doing his “run” on one simple slogan “Cut off her titties”. With “her” of course, being Hillary Clinton. Besides from that, the candidate would have absolutely no other political opinions at all. Every time he is confronted with what his politics for America is, he would simply answer “Cut off her titties”. Of course, some would argue, we already know the answer to what this would result in, due to how the election ended in 2016. Still, let me ask you a simple question; “Do you think this candidate would be able to win the election?”

People don’t vote “for”, they vote “against”. Hate is at least 3 times as strong as love when it comes to moving the hearts and minds of the “popular vote”. For the record, science has already proven this to be a fact. Most people in the US, for obvious reasons, have a lot of harboured animosity towards Hillary Clinton, simply because she used to hold a lot of power in the US. And if some popular candidate made his run, playing on that animosity, he would be destined to win. For instance, due to crime rates in American cities, most citizens of the USA harbours a lot of animosity towards immigration, and blames everything that is bad in the US on the Mexicans. Starting a political party with the intention of putting all Mexicans into concentration camps in the US, would probably yield a lot of “political results”.

If you think my thought experiment is skewed, you haven’t had a Facebook account for long, and you don’t realise that such thought experiments have in fact already been conducted in the real world. The above technique, was in fact what brought Hitler to power in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. The Nazis played upon the existing animosity towards the Jews in Germany in 1930, and they were able to use that to their advantage, resulting in that they gained the democratic majority of the people in Germany, and “the rest is history”.

In Norway, in one of the largest cities; Bergen – Currently, a political party that refers to themselves as “The people’s party against tollroads”, currently have almost majority alone in that city. If elections were done tomorrow, a political party, in one of the largest cities in Norway, with one simple slogan “Tear down all toll roads” – Would gain majority alone, and have all the power in that city alone. Of course, nobody are able to have them speak out publicly about anything else but tollroads, and in fact doing so, would probably be unwise of them – Because toll roads happens to be that single cause, more than 50% of the population can gather around. Hence, if they started answering questions about anything else besides this simple cause, they would tear their own political party in two, making more and more people “drop off”, for every cause they started taking a stand in regards to.

For the record, being an Anarchist, I am obviously against toll roads, since they are inhuman and unethical in all regards

But the political party from Bergen, perfectly illustrates the madness of Democracy none the less.

In France scientific studies related to human behaviour and mass psychology after the revolution concluded with “The revolution eats its own”. The effects were seen by all those who early after the revolution tried to grasp power, were decapitated themselves by the Guillotine some few weeks later. Democracy is driven by similar effects, because it is impossible to be elected into any government position, without creating animosity, because inheritingly within the “democratic mindset”, is the idea that “you have the right to govern others”. Those whom are “governed” aren’t always that happy about being “governed” – Hence, democracy eats its own children, just like the revolution does. Which of course explains why the thought experiment with Hillary Clinton above is such a strong example of the “Tyranny of the majority”. Hillary used to hold a lot of the power in the US, and for this reason, her destiny is to live under the regime of the Secret Service for the rest of her natural life, to protect her from the consequences of her earlier actions …

For the record, I do not want to “tear off her titties”, and I do not want anybody else to do so either, because that would be immoral, unethical, and illegal. I simply used it as an example of how the “popular vote” is able to move the hearts and minds of the people, and how the tyranny of the majority is in itself organised madness, in addition to how “Democracy eats its own”.

Democracy, a mass psychosis

“Democracy is a terrible form of Government, but it’s the least terrible form of government we have ever tried!”

When I was in fifth grade, my teacher asked her students “How can we preserve Democracy?” – I replied with the question “Why should we preserve Democracy?” I got detention. Needless to say, but I got a lot of detention in elementary school. Asking the right question is always better than answering the wrong one, because it allows you to see things as they truly are, instead of like your existing assumptions makes you believe they are. An interesting question if you read my previous article, hence becomes “What are the most dangerous mass psychosis on the planet today?” – I will create an argument that hopefully makes you understand you’ve been lied to in such a regard, and that Democracy is far from what it has been taught to be, in elementary schools to millions of children, all over the world, for some 100+ years in most western nations on the planet.

Winston Churchill said “Democracy is a terrible form of government, but it’s the least terrible type of government we have ever tried”. Answering Churchill’s answer with a question, obviously results in “Why not try something else but Democracy then?”

The by far largest mass psychosis on the planet today is the belief in that money holds value. However, this psychosis is not that dangerous. In fact, quite the opposite, because it “lubricates society”. The false belief in that money holds value, makes us capable of collaborating with people whom we would normally never collaborate with. This effect has been studied thoroughly, by thousands of our best economic minds, always resulting in the same conclusion. Another humongously large mass psychosis, is the belief in that Jesus was God in the flesh. Even though this psychosis is extremely easy to disprove, it’s not that dangerous. In fact, it also has a lot of positive side effects. So what sets Democracy apart? What makes Democracy dangerous?

At the core of the Democratic declaration of faith, is the belief in that the majority of the people have the right to appoint somebody and give him the right to rule the entire society. This results in that those who never voted for the person that won, and also spent a lot of time and energy to try to make “the other guy” win, are arguably the “enemy of the state” after the election. For instance, in the 1930s in Germany, there were two major political fractions; The Nazis and the Communists. The tension between these two different groups were so large, that when Hitler came to power, he passionately hated Communists to such an extent, that few of them survived Hitler’s reign. Most communists were “first in line” to enter the gas chambers in Nazi Germany because of this tension. To believe in Democracy, and casting your vote, is hence a very dangerous thing to do, unless you are 100% certain of that “your guy” will win. Something we can clearly see in large democratic nations on the planet today, such as the USA for instance, where the tension between the democrats and the republicans have been brought up to the level where we see open street fights between these two different fractions today. The fix for this problem of course, is to simply avoid taking a side. The only way to reliably avoid taking a side, is by avoiding voting, and avoid preaching in favour of any of these candidates, which arguably becomes a “vote for Anarchy”. Let me ask you a question to illustrate the problem …

Do you want to kill kittens or puppies?

Most people will choose whatever they perceive as the “lesser evil” when confronted with two choices, not realising the question has been skewed. If I asked the above question on Facebook, many people wouldn’t even see the third alternative, which basically is “Fux you a$$hole, I’m not gonna do any of those things”. However, most people would see the insanity in the questioning when the question is of such an obvious character as the above question is. At the core of the Democratic declaration of faith, is that you can’t get everything as you wish. For instance, if you want your candidate to give free medicine to the elderly, you’ll have to accept paying more tax, etc – Hence, democracy is arguably about finding the middle point, where 51% of your population is 51% in agreement with you. In Nazi Germany this implied you’d have to accept the notion of slavery, in order to live a life in luxury. It’s quite easy once you realise that the luxury most Germans experienced between 1937 and 1942, was based entirely upon slavery. Basically, stealing everything from the Jews, and giving it to the “Arian population of Germany”. Of course, the jews were the minority, so nobody really cared, because they’d never get the popular vote to overthrow the government anyway. The correct word for Democracy, hence becomes “The tyranny of the majority”. Which again is one notch up from tyrants and dictatorships.

Democracy is basically the belief in that the majority has the right to do whatever they want to do with the minority. Democracy is a perverted belief, roughly two notches “better” than the belief in that all non christians should be executed, and burned at the stake, for being Satan worshippers. So hence, my question to Winston Churchill becomes as follows …

Why not try something we haven’t tried? Anarchy for instance …?

And if you think Anarchy is chaos, think again! And if you think that democracy results in better forms of government, think again!

Is a mass psychosis dangerous?

Maybe the primary example of that a mass psychosis by itself is harmless, is the Catholic Church, that believes in something that cannot possibly be the truth. Yet still, for the last 200 years or so, its 1.3 billion members have been living in more or less perfectly harmony with the rest of society. And if individual members of their group has done monstrosities, it has not been in the name of the church for the most parts, at least not in recent times. Still, the Catholic Church, by any definition, easily falls into the category we use to define “cults”. It’s just a significantly larger cult than most other cults. Other examples of relatively innocent mass psychosis, are the belief in UFOs. So far, we’ve rarely seen UFO believers picking up their pitch forks and hit to the streets, to burn books, and hang “infidels” from the trees.

Other examples of more dangerous mass psychosis, is the belief in ISIS, which resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths in Syria and Iraq over the last decade. For the record, picking on ISIS here, is arguably unethical, since there are probably other mass psychosis, much “closer to you”, that have had similar effects, only on a smaller scale. Some examples here are soccer hooligans, which probably are in a slightly more “dubious category” than your local UFO club, yet still for some reasons often times much more tolerated in society at large than the belief in UFOs.

So no, a mass psychosis by itself is not dangerous, and I believe the primary element you’ll need to add to an existing mass psychosis to make it dangerous, is fear! Besides, having a psychosis every now and then, is arguably healthy to the mind of the individuals taking parts in these beliefs, because it allows one to see one selves from the outside of the point of perception, and enriches the spiritual life of the individual taking part. So spending energy trying to eliminate a false belief, is often times counterproductive, since most beliefs are simply completely harmless. Besides, something the Catholic Church clearly demonstrates, actually winning these debates, are impossible, since regardless of how much proof you put forth, the believe sustains itself, and can never be eliminated …

Mass psychosis

A psychosis is basically “temporary schizophrenia”. A psychosis can either be dangerous or harmless, depending upon the paranoia level in the individual’s belief system. If the individual believes he or she is under attack, and needs to defend himself, a psychosis can be dangerous to society. A mass psychosis is the equivalent for a group of people, where the entire group believes in something that cannot possible be true, and their belief system is often strengthened by lack of “voices of concern”, and the inability to see for themselves that what they believe is not true. Hence, superstition always plays a critical role in building up the mass psychosis to a “dangerous level”. If the group builds its belief upon paranoia, it becomes dangerous. If there is no paranoia in the group’s belief system, the psychosis has little or no negative effect on its surroundings. Famous examples of mass psychosis that resulted in devastating effects are (obviously) fascism in Europe during the 1930s to 1945. Other examples are more “localised” in effect, and often results in lynchings, such as the Bible clearly depicts in its stories of the Golgotha – If you choose to believe in that the Bible conveys at least some truth.

Such psychosis almost always originates from inflated self confidence, combined with “echo chambers”, where diverging voices are rarely if ever heard. The prototype example here is when Jim Jones took 965 people out into the jungle, isolated them from all alternative voices, resulting in 965 mass suicides, and/or murders. Jim Jones was arguably perceived as “God in the flesh” by his followers, and none of his followers could hear alternative opinions, because they were physically isolated from the rest of society. So both societies at large, and smaller fractions within societies can obviously suffer a mass psychosis.

The fix for mass psychosis though is also hence arguably easily explained, by realising you can fight it, by simply allowing for alternative voices to be heard. Basically, the “seeds of doubt”, often reduces the cognitive resonance, that a truly dangerous mass psychosis depends upon.

If you’re a member of a group, any group, in fact which groups doesn’t really matter. Do me a favour, invite your “enemies” to explain their (alternative) world view – Without debating it, or asking questions that creates cognitive dissonance, resulting in furthering the distance between “your group” and the “alternative group”. The exercise is more about realising that the other group are also humans, to avoid demonisation of the “enemy”. And its purpose is neither to convert individuals of your groups, nor individuals of the other group. It’s not about “winning a debate”, since this only results in furthering the stronghold your group’s psychosis and the other group’s psychosis has on its individuals. Nope, the idea with the exercise is to simply humanise the other group’s individuals, to such create resistance towards the most dangerous side effects of echo chambers. Because regardless of what group you’re a member of, including the local atheist group or chess club for that matter, the mechanisms that holds your group together, is basically mass psychosis.

In fact, all groups, ranging from your local police officers, to the national UFO club and soccer team, can suffer from mass psychosis. However, it’s not dangerous unless they’re also struck by paranoia …

Crazy people have more fun

It doesn’t require a rocket scientist to understand that dancing naked under the full moon, in the Amazonas, while tripping on Ayahuasca, and chanting with 200 friends in a drum circle, is probably “slightly more fun” than working nine to five, only looking forward to going to Disney World for a week, with your mother in law next summer.

Of course, these are the extreme cases, and there are lots of shaded in between. However, I happen to have a lot of “crazy friends”. Some of my friends are paddling the Amazonas, others are traveling the world. As to myself, compared to most others, I would probably be considered pretty crazy too – Although I’ve never done Ayahuasca in the Amazon – But hey, I am still young 😉

Do me a favour, and care less about what others think about you – Because when confronted with somebody living an extremely fun life, most nine to fivers will use words such as “irresponsible”, “whacko”, “fruitcake”, etc to explain what they are looking at. However, such reactions comes from jealousy, which is arguably the most common human emotion, and the saddest emotion too …